-
2 out of 5
by
James
from
Ridgewood, NY | Oct 23, 2007
Picture Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Really good books right? Now imagine if someone took the first book and mad libbed characters, settings, monsters, etc, so that you were left with the exact same story except instead of travelling the galaxy with your crazy friend and the most powerful man in the universe, you were travelling in haunted British sewers with a nerd's wet dream of a Xena warrior princess rival and a Gothic princess who can unlock doors (sigh). I don't think there is much of a coincidence either because Gaiman wrote the Hitchhiker's companion in the early 80s, as well as conducted interviews with Adams while he was alive (not to mention took writing tips from him). The only saving grace for me with this book was the fact that there someone actually made a miniseries on the BBC of it that is actually so bad that it makes the book look half way decent. Between all the cliche characters, cheesy narration, and formulaic plot, its just not worth your money or a read, especially when Hitch Hiker exists already. I've said it before, stick to American Gods and The Sandman when it comes to Gaiman.
19 people found this review helpful
-
3 out of 5
by
Shannon
from
Toronto, Canada | Mar 24, 2008
Richard Mayhew is an ordinary young man working in London, with a fiancee, Jessica, a small flat and a life more-or-less figured out. By Jessica. He's not a particularly brave man, or imaginative, and Jessica has his life all sorted for him.
Everything in his life is turned upside-down - quite literally - when he stumbles across an injured girl on the footpath who asks for his help. Despite Jessica's insistence that he leave her there for someone else to take care of, he carries her back to his flat and at her behest, goes in search of someone called the Marquis de Carabas.
By involving himself in her life, her world, he becomes invisible in his own. After the girl, Door, has gone back to London Below, Richard finds that no one can see him or hear him, that they've removed his desk at work and are renting out his apartment while he's in the bath. Jessica can't remember his name. The only thing left for him to do is seek out Door in London Below and somehow get his life back.
The world of London Below is vivid, labrynthine, confusing, other-worldly, bizarre and smelly. The sewers, the Underground (the Tube) and a vast plane of tunnels, caverns and bunkers form curious homes for curious creatures, most of which Richard has trouble believing are real. To say he's a bit slow would be an understatement.
He gets caught up in her mission to find out why her family was murdered and who wants her dead. Door has a unique talent - she can open any door, can create doors where they weren't before, and someone wants this skill badly enough to send two violent things after her, called Mister Croup and Mister Vandemar. She enlists the aid of a bodyguard, the famous Hunter, and goes on a quest to find the Angel Islington.
--------------------------------------
I can't quite decide if I liked this book, really liked it, or thought it was just ok. It is fast-paced and peopled with numerous eccentric characters, and I did enjoy the book. It won't be a favourite of mine, though. I think, at the end of the day, I really need to know the characters in a book, and feel for them. I grew to like Door, and even Richard (who was never as whiny as Arthur Dent but was pretty annoying at times). de Carabas was a treat, and I loved the Tardis-like quality of the Earl's home on the subway carriage, where the outside is defined and confined but the inside is larger than it should be, things like that. I love the concept of creating doors where there aren't any, and the flat-out bizarreness and unpredictablility of London Below.
The book itself is a bit predictable at times, but not enough to spoil it. One thing that distracted me was that I couldn't tell if they were above ground at times. It seemed like they were, like the first Floating Market that was held in Harrods, it mentions them walking across the pavement, and the second one is held on an old ship. Only, later, Hunter reveals she can't go to London Above. There were a few others spots too where it wasn't clear if they were above or below.
So my main concern with Gaiman - and yes, this is only based on the two books of his that I have read, Stardust being the other - is the mocking way he handles his characters. It makes it hard to really like them, because they're not presented as likeable characters. It also puts a bad taste in my mouth, like Gaiman is scoffing at this story he's written because he's afraid of putting confidence into it in case everyone hates it and leaves him looking silly. I can't really explain the strange, uncomfortable feeling I get reading his books any other way.
16 people found this review helpful
-
2 out of 5
by
Cat
from
Denmark | May 3, 2008
This story has a lot of interesting bits. When I started it, it drew me in immediately. I thought the storyline seemed interesting and it was well written.
However, the story is based upon a screenplay, and it shows. The story has so many horrible clichés it really, dreadfully, dragged the book down. The whole story reads like a film script, which, technically, it is. And this is all very well for a film, but the rules that apply to films don't apply to books.
There's the whole part with the Beast; ever so noble. All it made me do was roll my eyes. There's the whole wandering about, which annoyed me slightly; it got boring after a while. I don't see at all what good Lamia did in the story other than give the marquis something to do. The final showdown seemed rushed, and that "important thing" that happens to the marquis was just terrible.
Mr Gaiman also used too many "thens" occasionally in the story. He also had a tendency to add in bits that were completely redundant and that should have, in my opinion, been edited out.
There was also a scene where Richard goes through an "ordeal" where he is led to believe that everything he had previously experienced was make-believe, that he was crazy, and that he should go kill himself. This was done incredibly badly. At no point whatsoever did I question whether or not the first part of the story was a lie. I have seen this done much, much better in other books.
All of this, while it seems very little, really dragged the story down.
However, it still had a lot of good bits. It managed to surprise me on several occasions. I had not guessed who the Bad Guy was. I hadn't noticed what Door did. And there is a part in the end where Mr Vandemar (one of the cut-throats) does something ... sweet. In a way.
It still grates on my nerves. I don't regret reading it, but I do feel a bit cheated and disappointed because it began so promising and then petered out. I won't really recommend it to anyone, but neither will I advise people against reading it.
10 people found this review helpful
-
4 out of 5
by
Belarius
from
Portland, OR | Jan 27, 2008
Neil Gaiman's influential penchant for dark urban fantasy presents itself in its least complicated form in his first novel, Neverwhere. The book has the simplistic characters and perfectly-even pacing of television, which should come as no surprise as it is, in fact, an adaptation of a BBC miniseries. The book is pure entertainment, which is as much praise as it is condemnation.
Neil Gaiman is reputed to have a near-encyclopedia knowledge of matters both historical and fantastical, and this is without a doubt the singular strength he has to his advantage in the field of fantasy authors. His stories are elegant, Frankensteinian creations, the admixture of dozens of obscure references, conventional character archetypes, and fairy-tale plot structures. Neverwhere benefits from this approach, its various components fitted together by clever joints. The world is engaging, the story is easy to follow, the villains are the kind you love to hate, and the tried-and-true formulas go unviolated. Everything works.
And yet, like Frankenstein's creation, the story's efficient construction can't overcome what it is: an assembly of existing parts into a working whole. The protagonist, Richard Mayhew, really could just as easily be named "Arthur Dent," and undergoes a journey of self-discovery as mundane and uninteresting as the life he leaves behind when he is swept into London Below (a fantasy realm just below modern-day London). The other characters are, with few exceptions, completely flat, showing neither emotional range or development over the course of the story. Like any classic fairy tale, it's hard to tell the characters from the set dressing, and visa versa.
It's hard to fault Gaiman, as he's done everything right. And it's no surprise that, among readers of popular fantasy, Neverwhere is much-beloved as "brilliant modern storytelling." After all, here's a book that presents a world, both terrible and marvelous, in very readable prose and with PG-13 sensibilities. Despite its darkness, it's not terribly challenging or haunting, both qualities that would normally get in the way of pure entertainment. But at the end of the day, it's just another fairy tale, and like all things fae, it lacks the substance to be truly great.
8 people found this review helpful
-
1 out of 5
by
Steven
from
Birmingham, AL | Mar 25, 2007
The first book I read by Gaiman was a collaboration with Terry Pratchett, Good Omens. Actually a pretty funny read, although the person who loaned it to me seemed to think it was the best book ever written. This was probably back in 2000. I laughed at a couple of the more auspicious stances (One of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse, Famine, is responsible for the stick-thin models we see constantly…) but didn’t think much past this.
Last week I had a lot of travel scheduled. So when I was wandering through the used book store for a cheap read to get me through a grueling two days of flights, I picked this up. The cover is horrible. Remember all the really pseudo-eerie V.C. Andrews novels with holes in the cover and other silly crap like that? This has the same patina of menace- a big hole cut out in the front cover. It shows a tunnel, with torches burning every so often.
Anyway, on to the content. It’s … not bad. Not great, but not bad either. The concept is fun- there is an entire city underneath London. Another entire culture existing concurrently with our own. And of course, as with most successful culture-within-a-culture stories: Magics. Loads of em.
Our hero is invariably sucked into this other culture (like in all stories, who’d go willingly?) and then has to learn about all the new and different subcultures within his new world. There’s a girl, although no romantic scenes, thank goodness. At the end, we’ve all learned a powerful lesson about what to do when you’re inadvertently sucked into a completely different culture.
So. If you’re looking for a book to read that is not bad, you can read this one. It’s … not bad.
5 people found this review helpful