ghostboy1996's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-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
3.0
jakekilroy's review against another edition
4.0
This actually makes more sense to me.
Like a whole lotta other millennials, I saw the movie before I read the book. The novel came out when I was in sixth grade and largely unaware of contemporary literature, whereas the film came out when I was in ninth grade and it was the coolest-looking thing in theaters.
Tyler Durden was so undeniably dope to young dudes. He didn’t need a rich lifestyle (and even relished in squalor), he embraced his dark and weird streak with great flamboyance, and he was so unrelentingly ripped and handsome. To watch a chiseled hunk advocate for abolishing debt and never being complacent, it was downright hypnotizing (though some of us took his message as satirical and some took it as biblical).
But it always seemed a bit goofy to me that a boring guy invented a cool guy to do terrorism. I get that it’s a troubling exercise in losing one’s sanity, but the book is so much more clear that an unstable guy created an even more unstable guy. Tyler’s not that cool in the book. He’s definitely a weirdo, he for sure isn’t here for long, and he absolutely took freshman philosophy.
So you more or less wonder if seeing a grinning, attractive person spouting unhinged nonsense simply freshens it up (which is a fun, appealing theme in its own right). But I know that’s not all that’s at play, because, here, Tyler can be short, petty, argumentative, and childish. There’s a primal quality to him that doesn’t adhere to likeability. He’s reactive, reductive, immature, and kinda dumb — an inspiring loudmouth who appears cunning and self-reliant by way of A.I.M. away message poetry. He doesn’t play as confident, but rather marching toward oblivion, for his time on earth is unremarkable and exhaustible.
Likewise, what he pontificates isn’t so much about masculinity or being, like, anti-cul-de-sacs. He resents the very fact that we can find such an inordinate amount of fleeting joy in a new dining set. He resents that he’s not the one making the rules of his own life. He resents that he has to suffer while others don’t. But it isn’t profound. (However, I will say, reading this as an adult is strikingly accurate. I have asked myself what furniture defines me and I have been grateful for the opportunity to not go to work again when a plan experiences turbulence. So it’s not about being bombarded with dumb shit; it’s about how you grow to adore being bombarded with dumb shit.)
There’s quite a bit to agree upon with Tyler, but there’s also so much to him that goes in one ear and out the other because it’s so purposefully cliched that it doesn’t register as real thought. Tyler is almost a parody of himself as soon as he exists. He’s not to be admired. If anything, he’s like a high school friend who has gotten so strange and disconnected in adulthood, you know them more as a relic than an actual pal. But if you’re in a bad place and that lunatic is there for you when no one else is? Holy shit, he suddenly looks like your bestest friend with the goldenest heart. The rest of the world just doesn’t see him like that (or at all).
Moreover, the Narrator and Marla are both self-destructive, but they’re both real stable with more definition and agency. You can see how they got to where they are, even if they shouldn’t be there. You can see the desperate need for frenzied outlets in place of real stability. You can fight to be happy or you can fight in a basement on Saturday nights, and it’s only a matter of time before you mistake them for the same thing.
Like a whole lotta other millennials, I saw the movie before I read the book. The novel came out when I was in sixth grade and largely unaware of contemporary literature, whereas the film came out when I was in ninth grade and it was the coolest-looking thing in theaters.
Tyler Durden was so undeniably dope to young dudes. He didn’t need a rich lifestyle (and even relished in squalor), he embraced his dark and weird streak with great flamboyance, and he was so unrelentingly ripped and handsome. To watch a chiseled hunk advocate for abolishing debt and never being complacent, it was downright hypnotizing (though some of us took his message as satirical and some took it as biblical).
But it always seemed a bit goofy to me that a boring guy invented a cool guy to do terrorism. I get that it’s a troubling exercise in losing one’s sanity, but the book is so much more clear that an unstable guy created an even more unstable guy. Tyler’s not that cool in the book. He’s definitely a weirdo, he for sure isn’t here for long, and he absolutely took freshman philosophy.
So you more or less wonder if seeing a grinning, attractive person spouting unhinged nonsense simply freshens it up (which is a fun, appealing theme in its own right). But I know that’s not all that’s at play, because, here, Tyler can be short, petty, argumentative, and childish. There’s a primal quality to him that doesn’t adhere to likeability. He’s reactive, reductive, immature, and kinda dumb — an inspiring loudmouth who appears cunning and self-reliant by way of A.I.M. away message poetry. He doesn’t play as confident, but rather marching toward oblivion, for his time on earth is unremarkable and exhaustible.
Likewise, what he pontificates isn’t so much about masculinity or being, like, anti-cul-de-sacs. He resents the very fact that we can find such an inordinate amount of fleeting joy in a new dining set. He resents that he’s not the one making the rules of his own life. He resents that he has to suffer while others don’t. But it isn’t profound. (However, I will say, reading this as an adult is strikingly accurate. I have asked myself what furniture defines me and I have been grateful for the opportunity to not go to work again when a plan experiences turbulence. So it’s not about being bombarded with dumb shit; it’s about how you grow to adore being bombarded with dumb shit.)
There’s quite a bit to agree upon with Tyler, but there’s also so much to him that goes in one ear and out the other because it’s so purposefully cliched that it doesn’t register as real thought. Tyler is almost a parody of himself as soon as he exists. He’s not to be admired. If anything, he’s like a high school friend who has gotten so strange and disconnected in adulthood, you know them more as a relic than an actual pal. But if you’re in a bad place and that lunatic is there for you when no one else is? Holy shit, he suddenly looks like your bestest friend with the goldenest heart. The rest of the world just doesn’t see him like that (or at all).
Moreover, the Narrator and Marla are both self-destructive, but they’re both real stable with more definition and agency. You can see how they got to where they are, even if they shouldn’t be there. You can see the desperate need for frenzied outlets in place of real stability. You can fight to be happy or you can fight in a basement on Saturday nights, and it’s only a matter of time before you mistake them for the same thing.
charcola's review against another edition
5.0
FAVOURITE. it's just my favourite. This book altered the way I saw everything.
isabellesbooks's review against another edition
5.0
I have always known this title to be a cult classic and now I see why- I don’t know why it took me so long to read it, though. This is one of those books where you might be hungry and you really have to pee but nothing can peel your eyes away from the page and you’re definitely not getting up anytime soon. When I started reading I didn’t know anything about the plot besides “the first rule of fight club is you don’t talk about fight club,” and honestly that made this experience SO much better, because I was not expecting the ending in any way shape or form. Because I didn’t know what to expect, I got to be amazed. I don’t know if I could actually handle the movie without fainting, but I think the book lived up to the legacy.
francescazksxmc's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
phlegmcel's review against another edition
3.5
i liked the way it utilized themes of consumerism and expressions of masculinity but i think i wanted it to be better than it was the entire time i was reading and then it was over
erencoelho's review against another edition
dark
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
izzyaaa's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5