Rating: 
Summary: Okay...but not Neverwhere
Review: I read Neverwhere and was absolutely in love with it. So a friend presented me with a copy of American Gods. It was a pretty quick read. The story is good, and one you can get into pretty easily. However for the depth of the subject matter the story itself seems to only skim the surface. This is nowhere near the depth, intensity and imagery of Neverwhere - which amazed me b/c that was written for the BBC series, not a novel.
At any rate - this book is mediocre at best.
Rating: 
Summary: Gaiman, excellent!
Review: I loved this story. I was disappointed to see it come out; my husband and I had thought up a similar story during a long road trip---I guess Gaiman got the idea up and printed first!
So I found it intriguing to see what another person thought up in terms of "American Gods." Now, to business.
I loved the idea. The story. There are some flaws in the story.
I have read a lot of the reviews and they all have good points on the negative aspects of the book.
What main character do you know nowadays has a really good personality, or character? Look at the main character of this book. His name is Shadow. Do you expect him to have a lot of personality with a name like that?
The Gods---Its such a neat idea that the old gods came to America with their people. And that they are "dying" out. For a similar story, read "Forests of the Heart" by Charles de Lint.
There is a lot that this story follows in myth---however, I know only rudimentary Norse mythology, so I think I lost out on a lot of the books finer points. But it was still good.
The characters that Shadow interacts with---they are just up and weird and I don't recall what significance a lot of them had in the story. His dead wife, for example. Being ignorant in folklore and mythology, I guess I missed the significance of the gold coin and the dead wife following Shadow around.
Oh dear, I could write on this all day.
Look, you've seen all the reviews. I have never written this long of a review myself; most stories for me in review are a nice paragraph in length. READ this book. Its AWESOME. Its good, its bad. BUT look how much its done for all 300 of us reviewers...
Rating: 
Summary: Beyond his Depth
Review: Neil Gaiman is beyond his depth in this novel. He simply can't write a successful or substantial novel yet. He still needs the padding of comic illustrations. He writes excellent short stories, but hasn't mastered the art of writing a book. The editor should have cleaned up and shortened the book as it rambles and tends to veer off into plot developments that don't add anything to the story. The premise of the book was very interesting, but the execution lacks clarity, character development, and suspense. I found myself not caring about the main character, as he seemed a bit dim-witted and uninteresting. The "American Gods" that littered the chapters were cartoon sketches of beings that should have had more spiritual mystery or meaning. I found this book hard to finish, at the end I simply didn't care about the resolution of the story.
Rating:
Summary: myths and gods beware, gaiman has found you out
Review: i have read some of the reviews of gaiman's novel and it is hard for me to understand why so many negative comments have been made. this novel is a deep and literate work that delves into the life of a man who is otherwise lost in his own vices. shadow, the central character, is not 2-dimensional as others might have you believe. rather, he is a fully fleshed-out character who rolls through life's harsh realities building his character and personality as he goes.american gods blends fantasy, historical fiction, mythology, and science fiction with an ease that shouldn't be possible. any fan of stephen king would probably find a kindred spirit in the writing of neil gaiman. gaiman obviously enjoys what he does as he molds every character with a love of one who feels on the same level as his creations. he creates rich characters who are neither 2-dimensional nor boring. he fully molds them to pop out of the pages and give a sense of meaning to a beautiful work of fiction. to those who love a great read, pick this up, and enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: Second rate.
Review: I have read a lot of sagas, mythology, Zelazny, Harlan Ellison, cyber-punk, and I loved Gaiman's novel Coraline. I ended up skimming my way through the second half of this one. The central character is very two dimensional, and the book is an endless string of enticing brief encounters that lead to not very much. The plot is a pretty standard murder mystery/travelogue. All the "epic" aspects are just rehashes of ancient stories I've long since read elsewhere in much more truly epic form. They might be very impressive if you had not encountered them before, and I certainly respect his taste in borrowing them. Gaiman has a wonderful talent for description, and is a good smooth writer, though he has a hard time not patting himself on the back every so often for his knowledge of grammar. He has clearly read and explored and researched a great deal, but never managed to go very deep in this one. He kept reminding me of books I'd rather be reading. Check it out at the library, I wish I had.
Rating:
Summary: Ambitious but fragile...
Review: Gods are walking the Earth again... and that is the short summary of this book. But, to make a good book, interesting preposition (or a plot) is not good enough. Thoguh Gaiman had a good idea, idea that could have been developed in a more complex way (considering he got a Nebula for this), book lacks a few important things.
Amongst them are: 1. Prolonged narration - author often leads his characters in endless and meaningless converstion, just for sake of building his novel hundred or so pages more than is necessary
2. If we take the general idea of strugle of modern and ancinent pantheon out of the picture, what we are left with is average narrative story about lifepath of one man who find himself in strange situation... we read that story about couple hundred times, and this one does not jump out and screams: "Look at me, I'm extraordinaire"
3. Ending is catstrophic, just like those endings in a B production movies, with an enexpected twist in the tale, and resolution that satisfies all
Eventually, one finds himself wondering wath is good in this book, and one does not find and answer... this is a book that will draw attention for one reading and then it'll be forgotten... if you look for that kind of book I reccomend this, putting all things asside I cannot deny that it is entertaining, but if you look for something else, look elsewhere...
Rating:
Summary: Grim, gripping, grin-inducing-- all in one book
Review: I'm not usually a fan of urban fantasy but Neil Gaiman is changing my mind. NEVERWHERE is very good, too, BTW. This one is darker but more tightly written. One minute it's hilarious, the next it's gross, the next it's unbearably sad. The characters are wonderfully drawn. The basic concept of the old gods living among us is really well done-- imagine the god of thunder committing suicide from depression, the father of all the gods as a con man. Gaiman has obviously done his research; the details about the various gods add richness to an already rich story. I'm putting up every thumb I have.
Rating:
Summary: Why so many negative reviews?
Review: I have only read American Gods and Neverwhere. I will start by saying that Gaiman goes much deeper into American Gods with describing characters and settings. I was captivated by both and I agree that there were more comical parts in Neverwhere. However, Neverwhere is not in the same leauge with American Gods. This book is for much more mature audiences and some may not be able to handle that. It is a much harder read, but that does not mean it is not as good as Gaiman's other works. Its genius can be compared to Pynchon's "V". Honestley, after reading some of Stardust and all of Neverwhere I have come to a conclusion: it would not be a stretch to say that Gaiman's only great work is American Gods. It is the only book that sets him apart from other writers in the field and beyond.
Rating:
Summary: Great writer, but perhaps wrong medium....
Review: For me Neil Gaiman lost his steam after Neverwhere. I read all his sandman comics and looked forward to his novels, but this particular one didn't amaze me. Perhaps I was expecting too much. Mr. Gaiman displays his talent for colorful imagery all throughout the story, but it does little to MOVE the story. The book read like a series of short tales, and maybe he should've published it that way. If you never read Neil Gaiman before, I'd recommend Neverwhere before purchasing this title. That one has a more solid story and showcases Neil Gaiman's wonderful sense of humor.
Rating:
Summary: There aren't half stars...
Review: If there were half stars, I would have given this book a 2.5. Instead I gave it a 3, because it truely doesn't deserve a 2. While Neil Gaiman is one of my favorite authors, and one of the few "modern" authors I find captivating, this book was lacking something. How easily you can surmise numerous plot points long before you would wish to discover them, and when this leads to definite feelings of disappointment in the predictability of it all. There are also so many characters and points that feel too shallow. You are introduced to them for a page or two and then they completely disappear from the story, or they reaper again for a few more pages and still seem just as pointless to the plot. It makes the book feel like it should have been: A) Longer or B) a series instead of one book. I believe that if the story had been explored in more depth it would have added more relevance and intrigue, and allowed things to unfold in a much less predictable manner. Many parts felt rushed and cramped, as if a certain idea felt crucial when it came about but adding it then lead to another, more important, plot point being cut too short. The ideas in the book are wonderful, and the main character has a wonderful skeleton. Yet as a whole I didn't find it as captivating as Gaiman's novel "Neverwhere" or as the one he coauthored with Terry Pratchet "Good Omens...". So I have to say it was an enjoyable read, but disappointing.
|
