Jim Rion reviewed House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski
Monumental...
5 stars
In pretty much every sense of the word. And I'm so glad I got it on paper. This is an experiential read... I'll have to retry someone, I think.
736 pages
English language
Published July 6, 2000 by Doubleday.
In pretty much every sense of the word. And I'm so glad I got it on paper. This is an experiential read... I'll have to retry someone, I think.
There's a lot of purposeful filler in here, but it serves the same purpose as the blanks on a canvas -- it adds to the composition. That said, my expectations were a bit high going into the book after watching the myhouse.wad videos on youtube -- the mod was much more dynamic, and the book feels flat in comparison. Still an excellent read, worth your time.
The typesetting stuff in House of Leaves is unique, clever, impressive from a technical standpoint, and certainly not like anything I had ever seen before. Unfortunately, it is often little more than a gimmick — some of the most striking and complex printing in the entire book is used for what amounts to filler, never used for anything with more depth than adding some visual flair to a linear text. That might be enough for some, but it was hard not to be disappointed after hearing so much about the the novel's legendary reputation.
I enjoyed the book. I enjoyed the academic/informational presentation of the main text, I enjoyed the house and the analysis surrounding it, and I enjoyed some of the narrative around Johnny Truant, even if I found his footnote interjections mostly tedious and annoying, particularly earlier into the novel. I don't think I would have enjoyed these …
The typesetting stuff in House of Leaves is unique, clever, impressive from a technical standpoint, and certainly not like anything I had ever seen before. Unfortunately, it is often little more than a gimmick — some of the most striking and complex printing in the entire book is used for what amounts to filler, never used for anything with more depth than adding some visual flair to a linear text. That might be enough for some, but it was hard not to be disappointed after hearing so much about the the novel's legendary reputation.
I enjoyed the book. I enjoyed the academic/informational presentation of the main text, I enjoyed the house and the analysis surrounding it, and I enjoyed some of the narrative around Johnny Truant, even if I found his footnote interjections mostly tedious and annoying, particularly earlier into the novel. I don't think I would have enjoyed these elements any less if the book's strange typesetting was taken out entirely, though, which seems like a real missed opportunity.
Great book with great twists and turns.
Had me measuring the inside of my house and comparing it with the outside.
I can't stop thinking about what a nightmare this book must have been to design and print. I'm not sure any book will ever give me the sort of awe and revulsion I felt seeing a sentence span across the spine over two pages. It's obscene.
I didn't know much about House of Leaves beyond it's infamous typography, so it was surprising to learn it's functionally a book equivalent to found footage horror. It trades documentary "authenticity" for dense citations and pervert French, but conceptually I find a lot of similarities (both are primarily interested in the mechanics of their medium and how our trust in those forms can be exploited). How successful HoL is depends mostly on your willingness to indulge its most excessive elements, following footnotes to smaller footnotes and spinning the book around like it's the world thickest centerfold.
HoL slots into a weird segment of media …
Indescribable. This book will haunt me
This book was a slog, and there's a lot to roll one's eyes at, but I'm glad I read it given its influence on other works I enjoy and its relationship to interactive narrative.
It was cool and weird, but like 200 pages longer than i needed it to be. I was just here for the house metaphysics, not the truant side story.
I read about 30 pages...an appallingly pretentious crack at postmodernism. Another reviewer said this is probably what drove David Foster Wallace to suicide, and although irreverent, it's a good perspective on the book. It's embarrassing to think about equally pretentious college professors teaching this as a substantive piece of literature.
Wow this book. The layers upon layers, going Inception and Sixth Sense on you except better; though a little lull in the middle. The total mindfuck, the multiple truths at the same time and the deep sadness. Our inability to deal with space, and more importantly, our concept of time even if we project it into space, but when it comes down to it, just our inability to ever deal with what "an ending" means.
This is probably the strangest book I've ever read. One of those cult favourites where you'll either passionately love the book, or vehemently hate it. Everything depends upon how much are you willing to invest - when you have to read the words upside down or sometimes vertically, when there are pages after pages after pages of incomprehensible texts, when you lose control of story at every step of the way and wonder what's really happening, are the characters losing their minds or is it you - you have to remember that this is just a book. Nothing more, nothing less. Otherwise, you'll end up like me, obsessing over every tiny detail, wondering at midnight whether the emptiness and coldness you feel is just because the temperature is low or are there other factors in play.
I know. I sound paranoid. But this is exactly what the author intended.
On …
This is probably the strangest book I've ever read. One of those cult favourites where you'll either passionately love the book, or vehemently hate it. Everything depends upon how much are you willing to invest - when you have to read the words upside down or sometimes vertically, when there are pages after pages after pages of incomprehensible texts, when you lose control of story at every step of the way and wonder what's really happening, are the characters losing their minds or is it you - you have to remember that this is just a book. Nothing more, nothing less. Otherwise, you'll end up like me, obsessing over every tiny detail, wondering at midnight whether the emptiness and coldness you feel is just because the temperature is low or are there other factors in play.
I know. I sound paranoid. But this is exactly what the author intended.
On surface, House of Leaves is a book about a house which expands on the inside while remaining unchanged on the outside, the vast empty space consisting of nothing but darkness accompanied by a vicious and nerve-wrecking growl. But it is so much more than that. This is the story of a famous photojournalist who is retiring from his life to fix his broken marriage in a quiet, suburb place. What he gets instead is a haunted house which initially intrigues his interest, but later on consumes him completely with its idiosyncrasies. How the paranoia creeps into his wife and his friends, threatening to break their entire relations. Eventually, it becomes a tale of how love redeems him and brings them closer than ever. All this sounds like a normal story, except the way Mark presents it makes it special. You find footnotes to footnotes of a book inside the book, with narrator consistently interrupting the flow with his own, fucked up life, slowly spiralling out of control from reality.
I'm glad I picked it up. The only letdown was that I read it on kindle, 'cause I couldn't afford the paperback version at this time. But, this is a book that is meant to be read on paper. I will surely revisit it once I have the paperback in my collection.
1) "This is not for you."
2) "A little while later, when we said goodnight, Thumper gave me a big, sweet hug. Almost as if to say she knew where I'd just been.
'You're alright Johnny,' she said for the second time that night. 'Don't worry so much. You're still young. You'll be fine.'
And then as she put her jeep into gear, she smiled: 'Come down and see me at work some time. If you want my opinion, you just need to get out of the house.'"
3) "Can Navidson's house exist without the experience of itself?"
4) "Audrie, however, claims Karen only flirted and her indiscretions never went further than a coy drink or a curt meal. She maintains that Karen never slept with any of them. They were just a means to escape the closeness of any relationship, particularly the one with the man she loved …
1) "This is not for you."
2) "A little while later, when we said goodnight, Thumper gave me a big, sweet hug. Almost as if to say she knew where I'd just been.
'You're alright Johnny,' she said for the second time that night. 'Don't worry so much. You're still young. You'll be fine.'
And then as she put her jeep into gear, she smiled: 'Come down and see me at work some time. If you want my opinion, you just need to get out of the house.'"
3) "Can Navidson's house exist without the experience of itself?"
4) "Audrie, however, claims Karen only flirted and her indiscretions never went further than a coy drink or a curt meal. She maintains that Karen never slept with any of them. They were just a means to escape the closeness of any relationship, particularly the one with the man she loved most."
5) "Though Karen gives her piece the somewhat faltering title A Brief History of Who I Love, the use of Navidson's photos, many of them prize-winning, frequently permits the larger effects of the late 20th century to intrude. Gordon Burke points out the emotional significance of this alignment between personal and cultural pasts:
'Not only do we appreciate Navidson more, we are inadvertently touched by the world at large, where other individuals, who have faced such terrible horrors, still manage to walk barefoot and burning from the grave.'
Each of Navidson's photographs consistently reveals how vehemently he despised life's destruction and how desperately he sought to preserve its fleeting beauties, no matter the circumstances."
6) "(Untitled Fragment)
Little solace comes
to those who grieve
when thoughts keep drifting
as walls keep shifting
and this great blue world of ours
seems a house of leaves
moments before the wind."
Started on a bus to Sta. Rosa, and it was raining pretty heavily. Still raining at 10 pm on SLEX, and I'm still reading this crazy behemoth. God bless you, insane Luzon heavy traffic, I get to finish a lot of books.
A wonderful labyrinthine multitude of stories and pathways that reads more like an artwork than a book[1]. The sheer level of investment into writing what is essentially nothing at all is a fascinating experiment and has produced a monumental book.
[1] Also a psychological thriller, honed by the relationship to the abyss and the maze, and the crass notes of one Mr. Johnny Truant
This is amazing. There are two narratives here, the book itself and another, squeezed haphazardly in the footnotes. I felt torn between the two narratives the whole way, impatient with the one as I was waiting to get back to the other.
The first one is by a man known as Zampanò, whose prose is exquisitely Lovecraftian. Speaking as someone who's actually reading Lovecraft at the same time, I'll say that this echoes those of his works which are most disturbing. And I mean that in the best way possible.
In between and among Zampanò's book is the other narrator, Johhnny Truant (the one who ostensibly "found" Zampanò's work), whose words are just... beautiful. Well, I say "beautiful." Mostly I mean the language is fascinating, even if what the words mean is anything but beautiful. It is a masterpiece of... not quite stream of consciousness, but nearly. Wandering, barely-connecting thoughts, …
This is amazing. There are two narratives here, the book itself and another, squeezed haphazardly in the footnotes. I felt torn between the two narratives the whole way, impatient with the one as I was waiting to get back to the other.
The first one is by a man known as Zampanò, whose prose is exquisitely Lovecraftian. Speaking as someone who's actually reading Lovecraft at the same time, I'll say that this echoes those of his works which are most disturbing. And I mean that in the best way possible.
In between and among Zampanò's book is the other narrator, Johhnny Truant (the one who ostensibly "found" Zampanò's work), whose words are just... beautiful. Well, I say "beautiful." Mostly I mean the language is fascinating, even if what the words mean is anything but beautiful. It is a masterpiece of... not quite stream of consciousness, but nearly. Wandering, barely-connecting thoughts, but with punctuation, and occasionally coherence. It's so wandering, and full of black-ish whimsy. I love it. It's art, pure and simple.
Seriously, this book is like a Film - with a capital F, mind you - or like a goddamn surrealist avant-garde museum exhibit. Sometimes the words are upside down or backwards or slanted; often they make shapes on the pages (shapes which match the action or echo the mood); whole sentences are drawn out over several pages for effect. Everything means something, you're pretty sure - unless it doesn't, and you're just reading too much into it. Two thirds of the way through, and the storyline(s) just fell apart in my hands, crumbling into glorious madness.
And once having finished... I felt wrung out to dry.
I just... I wish he'd stop saying "alot." All I see is that bit from Hyperbole and a Half.