_cro's review
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
lalislost's review
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
2.0
lea1105's review
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
1.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Suicidal thoughts and Suicide
lenasophee's review
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
1.0
madeline11037's review
sad
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.75
littlemissdynamite's review
mysterious
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
2.75
l_ise's review
challenging
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
cieloblu's review
adventurous
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
hyaenidae's review
2.0
Where there is hype, there is expectation and when there’s expectation, there may be disappointment.
Ruhm has been lauded by numerous outlets as “world literature” (Weltwoche), “full of sparkling intelligence” (FAZ) or “a literary bravura” (Die Welt), but even though I encountered these reviews after reading it, I was already predisposed by the praise it got from a friend of mine. Yet all falls flat.
It is a book of nine short stories, that range from well-written episodes over mediocrity struck by sensibilities to cheap garbage and full of clichés. A memorable and often mentioned part seems to be the way these at first seemingly unrelated stories are intertwined by their characters and accentuated by a way of recurring meta-narrative. This seems fine from an isolated standpoint, but it feels cheap and gimmicky in the way that they are there trying to save the narrative. Plus: it has already been done before. And it has been done better. David Mitchell had his go at it, so did Thomas Pynchon, Italo Calvino, David Foster Wallace or even at a peak Gilbert Sorrentino. There is no issue of who came first, yet imagine some film studio doing “The Matrix”, but with lesser budget, worse cast and crew and a less refined script. If this movie were to come out in 1998, no one would care for the inherent quality of the movie, as everybody would flip for the cinematics, the bullet time™ and the dystopian future depicted. But it is not. All the gimmicks have been done and executed way better.
Stripped from the literary artifacts, the stories themselves should hold their own, yet the rarely do. Most of the times the characters feel rushed or laden with clichés or lost in quirky tales focused around ideas for the sake of the alleged novelty factor.
Ruhm as a book itself has its highs but was a struggle or even a chore for me to get through. Still, it may be of value to new readers as an introduction into meta-fiction and the world of contemporary authors mixing up things with new ways to spin their stories.
Ruhm has been lauded by numerous outlets as “world literature” (Weltwoche), “full of sparkling intelligence” (FAZ) or “a literary bravura” (Die Welt), but even though I encountered these reviews after reading it, I was already predisposed by the praise it got from a friend of mine. Yet all falls flat.
It is a book of nine short stories, that range from well-written episodes over mediocrity struck by sensibilities to cheap garbage and full of clichés. A memorable and often mentioned part seems to be the way these at first seemingly unrelated stories are intertwined by their characters and accentuated by a way of recurring meta-narrative. This seems fine from an isolated standpoint, but it feels cheap and gimmicky in the way that they are there trying to save the narrative. Plus: it has already been done before. And it has been done better. David Mitchell had his go at it, so did Thomas Pynchon, Italo Calvino, David Foster Wallace or even at a peak Gilbert Sorrentino. There is no issue of who came first, yet imagine some film studio doing “The Matrix”, but with lesser budget, worse cast and crew and a less refined script. If this movie were to come out in 1998, no one would care for the inherent quality of the movie, as everybody would flip for the cinematics, the bullet time™ and the dystopian future depicted. But it is not. All the gimmicks have been done and executed way better.
Stripped from the literary artifacts, the stories themselves should hold their own, yet the rarely do. Most of the times the characters feel rushed or laden with clichés or lost in quirky tales focused around ideas for the sake of the alleged novelty factor.
Ruhm as a book itself has its highs but was a struggle or even a chore for me to get through. Still, it may be of value to new readers as an introduction into meta-fiction and the world of contemporary authors mixing up things with new ways to spin their stories.
cecep's review
dark
emotional
reflective
fast-paced
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0