Literary Horror discussion

I hope it was okay to start this new thread for us to discuss The Wanderer.

I'm in for this one!

Me, also. But I may have to read one other one before I can start The Wanderer.

I ordered this today. Hopefully it comes in soon! :-)

Although I read the novel--and gave it a 4 star rating--I plan to chime in occasionally.

In my review, I called it a macabre picaresque.

Randolph wrote: "I'm about 10% through and I have to admit that I am at times baffled by the almost Shandean digressions. I hope I can keep track of things."

"Shandean digressions"! Wow! That's an obscure reference. I mean, who today reads Laurence Sterne, Jefferson notwithstanding? But okay....

Yeah, the book is meta-fictional.

So, what do people think about the Punch and Judy stuff?

I've finally started this one, just about 5% in but I loved the "Foreword", immediately made me think Lovecraft.

I will hopefully be starting this tomorrow.

I didn't catch the Joseph Curwen reference.
The appendices were ok--if they were left out, I wouldn't have missed it.
I think there are 'in-jokes' in the book. I think there is an immortal named Duncan in the book. Duncan is the brother of Connor in the Highlander movies.

There is a lot of language from Yeats's "The Second Coming" but I've not come to an overt reference yet.

It is quite a feat that though, many of his descriptive sentences are rather complex, he manages to write with a level of finesse that keeps it all hanging together (in the readers mind) well.

This one is slow going for me, just now at 15% and waiting to see what unfolds.

Damn, that long?

Randolph wrote: "I was so confused by the seemingly endless digressions. It begins to come together eventually."

Agreed. I'm around 80%.

Randolph wrote: "Hang in there. It took me 50% to get going in it."

Okay, good to know, I'll keep at it.

Maxine wrote: "Randolph wrote: "Hang in there. It took me 50% to get going in it."

Okay, good to know, I'll keep at it."

Being in a similar situation, I'll just add another useful tip: don't read it in short sittings. It seems to go better when I read it for an hour or two at a stretch.

I'm about a third of the way into the book. So far there's enough material here for three novels and half a dozen short stories! Some very strange and grotesque stuff, but I don't think the author is very successful at the dialogue.

Tony wrote: "I'm about a third of the way into the book. So far there's enough material here for three novels and half a dozen short stories!"

I think that is a feat in itself--it is only a book of average length, after all--to be so economical in giving the sense of these story lines. If you think this is complicated, I would advise you to have another look at the Arabian Nights entertainments; there it is truly a possibility to become lost in the "story within a story", to the point of disorientation.

1/3 through - the writing is hazy and all over the place, but it is a good kind of hazy and all over the place... feels like a journal of tall tales picked from weirdos while pub hopping through the Bardo (I am pretty sure they have pubs in the Bardo?). Jarvis seems very comfortable with writing that is persistently lurking in the fantastic. The story, thus far, doesn't jump in and jump out of the strange story lines, which is good, I have read other books with similar tone, but most writers have a fear tendency that the reader may get freaked out if the writing doesn't go Mayberry or Pleasantville every few chapters... not a lot of Mayberry here.

It's the weekend, looking forward to reading large chunks.

Randolph wrote: "Axolotl wrote: "Maxine wrote: "Randolph wrote: "Hang in there. It took me 50% to get going in it."

Okay, good to know, I'll keep at it."

Being in a similar situation, I'll just add another usefu..."

I'm not too far in yet-about 10% and I'm finding the "little sips" idea to be very true. Between trying to buy a house and taking care of my sick mother, I've not had big enough chunks of time to return to this book.

I'm really liking this one! It reads like an older story and then he will mention his cell phone or an ATM and I'll be reminded it's modern.

I had never heard of Punch and Judy until they were mentioned in Gone Girl. I didn't even realise they were a real thing. Punch is pretty terrifying.

I'm up to about 30%. I'm enjoying the set up.
Several scenes stick in my mind already. :)

Once I hit about 35% or so, the story got much more interesting. I find the timing of the narrative and slipping back and forth, past to future, into other people's narratives, into narratives within narratives, its a very layered story, and actually quite scary (at least to me). I wonder who the mysterious person is who is after our protag.

I'm at about 40% now and I agree with you, Maxine. I love intricate stories all wound up together and this one definitely qualifies.

I'm so happy to hear it gets even better! I love this kind of writing and I agree that it's scary.

I have the same feeling I did reading The Elementals, the shocks come out of nowhere sometimes. I love that.

Randolph wrote: "Punch and Judy go at least as far back as the Middle Ages. The plot of a classic P&J show is really quite stylized with Mr. Punch pretty much doing away with all in the end including the hangman."

I had to look it up, and I bet the show is actually really funny. In the book, when Punch singled him out from the crowd, that was scary.

Homicidal puppets...worse than creepy clowns.

Yikes!

Must be the origin of "slapstick humour".

I'm late to the party on this, haven't had much time for reading in the past few months. I'm about 20% through and would say this is very much my thing, I've always enjoyed the story within story format.

Neil77 wrote: "I'm late to the party on this, haven't had much time for reading in the past few months. I'm about 20% through and would say this is very much my thing, I've always enjoyed the story within story f..."

Glad to hear it, Neil!

I love the twist at 85% (view spoiler)[The tribeswoman is Rashmi and she's back! (hide spoiler)]. I finally finished, after thinking I had finished it turned out that I hadn't finished. There was an Epilogue, and afterword and a short story in between. Overall, I really enjoyed this book!

Does anyone else think that Elliot (view spoiler)[ is something of cross between a silly Bond villain (always flapping, talking about what they are going to do, and Freddy Kruger? (hide spoiler)]

At one point in the book there is a litany of (imo cheesy) allusions to writers who (view spoiler)[ Elliot has terrorized, Including Ligotti, Ambrose Bierce, Austin Osman Spare, and others (hide spoiler)] I barely care but did anyone catch others? Opinion: (view spoiler)[ There is a lot of "meta" crap around that feels like such a waste of time, made just so aficionados can feel a smug sense of "I get it", it's pandering and pitiful. (hide spoiler)]

I am sad to report that although I began reading this book with the most positive affect (Mark Valentine's recommendation being what did it), I feel glad to be almost finished this...exercise.
Reading this book is like the protraction of those painful moments in primary school of watching the clock with full knowledge that in five minutes the bell will sound, signifying the start of the holidays.

I do hope the (second) appendix will set me right.

Randolph wrote: "Axolotl wrote: "I am sad to report that although I began reading this book with the most positive affect (Mark Valentine's recommendation being what did it), I feel glad to be almost finished this...."

To shrug my criticism of the book off with a "to each his own" is less than I would expect, Randolph; it also seems antithetical to discussing the book under review. Why did you like the book so much, if I may ask?
Because of all the clever references?

Although you seem to misunderstand the part of the book I am referring to in my post above: there sort of isn't a character called Joseph Curwen in The Wanderer, because it is explained away as being a pseudonym provided by our protagonist who has an obvious affection for weird fiction, it's like calling him "Melmoth" (this really happens late in the book and is hardly a spoiler).

Appendix I
To avoid further misunderstanding: this is a book for pure entertainment, I understand that. I'm just criticizing the form this entertainment took, which I didn't find so enjoyable (the highly pretentious ending most recently, for example).

Appendix II
To further clarify: I don't "hate" this book, even if I found it somewhat tedious. I have read many books far more egregious and less enjoyable.

I agree with Randolph, the references were simply passing entertainment and the horror elements were solid. The appendices were pointless (I didn't see them at first in the small print on my Kindle and they didn't add anything once I'd gone back and read them), as were the last sections of the book, which ought to have ended at the 92%- "Homeward bound once more."

I would call The Wanderer a post modern horror novel.
While reading it, another post modern horror novel came to my mind: House of Leaves. But I liked this book much more than House of Leaves.
I didn't like of House of Leaves. It wasn't a difficult read, just tedious. House of Leaves didn't instill fear or wonderment; it instilled boredom.
Now I expect the many fans of House of Leaves heading toward my apartment with torches and pitchforks.

I really liked House of Leaves, but I totally understand those who got fed up with it.

Um I don't think the "literati" are any (more or less) rabidly devotional about their "masterpieces" than are the devotees of "weird fiction" (esp. ones with a penchant for Lovecraft pastiche); which is why I was a tad worried that my disappointment with The Wanderer would elicit an overly inflamed response here. Though I will be the first to admit that aspects of The Wanderer were well-done, I'm often struck with how uncritical horror readers can be---and (at the risk of contradicting myself) I also just felt like pushing a few buttons on this sleepy thread. However, somewhat as expected, I'm afraid, not too many rose to the bait, though probably because they were too civil to be drawn out, or choose to remain uncritical after all. Having said that, I'm pleasantly surprised by the tolerance of LH group members who did challenge.

The Wanderer is an interesting mash-up of influences, and I think I understand its appeal to so many (which reminds me somewhat of the recent love for the film Birdman). Though it started off promisingly enough, for me, Jarvis's conceit isn't sustained enough to carry the whole novel. It is a lengthy book which lacks scale--except for in odd instances like the first visit to Future London, while, on the other hand set pieces like the "amazing race"-style murder-hunt suffers in comparison. While there are plenty of well-drawn atmospheric and descriptive scenes, the characters (and it is actually forgivable in Peterkin, himself) are one-dimensional tinmen ready to be knocked down. The narrative itself poses as pervasively "doom and gloom" and has a cosy True Detective S.1-style ending, it even sort of becomes (view spoiler)[a romance story (hide spoiler)] at the end, which is an unwelcomed twist, I suppose--it would seem that "Meta" is quickly becoming synonymous with "a lack of commitment".

Tim Jarvis is obviously a writer to look out for and I'm interested in reading more by him--genuinely by him.

Axolotl wrote: "At one point in the book there is a litany of (imo cheesy) allusions to writers who [spoilers removed] I barely care but did anyone catch others? Opinion: [spoilers removed]"

I think I also spotted (view spoiler)[Goya, Maturin, maybe Zola, Baudelaire, the Comte de Lautreamont, William Hope Hodgson, Leonora Carrington, Shirley Jackson (hide spoiler)].

Tony wrote: "Axolotl wrote: "At one point in the book there is a litany of (imo cheesy) allusions to writers who [spoilers removed] I barely care but did anyone catch others? Opinion: [spoilers removed]"

I thi..."

Great work, Tony. So you mean that these were spotted in the section where (view spoiler)[Elliot is terrorizing Simon with all the writers he's put the fear into or attempted to make immortal (hide spoiler)]?

Axolotl wrote: "Tony wrote: "Axolotl wrote: "At one point in the book there is a litany of (imo cheesy) allusions to writers who [spoilers removed] I barely care but did anyone catch others? Opinion: [spoilers rem..."

Thanks! Yes, they're all from that section. I was stumped by some.

Finished this one in the nick of time! I loved this book. As soon as I was done I wanted to start over and read it again with better understanding of the characters and places.

(view spoiler)[I haven't read enough to get all the author references. I did guess Shirley Jackson, and I thought the "American author of strange tales who got away, laughed in his face, but he got revenge years later in Mexico, was Burroughs? Not sure.

I liked the never ending story aspect. I appreciated the Yukon mentions. Robert Service is near and dear to my heart. I used to live there so, that was fun. Strange thing, when in Whitehorse, I lived on Jarvis street. (hide spoiler)]

Great choice guys!

I liked this and wanted to discuss it, but a flu is currently decimating my family and my mom is ill as well.
I gave it 4 stars and will try to come back and share my feelings soon.

Charlene wrote: "I liked this and wanted to discuss it, but a flu is currently decimating my family and my mom is ill as well.
I gave it 4 stars and will try to come back and share my feelings soon."

Sorry to hear that, Charlene. We went through that last month. No fun at all. Hugs to you! I look forward to hearing what you have to say.

Kirstin wrote: "Finished this one in the nick of time! I loved this book. As soon as I was done I wanted to start over and read it again with better understanding of the characters and places.

I haven't read enou..."

Jarvis Street! That is an interesting coincidence!

Axolotl wrote: "Kirstin wrote: "Finished this one in the nick of time! I loved this book. As soon as I was done I wanted to start over and read it again with better understanding of the characters and places.

I h..."

It made me smile.

I'm about two-thirds of the way through and, sad to say, I'm having difficulty in motivating myself to keep reading. I probably should have taken the advice offered in an earlier post and attempted to read it in long chunks of time.

what has annoyed me is the quality of the stories being told by the various people who answered the narrator's ad (and, equally, the cabbie's tale). I enjoy dream-like horror in general, but these tales feel like they have very little internal logic and they suffer from a bit of cheesiness as well. they make me feel... impatient. the main impression I'm getting from the book is of a talented first-time author (I'm not sure if this is actually the case) throwing everything in his bag of tricks at the wall to see if anything sticks. as far as similar portmanteau novels go, at this point I prefer That Which Should Not Be, which surprises me because Jarvis is clearly the superior stylist.

all that said, there is still a lot that I'm enjoying. the opening chapters were great and Jarvis does the best pastiche of the Lovecraft style that I've read in a long while (although he seems to lose interest in keeping that up and at this point in the book, that style has disappeared). I also love the horror-science fantasy of the futuristic framing sequences. I rather wish the whole novel was in this bizarre, fascinating setting.

I finished the book a while ago and it certainly stayed in my head for days afterwards. But my overall feeling is that it is one strange, strange chimera of a tale.

I have a few randomish questions but I'm not sure they have answers. Why does he use the framing device and immediately undercut it? Why is there a minor character called (view spoiler)[FI.G.MENT (hide spoiler)]? I found the writing style slightly hard-going at times. Is this the author's own style or the author as Peterkin's style?