Previous Comments

[1] On Jul-31-2005, wrote:

i think Palahniuk is one of the most overrated authors out there. i don't even see why he is placed in the same category as ellis, who writes disturbing and meaningful satires, when his books are just downright silly. the fact that he publishes a new book every week and that each one is more bizarre for the purpose of "shocking" than the next, has really made him lose credibility in my eyes.

[2] On Aug-01-2005, JMB wrote:

I recently read Fight Club for the first time. I enjoyed it, but I agree that it's not on the same level as Ellis' work. From what I've read, Palahniuk's work is seems more accessible to 'the masses,' and thus is naturally more popular than Ellis' stuff. I can just see the world's biggest Fight Club fan setting down Glamorama and going 'huh?'

Of course, everybody probably said 'huh' after Glamorama...
--
JMB

[3] On Aug-01-2005, mitch wrote:

The thing that I don't like about Chuck is that in very book he tries to show off his intelligence. He lists all these facts, telling the reader ohhh how smart he is for knowing how to make a bomb and knowing this and that, it just doesn't seem so realistic. Chuck we know you have an IQ of 190 now write the damn book!

[4] On Aug-01-2005, Nathan wrote:

I'm a Chuck fan, although I don't like his books nearly as much as Ellis'.

I definitely think Chuck's popularity is largely hinged on how accessible his books are to the masses, language-wise. But think about it. Better for someone to be reading Chuck's books than Dan Brown, Tom Clancy or some other totally mainstream writer.

To comment on the notion that Chuck shows off his vast knowledge, that's actually not the way it is. He thoroughly researches the facts behind each of his books; he makes it a point to get that stuff right to counterbalance the obviously exaggerated things his characters do.

I met Chuck at a book signing last year, he's a very cool, down-to-earth guy.

I thought "Diary" was almost as good as the early books and definitely better than "Lullaby" and "Choke."

I do think, though, that it's about time for Chuck to branch out as far as his style and content go. He needs to do make changes comparable to what Ellis did with "Glamorama."

[5] On Aug-01-2005, jamesg wrote:

since when did we start rating non-ellis books in the news section?

[6] On Aug-01-2005, Bret Schlyer wrote:

Since way back in the day. Its just not something I do often.

[7] On Aug-02-2005, Lester wrote:

Chuck knocked the ball out of the park with his first three books but it seems like he's been treading water in recent years. People who complain that Brett Easton Ellis is one note should try reading "Choke", "Haunted" or "Diary"...

Sure he produces a book a year - but I'd rather see him take some time off...reflect, renew. It's should be about quality, not quantity.

[8] On Aug-03-2005, Jean-Luc Godard wrote:

Bret...what ratings did you give Ellis' previous books? Using the 10-point scale, just to see how good or bad a 7.5 actually is. I trust that would be a "thumbs up", but uncertain as to its actual ramifications.

[9] On Aug-03-2005, Jean-Luc Godard wrote:

Just to clarify...I stated "Ellis' previous books", yes I am aware that this is discussion of a Palahniuk book, I just said that since it's so close to "Lunar Park", which is another reason, so when he gives an actual rating for "Lunar Park", I'll be able to tell your thoughts in comparison to his previous novels.

Just covering my ass...I know how message boards can get about accuracy...very touchy.

[10] On Aug-06-2005, Bret Schlyer wrote:

9+ is a great book, something I'd re-read whenever I had the opportunity. (American Psycho, Glamorama, Lunar Park all fit here)

7.5 is a good enough book, but not something I'd ever re-read. (Informers falls solidly here for me)

5.0 is a book that had small enjoyable parts, but seemed unfinished or unsatisfying.

Under 5 is something I wish I hadn't wasted my time on.

[11] On Aug-15-2005, Jean-Luc Godard wrote:

Thanks Bret!

Now you've made me even more excited about Lunar Park...jeez...that's all i need...at least it comes out tomorrow :)

[12] On Aug-15-2005, Jean-Luc Godard wrote:

I haven't read anything by Palahniuk, and I was wondering where to go after Fight Club and Survivor...because it seems that those are the only two of his that consistently get positive recognition. I could be wrong...but are those his only exceptional books? Do the rest fall under the "worth a read if you have nothing else to do" category? I figure I'd ask the people on this site, because I'm sure the Palahniuk site wouldn't be fair about it, and I understand that, I'm the same way with Ellis, I tell everybody "all his stuff is great", but I'm a fan, and the people i tell this to have usually read at least one Ellis...I don't know if I'm a Palahniuk fan yet, but I guess I should give him a shot first.

[13] On Aug-27-2005, Porco wrote:

I'm a Chuck fan, but I thought Diary was attrocious. I have no interest in reading his new book after that experience.

I'd recommend Choke over Survivor. I'm surprised that the latter gets so much esteem, it felt terribly rushed to me.