Rating: 
Summary: Treading the halls of sanity
Review: At first, I was sceptical - the person who reccomended it raved about the 'brilliant structure' and the 'revolutionary technique,' using all sorts of words that send up my warning flags in a second. So let it be said I went in doubtful. I'm sold. The stories told in this book are dense, interwoven, and interconneted in more ways than I could possibly detail. From visceral descriptions of the utterly mundane to disturbingly efficient imagery of the uncomplicatedly mind-blowing, the book draws you into its world. More than anything, I reccomend this text because it lures you into a world that advertizes itself as both fact and fiction, leading you to question the reality of everything in the book - and maybe a little of your own life. This book may not be for everyone - if you get your kicks from pulp horror or mainstream thillers, this might be too involved. But for fans of artists of the sureal like Borges and Cortezar are sure to fall in love with this profoundly disturbing tome.
Rating: 
Summary: Non Linear Fiction
Review: Let me first make a suggestion - before you read this book, or even this review, consider the normal state of entertainment in America. Take your favorite play, book, movie or TV show. Consider how the plot or story line is developed. While there might be a flashback to another time, or a "red herring" to throw you off, the story almost always lays out in a straight line - it's linear. Mystery, solution - conflict, climax. Wrap it up in 22 minutes and see you next week. Please, go ahead, test this theory with any book you choose. Read it and when you're finished, plot out the story line. Then read House of Leaves by Mark Danielewski and try the same thing. That's what I've done in preparing this review, and have discovered the following: 1) I can't finish. I can read all the pages, in any order I choose, over and over again, but I can not say I'm done. I may never be done 2) I can tell you some of the story lines, I just don't know how many there are. I've found at least four - three in my first reading, and another in the second. There seems to be a fifth and sixth one trying to be unearthed if I look hard enough. I stopped plotting them out after creating two polygons, a circle and one somewhat straight line, that connects a point on the circle to one of the polygons. 3) Don't wait for the movie . It would have to be 3 days long, and it could only be viewed on videotape by yourself so you could rewind and review when you had a question.As you might have guessed, House of Leaves is not very linear, and definitely not for everybody. Mark Danielewski seems to have done everything possible to stop you from reading. 700+ pages first filled with type that suddenly goes upside down, sideways, backwards , even down to one letter on a page. Three different kinds of footnotes come in three different typefaces, and they can't be skipped, because most of the story is there, along with mountains of superfluous information. Determining which is which is part of the fun. This is a review, so I supposed I must try to answer the question What's it about? Perhaps it's the story of a paranormal experiences of a house which is larger inside than outside. Or perhaps it's the story of the movie about that house. Or perhaps it's the story of the review of the movie about the house, written over a 20 year period by a blind mystery man. Ostensibly, it's about the young man who finds the unfinished manuscript and extensive research notes of the review of the movie about the house, the young man who felt compelled to finish it for the mystery man, who dies at the beginning of the book. Or perhaps it's the story of the young man himself as the decision to finish the book throws his life into chaos. (Okay, there are the four story lines I found. The fifth is about the young man's relationship with his mother and her mental condition, and the sixth has something to do with mythology, I think) Ignore the "novel" designation on the cover - this book is real. Danielewski's genius is not in the story or the confusion of style, it's in his expert ability to suck you into his world. I was hooked instantly, and have to fight to remember that it's not a true story. Danielewski has created something that is so original in style and story that comparisons are almost impossible ( I can only think of one - "He writes like David Lynch makes movies." But that doesn't do either of them justice and probably won't get me a blurb in the advertisements for the next printing.) Should you read it? Only if you have lots of time and patience, and the urge to discover something before everybody else. But if you do chose to read it, take the advice of a (very) minor character in the book who has read the book - at least three of them have. As he hands it over he warns "Be careful. It will change your life." It has mine.
Rating:
Summary: Page ix
Review: I refer all those who gave this book a bad review to page ix. "This is not for you." Some of you read it anyway because you thought that was just some funny gimmick or pretentious on the author's part. You've discovered how wrong you were. I turned that page because I KNEW that it was not for me. Or anyone. Yet should read it anyway. And I was not a bit disappointed. Forget Blair Witch, House of Leaves is a Post-Modern <you can't get away from that> journey into madness. The writing is brilliant ... and I don't just mean big words, I mean everything: spacing, font, footnotes, interruptions, all of it. Give up the Blair Witch idea and think Lovecraft and Nobakov because THOSE are Danielewski's true ancestors when it comes to this book. Not only is the book brilliant as a work of fiction, but it is also a philosophical treatise of sorts, and espouses the "values?" of Post-Modern philosophy at almost every turn. Finally, what a lot of people are missing is that the BOOK itself IS the labyrinth. The Navidson Record might not exist, but every emotion and wrong turn within that movie is really what the author imparts to the reader through the medium of his book. Danielewski, there are only two. Nabokov and you. The rest are just reaching for straws. Oh! So, should you read it? Haha. No. Of course not. The author himself tells you that. No one should read this book. It's not safe. It will change the way you look at things. Especially the book you read AFTER finishing House of Leaves. Are you going to anyway? I hope so, if you're like me.
Rating:
Summary: "this is not for you"
Review: people seem very passionate about this book: either the reader loves it, or the reader hates it, and no reader seems to fall somewhere in between without writing something like "this would have been an excellent STORY without the baggage of esoteric 'marginalia' (i.e., the footnotes, which i would probably argue are margins in the derridean sense, pulling apart the STORY - your longed for 'center' or 'point' or 'enlightenment'), and without the submersion of the 'scary' stuff about the uncanny house beneath many layers of "unimportant" and "extraneous" material which a reader expecting a straightforward readerly novel (like king or other pop fiction) with beginning-middle-resolution. this is not the way to approach house of leaves, and if you begin it expecting a linear, clear, authoritative narrative, then you are going to be disappointed. in that case i suggest that you do not even attempt house of leaves, because you are going to dislike it and struggle with it. if you are going to enjoy this book - and it is a wonderful book, playing always with the very expectations of the reader, but also the possible forms of narrative itself, and concepts of authority, centrality, power (political & personal, for they are the same) - then you are going to have to approach it expecting it to violate all of the descriptive rules you have in your mind about narrative form and STORYtelling. you are going to have to read it carefully, thinking about every word, reading every footnote, but also remaking the text for yourself, making it your own and divorcing it from the sense and reference of the words themselves. you must be willing to work through the text slowly and carefully to get from it any pleasure, untainted by disappointment. if you are not willing to give that effort, then this book "is not for you." pass it, and the hype by, and pick up the next king novel, which you will enjoy, because he will meet your expectations rather than challenging them. however, i think it would be excellent for you to let lax your preconceptions and opinions, and put much effort into this amazing text, and to decolonize your "STORY" and "center" and "point/moral" and enlightenment" obsessed mind by combatting this text.
Rating:
Summary: makes you reconsider what fiction is (and should be)
Review: This is the first fiction book I've reviewed and I couldn't wait to finish the book to share some thoughts. Not since "Salem's Lot" came out when I was in high school have I been so terrified while reading a book...the passages when various characters are lost in the house are truly the scariest I have EVER read! While some reviewers found the author's character development limited, I think Danielewski did a great job with both stories (as some other reviewers have noted, the Pekinese incident alone, while only a few pages long, is very affecting). It is somewhat disturbing that the author does not reveal any "secret" to explain the existence of the house. Hey folks, I think that's the point. Some readers are used to being spoon-fed and, when forced to think, are challenged. Isn't it much more disturbing to conclude that there's no explanation at all (a la "The Blair Witch Project") than to learn some sort of implausible Stephen Kingesque "answer" such as the house was built on a cemetary? Enjoy this book. I know I'll be thinking about it for a long time.
Rating:
Summary: king, shakespeare, tolkien,heinlein, clarke, DANIELEWSKI!
Review: As a 16 year old I usually don't read much other than what my highschool makes me. But when I heard about this book, I had to get it. House (blue) of Leaves is definitley a challenge and an amazing work. will be different from anybook you'll ever read, RECOMMENDED FOR ALL HIGHSCHOOL READING LISTS as an alternative to Toni Morrison, Shakespeare, Steinbeck, and the To Kill A Mockingbird guy. DANIELEWSKI ON ALL HIGHSCHOOL READING LISTS NOW!
Rating:
Summary: mother from MA
Review: House of Leaves is an intriguing first novel. It made me look back several times to check if it was really a novel or an account of something that actually happened.Such alot of work to write! So much information! The work on Echoes alone makes the book worth reading. Not scary,takes a little concentration,but well worth while.(I must have liked it, I don't usually bother to write reviews!)
Rating: 
Summary: Different
Review: I liked the idea behind the book and the explorations into the house. The remaining materials were gimicky. Leave out some of the Appendices and save a few trees.
Rating:
Summary: Mindboggling
Review: This is a book that will blow you away with its originality and wonders. It is typographically fascinating as text is sometimes upside down, crossways, or even limited to a word or two per page, but always as a parellel to the story. The breadth of the author's reading as reflected in the footnotes and references is astonishing. I could describe all kinds of textual devices but suffice it to say, this is the most original and fascinating book I ever have, or ever will, read.
Rating:
Summary: Concrete Literature has arrived at last....
Review: It's easy to compare House of Leaves to the Blair Witch Project. It does little to quash the initial impression of it being a literary equivalent. But proceed further and you understand that what you have here is something far better than Blair Witch and with a much greater talent in control here. House of Leaves is, to sum up, about a house bigger on the inside than the outside. A house with a labyrinth that extends into forever and provides no solid explanation of why and where it exists. The book is an analysis of a documentary that seemingly never existed. The book, to use a cliche, truly defies a description of clarity. I tried explaining it several times and each time just ended up muttering and walking away. As the book progresses, the writing grows to reflect the story itself. Footnotes on par with 'Infinite Jest' begin to grow larger and larger, and then start running up the sides of each page and appearing backwards in a blue box in the center of the page. This book is one of the real solid examples of concrete literature, where the story is written to resemble the shape of its subject. After 100 pages or so, your eyes will hurt, you will be confused and unsure of whether or not to read the main story or the footnotes or the footnoted stories. And House of Leaves is genuinely disturbing and frightening, on a much grander and more inventive manner than Blair Witch could have ever hoped for. This ain't for everyone. It's on the verge of being experimental, enough so that most mainstream readers who patronize Steven King's bi-monthly releases will probably not enjoy this, but it is still effective storytelling. And exhausting. If anything, you'll come away with an extreme appreciation of Danielewski's endurance and rigorousness in his footnotes (even the fake ones read like real) and the audaciousness of having only one letter occupy an entire page. House of Leaves is not without drawbacks. Some of the techniques used can be highly frustrating. There is a whole chapter where bits and pieces have been burned, and Danielewski uses [] to signify where something was burned away, but to anyone reading, the gaps are obvious and using [] rather than filling in one letter is an exercise in tediousness. A lot of the footnotes are useless and long-winded. But for anyone who enjoys being challenged by literature...who looks for something new, even if it's a magnificent failure (not to say House of Leaves is a failure, but it does tend to drift)...for anyone who wants to feed their brain something it'll take awhile to chew on, get this. If Danielewski keeps this up (and one wonders how, if, he will ever write another book after this) he'll surely join that divine pantheon of Murakami, Carroll and Lethem, all of them shining with the inner light of pure transcendent beauty.
|
