twilliamson's review
4.0
Necroscope is the kind of novel that reads like it was directed by Dario Argento in the '80s. So convincing is the novel's atmosphere, ideas, and style that I can almost literally envision the film grain and the bad lip dubbing. It's a book full of grime and grit, huge ideas that don't seem like they should work at all on paper yet turn out to be thoroughly exciting and mind-warping.
Let it be said: Lumley's prose, dialogue, and narrative structure are not his strengths here. Everything in the book reads like '80s horror pulp, and that's either going to work for you or it won't, and I don't think there's anything in-between. Those that get the style will resonate with it, and those that don't will not appreciate it. The book's sexual politics are terribly dated--distractingly misogynistic at times and troublingly oversexed--but I feel this speaks more to the times and the nature of '80s horror than it is some kind of cogent statement about the relationships of men and women; it's hard for me to get mad at the book when it's so clearly just riffing hard on transgressive "vibes" common to horror as a subculture of its decade.
But clunky dialogue and bad sexual politics aside, the book is brimming with bizarre ideas so frustratingly cool that my biggest criticism is that we only get a taste of how absolutely hog wild the concepts could actually get. Lumley lays out a whole lot of world-building in the first two-thirds of the book that seem to be going nowhere and then begins to drop huge, world-breaking bombs through the entire final third of the book--like, it's a whole other kind of book at the end. The book reaches out into the abstract and bizarre to become almost pure spectacle in the very best kind of way. Regardless of whether or not any of it makes sense, Necroscope is the kind of book you just grab onto for the ride, waiting until it's over to make sense of it and salivate at the thought of more.
This book is by no means a game-changer, by no means high literature, and by no means the best vampire book or international spy thriller or superhero origin story that I've read, and yet it is one highly entertaining ride with so many bonkers ideas it earns the right to its extreme eccentricities. I don't think it's a book for everyone, and it's probably not even a book for anything other than a small, niche minority of horror readers--but if you get it, you get it, and I vibe with it straight through the Möbius continuum all the way down.
Let it be said: Lumley's prose, dialogue, and narrative structure are not his strengths here. Everything in the book reads like '80s horror pulp, and that's either going to work for you or it won't, and I don't think there's anything in-between. Those that get the style will resonate with it, and those that don't will not appreciate it. The book's sexual politics are terribly dated--distractingly misogynistic at times and troublingly oversexed--but I feel this speaks more to the times and the nature of '80s horror than it is some kind of cogent statement about the relationships of men and women; it's hard for me to get mad at the book when it's so clearly just riffing hard on transgressive "vibes" common to horror as a subculture of its decade.
But clunky dialogue and bad sexual politics aside, the book is brimming with bizarre ideas so frustratingly cool that my biggest criticism is that we only get a taste of how absolutely hog wild the concepts could actually get. Lumley lays out a whole lot of world-building in the first two-thirds of the book that seem to be going nowhere and then begins to drop huge, world-breaking bombs through the entire final third of the book--like, it's a whole other kind of book at the end. The book reaches out into the abstract and bizarre to become almost pure spectacle in the very best kind of way. Regardless of whether or not any of it makes sense, Necroscope is the kind of book you just grab onto for the ride, waiting until it's over to make sense of it and salivate at the thought of more.
This book is by no means a game-changer, by no means high literature, and by no means the best vampire book or international spy thriller or superhero origin story that I've read, and yet it is one highly entertaining ride with so many bonkers ideas it earns the right to its extreme eccentricities. I don't think it's a book for everyone, and it's probably not even a book for anything other than a small, niche minority of horror readers--but if you get it, you get it, and I vibe with it straight through the Möbius continuum all the way down.
zacko's review
adventurous
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.25
bluemaiden's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
fullwom777's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
4.5
silverleaf's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
funny
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
pat32's review against another edition
5.0
4 1/2 stars rounded up an interesting take on the vampire mythos
lexessoribooks's review against another edition
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
3.0
ashlawson09's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
leirben's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
verkisto's review against another edition
2.0
Man, do I remember this book. I discovered horror when I was in high school, thanks to Stephen King, and the Necroscope books always caught my eye whenever I browsed the bookstore, enough so that I have no idea why I never read it. I may have appreciated this novel more had I read it back in high school, but now, I feel like the book is kind of a mess.
There's something odd about Lumley's narrative. I can't quite place it, but there's something about his descriptions and dialogue that are jarring to me. There are odd bits interspersed into the narrative that take me out of the illusion of the story. It also didn't help that the story jumps around in time. The book starts off in the present (-ish) day, then dives into a lengthy flashback, which jumps between two characters and also goes into flashbacks. Oh, and the hero of the story, Harry Keogh, features in about half the novel, but mostly in his formative years. Once he gets to be, you know, the hero, there's only about 100 pages left in the story. It feels jumbled, and without focus, and it was hard for me to stay invested in the story.
For some reason, I thought this was going to be a vampire novel, and while the novel does feature a vampire (otherwise the cover art would be out of place), the story is really about ESP and other psychic abilities. In fact, the story starts off featuring two types of these abilities -- necromancy, which is the art of reading secrets from dead bodies; and necroscopy, which is the ability to communicate with the dead -- but then as the story progresses, more and more abilities are drawn in, muddying the story. By the end of the novel, it felt more like I was reading a science fiction novel than a horror novel, and while that would be fine under normal conditions, I can't help but feel like I was misled by the way the book was marketed.
Harry's ability allows him not just to talk to the dead, but also to glean skills from them by essentially allowing them to take over and do their own thing. At different parts of the story, he's a math prodigy, a successful novelist, a skilled fighter, and has mastered the art of ice skating, but through no efforts of his own. Harry winds up being a shell, really, just a conduit through which dead people can use their skills. It's a clever enough idea, but once you realize that the heroes aren't Harry, but those he channels, he becomes less a sympathetic character and more just an ordinary person with no real skills of his own. It seemed to be a failure in his character development, and I think that had a big effect on how I responded to the book.
I wonder how relevant this book would be to someone who didn't grow up in the '80s, though, or at least know enough about the Cold War. So much of the setting and theme revolve around the Soviet Union and the KGB, and while it does take me back to high school (which is really the perfect frame of mind for me to read the book, given that's all I was reading at the time) it dates the work as much as the female stereotypes do in 1950s science fiction.
Despite all that, the book didn't feel like a slog. It read quickly, and I felt engaged enough in what was going on to keep reading to see where it was going. I just didn't see that it was a worthwhile read. When I started reading this, and looked at the rest of the books in the series (four more in this one, and eleven others in tangential series), I was a bit apprehensive about tackling a series that big (my plan is that if I start a series I like, I'll go ahead and finish the whole thing before starting on something else (and yes, that makes me apprehensive about getting around to The Wheel of Time)), but now that I've finished the book, I'm not that interested in continuing on.
Ultimately, the book feels forced, and a little stupid. I think it's a good representation of what horror was back in the '80s, but I've moved beyond just wanting to be scared, preferring to read a story that's emotionally compelling. Necroscope, unfortunately, doesn't have that.
There's something odd about Lumley's narrative. I can't quite place it, but there's something about his descriptions and dialogue that are jarring to me. There are odd bits interspersed into the narrative that take me out of the illusion of the story. It also didn't help that the story jumps around in time. The book starts off in the present (-ish) day, then dives into a lengthy flashback, which jumps between two characters and also goes into flashbacks. Oh, and the hero of the story, Harry Keogh, features in about half the novel, but mostly in his formative years. Once he gets to be, you know, the hero, there's only about 100 pages left in the story. It feels jumbled, and without focus, and it was hard for me to stay invested in the story.
For some reason, I thought this was going to be a vampire novel, and while the novel does feature a vampire (otherwise the cover art would be out of place), the story is really about ESP and other psychic abilities. In fact, the story starts off featuring two types of these abilities -- necromancy, which is the art of reading secrets from dead bodies; and necroscopy, which is the ability to communicate with the dead -- but then as the story progresses, more and more abilities are drawn in, muddying the story. By the end of the novel, it felt more like I was reading a science fiction novel than a horror novel, and while that would be fine under normal conditions, I can't help but feel like I was misled by the way the book was marketed.
Harry's ability allows him not just to talk to the dead, but also to glean skills from them by essentially allowing them to take over and do their own thing. At different parts of the story, he's a math prodigy, a successful novelist, a skilled fighter, and has mastered the art of ice skating, but through no efforts of his own. Harry winds up being a shell, really, just a conduit through which dead people can use their skills. It's a clever enough idea, but once you realize that the heroes aren't Harry, but those he channels, he becomes less a sympathetic character and more just an ordinary person with no real skills of his own. It seemed to be a failure in his character development, and I think that had a big effect on how I responded to the book.
I wonder how relevant this book would be to someone who didn't grow up in the '80s, though, or at least know enough about the Cold War. So much of the setting and theme revolve around the Soviet Union and the KGB, and while it does take me back to high school (which is really the perfect frame of mind for me to read the book, given that's all I was reading at the time) it dates the work as much as the female stereotypes do in 1950s science fiction.
Despite all that, the book didn't feel like a slog. It read quickly, and I felt engaged enough in what was going on to keep reading to see where it was going. I just didn't see that it was a worthwhile read. When I started reading this, and looked at the rest of the books in the series (four more in this one, and eleven others in tangential series), I was a bit apprehensive about tackling a series that big (my plan is that if I start a series I like, I'll go ahead and finish the whole thing before starting on something else (and yes, that makes me apprehensive about getting around to The Wheel of Time)), but now that I've finished the book, I'm not that interested in continuing on.
Ultimately, the book feels forced, and a little stupid. I think it's a good representation of what horror was back in the '80s, but I've moved beyond just wanting to be scared, preferring to read a story that's emotionally compelling. Necroscope, unfortunately, doesn't have that.