Just started reading this, and it's really fascinating. I know I'm late on the ball on this but I'd heard it was going to be a tv show soon and I wanted to get the jump on it beforehand
>whore swallows a man with her vagina
You have my attention.
Also this is the first time I've read anything by Neil Gaiman, which from what I understand is an absolute tragedy.
Not on this board, people tend to reserve his work to Reddit.
I actually did enjoy this book too, though.
People shit on gaiman here a lot, not entirely undeservedly, but I'll always like this book for name dropping Gravitys rainbow, causing me to go buy it while under the impression that it was a science fiction book of some sort.
His sandman comics are better than any books he's written. Stardust is the only book he's written that I really liked.
He's a good writer that Veeky Forums doesn't like because he's fairly accessible.
So what you're saying is he's like the Tarantino of Literature: easy enough to enjoy and get into, but most people here look down on it for being TOO easy
I can live with that.
Pretty much. Except unlike Tarantino, he hasn't gone mad with power.
I'd say he has more in common with Matt Groening. His body of work never really changes or challenges you, but more of the same can be enjoyable and comforting.
Neil Gaiman and Clive Barker are the best authors of popular (accessible) literature.
I tried reading American Gods a while ago and I stopped about a hundred pages in I think. It just felt aimless and the plot just a list of unrelated encounters with fantasy people. It's the same problem I have with Stephen King books where it reads like the story was obviously made up as it was written.
Was I wrong? Does the story eventually cohere?
It's the kind of novel which people can enjoy without shame, but others have no reason to like or finish.
I have no clue, as I'm only 50 pages in myself.
However, I love stories with little-to-no coherence. Just a series of events happening to a main character and how he reacts to said events.
It's why I love Linklater movies so much, it's why I love neo-noir, and hopefully it's why I'll like this book.
>Just a series of events happening to a main character and how he reacts to said events.
I wouldn't mind that if the main character wasn't a bore, but he was as far as I read it. Does he deepen later? Was I wrong?
tarantino never bored me to near-death, so I don't think the comparison is apt, like, at all
When you finish this (in case you do) come back and review the book.
Also i enjoyed more the comics, but once again, i can hardly enjoy pleb books.
Give me your opinions on Barker. I’m considering reading Books of Blood, but I know nothing about it.
Read this a month or two ago and liked it as well. It's a fun book in the sense I like how Shadow and Wednesday travel across America. Ending was eh but I enjoyed the ride. I never got the whole reddit tier book idea. It was entertaining to me so whatever. At least I don't meme all day and actually read books.
There is a point to all that at the end.
He is suppose to be boring, it's mention near the end of the book.
It sucks so badly. Someone post the thing about Shadow or whatever and his time in prison. It's sonic the hedgehog fanfiction-core.
I quit a little over halfway in. The prose was bland, the characters were shallow, and the plot, especially the mythological namedropping, was hilariously predictable. It also seemed like he was trying really hard to be edgy in some parts. Not my cup of tea.
motherfucker the MC's name is fucking shadow, what do you think he's going to do, buttfuck his cousin and redefine the boundaries of true love? no.
I certainly will. Been a while since I actually finished a book.
I didn't like it THAT much. But then again, he gave us the Sandman so he's automatically forgiven of any mistakes he can make.
I used it in an academic paper. I never got past the first chapter, honestly. And there I sat thinking it would be something like ole' Stewie King, but this was different, oh so different.
The only thing I did like about it was his, admittedly very basic, philosophy about "modern Gods" and using American tourist locations as "holy lands". I thought that was a cool thought but I'm a sucker for Americana and roadside attractions and nostalgia and all that.
I see people like Gaiman and Palahniuk trying to be the next Stephen King, in their own way. Not great, not horrible. A few interesting thoughts and passages along the way.
>Shadow had done three years in prison. He was big enough, and looked don’t-fuck-with-me enough that his biggest problem was killing time. So he kept himself in shape, and taught himself coin tricks, and thought a lot about how much he loved his wife.
>it's shit on purpose
>it reads like the story was obviously made up as it was written
>like the story was obviously made up as it was written
>the story was obviously made up as it was written
>obviously made up as it was written
>made up as it was written
>as it was written
>it was written
What did he mean by this?
not funny/10, see me after class
>see me after class
I know what he meant by this...