Deuses Americanos

I'm still not totally sure what all went on. This book is like a road trip of interesting and perplexing ideas, people, and places, something to be experienced in between when the plot picks up again. I might've missed a lot in the several weeks it took me to read this book (I had days where I didn't read it and it might've messed with retention), and I was interested in what was going on, and where the characters were going. I really was there with Shadow most of the time, because we were both trying to understand what was going on.

As far as the rules regarding gods and humanity was concerned, I couldn't really figure it out. There were many questions, some answers, and other things about the plot I just couldn't get. But I'm still gonna keep it and give it another shot. Maybe after watching the series (or starting it), I might get a better grasp at what eluded me. Some of the questions that were answered were more than satisfying, however, and i just wanted to know more, more, more.

Never read Neil Gaiman before. Definitely a keeper on my shelf.

For the most part, you'd think this is a story of the clash between Gods, new and old to be exact, and a man who got trapped in between. But in truth this a story of desire, hunger for power. And that's where Neil shines I guess. The main story is carefully hidden until the very last, and when you finally reach the end you get swept away with the story underlying. It's a well-crafted story and I would've given it a 5 star if it weren't for some unnecessary chapters, or at least that's how I feel. The parts describing the departure of Gods and how they came to be (in America), which don't get me wrong are very interesting. Still, they felt unnecessary to the main plot and only helped make an already lengthy book, well lengthier (If there is such a thing)! The protagonist Shadow's character development is superb and his distress troubled me which is always a good sign. This is a well-written fantasy about Gods among us, real Gods! What more do you need?

Yo entiendo que hay ciertas inercias que es díficil de luchar contra ellas, y una es decir que Gaiman es genial en todo lo que hace.
Que malo no es, pero hay cosas que no entiendo.
En el original en inglés de esta novela hay un tiempo compuesto partido en el que entre auxiliar y participio introduce una aclaración totalmente innecesaria y absurda. Algo como decir que una señora era la esposa de un señor cuando estaba viva. Pues claro, igual que cuando estaba viva respiraba y luego de no estar no lo hacía. Una aclaración innecesaria y que de paso crea un frangollo gramatical que hacía la frase casi imposible de entender. Y de ese tipo de frases había más de una, en plan capitán obvio. Y esto cuela en libros editados por editoriales.
En esta novela, como en todo lo demás de Gaiman que he leído, siempre me pregunto lo mismo: ¿dónde están los dibujicos? American Gods parece un guión de una saga de Sandman, un cómic que me gusta mucho, y la verdad es que no desentonaría en absoluto como una saga de ese mundo bajo el sello Vertigo, y encontramos ideas ya explotadas allí: los distintos panteones de dioses como fuerzas arquetípicas, conceptos modernos encarnados en formas humanas, etc. Pero por eso mismo echo de menos los dibujos, porque las descripciones son morosas y el ritmo no está pensado para una narración literaria, sino visual. Por eso las historias de Gaiman me suelen gustar bastante más en su versión adaptada que en la original, cuando alguien aporta lo que le falta a su prosa en profundidad. Es un buen argumentista y crea historias muy sugerentes, no cabe duda, pero lo que escribe bajo formato libro parece más un proyecto o conjunto de ideas que un producto literario realmente acabado. Sobre la tomadura de pelo de su libro tratando la mitología nórdica ya lo dije: no está mal, pero si eso mismo no viene firmado por Gaiman no se lo traga nadie, y está escrito de una forma tan plana y superficial que podría habérselo escrito un negro. Luego dicen de España y que cualquier pestiño escrito por Reverte se convierte sin saber cómo en un éxito editorial, pero esto es parecido.
La historia de American Gods está bien contada, tiene interés, y por supuesto la representación de esos distintos panteones enfrentados a los arquetipos del presente es tan graciosa como consigue evitar pisar ningún callo ni meterse en ningún marrón interpretativo, evitando cualquier polémica innecesaria. Algo que deje satisfecho al friki sin meterse en el más mínimo berenjenal aunque se esté hablando de fe y de religiones, pero todo queda en un buen rollito new age muy del gusto moderno. Y eso, saber nadar y guardar la ropa, también tiene mucho mérito. También tiene sus consecuencias: tal cual se termina de leer, se olvida.

I made a mistake with this book, I saw it was being made into a TV series and thought I'd read the book before the show airs, my mistake was reading this so soon after reading [b:Neverwhere|14497|Neverwhere|Neil Gaiman|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348747943s/14497.jpg|16534]. Neverwhere was stunning and American Gods comes across as a weak rambling sort of story. This book is Neil Gaiman's "on the road" book, it was an interesting writing style, driving and describing all the places on the route, unfortunately there were some bits that bugged me.

At the end of some of the chapters there were extra stories about some random Gods and how they ended up in America, these bits were so long, almost a book in their own right, they weren't that interesting and by the time I'd made it to the end I had forgotten what had been happening in the main story.

One of the strongest things about Neverwhere was how vivid the descriptions of the places where, within a few sentences you could easily picture the place. In American Gods everything felt bland, I wasn't even sure it was set in America. Maybe it was the fact the settings were right in front of Gaiman and not in his head but something went wrong.

The characters were up to his normal standard and so was the plot including a very well thought out mystery. I have enjoyed the story, just ruined a bit by the issues I had with it. Looking forward to the TV series, I think that will be really good.

I may have more to say about this book later on, as I just finished it today.

I really enjoyed this book. It might not be my favorite Neil Gaiman book, but so far it's the most complex, most fully realized and interesting one that I have read. A couple of points I'd like to make:

1) I thought I was pretty clever when I figured out 'Mr Wednesday' when he was first introduced... but then the part that I 'figured out' was hardly even a twist and came really rather early in the story. Coming in to the book with a pretty decent background with the mythology that Gaiman delves into is probably not necessary to understand the book, but will greatly enhance your enjoyment and probably help you pick up the hundred little clues scattered before the 'end'

2) For me at least, there was a decent chunk of the story that seemed to be stalled out. Even a few parts leading up to that point I was wondering aloud what exactly the point of any of it was.... but after a bit of time, it became clear that these sections truly had been groundwork and they started paying off nicely. After a few nights not-quite-struggling through, plot lines started coming together and I found myself unable to stop reading until I knocked out the last 100 pages or so.

A strong recommendation to anyone who has enjoyed Gaiman's other work, or fans of Mythology or fantasy.

This book was a kind of a disappointment to me, meaning, it was not as good as I thought it was. For many years I've heard wonders about this book and how it was amazing. It was on my "to-read" for at least a couple of years and I purchased because of a Kindle deal, and last month I decided to give it a try.

Well, I think the book starts pretty well, telling us about the situation of Shadow, his time in jail and how he is mysteriously released from prison one day earlier than expected. I enjoyed that first part of the book up until how Shadow met Wednesday. Then, many parallel stories start to come up in the middle of the narrative, Shadow's errands becomes uninteresting, and for me the road trip became quite boring from the middle of the book forward.

There are many references of American culture, religion, ancient and modern mythology from around the globe, which is inherently interesting, but the way all these elements were put together in the story didn't work very well, in my opinion.

I read the 2011 version (tenth anniversary edition), that one with additional 12,000 words, and maybe that was one of the reasons I thought there were whole chapters of the book that seemed not be essential to the story. So the rhythm of the story is irregular, there were great chapters and then a couple ones that simply dragged and I couldn't wait for the narrative to get back on track.

All in all, the premise of the book is great, I enjoyed the "weird fantasy" aspect of the story, but for me it was not executed very well.

Hugely entertaining book, full of weirdness and references - not only the gods themselves but I could see enough subtle little literary allusions to realise there must be many more there. Also some that I suspect may just be looking too hard, but oh well - they didn't detract anything from the book....

I love the broad ambition of this story, the multiple levels it runs on, and the ease with which Gaiman can switch between those levels. It suffers a little from trying to pack too much in. By the end I was a bit tired of new characters being introduced without development, and wishing a few of the subplots had been explored better. It's both telling and a good move that when Gaiman wrote a ~sequel (Anansi Boys) he picked up one of the second-tier characters from American Gods, fleshed him out beautifully, and told a much more focussed story with him. Anansi Boys ends up being a stronger book as a result.

A few references I'm wondering about:

About halfway through part one, there seemed to be a subtle allusion to Eliot's Journey Of The Magi. I'm not sure if it's either intended or real, but read or listen to the poem: www.poetryarchive.org/poem/journey-magi - it seems to fit, eh?

One thing I was left not understanding at the end was why Wednesday needed Shadow. It seemed that he could have orchestrated the whole con at less risk without Shadow involved, which was the one thing I found unsatisfying about the otherwise very clever ending. I read somewhere that Monarch Of The Glen explains more about who Shadow is, so I'm looking forward to reading that.

The two-man con idea feels like a wonderfully biting allegory about US politics. If so, then Gaiman was pretty prescient - it's a thing that has become much more obvious since.

The two-man con and its motivations also feels like an allegory about the "Clash of Civilizations" nonsense that has potential to be so self-fulfilling. I'm pretty sure this on my mind because I happen to have read the book in a week when anti-Muslim attacks in the US are more prominent in the news than usual, but I wonder if it wasn't also an intended message, given that the book was first published in 2001. But then... that crap didn't get much airtime until 9/11, and this book must have mostly been written before that.

And finally, I really want to learn more about Sammy Black Crow. I was expecting her to be more significant in the end.

Hugely entertaining book, full of weirdness and references - not only the gods themselves but I could see enough subtle little literary allusions to realise there must be many more there. Also some that I suspect may just be looking too hard, but oh well - they didn't detract anything from the book....

I love the broad ambition of this story, the multiple levels it runs on, and the ease with which Gaiman can switch between those levels. It suffers a little from trying to pack too much in. By the end I was a bit tired of new characters being introduced without development, and wishing a few of the subplots had been explored better. It's both telling and a good move that when Gaiman wrote a ~sequel (Anansi Boys) he picked up one of the second-tier characters from American Gods, fleshed him out beautifully, and told a much more focussed story with him. Anansi Boys ends up being a stronger book as a result.

A few references I'm wondering about:

About halfway through part one, there seemed to be a subtle allusion to Eliot's Journey Of The Magi. I'm not sure if it's either intended or real, but read or listen to the poem: www.poetryarchive.org/poem/journey-magi - it seems to fit, eh?

One thing I was left not understanding at the end was why Wednesday needed Shadow. It seemed that he could have orchestrated the whole con at less risk without Shadow involved, which was the one thing I found unsatisfying about the otherwise very clever ending. I read somewhere that Monarch Of The Glen explains more about who Shadow is, so I'm looking forward to reading that.

The two-man con idea feels like a wonderfully biting allegory about US politics. If so, then Gaiman was pretty prescient - it's a thing that has become much more obvious since.

The two-man con and its motivations also feels like an allegory about the "Clash of Civilizations" nonsense that has potential to be so self-fulfilling. I'm pretty sure this on my mind because I happen to have read the book in a week when anti-Muslim attacks in the US are more prominent in the news than usual, but I wonder if it wasn't also an intended message, given that the book was first published in 2001. But then... that crap didn't get much airtime until 9/11, and this book must have mostly been written before that.

And finally, I really want to learn more about Sammy Black Crow. I was expecting her to be more significant in the end.