Hannibal

Rating:
Summary: Bummer of a book, Hal.
Review: This book had me as its captive audience on a trans-Atlantic plane flight. It is a downer from start to finish - nothing of the quality of the other Hannibal books. I wish I could have fallen asleep, or had the forethought to have a back-up to read.

Rating:
Summary: An intellectual feast - but light on plot structure
Review: I'm not terribly suprised at the poor reviews of _Hannibal_- most readers seem to expect Harris to write just like he did 10 years ago. This book, however, is significantly different. Not that this is new for Harris- if you read both Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs, you saw how Harris grew as an author and thinker between the two books, the former being a mostly a simple thriller, the latter being a well thought-out, fascinating character study with a brilliant plot overlay. Hannibal carries this arc farther; the plot moves more to the rear, while the character interaction comes even more to the front. Harris shows us much more of Hannibal's vibrant world of immediacy, and does it in an utterly spellbinding way, for those who are receptive. It seems, though, that Harris got lost in this world, and only provided us with enough plot to set up new interactions and possibilities. I didn't mind- I loved every minute of _Hannibal_, simply for the new ideas it presented, and the mood it created. If you have a bit of an intellectual bent, and don't neccessarily care if this book isn't "Silence of the Lambs 2", you'll probably enjoy _Hannibal_. If you're looking for more a cops and killers mystery novel, it will dissappoint... or maybe expand your horizons a little. In the end, the choice is yours.

Rating:
Summary: What was that?
Review: I am not sure what happened to Thomas Harris in this one. The man has proven his writing talent in the past with 'Silence of the Lambs' and 'Red Dragon'. He stripped Clarice of all we loved about this character. If you want to read the book, borrow one.

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal really bites!
Review: While the first two books in this series were absorbing crime dramas with elements that were horrific. "Hannibal" is a contirved attempt to write a horror story that just didn't work. The whole section in Forlence was cliche. Character treatment was lame. Lecter wouldn't have noticed the big grey van in the parking lot? Starling was so weak willed as to sucumb to Lecter's mind games? Jack Crawford would just wither up because of his wife's death? I think NOT! I suppose if you hadn't read the previous two books it would have helped, but really "Red Dragon" and "Silence of the Lambs" are far better novels on many levels. After much anticipation "Hannibal" is a real let down.

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal rules!
Review: Absolutely spellbinding. I couldn't put it down. Harris has created a scary but facinating character. The ending is mind-blowing. It will take a Sherlock Holmes to get this bad boy because the 'dark knight' now has his Robin! I can't wait for the next Dr. & Madame Lecter from Harris.

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal... Reconsidered,
Review: Hannibal 2

"Hannibal" is the first of the Lecter trilogy that I have read. I opened the cover with a sense of trepidation and dread based on the "legendary" reputation of the character Hannibal Lecter. I was surprised to find that the story included a plethora of "monsters" who had been corrupted by their own lusts--- for revenge or sex or money, or all the above--- so that Hannibal is merely a superior monster (erudite, sophisticated, genteel...) surrounded by a world filled with lesser (crass, short-witted, vulgar) monsters. By observing the masses of humanity through the contemptuous eyes of "Hannibal Lecter", the author subtley but CLEARLY projects the notion that humanity is in fact a race of monsters who ALL hide dishonestly behind the mask of "culture" and a meaningless veneer of "civility". Remove this veneer, Harris says (through Lecter's thoughts) and all you have left are monsters who are no better than Lecter himself, and in fact, who deserve to be ruled and tormented by Lecter's superiority.

I'm no Bible-thumper--- and I'm not saying that Harris intended any of these parallels--- but parallels to Christian scripture are unmistakeable: having rejected God's spiritual ideal personified by Jesus, a corrupt humanity is subjugated (in Revelation) to the rule of the antichrist. So too, Harris portrays that humanity is irredeemably corrupt, and thus DESERVES to be subjugated by evil in its most self-conscious, self-worshipping form imaginable, the genteel cannibal, Hannibal.

Harris even draws a distinction between common human corruption and true evil, through the scene where the gypsy-thief looks into Lecter's eyes and recognizes his true identity.

The final chapters alone are worth the price of the book. The author skillfully brings his premises to their logical conclusions: where virtue is folly, and hope is in vain, then evil shall rule. The final chapters contain one of most gruesome yet bloodlessly tidy scenarios ever written.... At Lecter's "last supper", the biblical apostasy and the "scarlet whore" are easily implied.... Even the shattering teacup ingeniously suggests and foreshadows the "Second Coming" of Christ, whose reappearance reverses the entropic nature of the universe, making possible the resurrection of the dead. With a chilling wink and a mocking smile, the author serves everyone (including the reader) their "just desserts". But most cleverly of all, the author sets aside his own pen and bows out of the play, with the explicit suggestion that the most final chapters of all might be too "fatal" to observe, thus leaving the greatest horrors to be revealed by the reader's imagination... Or possibly, by the hands of Time.

This book is a must-read for everyone but the most squeamish and the young. Lecter's erudition and sophistication lend a superficial glamor and charm to an otherwise despicable character. The Memory Palace was a WONDERFULLY mystical touch to Lecter's psyche. The book's theme is disturbing and appalling, BUT... it is nonetheless meaningful and relevant for this--- and future--- generations.

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal, the Genteel Cannibal...!
Review: The book "Hannibal" would have been more aptly named "The Most Respectable and Genteel Cannibal". What disappointed me most is that the story contains NO heroes. But it's not merely the lack of a hero that makes this novel unique: the author makes it abundantly clear that HUMANITY can be divided into two categories: LAMBS and SWINE. The lambs are incorrigibly pathetic and helpless, and the swine are incorrigibly unholy and predatory. At the end of the novel, I found myself sympathic to no one (except the reader). Even the surviving victims of Hannibal were so corrupted by their lust for revenge (ie, emotionalism over intellect) that I could no longer sympathize with their victimization. I first placed my hopes in Clarice Starling, but it soon became obvious that while she was interested in pursuing Dr. Lecter, her concern was NOT with bringing him to justice. Hannibal's villainy is compared and contrasted with the villainy of those who seek revenge against him. But the other "monsters"' in the story are all "babes in the woods" compared to the suave, sophisticated and highly-cultured Hannibal... They hate Hannibal because he has tormented and mutilated them...but they cannot gather their wits sufficiently to satisfy their emotional need for justice against him. The author Thomas Harris loudly proclaims Hannibal to be "Il Mostro Supremo" by gracing Hannibal with THREE advantages: SUPREME intelligence and intuition, the ability to CULTIVATE SYMPATHY from those who should know better, and sheer "good LUCK" when the first two fail. In other words, the author Harris tries to make us sympathize and even "admire" the character of "Hannibal the Cannibal"... After all, Hannibal only eats "rude" people. Which makes me wonder: would we sympathize, admire and respect Jeffery Dahmer... IF he had played the harpsichord, eaten white truffles, and evaded captivity by outsmarting authorities? (Perhaps Hannibal is the ultimate POLITICIAN). It boggles my mind that an author could spend and entire DECADE thinking and writing about these characters... emersed within their possibilities...During the time he wrote Hannibal, WHAT was Harris thinking...? When Harris dedicated Part 3 "To the New World..."' what is it that he's trying to suggest about the future of the New Age? "The Serpent devouring Humanity" is an appropriate cover for this novel. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the devil himself knocked on Mr. Harris' door and handed him the completed manuscript for "Hannibal".

Rating:
Summary: A positive come-back
Review: Most say this book was a major disapointment. However, I thought it was a great book. Although choppy and not connected at times, it leaves you wandering why and how the major characters and events have anything to do with each other. When you think that something is definitely going to happen, the event takes a turn and something completely unexpected occurs...especially the ending.

Rating:
Summary: A really good book
Review: When I picked this book up at an airport bookstore, I did not have the benefit of reading either Red Dragon or Silence of the Lambs previously. Rather, I took at as simply a NYT Best Seller, assuming it would be a good read. Indeed it was. It was worth my time reading it, and I enjoyed doing so. I would recommend that everyone else do the same, before they come out with the movie.

Rating:
Summary: Nothing More Disappointing
Review: When I began reading this book I had extremely high hopes: I hoped to be entertained, I hoped that I would finish the book in one sitting as I had Silence of the Lambs and Red Dragon, and I hoped to learn more about the fates of Hannibal and Clarice. Having studied death scene investigation and serial killers myself, and being interested in learning more about the FBI, I have always loved his books. Unfortunately, I have to agree with many other people who have written scathing reviews of Harris' newest book. I was impressed with the European flair of this new book, but I was less than impressed with the use of Italian at key points. Unfortuantely some of us took French in college, I guess. His use of history as a backdrop for some of the story was interesting, but I don't think it's what most of us expected. I think we were expecting another "true crime" story, and that's why we bought the book. What we got was more of a "murder mystery" type of story. We also got a story that was seemingly tailored for the forthcoming movie, and an ending that will make all of the sappy movie goers happy. But I personally threw the book across the room when I finished, and vowed never to buy one of his books again (or go see the movie).