Rating: 
Summary: Unordinarily Funny
Review: I thought this was a good novel, at least as good as 'Oryx & Crake' and 'My Fractured Life.' I thought it was terrific. The comedy is very unordinary, don't let it slip by. It is a terrific 'what's happened to the world?' slant.
Rating:
Summary: a very funny if somewhat overblown satire on America...
Review: 'Vernon God Little' by DBC Pierre is a curious book, made even curiousier by winning the 2003 Booker Prize (British Commonwealth equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize). The story is about Vernon, a teenager in rural Texas, accused as the accomplice in a massacre at his high school. No one believes poor Vernon, and from his eyes it seems everyone around him is a bit loopy ... especially a Geraldo Rivera-wannabe reporter. While the story is anything but believable, the author deserves kudos for his very insightful study of one hapless, confused young man. The essence of Vernon is captured perfectly, often hilariously. This saves the book from being a very cheap shot at rural America and its youth.I should add that people should NOT take 'Vernon Little God' personally. It is satire, and pure fiction. The book looks at the world from a introverted teenager, who seemingly sees the worst side of small town America. And the book is not anti-Texas. The author could have easily transported the setting to rural Canada or Australia. Worthy of the Booker Prize? No, I thought 'Oryx & Crake' was better (..and I haven't even read the other four nominated books). Bottom line: funny and at times insightful but its lack of depth and over-the-top storyline compromises for what could have been a great book.
Rating: 
Summary: What a disappointment
Review: To call this amateur writing is too much a compliment. I got this because it won the Booker prize, but am perplexed at how they reached that conclusion. What's next? Are they going to put accolades on a book that portrays young black children as addicted to crack and watermelon? Jews who are stingy?
The only people who seemed to vote in favor of this book are more interested in insulting Americans and "teaching them a lesson" than discussing the novel itself. Perhaps they could barely finish it as well?
Rating: 
Summary: Good Stuff
Review: I read this off a recommendation of a friend. After about 40 pages I wasn't really sure about this book because it seemed to be lacking a point, but after a little while I couldn't put it down. It reminds me of a modern day Catcher in the Rye and offers a perspective of the world from a cynical 15 year old subjected to wild accusations of murder at the hands of a town yearning for someone to blame for the massacre of 16 young lives. This is a great book and its definitely worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: A missed opportunity to combine real cleverness and grit.
Review: Don't bother reading this book, there are many much better out there. The last Booker winner I read was "The God of Small Things", which I thought was brilliant. I read this book based on the stength of TGOST, and the rich potential for examining the disturbing school massacres that have occured in the US. If it hadn't won a Booker I would give it three stars, but never recommend it to anyone I respected. Pierre's haphazard plot structure both comes from nowhere and is stunningly predictable. Elements that are not random flights of fancy make all the easy choices. The somewhat clever but barely plausible ending has a sickly sweet feel goodness to it. The kind of feeling brought on by overindulgence. Overall there is a lack of rigor. The story is all over the place and needs a few more edits to come together. Pierre's lampooning of reality TV, the USA's justice system, and small town middle America is shallow. They are worthy subjects, but there is nothing new or even that funny about his treatment of them. As an American who grew up in a rural area and both despises and respects the people there, this book rings hollow. There is a lack of real insight. It is obvious that author is just imagining what it might be like in those parts in order to draw his hackneyed characterizations. This dooms the feeble pricks of Pierre's satire to never cut through to a deeper understanding. I wonder if the booker jury chose this book because of the polical relevance of it's topic. If so it was a nice thought.
Rating: 
Summary: could not even finish this book
Review: I too was interested to read this book after hearing it was a first novel by a new writer that won the Booker Prize. I really had high hopes. But try as I may, I simply cannot get through it. I will agree with other comments here that the humor is forced, and not too funny. A lot of it is based on cruel slams about women past their prime, snide remarks about country folks. Don't know if it was meant to be cruel, but it comes off as mean-spirited, and does not seem to be coming strictly through the voice of the main character. I realize that Vernon is not meant to be Pollyanna or anything, but this is unrelentingly hard on everybody and everything. I could not maintain my interest in the plot. Sorry. I know it is difficult to write a book, but I think this needed editing. Hope the author finds some happiness with his prize money, and his next project finds a better editor. This is unlikely, since he did win a big prize for this mess. Go figure.
Rating:
Summary: Funny, but not THAT funny
Review: I'm not familiar with the criteria by which the Man Booker prize is awarded, but I purchased this book on the assumption that it would be "funnier than The Simpsons","a showpiece of super comic writing" according to the reviews on the back cover. This is far from being the case. I believe that what other reviewers have said regarding stereotypes of Texans and Mexicans is a valid criticism of the story, and it disappoints in not being nearly as funny as we are lead to believe. Giving prominent mention to human excrement? Playing on stereotypes of grammatically challenged rednecks? Over use of a slightly modified version of the four letter f word? At least no one can accuse the writer of being sophisticated in his 'humour'
Rating:
Summary: Preaching to the Choir
Review: Surprise Booker Prize winner D.B.C. Pierre (not his real name, but initials always impress--why not try three?) has written a book that will confirm in the mind of transatlantic elites what they already want to believe about white middle-class, non-metropolitan Americans. Nice to see that there are still a few groups in society who are still acceptable targets for revulsion and condescension. It is amusing when books like this are called daring or provocative, when in reality they merely persuade the already persuaded. Will a social novel like this really bring about any change or true understanding of the diversity and complexity of its subjects?
Read Michael Lind's review in the Prospect (U.K.) for how poorly Little understands his subject (and the culture of Texas in particular). Here is a quote: "But I don't want to be too hard on the Booker jury. They've democratised literature by proving that a book doesn't have to be any good to win a prize, so long as it exploits socially acceptable national and ethnic stereotypes."
Rating:
Summary: Overrated and superficial
Review: The satire is weak, phony, and superficial, and the targets are easy. The book has nothing new to say.
Rating:
Summary: Who's Become the Cliche?
Review: Let's see, con man writes first novel capitalizing on human tragedy and gross stereotypes of American society. Book is unoriginal rip-off of numerous well-known and far better executed examples of the genre. European elites read book which confirms all their ignorant misconceptions about the US. Elites award him the most prestigious book award to stick to the Americans, again. Has it ever occurred to these people that they've become the cliche?
| 
