Is there anyway to get notifications when new posts are posted on a specific discussion? This is why I haven't said anything lately cause I have to keep logging in to find out if anyone has said anything.

I can't believe people are already discussing the other book, I'm still waiting on my copy which I assume will take a while longer now that Canada Post is on strike.

I will be back on later to discuss this more, busy at the moment

@ pyrilamine

Go to Pete original post in the thread and click the link at the bottom where it says 'you are not watching this thread, click to start watching' or something along those lines.

That way you should get a mail message with each update.

Hope that helps!

Doesn't the first post say something like "You are not watching this"?

I believe if you click that, it will give you notifications - though I've never used it myself so I could be totally wrong.

Well I've been out of town and also busy with a big move -Anyone still interested in talking about this? I tried to give it some thought while away -I want to reread it and I think that desire is great for a book to leave you with. I don't think, necessarily, that it would make a good movie -just to stay relevant to previous conversation. But I feel that way about Most books. I don't always need a movie. Like Kiss Me, Judas -love the book, but would never want to see that made into a movie. I don't know.

But Sonbert's love for 80's music (seemingly) -it's interesting how he works that into his books -stories so far about characters having to either grow up, or face themselves. Wondering if that's a subconscious soundtrack that helps him identify with his characters, or just the music that helps him write in general.

Hey Nathan you're back, I missed those shades and that hat over the last week or so!

Largely I agree about this not being suitable for a movie - like I said before I'd be afraid they'd give the job to the guy that directed Hostel or Saw part eight hundred and twelve and the outcome would be an hour and a half of close ups of wounds and people screaming. I am not a big movie fan at all though, less so than most folks seem to be anyway.

The music thing, maybe you're onto something there, maybe not though. The only music I like from the eighties is the heavy metal so I'm probably not the best qualified person to comment but that decade was the era of the supposedly inspiring, montage soundtrack type songs, no? These songs seem to be very much fitting with the themes that were picked out by Matt earlier in this thread. (making a mark on the world, nobody into a somebody, so on) This kind of music might have been an influence if Sonbert was the right age back then?

Maybe we're over analysing though. Maybe he just likes the tunes.

Hey! You've Changed Your Appearance! Like the new colors

And the music? Maybe so. Quite interesting what you wrote here, though: "inspiring, montage soundtrack type songs... These songs seem to be very much fitting with the themes that were picked out by Matt earlier in this thread. (making a mark on the world, nobody into a somebody, so on)"

Very interesting. Now when you say 80's heavy metal, do you mean like Slayer, Megadeth and Metallica, or stuff like Warrant, Trixter and Poison? What are we talking about here?

If we're talking American stuff then I love the thrash from the eighties, Slayer, Megadeth, Exodus, the early early Metallica records etc. But also the beginnings of the heavier stuff. Morbid Angel and Death and Obituary all started up late eighties.

Not so much the glam and power stuff. Not my cup of tea.

Back on topic hehe,

I want to throw a random tangent into the mix. Something that occured to me as I was first reading WAO that I don't think that I (or anybody else) has mentioned so far is how well Mansfield works for the unreliable narrator. The brain damaged boxer is a perfect way to add a quirk to this kind of character. The lapses in perception, the confusion he suffers at times, his forgetfulness - these things really add a new depth. What a clever way to be able to fit them in, Sonbert basicallly gave himself licence to make Mansfield as nutty as he liked, and because of the dementia inflicted from boxing we (or at least I) buy the behaviour as being more believable than we might have otherwise.

And of course even though Mansfield himself doesn't know at first (and maybe by the end we are questioning it), but we are told in the blurb and in the promo material for the book that he is an ex-boxer. Cleverly done, that.

Yes, I've talked to people who didn't like the book, and the (for lack of a better term) shock value of the narrator's voice and actions was the primary reason. But also, filtering it through this kind of character is what excuses it. Which you could argue might be a little too convenient. I've been guilty of such judgment myself (for example, I hated, hated Noah Cicero's The Condemned largely because I was judging the author by his narrator, who just sounded like some misanthropic kid to me, without any literary merit, and I haven't read any of his other work). But once we start peeling the onion and you see why he is the way he is, and the patterns and his dubious history, it works much better for the story going forward.

Have to agree -and yeah it works well just on the level of facing death.

Notice in the first chapter, Fancy says to him, "Have you ever thought about killing someone, what it would feel like?"

So that's where his mind goes in the face of death -he's seeing a life flash before his eyes, as they say, only not a real one -he's seeing the answer to Fancy's question, or his mind's answer to it, now that is mind is thinking about it and trying to feel something about it. Is he even capable of it? What exactly is he capable of? Goes back to what Martin's saying about the author making Mansfield as nutty as he liked. Reads to me like the character's subconsious is wondering what he's truly capable of -Who am I? Or who was I? Does it even make a difference? -all while facing death. Then when he comes back and tries to remember his real self... It's just really well done when you think about it. But interesting thing about that blurb and Mansfield being a boxer -I actually didn't read that before going into the book and I'm glad I didn't. Not knowing he was a boxer gave me a wild ride.

But interesting thing about that blurb and Mansfield being a boxer -I actually didn't read that before going into the book and I'm glad I didn't. Not knowing he was a boxer gave me a wild ride.

Wow, yeah that would have changed how the first half of the book read a great deal.

Hmm a re-read will be especially interesting for you then, no?

I didn't read anything about it. I usually don't do that with books, and it makes the reading experience more interesting.

Oh yeah I understand that,

My usual tactic for books by authors I know I like is to avoid all info before reading, no blurbs or anything.

But if it's someone I have never read before then I'm gonna read the back. This was the first of Sonberts work I checked out.

This reading the back thing, I only do it when I get books from the library, and like you said, of authors I haven't read. Though it happens that I choose a book simply by its title, and I've made some pretty good choices so far. Two of my favourite books were picked like this.

Yo you crazy mother effers. Thanks so much for talking about the book.

Can't believe how insightful you are when discussing it. It gives me hope. I rate books as either boring or badass so it's pretty inspiring to see people discussing themes and sub-themes and so on.

Anyway, I'm on vacation so I'm happy to answer questions anybody has. Just post em and I'll respond. If nothing comes up, no worries. Just a big thanks for taking the time to read the book and then weigh in on it.

To answer one question - Why Rio?

Hmmm...no fuckin clue. I guess I didn't want to choose something too new. At least I know that song has held up whereas "Poker Face" might not. And Duran Duran was huge when I was younger. Mansfield is about the same age as me so it makes sense that he would know it. But ultimately, the video has always stuck with me. It reminds me of being happy and I'm not sure why. Plus, the song kicks ass. If you disagree, send me you address and I'll come to your house to fight you.

Rock on.

I knew it! You love the 80's music. Book 3 better have some Huey Lewis and The News in there. Or some Voices Carry, by Till Tuesday.

The Outfield and some Mr. Mister might work as well.

To Michael Sonbert
I heard that The Never Enders was no longer being printed...
Is that true? Because I've been reading We Are Oblivion (hence the reason I'm writing in a book club for it) and I can't seem to put it down. Your style of writing and your attention to detail are amazing. Thanks for the great work. You can bet that I will continue to read any books that you release.
-Justin Teeter

@ Teeter

I put in an order from Amazon UK for a copy of The Never Enders and had no trouble. In fact it is due to be delivered today.

If the UK site has it then I'd have thought the American one does too.

The Never Enders is also available in ebook from Amazon. Not that that necessarily helps, but.

I've got a nook so I don't know if an amazon ebook works with the nook. But thanks anyway.

@wickedvoodoo Thank you!!! I looked for something like that but didn't look at the post. That's really helpful!

Sorry I didn't post back, I was in and out of the hospital with an emergency situation so I was not able to post.

@Michael Sonbert: This book was BADASS!!

This book was totally entertaining to me. When I started reading the book and Mansfield was pouring boiling water into the plant pot it made me smile.

Before I read the book, I did read the blurb at the beginning of this thread which said Mansfield is a boxer etc, so I went in knowing he was a boxer and Fancy was a pregnant prostitute. For me in the beginning when he was having his memory issues I was under the assumption that Mansfield must have been in a fight and got his head beat in pretty badly.

I went back and forth with Fancy wondering if she was fucking with him, using him, and being completely honest.

I loved it! I couldn't see what was going to happen next. Even when Mansfield is running from the car and he looks back and sees the girl in the car with her face beaten I was going Whaaaaat?!

I still wish the ending hadn't taken away all the f'd up stuff that went on. I really liked it up to that point, I think it's like holding a treat over a dog's head and then taking it away.

I agree that making a movie out of it might go wrong, it wouldn't make the right impression on people. I look forward to reading more Sonbert books, I will be getting my Kindle version of The Never Enders asap!

Thanks Justin. Glad you're digging WAO. And thanks for the heads up on TNE not being available. I've spoken to my editor and he's looking into it. It's something on the distributor's end. I'll let you know when it's straightened out.

Rock on
M

Thanks so much.

PS- the original version did actually end on the beach. Mansfield is drowning and the sky is changing from light to black and he believes he sees the NYC skyline at points but he's not sure. I thought it was OK but every person who read it was REALLY confused and kind of annoyed. The ending didn't really pop if that makes sense. So I changed it. But I get why you want it the other way.

PPS- fuck it. Make the movie and then we'll figure it out. That's big bucks if that happens.

I conducted an interview with Michael about We Are Oblivion for my blog/writer's hideout.

I posted a link over in trades and promotions but thought it would be apt to put it here too

You can see the interview here .

Michael gave me some great answers.

Cheers guys.

We Are Oblivion is now available on Kindle for 99 cents: http://www.amazon.com/We-Are-Oblivion-ebook/dp/B0050DPEWQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=...

What about nook!

Funny how the endings change according to feedback and sentiment - and the way in which said ending can work most of these ways.

That's true!

GREAT book, by the way. Just finished.

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/59403

Hey, awesome! I'm going to go get it...now.

Nice! I'm curious to see what you think of it Alecia.

A little behind the game--I ordered this book from Amazon almost a month ago, it took forever to get here, and I ended up reading another book before this one so... I just finished it.

Let me first say that I'm a slow reader. With my track record, this book should have taken me a week but I finished it in a day. I couldn't put it down.

What's more amazing is that I almost stopped a couple of times--some parts of this felt over-the-top disgusting/disturbing--but I was gripped by the story and wanted to know what happened next. I am so glad that I stuck with it.

Finally, this was an awesome read. After finishing, I found myself going back and re-reading parts. Awesome.

There's my two cents, now I'm going to read all of the posts.

I thought the ending was perfect!

Spoilers All Over The Place

I felt throughout the book that Mansfield was a good guy but his brain damage kept him disassociated (perfect term Tuffy) with the ultra-sex and ultra-violence.

I believe that subconsciously Mansfield knows that Fancy is bad for him. I know that he states that she likes what she does at the beginning. But, throughout the story, she is trying to destroy anything that is good and constantly calling the one person she feels connected to "retard." He seems to go along with her destructive behavior but always ties that destruction with something innocent... ie. "Rio".

It is true that he starts to relish in the destruction, but I chalk that up young boys burning ants with a magnifying glass--when you look back it's awful but, admit it, at the time it was fun.

I also like how he makes connections with the two blondes and the twenty-year-old but, looking back in the end, the relationships were ultimately part of the destruction. I think this is where the ending lies:

I felt that Mansfield decided to break from the norm and take that trip with Fancy. I believe that he cared about her and thought that the trip would turn out like the dream. The whole Tyler Durden dogma of: (paraphrased)is it better to be good and not noticed by God or to make God notice and hate you?

The whole dream was coming to grips with sacrificing your safety and freedom to be 'somebody' by being bad. But when he was brought back to reality, he was becoming 'somebody' by sacrificing his own safety to save others. So instead of becoming ultra-bad, he became ultra good.

And, on the aforementioned point of who is Mansfield really--don't you usually base your dreams on yourself? I don't know--that's how I took it.

But all of this could be a bunch of bunk and I'm totally off.

Read and watched it--great analogy.

SPOILERS

I just finished it, and I'd echo most of your sentiments. It was a hell of a ride, and the historical meetings were done with a great flair. The book spelled a lot of things out for you, but left some things for you to decipher yourself. So it had a good balance. The ending reminded me of American Psycho, in which Ellis confessed himself to being an unreliable narrator in Lunar Park. It was done pretty vividly here though. I was a bit unimpressed with the first 3 or 4 chapters, and the prose seemed kinda weak. Though it seemed to get stronger and tighter as went along. As I got 65% through, and Fancy met her parents at the grave-site.. I could not put this down. It went from being a pretty pedestrian book reminding me of Mickey and Mallory Knox, to a gut-wrenching tragedy that actually made me CARE for these misfits. The knife scene definitely tugged at your heart-strings, and I really felt for Mansfield in the end when he had to give the baby up.

All in all it wasn't the best book I've ever read, but I liked the twist. It was an above average character study, and got very good as the story progressed.

Forget the spoiler tags, guys. Go nuts. Let's talk about the ending, in detail. It's the biggest talking point of the novel, really, outside of the ultra-violence.

Me? At first, I hated the ending. I started reading it and when I realised it was "all a dream", I got so fucking pissed off. I was with him the whole way. I sped through the book like a bullet through the brain. But when that ending started being revealed, man, I was pissed. I didn't chuck the book or anything because I had an ARC and, well, I like books a little too much to do that. But, seriously, I was so disappointed that I put it down and almost didn't read the last ten pages. I was muttering to myself, Really? Fuck. Come on, Mikey. Man. Shit. Really? All a fucking dream. Come on!

BUT--yes, but--then I kept reading and finished it and was still kinda pissed, but I thought he did it well. It was well plotted. The clues were enough that on a second read you see them and smack yourself for not seeing it the first time, but not too much that it gave it away or even made you think that it was coming. I was still disappointed though. Regardless though, the story stayed in my mind. It kept me thinking. I kept coming back to it, even if I was getting pissed off about it.

I didn't necessarily think it should've ended on the beach. Not at all. I just hated that it was a cop-out, that it leant on that "it was all a dream" technique.

I spoke with Pete extensively about. We didn't agree. He loved it. It didn't bother him that it was all a dream. Said he didn't feel cheated, like me. I argued that I'd spent all that time with Mansfield and felt awful because you just don't know the guy once the reveal comes. I just didn't care about him at all anymore. And, I hated that. I hated that I ended up caring so much about this revolting character only to have it snatched away from me.

BUT--yes, more but--then I got to thinking on it. And, I started thinking about the whole "A nobody trying to be a somebody" theme. And I thought about how maybe it didn't matter. Like, the dream was a projection of his desires, of his deepest wants. So, I did still know Mansfield. And, maybe it wasn't the guy that I followed through the whole book, but I knew the man on a much deeper level now.

I have more thoughts on this, but I haven't thought about it for a bit and I can't collect my original theory at the moment. I know my theory was a lot more intricate than that. And, I told Pete and he dug it and it gave him a whole new level of appreciation for the text. Say, Pete, do you remember any of what I told you after I had my epiphany?

I've been flat-out and in a bit of a personal rut of late, so forgive my absence for the last couple of weeks of the book club. You all did well to keep it going. There's no reason why we can't keep talking about this after the month, so, please, continue.

Honestly, with the way the book was written, it didn't piss me off it was a dream. I accepted the ending. And I really enjoyed the book. It was so well written and it just sucked me in. I loved it.

But then after the discussion with Matt, I did think about the ending a lot. I really like where he went with it. Here's a guy who probably had a shitty boss. He probably got kicked around a lot. He hated his life maybe. And he has this dream where he's the person who can do anything. He can snort vomit. He can kick ass. He's the shit and he doesn't give a fuck about anything.

I don't know. I liked the book so much more and now I really want to reread it when I can fit it into my schedule.

Here is the main text that Matt sent me that day:

Perhaps we don't know Mansfield, but maybe we don't need to. He's an Everyman. He represents All of us that are so fucking scared that we're gonna amount to nothing at the end of our days. And that makes the ending hit me so hard. It's something I'm scared of more than anything. Perhaps this elaborate dream is this guy, this regular guy, not having his life flash before his eyes, but having the life he dreamed of, the one he never had the guts to persue, flash before his eyes in his dying moments. You know? It makes the end so fucking sad because he's seeing what could have been but it's too late. It's too late to fix it. To be Somebody. He's just another dead body floating in the water.

All forshadowing aside (sound cutting out, water, etc.), would the ending have been better if he woke up in, say, the nuthouse?

My opinion:

No - I think he needed to be on the verge of dying. That's why I accepted the "it's just a dream." (That and all the clues throughout)

If all the clues were there, though, and they pointed to him being in a straight-jacket in some asylum - I wouldn't have been as satisfied with the ending.

I think I was so ready to accept it because it made sense in my head.

Yeah, I wouldn't have been into the nuthouse-version. No way.

Michael, you around? Was that ever on the cards?

I LOVE the ending now, by the way. Maybe I didn't make that clear. But that text I sent Petey that he just posted probably shows that I ended up loving it. Really appreciating the ending. And, I think, the fact that it's a bit controversial makes it all the better. Because it evokes real emotion from the reader. And even if you're frustrated by it, you're still thinking about it long after you turn the last page, which means, really, Sonbert's gone above and beyond his call of duty. His written a book that stays with the reader. And, at first, I liked TNE much more than this, despite WAO being way more up my alley, in general. It's because of that reason. It's because I'm STILL thinking about this book. About Mansfield.

I pretty much nailed what I wanted to say in that text that Pete posted.

What are your thoughts in that interpretation, guys?

Overall, I prefer TNE, but still liked this book. The other day, I read a review online where the guy was calling people out as liars for all the praise they were giving this book for being well-written. Which to me just underscored the importance of finishing the effing book before passing judgment publicly (which this person hadn't). I wasn't in love with the first several chapters, either. And in one sense it's a bit of a deus ex machina ending, yeah, but it's not just dropped on you. There were foreshadowings. And the character evolves on his own in the third act before any of this other stuff happens.

So now that some time has passed, anyone else seen Stay? That's the thing WAO reminds me most of. The technique, anyway.

Oh, it's been a long time since I've seen that. I should check it out again to see where you're coming from.

Let's be a forthcoming as possible here: the guy was Eddy J. Rathke and he called the book complete shit based on (as you pointed out) the first six chapters, and then he proceeded to go on about how this book is essentially the opposite of art, and that anything that isn't art should be vehemently opposed because "bad art" has no place in this world.

Now I'm cool with the part about him saying it's not his cup of tea for whatever reason. That's fine.

A formal hatchet job based on six chapters and then proceeding to say that everyone who gave it a positive review is wrong is bullshit.

If Eddy feels so strongly about Michael contaminating the world of literature, he needs to release his own book and outsell him. Anyone can talk shit from a distance.

My sentiments exactly. The first act seemed a bit a bush league to me, but it really comes together as you get immersed into the story. I wasn't a fan of the prose at all, as it seemed like something my friend, who hasn't even picked up a book since high school could write. It gets really tight though once they decide to spare the old man who was going to meet his daughter.

When you finish it, you realize why the first act was written that way. The narrator is a bumbling moron suffering from hallucination, so it was only right to treat him as such. He didn't have a capacity for morality, because he didn't know who the fuck he was! So it would be a bit contrived to see him narrate the story as an erudite with perfect grammar and English.

After thinking about it, this book reminded me of the Frasier episode (season 6 episode 11) "The Good Samaritan":

Found it on YouTube and posted it if interested.The part I'm talking about starts at 10:23

it has the same twist that supports my theory.

One thing that bothers me is the time travelling in the dream. I didn't feel that it added to the story. I get the fact that he was hinting to a dream-like setting and contrasting Masnfield with infamous people--Oswald and McVeigh--but I thought Katrina didn't fit. Did this bother anyone else?

Where was Eddy's review posted? Link please.

Review: http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/181155791

And then here's his little rant on The Velvet: http://welcometothevelvet.com/forums/showthread.php?13175-What-re-you-re...

I didn't get that he was an Everyman. In the first chapter, outside the dream, he is introduced as a man with brain damage that is living with a prostitute. I'm guessing one of these scenarios would be a bitch to live with but having both... that is why he sits around and does nothing. I still think this dream is a way to come to grips with who he is and to find some kind of direction. Instead of Everyman, I take this as a morality tale.

I don't know what I'm talking about!

Hey, everyone. Well this got good. Welcome back Doc -agree that I had a slight moment of "it's only a dream?" -but then seeing that they're dying, I came to understand it more as a life flashing before your eyes sort of thing, or desires as Doc put it, wondering about himself and who he truly is before he goes. I think the ending is great as is, and for me it goes back to that question in the first chapter "Have you ever thought about killing someone, what it would feel like?" It read like that's where his mind goes in his final moments.

And what's all this talk about texting each other? You guys in some elite part of the book club I don't know about?

I have not read all the negative reviews on this, but did check out the velvet link, and speaking to my reading experience, I never once came away with "this writing is not on the level." I felt the Opposite. I felt that it's like nothing else out there at the moment. N

And whatever to his rant about the 5 stars from readers being disingenious. Yeah, I gave it 5 stars. It was an exciting, enjoyable experience from start to finish, it left me wanting to read it Again which a lot of books, even ones I like, don't, and there's something about the book that's doing what we're all seeing right now -generating Discussion, where you have haters on one side, and us on the other. What books do that? Generate discussion, I mean? Usually great books.

I didn't give it 5 stars 'cause I know him. I don't know him. I won't call out anyone else but I gave another book from someone I have interacted with a 4 star rating. So this guy on the Velvet doesn't exactly what he's talking about as far as why people are raving about We Are Oblivion. He makes assumptions on the book And its readers, and assumptions are only just that -assumptions. He's off base.

You know what? I'm joining the velvet today and posting this there -that's where this needs to go. But those are also my thoughts on the book as far as book club goes.

I wouldn't waste your time.