in the unlikely case that anyone is still checking this site - i've been terribly busy lately (new job and all), thus the negligence of the blog. also, i've heard rumours that i need to update my 'google stats,' whatever that means. help is appreciated.
so, just a short entry this time. due to me being a full-time teacher now, i haven't had time to read much. however, there's one book i managed to finish:
max brooks, author of the zombie survial guide and son of mel brooks, delivers a story about - you might have guessed already - a world-wide war against the undead. the interesting thing is that he doesn't stick to convential horror lore - instead, he presents a fictional non-fictional account of the dawn, spread and eventual defeat of a zombie pandemic in the not-too-distant future. the book consists of interviews with veterans of said conflict which detail the economic, military and political impact of the rise of the living dead.
overall, it's a good read. especially brooks' observations concerning the consequences of a global downturn struck me as eerily relevant in the face of the economic crisis we're facing today. also, it's a strange coincidence that his descriptions of the unnamed, heroic us president more than once mirror obama, although there are hints in the text that the vice-president, nick-named 'the whacko' for his radical politics, is an african american, not the president himself. talk about fact outrunning fiction.
however, brooks is not a great writer: especially his characterizations are mostly ham-fisted, clumsy and rely on tried-and-tested stereotypes far too much. which, of course, is a problem for a book that basically evolves around the frequent introduction of new characters who get to voice their point of view. especially the unconvincing narrative voices of the american survivors of world war z are often hard to bear, in some cases insufferable.
but still, the novel manages to entertain. i once read an editorial piece in time out where the author tried hard to come to terms with the fact that he actually enjoyed "the da vinci code'" despite dan brown's abysmal writing - it's not as bad in brooks' case; his text is cleverly constructed, well-paced and full of interesting ideas. which, in turn, makes me realize that he might not be a bad writer after all, since all of the things mentioned above are, of course, essentials of storytelling. it's just that i (as pointed out earlier) like books with fully-realized characters, which is what brooks doesn't pull off.
well, so much for the undead. the entry turned out not to be so short after all. taking a look at the books and stories i reviewed so far, it looks as if i mainly stick to horror/fantasy-tinged ficition with a literary bend. that's quite a surprise to me, since i always liked to think of myself as an aficionado of post-postmodern serious stuff. time to face the facts: i'll have to write something about pynchon or gaddis, otherwise my self-perception will be completely fucked.
now: back to work. get your guns, your machetes, canned food and a huge supply of clean water. and always aim for the head. good night.
so, just a short entry this time. due to me being a full-time teacher now, i haven't had time to read much. however, there's one book i managed to finish:
max brooks, author of the zombie survial guide and son of mel brooks, delivers a story about - you might have guessed already - a world-wide war against the undead. the interesting thing is that he doesn't stick to convential horror lore - instead, he presents a fictional non-fictional account of the dawn, spread and eventual defeat of a zombie pandemic in the not-too-distant future. the book consists of interviews with veterans of said conflict which detail the economic, military and political impact of the rise of the living dead.
overall, it's a good read. especially brooks' observations concerning the consequences of a global downturn struck me as eerily relevant in the face of the economic crisis we're facing today. also, it's a strange coincidence that his descriptions of the unnamed, heroic us president more than once mirror obama, although there are hints in the text that the vice-president, nick-named 'the whacko' for his radical politics, is an african american, not the president himself. talk about fact outrunning fiction.
however, brooks is not a great writer: especially his characterizations are mostly ham-fisted, clumsy and rely on tried-and-tested stereotypes far too much. which, of course, is a problem for a book that basically evolves around the frequent introduction of new characters who get to voice their point of view. especially the unconvincing narrative voices of the american survivors of world war z are often hard to bear, in some cases insufferable.
but still, the novel manages to entertain. i once read an editorial piece in time out where the author tried hard to come to terms with the fact that he actually enjoyed "the da vinci code'" despite dan brown's abysmal writing - it's not as bad in brooks' case; his text is cleverly constructed, well-paced and full of interesting ideas. which, in turn, makes me realize that he might not be a bad writer after all, since all of the things mentioned above are, of course, essentials of storytelling. it's just that i (as pointed out earlier) like books with fully-realized characters, which is what brooks doesn't pull off.
well, so much for the undead. the entry turned out not to be so short after all. taking a look at the books and stories i reviewed so far, it looks as if i mainly stick to horror/fantasy-tinged ficition with a literary bend. that's quite a surprise to me, since i always liked to think of myself as an aficionado of post-postmodern serious stuff. time to face the facts: i'll have to write something about pynchon or gaddis, otherwise my self-perception will be completely fucked.
now: back to work. get your guns, your machetes, canned food and a huge supply of clean water. and always aim for the head. good night.
Posts
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen