Scan barcode
Reviews
The Night of the Gun: A reporter investigates the darkest story of his life. His own. by David Carr
hollyejacobs's review against another edition
5.0
A.MA.ZIG. Though the subject material was incredibly challenging, I loved loved loved this book and highly recommend it for anyone who is or has a family member facing the disease of addiction.
ariya1's review against another edition
4.0
Although I'd vaguely heard of David Carr (mainly because I routinely read the NY Times), I can't say that I was an avid follower of his columns. However, like some of the authors I start reading, I became interested in his memoir after learning of his untimely death in February 2015. I was intrigued by his trials and tribulations dealing with his addiction and the fact that he'd seem to overcome his addiction and was doing what he loved. I wasn't able to read his memoir until recently and it was a gripping tale of the ups and downs of addiction recovery. The first part of the book was a bit perplexing because I assumed that it would proceed in chronological order. It does, in a sense, but it isn't necessarily formatted in a strict linear fashion. Instead, he presented what I took as vignettes from his pre-recovery period that (to me) effectively conveyed the chaotic turmoil that ensues with addiction. As the book proceeds to his recovery period, it's a little more chronologically ordered. The effect is a subtle nod to the disorder of addiction versus the somewhat more ordered life of recovery. I'm not sure if that's what he intended but that's what I took from it. Unlike other memoirs of famous/quasi-famous people that at the end simply become a monotonous litany of name-dropping, Carr's memoir (thankfully) refrains from engaging in this. I also appreciated the journalistic methods he employed in attempting to recount the tremendously traumatic periods of his addiction and recovery.
seest12's review against another edition
5.0
I really appreciated the honesty of this memoir of an addict who found a lot of luck in his life and has been able to "succeed" without too much damage. There certainly has been damage done to himself, his family, his work--but Carr admits all of it, most of it very ugly in nature. He is brave and earned my respect for his courage and honesty.
mvancamp's review against another edition
4.0
When I first read about this book I thought: Do we really need another book about an individual's battle with drugs and alcohol? It seems that every month there is a new addict memoir. What intrigued me about Carr's book was his technique, a clear reaction to the scandal surrounding James Frey's memoir exposed as addiction fiction. Carr decides to use his journalism skills to investigate his life as an addict. He does research reading police reports, news articles, letters, diaries, etc. and conducts numerous interviews to see how his memories of several past incidents jive with his memory of them.
As he investigates, he discovers that crucial pieces of the story of his life were not as he remembers. This is not surprising given the state he was in when they occurred (drunk and stoned and more). The fact that most of the people he interviews were in the same state also means their memories are equally suspect. Most disturbing are the pieces of documentary evidence, including medical records and police reports, that point to entire incidents that Carr has no memory of. The whole exercise is quite interesting as an examination of memory and how we choose to construct our own stories.
The narrative arc follows other similar works I have read. The beginning is all about the addiction; middle section on the epiphany or moment when the addict knows he has to change; final section is about life post-recovery. The very thing that makes this original--the journalistic attempt to verify or correct memories--proves to be the book's biggest problem. Every time a new character in his life is introduced, the reader can expect the second half of the chapter to be a modern-day interview with that person. It all gets to be a bit contrived and forced after a while and the constant jumping from past to present tends to interrupt any real narrative rhythm or coherence.
Another issue some readers might have with this book is that Carr is far from a sympathetic character for the first two hundred pages (and he knows it). Not only is he a drunk and a junkie but he repeatedly strikes women in his life. There were several times during the early part of the book, where I found myself thinking, Why do I care about this jerk?
Even with these criticisms, Carr's story is compelling enough that you keep reading. And, Carr is an excellent writer who paces the story quite well. He is attuned to a reader who might grow disgusted with his antics/attitude and--at just the right moment--foreshadows the changes to come, which keeps interest from flagging. Despite my early reaction to the book and its self-centered, self-obsessed narrator, I found that he not only kept me reading but had won me over by the end.
As he investigates, he discovers that crucial pieces of the story of his life were not as he remembers. This is not surprising given the state he was in when they occurred (drunk and stoned and more). The fact that most of the people he interviews were in the same state also means their memories are equally suspect. Most disturbing are the pieces of documentary evidence, including medical records and police reports, that point to entire incidents that Carr has no memory of. The whole exercise is quite interesting as an examination of memory and how we choose to construct our own stories.
The narrative arc follows other similar works I have read. The beginning is all about the addiction; middle section on the epiphany or moment when the addict knows he has to change; final section is about life post-recovery. The very thing that makes this original--the journalistic attempt to verify or correct memories--proves to be the book's biggest problem. Every time a new character in his life is introduced, the reader can expect the second half of the chapter to be a modern-day interview with that person. It all gets to be a bit contrived and forced after a while and the constant jumping from past to present tends to interrupt any real narrative rhythm or coherence.
Another issue some readers might have with this book is that Carr is far from a sympathetic character for the first two hundred pages (and he knows it). Not only is he a drunk and a junkie but he repeatedly strikes women in his life. There were several times during the early part of the book, where I found myself thinking, Why do I care about this jerk?
Even with these criticisms, Carr's story is compelling enough that you keep reading. And, Carr is an excellent writer who paces the story quite well. He is attuned to a reader who might grow disgusted with his antics/attitude and--at just the right moment--foreshadows the changes to come, which keeps interest from flagging. Despite my early reaction to the book and its self-centered, self-obsessed narrator, I found that he not only kept me reading but had won me over by the end.
hanntastic's review against another edition
3.0
Really interesting conceit- the fallibility of memory, how we remember our own lives is drastically different from what happened/how others do. However, it was definitely too long, and there were too many one off examples of this and chapters that mentioned a person who was never to be heard from again. Overall, I'm glad I read it.
almartin's review against another edition
4.0
possibly flawed, but an engaging variety of flawed. i think i was constitutionally required to read this as a nyt subscriber/page one viewer/native minnesotan/consumer of the twin cities reader.
the concept of reporting your own past like a newspaper story adds a touch of critical distance to a highly personal story, and makes night of the gun an odd book. subject matter is classic drug memoir, but the voice is more like investigative journalism. when it works, it's excellent - a really novel way to tackle a genre ridden by cliches.
one final thought -- carr's habit of referencing intervening characters only by their first name is a touch obnoxious. respecting the privacy of folks from your past is one thing; shouting out writers at dc city paper only by their first name is confusing at best or just name dropping at worst.
the concept of reporting your own past like a newspaper story adds a touch of critical distance to a highly personal story, and makes night of the gun an odd book. subject matter is classic drug memoir, but the voice is more like investigative journalism. when it works, it's excellent - a really novel way to tackle a genre ridden by cliches.
one final thought -- carr's habit of referencing intervening characters only by their first name is a touch obnoxious. respecting the privacy of folks from your past is one thing; shouting out writers at dc city paper only by their first name is confusing at best or just name dropping at worst.
kaetiii's review against another edition
3.0
The local connection is fun, as is learning more about the Minneapolis (journalism) community during the 80s. It’s smart, quippy and Carr manages to come across as both arrogant and self-effacing. He uses the word “acuity” a lot, and I was kind of left wishing that he’d told more stories instead of all that blathering about the ephemeral and fecund nature of memory (we get it). Even with the slogs through memory philosophizing, I really enjoyed reading it.
robmichz's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
medium-paced
3.5
gemmabenglish's review against another edition
1.0
god what a dick.
i could say a lot about all the ways i think carr is despicable, and the writing of the book is subpar and ultimately narcissistic, but perhaps it just boils down to the fact that i don’t believe it was his addiction that made him a bad person. i think he had that one pretty well handled from the start. and to be frank reading about misogynistic abusers who don’t even seem sorry for their crimes? not my cup of tea.
i could say a lot about all the ways i think carr is despicable, and the writing of the book is subpar and ultimately narcissistic, but perhaps it just boils down to the fact that i don’t believe it was his addiction that made him a bad person. i think he had that one pretty well handled from the start. and to be frank reading about misogynistic abusers who don’t even seem sorry for their crimes? not my cup of tea.