Mr. X

Rating:
Summary: IF YOU'VE A PENCHANT FOR THE PARANORMAL
Review: For those with a penchant for the paranormal there are shivers galore in this thriller-diller from Peter Straub. A master of the Stephen King-type genre, Straub has proven himself in such spooky offerings as "Houses Without Doors" and "The Talisman," which he collaborated on with King.

This time out protagonist Ned Dunstan receives an unwelcome birthday gift each year - he is haunted on his natal day by scenes of malevolence, visions of rampant murder that he is seemingly forced to witness. The perpetrator of these heinous crimes is a sinister figure in black whom Ned has come to call Mr. X.

As his 35th birthday nears, Ned, a computer programmer, returns to his Illinois hometown, drawn there by a feeling that his mother, Star Dunstan, is dying. She is, indeed, in ICU. A former jazz singer, Star played almost as small a role in Ned's childhood as the father whom he never knew. Before dying she tells Ned the name of his father, and another name - Robert.

Before there's time for decent mourning, mysterious and frightening things happen to Ned: he accused of crimes he could not have committed, and the fearsome vision that has haunted him each year recurs even more vividly.

Some of the Dunstan family secrets are revealed as Ned renews acquaintance with his elderly aunts, an especially gifted trio adept at teleportation. The aunts throw roadblocks at Ned as he searches for his father, partially to protect him and partially to guard their own secrets.

Don't worry, Straub doesn't disappoint as far as love interests go - there's a gorgeous young woman, Laurie Hatch, who has some dark family secrets of her own.

There's complex plotting in Mr. X, which doesn't allow the tale to slide easily into home plate. There are freakish curlycues and horrific twists before we learn who Robert is and, most importantly, the identity of Mr. X.

At times Straub does seem to go on about peripheral ideas; it's a hefty read. But, it is vintage Straub, and his fans will relish it.

- Gail Cooke

Rating:
Summary: An Excellent Come Back
Review: I began reading Peter Straub books with the book "Ghost Story". I read it because my mother told me it was ultimately frightening, and I found that she was correct. It was intricate, and the plot was well done, but most, the characters were well developed and pleasing. After I finished that one, I began to read his books one after the other, and what I found was that his "Under Venus" through "Shadowland" age was his shining moments. Each one of the books in that period was almost as pleasing as "Ghost Story". However, the few books following that, "Koko", and "Mystery" for example, lost what makes Straub so intriguing: his excellent writing style. These books were enjoyable, though not as pleasing to the senses. Lately, with "The Throat" and most of all by far, "The Hellfire Club", Peter Straub lost everything going for him, and sank to the levels of Dean Koontz, with overly described gore and rape, etc. However, "Mr. X" finally puts an end to that. The book, I found, stands up right beside his earlier books, "Ghost Story" and "If You Could See Me Now" being his best. The character is well thought, likeable, human. The plot is simple and pieced together orderly, one of the things he lost in later books. The writing style is so fluent and beautiful that I finally enjoy one of his books. This book is for those of you who prefer the adult, mature, thought-provoking Straub, and is a good starting place for any curious, new Straub readers. This book is not for those of you who are looking for simple, "book candy", not requiring much thought or vocabulary. This book is for those of you looking to read difficult, well-written fiction.

Rating:
Summary: Well, not an encouraging review I think
Review: I have never been a fan for Lovecraft or Poe type; a story is frightening for me only if I root for the characters and if they are in peril; other than that, monsters from other worlds, sounds, convoluted giant creatures or some imaginative books do nothing for me.

That's why Stephen King did the trick for me. From the moment I read him for the first time (the wonderful "Mist") he grabbed me in total awe. And so far I have yet to find any other horror writer that so daringly, skillfuly and masterfully yields modern horror stories: Salem's Lot, Shining, Pet Semetary and Christine are yet to be exceeded stories. The horror in them is actually the horror of 20th century man: alcoholism, master cards, highways, alienation of people etc. In my humble opinion, King's clever take-on horror literature is a five star one: He understands that strong characters and down-to-earth dialogue and a sense of location make a horror book (at least modern ones) unforgettable. He singlehandedly made a genre stand on its feet and made it his own particularly created a Stephen King genre.

But I also gave up to expect any other Salem's Lot or Christine from the Master; I don't know why: He stubbornly rejected producing straight horror stories after the Dark Half. He mostly shifted to fansaty/ dutifulworks and SF. That's not too bad because he is still the best dialogue and character writer in the world with clever observations and a strange type of humor, which I find quite amusing and Mr. King is still very clever, whether or not you make like it (see Dark Tower series)

That's why I started to hunt for other horror writers; I've never read anything apart from SK before (except Dean Koontz, whom I think must be the poorest author-caricature in the world) I had read Talisman so I grabbed Ghost Story by Mr Straub.

Well, he was as good as the Master but was more unaccessible. No problem there:; if a book keeps you awake until the morning of a long business day then there must be something in it. Ghost Story was followed by Floating Drogan and Shadowland. While the former was very good, the second one left me worried: Straub reflected the best characteristics of a SK-type writing but he also paints a very complex picture; the plotlines, the characters...somehow become hard to follow.

But that is a little bit unnecessary in horror literature; because horror books demand to be fast-reading ones so that as soon as a scene grabs you, you should be able to shiver and move to the next scene like a freight train wondering on how the hell this will clear out (try Christine). But Straup sometimes puts huge blocks in front of this freight train. Anyway, my last try was Koko which suffered the same problemb

As I really liked Peter Straub (even his bads are not so bad as is the case with the Master), after a long time I tried to read Mr. X

The story started very well; there is something sinister in the death of his mother; there are some secrets not revealed; these secrets involve other-worldly things; Ned Dunstant is trying to protect himself against those other-worldly and worldly horrors; the town seems to be full of intricate relations.

What starts great beginsg to puff and huff in the middle. May be Mr. Straub is very clever maybe he is starting with a broad sketch of floppy discs: he throws several characters with several no-where-going subplots and then tries to tie each and everyone; but the reader is generally left confused who died why or who was whose servant or who went there etc etc.

Even in the middle you keep waiting for a big armageddon between the good (Ned and his aunts) and the evil (Mr X and his masters and servants); but there is a sudden super-homage to Lovecraft; a dream scene, a collusion with the chief police officer and suddenly you face the END.

Well characterisation is good; Nel and his aunts are wonderfully drawn out; they talk like real people; but there are some overdone things:; Nel comes to town with nothing and leaves there almost a billionaire; you can't help yourself that all the evil and good in that town served for one purpose: To make him rich and happy. By the way family connections become too complex to understand and care

At the end what I felt was: Peter Straub's writing is still high quality, powerful. He writes characters and dialogues well; his level of humor is better than the ones I read; but same problems with Shadowland: Too much symbolism-like things, too many sub-plots; too many unanswered questions;too complex writing for a horror writer.

Of course I will go on reading him; next the Lost Boy Lost Girl because he is very good at creating sinister atmospheres (even if they sometimes do not bring any fruitfil thing) but he is far from Ghost Story days or Salem's Lot, Pet Semetary or Nightshift horror.

One of the reviewers below claims that Douglas Clegg. Don't believe; he is very weak indeed