Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating
Review: I don't normally read horror, but who couldn't make an exception for Gaiman? His background in comics and fiction points to him as a master storyteller, and American Gods is no exception. The books length is hardly noticed as Gaiman weaves a fascinating story of a Gothic America, peopled by Gods from the old world in conflict with Gods of the new. His mini-chapters covering previous periods in American history are worth the read alone!
Rating: 
Summary: Gaiman's over-rated as a novelist for this one
Review: After "Neverwhere", I was looking forwards to "American Gods". Unfortunately it's not his best work. Sure, all the cool stuff is there - new modern Gods of plastic and wire coming up against old ones of blood and trickery - but it's curiously un-compelling. The whole book feels as it could have been more cohesive. Many of the creatures and gods Shadow and Wednesday meet have little impact on the final showdown between the pantheons, and it makes the scenes episodic. "You know what would be cool? If they met the original Easter. And hey, genies are neat. I'll write a short throwaway scene with them in it." It feels like Gaiman just wanted to introduce as many different religious myths as he could. And he HAS done his research, there's no mistake. I appreciate how much work has gone into looking it up - it's interesting so see just how OLD the variations on our myths are. The problem is that they don't really flow into the plot, which is a bit thin as it is. The climax reflects this: it makes sense in its way, and it's not TERRBILE. But it'll leave you wanting something deeper, a little something more, especially from Neil when we know he can do better.Another thing that fell flat were the new Gods of the modern age. Aside from a few interesting scenes with Media not much of them stood out for me. The Deity of the Internet, for example, was ripe with potential. He acts obnoxious in a few short scenes and then degenerates into gibbering. It's disappointing. Good points, well, hey, it does have its cool bits. As I said, the research into religions shows and it adds some nice verisimilitude to the story. The character interaction works, and it has some lovely descriptive scenes. (The ones detailing the decay of Shadow's dead wife's body were particularly riveting) But in the end the flaws overbalanced the fun of reading it for me - It came off as a merely adequate piece of work, especially from Gaiman. Some more editing would probably have netted it another star. I wouldn't purchase it but simply take it out from the library.
Rating:
Summary: ETBR - American Gods
Review: 1. Reflections: When this book was written, it became an immediate bestseller. Previously, Gaiman had only been known for his lengthy and verbose Sandman graphic novels, more of a specialist collection of the strange and beautiful. Why did people respond so well to American Gods? 2. Thematics: American Gods continually claims that the existence of gods is only because we need them, and when we lose the need, they fade into oblivion. Does Gaiman offer any solutions to this problem? 3. Characterization: From the moment we are introduced to him Shadow remains a mystery. As we follow him on his journey, it could be said that he is a walking shadow. Yet there is a deeper significance of his name. What is it? 4. Symbolism: Gaiman asserts that many objects in today's world, such as historical monuments, popular festivals, and contemporary philosophies, had their roots in a pan-theological foundation, or from the hands of many gods. What examples do you see in American Gods? What examples do you see that Gaiman doesn't mention? 5. Authorship: In Gaiman's other works, he often writes about similar themes. The gods in the contemporary world, the reality of the dream, the immortal nature of the spirit world, the failing of the gods to appease mortals and thus are forgotten, the mastery of the human over the material but limited in the spiritual: these are all themes be tries to work into his books. In what ways does Gaiman break with his tradition in American Gods? In what ways has his philosophy changed by becoming a novelist?
Rating:
Summary: A waste of a good idea
Review: My only experience with Gaiman prior to this book was Neverwhere, and I found it entertaining if rather light and fluffy. With all the hype and positve opinions, I expected the 600 page American Gods to be as engrossing and entertaining as Neverwhere but with an epic scale and deep meaning to it. The idea behind the book points in that direction too: an examination of America's current cultural identity via a grand battle between the old world gods brought to America by settlers, and the personified forces of modern consumerism. You have to admit, Odin fighting the internet for control of America's collective unconscious is an interesting concept.
So, between Gaiman's capacity for readability and the interesting premise there was a lot of potential here. But American Gods failed on both counts: I found it neither deep nor entertaining. The narrative structure is extremely fragmented. The digressions from the central story following the protagonist Shadow are long, many, and largely irrelevant. Even Shadow's story gets bogged down by the inclusion of people, places and details that are unimportant to the rest of the novel. I considered putting the book down several times, but I finished it in hopes that all of the anecdotes would come together to make some glorious unified point, but it never came.
Perhaps this book would have been alright had it been edited down and not treated as an epic. Or else, written as an actual epic instead of a series of disjointed scenes. Either way, I don't recommend the book, and I don't understand why so many people do recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: That Ol' Time Religion
Review: Mr. Gaiman is a really good writer. This is one that is hard to put aside. Starting from the introduction of the hero in prison, to the end, you feel that this could happen. The oddest part of the story is that when you reflect on the happenings, you feel that to describe them a person would be thought insane, these things can not happen in real life, yet, in the story, it is very real and possible.
It may be trite, but his reference to Greek girls is funny (Who does he hang out with that he heard this? I did not hear this until I was 45 or so.), and the little poke at modern pagans is truly telling. The ending is rather unusual and a surprise.
Rating:
Summary: Gaiman's masterpice.
Review: American Gods is the pinnacle in the great career of Neil Gaiman. A tapestry of unforgettable characters that take us all on a journey of History and self-discovery. Gaiman weaves a tale that has heart, heartbreak, Good Vs Evil and tradition versus progress. It's a joy of a ride and I suggest you take it with him.
You will not forget this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Gaiman's masterwork!!!
Review: Shadow is let out of prison early due to the death of his wife. While travelling home he meets a strange character named Wednesday, who hires him as a personal bodyguard. Together they set on a journey to collect all the old Gods who came to America, as Wednesday himself is the father-God, and face the final battle against the new American Gods born out of TV, internet, etc. Gaiman superbly describes how each God arrived in America and what happened to them, what our advanced civilization did to them and us. The writing is a masterwork of fiction. A fabulous journey into the world of unreal.
Rating:
Summary: Lock the door and throw away the key
Review: First things first. I rarely read comic books or graphic novels (nothing against them, it is just they aren't my métier), so I'm not biased to review a Neil Gaiman book -- actually I have never read anything wrote. "American Gods" was my first experience approaching Gaiman's universe, and it left me with mixed feelings. I know this book has won prizes and hype, but that doesn't mean much nowadays -- when prizes are rather political.
However much I found the idea very interesting and thought provoking, I have to admit that "American Gods" is poorly executed and lacks a good editing. Gaiman seems to be the kind of writer who is dominated by the form of the book he is writing -- instead of he himself dominating the form. Due to his graphic novels experience, he seems not to give credit to his reader's imagination. The fact that a novel doesn't have images affects his descriptions, making the text over-repetitive and over-explained.
Gaiman is what we could call a key-in-the-pocket writer. For instance, if he has to tell you that a character found something important in a room. He begins by saying that this character has a key in his pocket, then this person will get the key, introduce it in the key hole, turn it, grab the doorknob and bla bla bla... until he says that the character found a bos in the room. All the previous actions don't count to make texture or to move the story forward. So cut the beating around the bush short, please. This is where an editor would step and tell "Neil, my dear, let's work a little more in this text. You can thrust the ellipse. They can be effective".
But, since Gaiman has a graphic novel God status, nobody seems to have courage to tell him how poor his text is. But we can't hate this writer. If on the one hand, he has all these problems with his texts, on the other, after boring you with pages of painfully useless descriptions, he comes up with such a brilliant sentence, that you feels like patting him on the shoulder, like a friend who has a problem but we are okay with it.
But it is still something to think of how somebody writes a book with almost 600 pages and don't develop a character at all. Supposedly "American Gods" is a kind of quest that the protagonist goes through. In the beginning Shadow, the man, lacks personality and will. So, one hopes he will have acquired at least one in the end -- or that being in contact with Gods will change him. But not, this is not what happens. He is supposed to be an average guy, and that's why Gaiman made him so plain -- that's the only explanation. But Shadow doesn't have an average guy appeal.
The narrative, that is rarely put forward, is fragmented and confusing -- in place of being epic and meaningful. However "American Gods" is a page-turner, it is never memorable. The over repetition and stereotypes character never accomplish much. I believe that Gaiman wanted to writer an allegory criticism the contemporary America -- or the Western World as a whole-- but he never delivers it. For one thing, he could start writing Americans speaking Americans, and not British. Just because he uses the word `carousel', instead of `merry-go-round' doesn't mean they are talking American.
One of the best things of reading "American Gods" is that it made me enjoy Chuck Palahniuk's novels even more. Gaiman seems to have the same coolness of the creator of the "Fight Club". But while the American writer knows how to keep it short, moving and with a point, Gaiman is exaggerated, sometimes boring, and doesn't know where he is really heading to. He could have made a great book with "American Gods", and should start by locking the door and throwing away the key. Because, so far this is much ado about nothing.
Rating: 
Summary: Not as good as it could have been
Review: Never thought I'd see the day. Never thought I'd say this: This is the first Neil Gaiman book I put down halfway through. Kind of stunned here, but there we have it.
What was wrong with it? Well, first of what was right with it. Interesting ideas and interesting incidents- the bank scam Wednesday pulls with Shadow, the Arab cab driver who meets an effrit (though I didn't like the homosexual sex scene- we have Clive Barker to thank for that, no doubt) and the notion of gods being made from malls and TV- not just metaphorically speaking, but actual gods. Good idea, that, not scintillatingly original, but in Gaiman's hands it should have made a damn good book. It didn't ... well, if it did, I couldn't get to it because these things annoyed me: (1) Like Cliver Barker when he sets books in America, he didn't get the accent right. Americans don't say: "I should rather think not!" That's how Brits talk. Gaiman probably doesn't watch enough TV to get the accents right. It bugged me just enough to keep bugging me. (2) The protagonist Shadow was wooden. He had no personality. Everything he said was a one-sentence retort to whatever had just been said to him. "Yeah. I think so too." "No. It doesn't." "Where are we going?" I guess the thinking is that Shadow was the 'straight', as in comedy. But he had no personality at all, nothing to like or hate about him, nothing to make you give a damn. Gaiman did this in Stardust too, but it wasn't very problematic ... Stardust was good enough in other regards to make it work. He did it in Neverwhere, which was more noticeable ... the protagonist in that book was as wooden as Shadow, but had a touch of wimp about him at least, enough to invoke pity at certain points in the book. They call this type of character 'everyman,' supposedly an archetype of some kind. I don't approve, especially not if it's going to be what you use every time. The protagonist is the one you follow around, there ought to be some substance to him. Shadow was a gruff ex-con, part of his makeup being he don't feel much, don't think much and don't say much. Ohhh kay, fair enough. That doesn't seem to justify 600 pages of his adventures. I don't like Gaiman's protagonists and think he could put a little more effort/imagination into them.
Rating:
Summary: ...
Review: I bought this on a whim after seeing it for sale at a used bookstore. The only thing I'd read by him prior this was the amazingly funny "Good Omens," which he co-wrote with the great Terry Pratchett. While a bit darker in tone, and not the avalance of jokes that "Good Omens" was, I was happy to find that "American Gods" was still farily humorous.
The main character, Shadow, is set in the present day and has the same level of understanding at how the world work as we do. He lives (albiet in prison), has joys and tribuation and looks forward to getting out. Unfortunaty, the way he gets out of prison is less than ideal. With his whole world smashing around him, Mr. Wednesday offers a helping hand in the form of a job.
Early on, Mr. Wednesday displays some... unusal qualities. It doesn't take too terribly long to figure out what he is (a god created in the minds of people long ago) and what he's trying to accomplish (surviving against modern gods)... and in doing so needs to unite all the different "old" gods.
Shadow ends up his assistant, and as a result his perception of the world has to change. (I mean, how many people will have the television god talk to you in the form of Lucy from I love Lucy?)With his new position he sparks a lot of interest in the god sub-culture... and a lot of danger.
Overall the book is written well. Toward the end things get a bit confusing and muddied, however, by the time the book rolls to it's conclusion, everything feels in order. The characters are mostly written well, with one exception.
Shaddow runs into a girl named Sam. She is one of those interesting girls whom can make or break a story. Unfortunately, after her first appearance, she drifts into the background and only makes a few more appearances. She should have become a semi-main character, instead it feels like she was discarded.
The writing does tend to feel a bit pop culture, it won't be a stunning epic. But it is a fun and enjoyable read. And unlike one reviewer tried to imply, the book isn't all violece and sex. While there are two or three graphic sex scenes, they aren't long and easy to skip over. The violence actually seems minimal for a book like this and isn't overly gruesome or reveled in.
|
