The Pet

Rating:
Summary: A novel to be avoided
Review: Grant's novel is an unforgivable mish-mash of horror cliches, stock characters, and controved situations. The basic premise of an unpopular teenager gaining revenge on his tormentors via a projection of his unconscious mind has been done much better by other writers. The characters in Grant's novel would not be out of place in a grade-z teen slasher flick. There is the unpopular kid, the school bullies, the stuck-up beauty, and the self-absorbed parents who have no idea what is going on in their son's life. They are all totally one-dimensional, and their actions are frequently illogical & inexplicable. Worst of all, the story lacks any type of resolution.

This was a very unsatisfying book, one that I did not enjoy at all. It was the first, and only, book I ever read by Charles Grant. I'm afraid to try anything else by him because of the utter disappointment that this novel was for me.

Rating:
Summary: Sometimes confusing, but I like that in a horror novel
Review: I have just finished reading The Pet, and I have to say that while some of Grant's situations in this book were rather contrived and somewhat ridiculous, the book was a smashing success in slowly and "quietly" creeping me out and keeping my attention riveted. When a book captivates me so much that I can read 100 pages in just a two-hour plane ride, the author is certainly doing something right.

This being my first book from Grant, I can't say how he develops characters in his other novels, but in The Pet, I liked the way that he selectively worked on character development, shallowly developing characters whose personalities and outlooks on life were shallow, deeply developing those who had more personal substance.

Finally, one thing I noticed immediately upon beginning this book is that Grant very quickly switches from character to character when those characters are having conversations. While this can be a bit confusing, that's OK, because I like being somewhat confused when reading a horror novel, having to think my way through what exactly seems to be going on.

All in all, I highly recommend this book and look forward to reading more Grant in the future.

Rating:
Summary: One of the best ever produced in this vein.
Review: I'm not one for the online review, but when I saw the way this book had been misrepresented, I had to add a comment. Charles L. Grant's style of prose is poetic, and therefore not for everyone. Moreover, this book starts very slowly, building mood and establishing the setting. However, it is WELL worth the wait. Selected as one of the 100 best horror books of all time in the Jones & Newman edited _Horror : 100 best books_ (in which different professionals each selected their all time favorite, and reviewed it); nominated for a World Fantasy award for best novel... this is a entertaining, surprising novel, and one of the best by an author who has garnered more awards and nominations than Anne Rice _or_ Stephen King. No gore, no overt sexuality, but if you want that stuff written well, go read Graham Masterson or Nancy A. Collins.

Rating:
Summary: Among Grant's best
Review: The opening paragraph: A cool night in late September, a Wednesday, and clear - the moon pocked with grey shadows, and a scattering of stars too bright to be masked by the lights scattered below; the chilled breath of a faint wind that gusted now and then, carrying echoes of nightsounds born in the trees, pushing dead leaves in the gutters, rolling acorns in the eaves, snapping hands and faces with a grim promise of winter.
The second paragraph: A cool night in late September, a Wednesday, and dark.
An astute reader might pick up on the fact that the first two paragraphs in this novel have subjects but no predicates. Also, that despite the disparity in size, both of the paragraphs are single sentences.
This is not the way you are supposed to construct a novel. If you're a writer who truly understands his craft, though, you may know when to break convention; you may understand that the true purpose of writing is communication, and while communication is most often effective when following widely understood conventions, sometimes, just sometimes, the opposite is true.
Mr. Grant's love of poetry, especially that of e.e. cummings, has been documented elsewhere. That same love of poetry shines in his writing, and allows him to evoke mood as well as any other horror writer, and far better than all but the best of them. The main drawback to his writing style is that it does not work well with the clinical violence inherent in many other novels.
If you're looking for bodies stacked like cordwood behind a haunted house, look elsewhere. There are some authors who can make beautiful and frightening poetry out of violence: Joe Lansdale, David Schow, Nancy Collins, Jack Ketchum. Grant's specialty is making poetry out of dreams, or nightmares. There is some violence, but it's not lingered upon, merely offered in frames to add to the tension.
Ironically, this is also one of the rare horror novels which takes care to follow the most basic structure of the classic novel: that the book should be a chronicle of development, that a key change must be made in a primary character or location as a result of the activities in the book. Read the book, consider Donald Boyd and the events which unfold around him, and when you get to the end, you'll be left with a few uncomfortable questions... which is the goal of all truly 'literate' horror.
I cannot recommend this book highly enough, and I'm proud to be (originally) from the same state as the author.