Well, I recently read "Go-Go Girls of the Apocalypse," and I found it wildly entertaining. A great read, and a humurous look at the horrible world of I-75 after the apocalypse. Frankly, I'm disappointed it isn't mentioned here, unless iO9 is planning a major 7 day series of posts just to laud this work of Victor Gischler. Of course, others might find it crap.
@Nudemanatee: @AbramWachter: Hmmm... a shocking oversight to be sure. I missed reading that book (though I had heard of it) and forgot to include it. Thanks for mentioning it though!
@Pope John Peeps II: Nope, the "To be sure" graf is a time-honored journalistic escape clause. It means "yes, there is evidence against the point I'm making here. I will now list it, and then go on to ignore it for the rest of the article."
In any case, say there were two funny post-apocalyptic books in the past decade. And now there are two at the same time, and they're both getting a lot of buzz. Doesn't that seem like it's more of a subgenre now, and less a collection of flukes?
@Charlie Jane Anders: "Journalistic escape clauses" are one of the reasons journalists don't make great essayists. It just sounds like your hedging a bad bet, and trying to cover all your angles without making an opinion.
If a couple of books of the same theme existed before, it seems like the genre existed before, regardless of the frequency of the occurrence.
@Pope John Peeps II: actually, the "to be sure" paragraph is a staple of essayists as well, I think. In any case, I'm sticking to my guns. Two books in a decade don't make something a genre, but when you start seeing more of them sprout up at the same time, it looks more like one.
@phoghat: Unfotunately, I suspect that an examination of history would teach us that the most numerous survivors of any apocalypse are conformists, bullies and sneaks.
@Charlie Jane Anders: I generally approve of Charlie's taste in books but I couldn't stand it. It does have a few fine qualities but the long rambling druggie slam poetry sequences really got on my nerves. And I usually like that gonzo Pynchonesque $h!t.
Re-reading Jay Lake's Trial of Flowers at the moment and looking forward to the sequel coming out next week. Super-weird "Urban Fantasy" with creepy mystics, decadent fops, and SEX DWARVES.
All a matter of personal taste, of course.
And now my work here is done, Drunken Book Reviewer Awaaayy!
@Dormouse II: The Wrath of Gryphon: I'd say it's mostly fun, but with a depressing undertone... there's a decent amount of assassin duels and zany set pieces. It really is true that some of the long passages where there's a party and somebody plays blues music and everybody dances are crying out to be skimmed. You get the feeling Slattery really likes parties.
You might also take a look at The Apocalypse Reader, an anthology of new and selected short fiction about the end of the world, which I edited, and which came out last year from Thunder's Mouth. There are a number of stories that fit in with the trend you're describing. A story called "Fraise Menthe et Poivre 1979" by a guy named Jared Hohl, is the best example of what you're talking about, but also check out Shelley Jackson's "The Hook" and Brian Evenson's "An Accounting." Plus, the rest of the book isn't bad either. Sorry to be such a commercial, but I just think/hope you might get a kick out of it.
I loves me my science fiction, but I put this one down after getting a third of the way in. I think Anathem had come out and I was lured away. Haven't felt inclined to go back, must say.
@ShubhraKnuks: It gets better. I almost put it down after the first 1/3 of the book as well, but it picks up steam. And you really can skim past some of his not-quite-funny digressions.
So - from your first paragraph I have bought the book because it sounds intriguing. But I didn't read the "review" because you said there are spoilers in it.
Surely if you are "reviewing" the book you should avoid spoilers - otherwise you are "discussing" the book, which is perfectly valid but not how this is labelled. Perhaps adding a line about what you thought about the book in the first paragraph might have helped (I went and read a few other actual non-spoilery reviews to see if it was worth buying).
@BrookeHolodyne: Sorry, in my world reviews almost always have spoilers. I didn't give away the major plot twist of the book, but it's hard to discuss what the book's about without getting into specifics. I've written book reviews for the SF Chronicle, Publisher's Weekly and various other places, and the only difference there was that we didn't have to include a spoiler warning.
Sure, I'll take a stab. The massive twist two-thirds of the way through is that the un-named narrator IS his friend, Gonzo Lubitsch. And the Fight Club they created is starting to get a little nutty.
12/11/08
12/11/08
12/10/08
2) To be sure, there have been funny books about the apocalypse forever.
Just thought I'd point that out. In grad school, you'd get the red pen, and a couple of red pen exclamation points.
12/11/08
In any case, say there were two funny post-apocalyptic books in the past decade. And now there are two at the same time, and they're both getting a lot of buzz. Doesn't that seem like it's more of a subgenre now, and less a collection of flukes?
12/11/08
If a couple of books of the same theme existed before, it seems like the genre existed before, regardless of the frequency of the occurrence.
12/11/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/11/08
12/10/08
I need shit to read over Christmas break.
12/10/08
12/10/08
Re-reading Jay Lake's Trial of Flowers at the moment and looking forward to the sequel coming out next week. Super-weird "Urban Fantasy" with creepy mystics, decadent fops, and SEX DWARVES.
All a matter of personal taste, of course.
And now my work here is done, Drunken Book Reviewer Awaaayy!
12/10/08
Oh yeah, I forgot about that review. I guess I'll give it a try.
Is it the fun kind of satire, or the depressing kind? The cover and subtitle look fun, but the slavery shit sounds depressing.
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/11/08
12/02/08
12/02/08
12/02/08
Surely if you are "reviewing" the book you should avoid spoilers - otherwise you are "discussing" the book, which is perfectly valid but not how this is labelled. Perhaps adding a line about what you thought about the book in the first paragraph might have helped (I went and read a few other actual non-spoilery reviews to see if it was worth buying).
12/02/08
12/01/08
12/01/08
12/01/08
12/01/08
12/01/08
12/01/08
12/01/08
12/01/08