Parkaboy's Review **SPOILERS**

[QUOTE=jane s.]*cough*

Anyway. To me, writing, moviemaking, any kind of art is such a mixed bag. If you follow a winning formula, something that's garnered you fame and fortune and one of the biggest author fanbases in existence, you get naysayers that bitch about how it's all retread, and it's not new, and it's not different, and it's not interesting. If you change your formula, go a whole new direction--if Chuck started to do flowery language, description so clear you could see every blade of grass in your mind's eye--face it. You'd still bitch about it. Because that's what (warning warning incoming stereotype [but you've done them about [i]me[/i] enough in the past, so I guess it shouldn't bother me much, huh?]) people like you do. If Chuck had changed his style, I would have expected the exact same reaction from you. A three page diatribe about his selling out, his cashing in.

So my suggestion to you is either start living an artless life, or just shut up and roll with the punches.[/QUOTE]You are very poor at assesing motives. Perhaps a psych course would be of benefit to you.

Again you make a facile analysis using stereotypes which you seem to think is insightful. You may very well like the book, Jane. Pick it up after you finish My Pet Goat. Oh and SPOILER ALERT everyone, at the end, 3000 people die in New York. Now [I]that's[/I] a twist ending.

You obviously didn't read [i]my[/i] post:

Ahh but of course, the "you people" argument. This is why I think you're pseudo-intellectual. Because everything you say sounds like a cliche of something you've said before. And like a halfway intellectual summation of a smarter thought that someone had before, and you liked enough that you wrote it down on a cocktail napkin and repeated it here. You don't actually bother to look deeper into anything; you judge on surface and stereotypes.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]You are very poor at assesing motives. Perhaps a psych course would be of benefit to you.

Again you make a facile analysis using stereotypes which you seem to think is insightful. You may very well like the book, Jane. Pick it up after you finish My Pet Goat. Oh and SPOILER ALERT everyone, at the end, 3000 people die in New York. Now [I]that's[/I] a twist ending.[/QUOTE]

Heh.

Anyway. Continuing to assert your intellectual dominance over me and everyone else will really win you a lot of battles in this life, buddy. Keep up the good work.

[QUOTE=jane s.]Heh.

Anyway. Continuing to assert your intellectual dominance over me and everyone else will really win you a lot of battles in this life, buddy. Keep up the good work.[/QUOTE]
You've gone mistaking a message board for "life" again, Jane. this place is a non-space, it's faerie glamour it doesn't exist. Your actual life doesn't matter and you can do whatever the fuck you want. That's the appeal.

I still don't know why you are angry over my opinion on Chuck's new book, which is how this got started. I suppose it's your sometimes controlled contempt for me in general finding a easy venting point. but really, jane, you still have made any intelligent points about the book or Chuck's writing in general. Instead you cast generalizations and hal-assed arguments that won't serve you well in life buddy. Because I think you're basically who you are on these boards because the life you have here is more satisfying and non-corporeal than your actual existence.

I just come here to let off Id.

every time i see this title, i think it says "parkaboy's revenge." like, montezuma's revenge. but, you know, different.

My revenge will come out on the 19th and be crappy.

Again, your assesment of me is wrong, but. You should talk, having met your "girlfriend" on the Cult and haven't actually ever met her.

This is why I like you, you know that? Because you're such a good martyr.

And here's that grammar thing I was talking about again!

You're the one who studied philosophy but lives with his mother. Project much?

This is great. Have you noticed that every single argument you have against me is a "card"? The you're stupid card. The this is just a message board card. When are you going to bring out the Christianity one? The blond one? The female one? I like the board. The board likes me. We spend time together. I also have friends, attend college, work, blah blah blah. But it's comforting to know that YOU consider me nothing more than words on a screen, so you're basically just arguing with a complex vBulletin program. Good for you.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy] ..."Society of the Spectacle"he rails against.[/QUOTE]

Guy Debord, no?

having read "haunted" now, i can't help but think all this negativity towards chuck is a little bit misguided. i mean, hasn't he given us the best years of his life? so what if now that he's written some of the best novels of the last decade he wants to live the life he's dreamed about, before it's too late?

sure, i can't shake the feeling that he can't be bothered anymore to put together a real novel so he's cobbled together some short stories, anyone of which, if i had written, would make me think i was the shit. but no matter what, he can't unwrite the incredible novels he's written, can't erase his place in my life as an amazing novelist, even if now that he's a millionaire several times over he no longer feels the need to recreate himself every other year. isn't "haunted" a story about writing stories, the agony involved? yeah, it's the same old tired out line that fame isn't what it's made out to be, and i'm sure chuck wouldn't trade it in for anything, but maybe he can look back and see that he's sacrificed parts of himself to get where he is. maybe writing is the disease like miss sneezy's that's killing everyone he loves and yet keeping him alive. there are parts of this new book that leave me profoundly disappointed, but i still think it's a deep, honest look into the soul of a man that has already earned my respect enough to slip a little. so, you won't be seeing any negative reviews from me.

[QUOTE=jody]having read "haunted" now, i can't help but think all this negativity towards chuck is a little bit misguided. i mean, hasn't he given us the best years of his life? so what if now that he's written some of the best novels of the last decade he wants to live the life he's dreamed about, before it's too late?
.[/QUOTE]

I haven't read Haunted yet, but I've been left a little cold by his last couple of books anyway.

However - even if I end up miserably disappointed with his new book, nothing will detract from the generosity with which he offers advice about the craft of writing and insights into his own method.

Like you say, he's already given us a few superb novels. He's also only been going for a decade or so. It may be a blip, it may be he's trying to discover a new form to communicate with. He could have twenty-five years of literature left in him. Whatever it is - he's still inspired a generation of readers.

But for me, Chuck is now more of a case study and teacher than favourite author. That's just the way it's gone...

[QUOTE=sacredchao23]Guy Debord, no?[/QUOTE]
Yep.

[QUOTE=jody]having read "haunted" now, i can't help but think all this negativity towards chuck is a little bit misguided. i mean, hasn't he given us the best years of his life? so what if now that he's written some of the best novels of the last decade he wants to live the life he's dreamed about, before it's too late?

sure, i can't shake the feeling that he can't be bothered anymore to put together a real novel so he's cobbled together some short stories, anyone of which, if i had written, would make me think i was the shit. but no matter what, he can't unwrite the incredible novels he's written, can't erase his place in my life as an amazing novelist, even if now that he's a millionaire several times over he no longer feels the need to recreate himself every other year. isn't "haunted" a story about writing stories, the agony involved? yeah, it's the same old tired out line that fame isn't what it's made out to be, and i'm sure chuck wouldn't trade it in for anything, but maybe he can look back and see that he's sacrificed parts of himself to get where he is. maybe writing is the disease like miss sneezy's that's killing everyone he loves and yet keeping him alive. there are parts of this new book that leave me profoundly disappointed, but i still think it's a deep, honest look into the soul of a man that has already earned my respect enough to slip a little. so, you won't be seeing any negative reviews from me.[/QUOTE]
I think, for me, my particular form of ire with Haunted is this: It could have been a really great book. The potential is there and you see certain parts that are grand. But it's like he only went half-way. With Lullaby and Diary I didn't feel cheated or mad, I didn't think either one was much of a copncept. But with haunted, the frame story and a couple of the backstories could have set up an intense "fishbowl" character study where the people were pitted against each other in this strange solitary locale. I suppose I'm harder on it for it's perceived potential in my eyes.

Whatever, I still think he's half-assing lately, which doesn't take away from his better novels, but it's a shame.

[QUOTE=Riddlegimp]

But for me, Chuck is now more of a case study and teacher than favourite author. That's just the way it's gone...[/QUOTE]Yeah, I agree with that. Most definitely.

[QUOTE=Riddlegimp]
But for me, Chuck is now more of a case study and teacher than favourite author. That's just the way it's gone...[/QUOTE]

I agree too. Even then, I don't consider him a GREAT case study, but one to kind of dip your toes in the water, so to speak, and figure out for yourself what's a good idea and what's a bad idea, in terms of writing. In some journalism courses, I'd have teachers telling me to "write this way and not that way, except this guy can write that way, because he does it well..." The gist of writing, in journalism or with stories, is to just do your own thing. If people like it, great. If not, oh well. Either accept it or try something different with your style.

weird, I just logged on, and this thread had 666 views.... is it.... Haunted?

(jk, yeah that was dumb)

[QUOTE=jane s.]Frankly, because Parkaboy just strikes me at the time to take the piss out of things for the sake of it. I would've been shocked if he had liked the book. This is just so...typical. But at least I wasn't let down. I came to this thread for psuedo-intellectualism and a put down of the intelligence of everyone on this board and I was not disappointed![/QUOTE]

I think I'm beginning to underst-

* my head a-splode *

[QUOTE=ireLocus]I think I'm beginning to underst-

* my head a-splode *[/QUOTE]
Sorry about your head, maybe you can tell me why Jane takes such a keen interest in my review of a book she never read?

[QUOTE=jane s.]
But it's comforting to know that YOU consider me nothing more than words on a screen, so you're basically just arguing with a complex vBulletin program. Good for you.[/QUOTE]
Your comfort is our top priority here at Virtual Marriott.
We're here to serve [I]you[/I].
And that's the VM gurantee!

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]Sorry about your head, maybe you can tell me why Jane takes such a keen interest in my review of a book she never read?[/QUOTE]
* scrapes up the pieces of head and brain and such *

* writes a harldy legible "sorry about your shirt" on a pad of paper *

* hands paper to Parkaboy *

* stumbles away *

[QUOTE=ireLocus]* scrapes up the pieces of head and brain and such *

* writes a harldy legible "sorry about your shirt" on a pad of paper *

* hands paper to Parkaboy *

* stumbles away *[/QUOTE]I didn't accept Kennedy's apology and I'm not accepting yours. Do you know how quick brain matter sets in pink, sir!

[QUOTE=jane s.]You have "I liked Nirvana before they were popular" written all over you.[/QUOTE]
This is just a really crap thing to say really. There is a difference in Chuck's last few books and the early stuff so some people are bound to dislike the new stuff. But hey, the last few pages of this thread have been entertaining.

[QUOTE=jane s.]Again, your assesment of me is wrong, but. You should talk, having met your "girlfriend" on the Cult and haven't actually ever met her. [/QUOTE]

So...is that what topography means?
[url]http://www.chuckpalahniuk.net/community/showpost.php?p=577983&postcount=1[/url]

[QUOTE=Vendetta]So...is that what topographical means?[/QUOTE]
Actually Jane doesn't know shit about who I've met and haven't and I'm not about to share with her for her own gratification. Assuming you know anything about someone whose a "persona" on internet is a really naive thing to do.

In general I don't believe anything people say about themselves on these boards. maybe if I talk to them on the phone, but otherwise, you could all be fucking Trafalmadorians for all I know.

Which would be a damn site cooler.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]Actually Jane doesn't know shit about who I've met and haven't and I'm not about to share with her for her own gratification. Assuming you know anything about someone whose a "persona" on internet is a really naive thing to do.[/QUOTE]
It's a scary and dangerous place.

[QUOTE=Vendetta]It's a scary and dangerous place.[/QUOTE]It's a construct, total simulacra. I think the Brock Landers model is a good example. Or this guy, alex, I think his name was who pretended to be a woman and then "introduced" women whose confidence he had gained to "My good friend Alex" so he could get laid...

Yeah, go with what you hear on internet.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]It's a construct, total simulacra. I think the Brock Landers model is a good example. Or this guy, alex, I think his name was who pretended to be a woman and then "introduced" women whose confidence he had gained to "My good friend Alex" so he could get laid...

Yeah, go with what you hear on internet.[/QUOTE]

Yup, you don't wanna go trustin' that Cassun.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]I didn't accept Kennedy's apology and I'm not accepting yours. Do you know how quick brain matter sets in pink, sir![/QUOTE]
* wump *

Parka lives with his mom? What does that have to do with reviewing Haunted?

[QUOTE=capitalistnihilist]Parka lives with his mom? What does that have to do with reviewing Haunted?[/QUOTE]
What does any of what Jane said have to do with reviewing Haunted? At least I admitted I hadn't read the book any further than Guts, gave my two cents, and jumped out of the way. I'm just a spectator at this point... (though I seem to have lost my head... working on that....)

i will geta library copy eventually, assuming chuck fans don;t rip all the copies off. We live in an age of fanaticism.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]What does any of what Jane said have to do with reviewing Haunted? At least I admitted I hadn't read the book any further than Guts, gave my two cents, and jumped out of the way. I'm just a spectator at this point... (though I seem to have lost my head... working on that....)[/QUOTE]

I have noticed that Jane may not be the brightest bulb in the box.

Also-

Parkaboy is a Jackass, he's the type of person who would say things like "the Internet is a construct". If you read through this sort of jargon the review isn't too bad though, it probably discouraged me from buying the book straight away. I wondered if anybody had any proper counter arguments so I skipped to the last page of the thread and found that P and J were still bickering. It's obvious that they were both having such a great time arguing with each other.

[QUOTE=mikandrewz]I have noticed that Jane may not be the brightest bulb in the box.

Also-

Parkaboy is a Jackass, he's the type of person who would say things like "the Internet is a construct". If you read through this sort of jargon the review isn't too bad though, it probably discouraged me from buying the book straight away. I wondered if anybody had any proper counter arguments so I skipped to the last page of the thread and found that P and J were still bickering. It's obvious that they were both having such a great time arguing with each other.[/QUOTE]
Yeah... it is a good review, and there have been a couple good rebuttles as well, check the last couple pages if you want to hear the counter argument, cause it's there. Parkaboy is just so much more voluble that his review can be very convincing, if only because of sheer volume.

The thing to remember is, it's not bad to like this book for what it is, even if it's not what we want or expect or demand from CP. He's still a great author, and from that standpoint we have to assume he knew what he was up to from the beginning. I can't imagine him saying, "Oops.. shouldn't have done that.. what was I thinking?"

Then again, I could be totally wrong.

[QUOTE=mikandrewz]Yup, you don't wanna go trustin' that Cassun.[/QUOTE]
Tell me about it... I trusted him once and woke up in Tijuana wearing only the top half of a Santa suit, a rubber clown shoe and Mescal tattoo.

Bastard.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]Yeah... it is a good review, and there have been a couple good rebuttles as well, check the last couple pages if you want to hear the counter argument, cause it's there. Parkaboy is just so much more voluble that his review can be very convincing, if only because of sheer volume.

The thing to remember is, it's not bad to like this book for what it is, even if it's not what we want or expect or demand from CP. He's still a great author, and from that standpoint we have to assume he knew what he was up to from the beginning. I can't imagine him saying, "Oops.. shouldn't have done that.. what was I thinking?"

Then again, I could be totally wrong.[/QUOTE]I'm still saying, even for what it is, it's still a mess. He needed to tighten the structure and expand the characters. Even a horror story, or whatever you want to call it, ought to have three dimensional characters and a villain with plausible motives.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]I'm still saying, even for what it is, it's still a mess. He needed to tighten the structure and expand the characters. Even a horror story, or whatever you want to call it, ought to have three dimensional characters and a villain with plausible motives.[/QUOTE]

I haven't read the book yet, outside of "Guts" and the other short story/stories published in advance, but if the characters don't have much personality, that's a bit disturbing. I don't have any initial objections about making the stories read like anyone can tell them, but when he'd say at readings that one of the stories is from a best friend of his, and since publishing the story, his friend supposedly got pissed off at Chuck, that presents more depth and dimension to the person the story is from than the actual story. Granted, that display of personality was a result of the story being published, but my point is, I think it's a bit sad that I know more about the source of a story OUTSIDE of the story than what's presented within the story.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]I'm still saying, even for what it is, it's still a mess. He needed to tighten the structure and expand the characters. Even a horror story, or whatever you want to call it, ought to have three dimensional characters and a villain with plausible motives.[/QUOTE]
yeah, I hear ya... unless CP was intentionally poking fun at the reality TV stuff.. but then I just have to ask why? That doesn't make good literature, just a time sensitive piece of fiction that will be obsolete in twenty years.. then what?

[QUOTE=ireLocus]yeah, I hear ya... unless CP was intentionally poking fun at the reality TV stuff.. but then I just have to ask why? That doesn't make good literature, just a time sensitive piece of fiction that will be obsolete in twenty years.. then what?[/QUOTE]
I know he's satirizing the Reality TV phenomenon, but you can do that without having flat characters. Have the "cast" be dull, insipid and deserving to be shot, but focus on the producers, the agents, the greed and the lengths they'll go to manipulate the contestents. You want to add the horrific, have the competive producers, agents and the like trying to one up each other by torturing the cast, have them start hiring "wannabe artists" (like chuck's one Duke of Vandals) to kill rival execs, have the agents and producers slide into the madness they are perpetrating on their "guinea pigs." Just one idea, but right there you have more conflict and drama then in 404 pages of the actual novel.

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]I know he's satirizing the Reality TV phenomenon, but you can do that without having flat characters. Have the "cast" be dull, insipid and deserving to be shot, but focus on the producers, the agents, the greed and the lengths they'll go to manipulate the contestents. You want to add the horrific, have the competive producers, agents and the like trying to one up each other by torturing the cast, have them start hiring "wannabe artists" (like chuck's one Duke of Vandals) to kill rival execs, have the agents and producers slide into the madness they are perpetrating on their "guinea pigs." Just one idea, but right there you have more conflict and drama then in 404 pages of the actual novel.[/QUOTE]
I'd nod if I could.. good point.

the cover still sucks !

[QUOTE=Parkaboy]I know he's satirizing the Reality TV phenomenon[/QUOTE]

Which is hardly a novel idea...not very...zeitgeisty.
He's cashing in on a phenomenon where before he was the phenomenon. Or so it seems to me.

The Internet? Come on, do you really trust something invented by the Army so they could keep tabs on antigovernment conspiracy theories involving dead alien spacecraft and vortex mind control using HAARP? And lets not forget how Internet linked first-person shooter games are training our kids with real-life killing skills and increasing their killosity with subliminal brainwashing so that they all join the Army. And kill.

Why do you think recruitment numbers are so high, anyway?

(You can read more about this in my self-published book BLACK HELACOPTERS OMG!)

[QUOTE=karbunkle]the cover still sucks ![/QUOTE]
Oh my yes!

[QUOTE=Vendetta]Which is hardly a novel idea...not very...zeitgeisty.
He's cashing in on a phenomenon where before he was the phenomenon. Or so it seems to me.[/QUOTE]
Very true, it's passe. He's behind the the curve of late.

[QUOTE=Spike]The Internet? Come on, do you really trust something invented by the Army so they could keep tabs on antigovernment conspiracy theories involving dead alien spacecraft and vortex mind control using HAARP? And lets not forget how Internet linked first-person shooter games are training our kids with real-life killing skills and increasing their killosity with subliminal brainwashing so that they all join the Army. And kill.

Why do you think recruitment numbers are so high, anyway?

(You can read more about this in my self-published book BLACK HELACOPTERS OMG!)[/QUOTE]

The Army and the rest of the military-industrial complex has your best interests in mind. They are looking after you. Trust is compulsory. Suspicion breeds confidence.

Nothing, really. My point was more that I didn't really put any stock into the review itself because of Parkaboy's style of judgement.

But what do I know?

I'm not the brightest bulb, apparently.

[QUOTE=jane s.]Nothing, really. My point was more that I didn't really put any stock into the review itself because of Parkaboy's style of judgement.

But what do I know?

I'm not the brightest bulb, apparently.[/QUOTE]

i guess to do the bizarro version of mik's post, i will add that you are indeed very bright and parkaboy isn't quite as bad of a jerk as people say he is.

It's be nice if we kept the personal attacks to a minimum, though. But hey, as Mirkah says, this ain't Disneyland.

Yeah.. the cover does kinda suck.... I mean, there were a bunch of covers in the contest thread that I though were crap that were still better than this one.

[QUOTE=snuffy]

It's be nice if we kept the personal attacks to a minimum, though. But hey, as Mirkah says, this ain't Disneyland.[/QUOTE]
funny you should mention this..... * smiles like he knows something *

[QUOTE=ireLocus]funny you should mention this..... * smiles like he knows something *[/QUOTE]

we learn by doing, and no one knows a hearty personal attack better than me.

[QUOTE=snuffy]we learn by doing, and no one knows a hearty personal attack better than me.[/QUOTE]
that had nothing to do with you, snuffy... but point well taken.