Firefly

Rating:
Summary: I Read This When I Was 12
Review: If I could've picked one book that would seriously expose a little girl to the world of lust and sexual abuse, this would be it. I read this book years ago (I'm 18 now) and it strongly affected my attitude towards sex while growing up. Even now I'm not sure if the affect was bad or good, so my review is mixed. On one hand, I emerged from the experience much more open-minded than I had been, on the other hand, I was robbed of a rational and clear-headed view of the possible sexual relations between people. One thing I do know.. my parents were Not Happy with my reading choice that had heretofore been unrestricted at the local library.

Of the book itself, the sheer imaginative and erotic power of this novel is formidable. While I remember nothing of the writing style, I remember the ideas of the plot. The book, however, is definitely not for the easily shocked. I would recommend this book if you were looking for something sexually charged, but not if you were looking for a great novel. In any case, don't let your kids read it. Please.

Rating:
Summary: Writing on the wall, anyone?
Review: Like another reviewer, this book has ruined what was originally a longtime loyal readership of Piers' work.

As with VC Andrews "work," Piers' books were great reading as a teenager and it wasn't until I went back as an adult that I really started to wonder what the heck was going on with these two particular authers and how literary classics like To Kill A Mockingbird and I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings were yanked off shelves in a censorship frenzy, while material like this sits on them instead.

Both authors were/are immensely popular, and both were writing fiction that doesn't just cover a sexual "taboo," but attempts to get you to sympathize with the people committing child abuse, incest, etc.

Firefly, as it's been mentioned over and over again, is not teen material...it's adult material...and then some. And since others have gone to the trouble to describe the plot and point out there are graphic scenes regarding child abuse...let me clarify that for you: the scene in question involves a child (under 10) having sex with an adult male (30's). This scene is not written from the perspective of a horrible thing having happened. And it is not just "graphic," it is explicit down to every last detail of the encounter and horrifyingly enough, it is written from the viewpoint of eroticism. Anthony shallowly does his little disclaimer saying that this child didn't understand love in any other way...but we're to see these two as a couple tragically seperated. We're to see the child as a lusty nymphomaniac who talked the adult into the situation and instigates it. It might be said I'm missing the point that Anthony was trying to make -that the child's perspective was damaged by abuse into equating all things sexual with love - but if there was a good "cause" there, he blew it by writing it out like a [poor quality] story in penthouse letters. It comes across as though we're to see molestation from a different perspective...that the child might instigate it and that sometimes it's "not the adult's fault, after all, he did ask her if she was 'sure.'"

With this scene in mind, I went back and looked over Piers' other work...books that I enjoyed as a teenager. It's ruined for me now. If shallow, hack writing (compare him to Bradbury, McCaffrey, Asimov and you find there just is no comparison at all, even in his more "serious" works) is what you enjoy and barely veiled pedophile fantasies don't bother you, by all means, read it, but I would suggest using the library to review Piers' books first rather than spending (wasting) your money and supporting this man. Going back, I see everything else he's written has that disturbing undercurrent to it and what creativity is evident in his writing has been soured.

Rating:
Summary: Ok, so maybe not a horror novel
Review: Piers Anthony delivers another stunning book. True, not the best work ever written, yet still something to curl up with when you are looking for a good read. A tale packed with sexual cravings, love gained, death and abuse. I love how Mr. Anthony attacks some of the topics in this book because he deals with some of the more "touchy" issues according to popular culture. He writes of the abuse that two women receive in their marriages; he deals with the ancient tales of mythology bringing alive, once again, Paris and Helen. The characters are so developed many have a second secret life, not apparent at first yet gradually building though the story. After hunting for over a year for this book I got my hands on a copy and read with utter delight the story for a second time. The idea of the firefly is so unique you have to applaud Mr. Anthony, if for nothing less than a brilliant idea. I agree the book shouldn't be a horror novel, yet it is still an excellent read.

Rating:
Summary: Why be so easily offended?
Review: Piers Anthony's Firefly is an excellently written novel of horror, love, and yes, sex. That Piers writes so vividly seems to offend some people, but I believe that this is what makes him such a good writer. This book is a great read, but if you are a fan and you think vivid sex scenes involving a child might ruin that for you, skip it. No need to let this book ruin your opinion of him. As for the ending, I like it's non-traditional way of working out. But I don't want to ruin it.

Rating:
Summary: Ho hum
Review: Started out with a good premise and then was lulled to sleep by Enone's endless rambling stories. Good erotica, if that's what you're looking for. I was looking for a good classic horror story, as the book jacket promises. The only horror I encountered was reading it.

Rating:
Summary: A most intriguing novel
Review: The Book "Firefly" by Pires Anthony, to me, was wonderfully written. The characters could have been from my home town. The town itself could have been my own! I felt compassion for these characters and found myself hoping they would find their happiness, including the Firefly.

The book also gave a good look at the shortcomings and blindness that most of the people have when it comes to abuse of any kind. Most people, if they are not the focus of the abuse, believe that if they ignore it, it will disappear or resolve itself. Those who are being abused either try to escape it or accept it. The one exception to this was Geode. He was simply misunderstood because he was different from the norm. His difference caused him to be put into an asylum until he started acting as if he was "normal".

The ending didn't satisfy me. I feel that Jade shouldn't have "died" just when she had found someone who loves her just as she was. I know that the firefly had to die. There was no o

Rating:
Summary: Certainly not the best he's done.
Review: This book certainly has merit. It isn't your run of the mill "scary monster jumps out and eats you" horror novel. Strong sexual content permeates every page of the book, and the writing seems at times quite amaturistic, yet it keeps you rivited, turning page after page long into the night. I applaud him in the fact that this book touches on MANY areas that most writers shun due to their controversial nature, but on the whole it tends more towards sensationalism. Did I read it, and enjoy it? Yes. Would I recommend it to my mother? Never. If you are not easily offended, and are looking for nothing more than an entertaining read, this book will do just that. If you're looking for truely good literature, look somewhere else.

Rating:
Summary: Just awful; Anthony shames himself
Review: This book ended a 10-year relationship with Piers Anthony and his novels. I began with his Xanth novels and continued to consume well over 50 of his books. I read this book in 1993, after taking some time off from his work - I had come to the conclusion that he was becoming a hack. This novel confirmed it. Using the horror novel as a not-so-subtle means of preaching his message of "tolerance" in all things sexual, Anthony continues to degrade the memory of every book of his I had read and loved. If it had just been the message, I could have enjoyed the book on its artistic merits. Unfortunately, it has none. A total sham. If you're thinking of reading Anthony, I recommed "Macroscope" and the "Chthon" & "Pthor" books. These books, written 30 years ago, put his recent work to shame.

Rating:
Summary: Too pedophile-friendly for my taste
Review: This book has several problems, the worst one being that I found that the tone was much too sympathetic towards pedophiles.

In chapter 32 a leading character tells a story about a five-year-old girl named Nymph who is being sexually mistreated by her father and her brother. This girl, in her confusion, seduces an adult man who she encounters. The seduction is described over 10 pages and becomes pornographically explicit at times. The story is presented in the context that the adult man (whose name is Mad) should not be condemned because he only did what the child asked him to do.

In chapter 37 the same character tells a story about an old woman who happens to have a one-way mirror in the wall between a darkened room in her house and a shed built onto the outside of the house. One day two children, a boy and a girl approx. 9-10 years old, wander into the shed and eventually take off their clothes and try playing man and wife, without much success. The old lady is watching through the one-way mirror, and after the children leave she places a tube of lubricant in the shed. When the children come back next day they find this lubricant and use it and their playing is more successful. The old woman, who is watching again, finds this satisfying.

At the end of the paperback edition that I read there is an 8-page "Author's Note". (I believe this note is shorter or missing in some other editions.) In this "Author's Note" Piers Anthony tries to justify the stories of sexual activities between children and adults and the sympathetic slant towards the adults in the stories. In fact, he shoots himself in the foot:

"The games five year old Nymph played with Mad where a joy to her at the time, but it was nevertheless abuse by our society's definition (not necessarily that of other societies) ..."

"One of the included stories was written by Santiago Hernandez, in prison for pedophilia."

"On another occasion she (an innocent five-year-old girl) is left at home with a kindly uncle. He is very attentive and gives her what she likes best: candy. He plays a game with her, but cautions her that it must be secret or they won't be able to play it again. It involves tickling in funny places ... She loves it; no one else treats her like this. She looks eagerly forward to future visits with Uncle, and to the sharing of more secrets."

Now it's certainly true that the sexual abuse of children is a problem that exists, and pretending that it doesn't exist won't make it go away. But why make the pedophiles look sympathetic and why try to claim that (some of) the victims are not really victims? I simply can't understand how these pedophile-friendly sections of this book got past the editor.

Just out of curiosity, and to check that I wasn't completely off base, I did a Google search for '"piers anthony" pedophilia'. This resulted in quite a few interesting hits, many of which referred directly to this book.

The most shocking web reference I found was a message board where pedophiles hang out and exchange messages concerning their sexual preferences. (I had no idea that such a message board existed.) Here were several messages about how good the books of Piers Anthony are. So despite Piers Anthony's claim that he is not sympathetic towards pedophiles, the pedophiles certainly think that Piers Anthony is sympathetic towards them.

Neglecting the pedophile-friendly problem, what about the rest of the book? Well, until I hit chapter 32 I was preparing to give this book only two stars because I found that none of the characters are believable. They all do strange things and are driven by strange motives, and none of them act like normal human beings.

There is a lot of allegorical story telling in the book, and at one point I wondered if that explained the strange behavior of the characters. In other words, the entire book was perhaps intended to be an allegorical story instead of story about real people. In that case the allegorical messages, other than the suggestion that pedophiles aren't necessarily bad, went over my head.

Not recommended.

Rennie Petersen

Rating:
Summary: Too pedophile-friendly for my taste
Review: This book has several problems, the worst one being that I found that the tone was much too sympathetic towards pedophiles.

In chapter 32 a leading character tells a story about a five-year-old girl named Nymph who is being sexually mistreated by her father and her brother. This girl, in her confusion, seduces an adult man who she encounters. The seduction is described over 10 pages and becomes pornographically explicit at times. The story is presented in the context that the adult man (whose name is Mad) should not be condemned because he only did what the child asked him to do.

In chapter 37 the same character tells a story about an old woman who happens to have a one-way mirror in the wall between a darkened room in her house and a shed built onto the outside of the house. One day two children, a boy and a girl approx. 9-10 years old, wander into the shed and eventually take off their clothes and try playing man and wife, without much success. The old lady is watching through the one-way mirror, and after the children leave she places a tube of lubricant in the shed. When the children come back next day they find this lubricant and use it and their playing is more successful. The old woman, who is watching again, finds this satisfying.

At the end of the paperback edition that I read there is an 8-page "Author's Note". (I believe this note is shorter or missing in some other editions.) In this "Author's Note" Piers Anthony tries to justify the stories of sexual activities between children and adults and the sympathetic slant towards the adults in the stories. In fact, he shoots himself in the foot:

"The games five year old Nymph played with Mad where a joy to her at the time, but it was nevertheless abuse by our society's definition (not necessarily that of other societies) ..."

"One of the included stories was written by Santiago Hernandez, in prison for pedophilia."

"On another occasion she (an innocent five-year-old girl) is left at home with a kindly uncle. He is very attentive and gives her what she likes best: candy. He plays a game with her, but cautions her that it must be secret or they won't be able to play it again. It involves tickling in funny places ... She loves it; no one else treats her like this. She looks eagerly forward to future visits with Uncle, and to the sharing of more secrets."

Now it's certainly true that the sexual abuse of children is a problem that exists, and pretending that it doesn't exist won't make it go away. But why make the pedophiles look sympathetic and why try to claim that (some of) the victims are not really victims? I simply can't understand how these pedophile-friendly sections of this book got past the editor.

Just out of curiosity, and to check that I wasn't completely off base, I did a Google search for '"piers anthony" pedophilia'. This resulted in quite a few interesting hits, many of which referred directly to this book.

The most shocking web reference I found was a message board where pedophiles hang out and exchange messages concerning their sexual preferences. (I had no idea that such a message board existed.) Here were several messages about how good the books of Piers Anthony are. So despite Piers Anthony's claim that he is not sympathetic towards pedophiles, the pedophiles certainly think that Piers Anthony is sympathetic towards them.

Neglecting the pedophile-friendly problem, what about the rest of the book? Well, until I hit chapter 32 I was preparing to give this book only two stars because I found that none of the characters are believable. They all do strange things and are driven by strange motives, and none of them act like normal human beings.

There is a lot of allegorical story telling in the book, and at one point I wondered if that explained the strange behavior of the characters. In other words, the entire book was perhaps intended to be an allegorical story instead of story about real people. In that case the allegorical messages, other than the suggestion that pedophiles aren't necessarily bad, went over my head.

Not recommended.