Rating: 
Summary: HHGTTG for the 90's?
Review: Although any comparison to Douglas Adams is probably going to be unfavorable for the comparee, this is one of the more Adams-ish novels I've read in ages.
The similarities are striking, but not unexpected, as both were based on BBC series (HHGTTG = radio, Neverwhere = TV), and there may be a style that is inherent in the production system.
However, going deeper, we find that both are travelogues in which the protagonist is an Englishman who's been yanked out of his very ordinary life into an entirely different, mythic one that he had no prior knowledge of. Furthermore, both authors give us no real clue as to what the end goal of this journey is until we are halfway through. One isn't even sure that the author himself knew when he started (moreso with Adams).
There are also some strong similarities in characters.
Richard Mayhew -> Arthur Dent. Fairly obvious. Displaced and rather upset about it.
Door -> Ford Prefect. Where Ford actively involves Arthur, Door just happens to Richard. Both Door and Ford are the facilitating agent for the journey.
Marquis -> Zaphod. Insufferable, well-connected, overconfidence, self-important.
However, Gaiman's view of a fantasy trek is much darker than Adams'. Where Adams' characters banter and chatter, Gaiman's tell each other to be quiet and not get in the way. Adam's villains (the Vogons, etc.) are comic, and their unpleasantness is actually rather silly (would feed his own grandmother to the ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal). Gaiman's villains (Croup and Vandemar, etc.) are comic in a much darker way, and their unpleasantness is quite graphic and violent. Their repartee is mildly reminiscent of Saki's "Clovis", as opposed to the Lewis Carroll-esque trading of absurdities in HHGTTG.
Obviously, author styles are the key difference. But, are the differences something I can chalk up to the fact that they were written 15 years apart? The answer is a tentative yes. The general trend in SF is toward the dark dystopic works of Gibson, Sterling, Stephenson, et al. We get films like "Seven" and "12 Monkeys." The remake of "Lost in Space" bears little resemblance to its happy, fluffy progenitor, instead going for a 'bad-ass' attitude.
So, if you like Douglas Adams, and can deal with a darker take on the SF group quest, Neverwhere is a good read. I'd say it also owes a little to Phillip K. Dick (attitudes towards time as flexible) and Terry Gilliam (darkness, disconnectedness, and decay). The last eighth of the book could have been stronger, as it feels a bit like Gaiman threw it together to have a climax and tie up some loose ends. Unfortunately, he also ties up some loose ends that we never knew existed, which I find to be a rather irritating habit in some writers. In an Asimov book, there are many details and threads throughout that can be handled with a very clever and simple ending. Gaiman over-embroiders and introduces far too much new story to explain the one we've just finished.
Rating:
Summary: If it's fun, why not just enjoy it?
Review: A lot of people are criticizing this novel, saying that there's nothing added to your life after reading it. So what? How about the joy of reading it? Neverwhere starts in a weird way, probably because it's weird to read Gaiman without pictures. But it goes on well, and gets better at each page, with all kinds of mythologies mixed in a kind of organized chaos (I said it was weird). The best thing is that this book is 100% Gaiman. Some say the book has nothing behind the story, that the characters are shallow, adn I ask again, so what? Neverwhere is just what it is, 377 pages of the best kind of entertainment.
Rating: 
Summary: WONDERFUL & IMAGINATIVE!
Review: All I have to ask is when does the sequel come out?
Rating:
Summary: The most fun I've had reading a book in years
Review: It's weird reading the occasional downer reviews on this page, as if we read different books. I loved "Neverwhere" completely and entirely, it was like a Narnia book for adults, deceptively simple but filled with strange depths and moments of completely astonishing depth and profundity and of humor. C. S. Lewis would have loved it and understood it and so would Frank Baum. I've loved Gaiman's prose for a long while, some of the "Angels and Visitations" stories are astonishing, and "Stardust" his new book is like a cross between Dunsany and E. Nesbit, with a prose style that's pure delight. "Neverwhere" is quite different though, simple and powerful and dangerous. I hope he writes a sequel, I want to go back there again.
Rating: 
Summary: Mildly amusing comic without pictures; boring, cliched novel
Review: Summary: Accountant joins the society for creative anachronism, except...it's real!!!! Neverwhere's gothic characters, plot and imagery is all on the surface. A brooding character broods, a clueless character has no clue, vicious characters are vicious, comic relief is comic relief. Everybody acts in their heavily stylized way, so that once you know which character plays what role, you also know pretty much what they're going to do for the rest of the book. London Below is gothic, bloody and brooding because that would be cool. People who fall through the cracks develop powers because that would be cool. This works wonders in Gaiman's comics (excuse me, graphic novels!), but it doesn't work as a novel. Don't get me wrong, this book will entertainingly pass your time. Will it add anything to your life after? No. If you want to read a really great, lush, textured, nuanced book with about where fantasy and reality meet, try Little, Big by John Crowley, or The Bone People by Keri Hulme.
Rating:
Summary: Me again
Review: What I meant by that Neil's style is somewhat simple is that he lacks a sense of structure (in this book, anyway); take Alan Moore or Emily Bronte, they certain have a good sense of organization. Neil's style is too matter-of-fact, too Hemingway for me.
Rating:
Summary: This book won't disappoint Neil Gaiman Fans
Review: I enjoyed Neil's book as much as I would anything that Neil writes or is involved in. I'm hesitant to give it a ten, because then it woul make less of other books, such as _The Picture of Dorian Gray_ or _Crime and Punishment_. This book is imaginative and entertaining. However, what I find fault with this story is that it lacks any substantial meaning, and sometimes Neil's diction is simple, and not as impressionable as other books... but perhaps I'm just stuck in other time periods...
Rating:
Summary: This aye night, this aye night, every night and all...
Review: This could have been a great book. One of the highest on my list of great fantasy books. It was funny, it had nice dialogue, and interesting characters (Old Bailey, Mr. Croup and Mr. Vandemaar are my favorites). The premise itself was interesting itself, if not used before (see "Down Town"): an underside to London where people fall through the cracks and Richard dragged from the Upworld to the underside. And if it had completely failed as a story, then it makes a pretty nice travel guide to London (I'm speaking as someone who read the American version of the book and has never been to London before). But the ending! I felt so disappointed. It was the ending that made it an nice book, but not a great book.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best books I've ever read!
Review: Neil Gaiman shows what a master he is with this enthralling and imaginitive novel. His characters are likable (even Croup and Vandemar!) and his plot twists are brilliant.
Rating:
Summary: Just a reader, not a fan
Review: Although I know who and what Gaiman has done, I've never followed his work. Neverwhere is good.....a nice weave of fantasy and reality which is where it's strength lies. I thought the main characters needed more developing, but the concept is more than enough to intrigue.
|
