Scan barcode
thewallflower00's review against another edition
2.0
The writing is as austere as the setting, which fits. This is a stark horror and it builds slowly. There is no monster here (except for the greatest monster of all–man).
Yes, this is one of those psychologically scary horrors like Oldboy or Se7en. Fear is created through a slow burn as the person terrorizing others is just a guy like you or me. And he does it by degrees, not in a single brutal slash. And you are left to wonder what you would do in this situation and finding yourself not liking the answer.
The novel, as written, was more an allegory of city people fleeing into the rural areas, gentrifying them, farmers getting shouldered off their land by weekend warriors and the invasion of suburbia. But you know how I interpreted it? I saw an allegory for how Native Americans were driven off their land. Getting increasingly worse deals for their property, always the threat of violence implied if they didn’t surrender.
The problem is that, like other horror novels I’ve seen, like in The Deep and Touch the Night, they get into a “horror loop”. They remember to include the scares but forget to move the plot along. The scary thing repeats and no one does anything about it. It’s like building a stack of papers one sheet at a time. Which, I guess, is what a book is. But for me, I need more development than that, not just scrapings.
Yes, this is one of those psychologically scary horrors like Oldboy or Se7en. Fear is created through a slow burn as the person terrorizing others is just a guy like you or me. And he does it by degrees, not in a single brutal slash. And you are left to wonder what you would do in this situation and finding yourself not liking the answer.
The novel, as written, was more an allegory of city people fleeing into the rural areas, gentrifying them, farmers getting shouldered off their land by weekend warriors and the invasion of suburbia. But you know how I interpreted it? I saw an allegory for how Native Americans were driven off their land. Getting increasingly worse deals for their property, always the threat of violence implied if they didn’t surrender.
The problem is that, like other horror novels I’ve seen, like in The Deep and Touch the Night, they get into a “horror loop”. They remember to include the scares but forget to move the plot along. The scary thing repeats and no one does anything about it. It’s like building a stack of papers one sheet at a time. Which, I guess, is what a book is. But for me, I need more development than that, not just scrapings.
treedog669's review against another edition
5.0
It's possible I'm just biased because it's in NH.
The introduction says that it's about the idea that when you move to a new place, you don't get to start fresh — rather, you simply get to retell the same story. I didn't pick up on too much of that in the story (perhaps it'll reveal itself when my bookclub discusses it). I mostly picked up on the abuse that happens when someone asks you to "haze yourself", as they say in the military, because you know the consequences will be worse if you don't. When do fight back? How do you fight back? How much do you take? Will it go away on its own?
The prose is mid-century, with its paragraphs slowly describing settings and its sentences shorter than the ambling prose of yesteryear but longer, more relaxed than what you might find today. But I'm basing this on feeling — nothing concrete.
I was prepared to be unsatisfied with the ending, but it ultimately came together pretty nicely. I think the dialogue could've been done a little differently, maybe the ending scenes could've been paced a little slower, but I'm overall happy with it.
The book is centered on justice: what happens when you endure something that you deem to be unfair, what happens when you see other people enduring unfairness, and how do you change it.
The epilogue by the author's husband (since the author died 5 months after publishing) highlights parallels to Trump. I don't personally see them, but I can understand the linking of the the two with the threads of injustice and unfairness.
The introduction says that it's about the idea that when you move to a new place, you don't get to start fresh — rather, you simply get to retell the same story. I didn't pick up on too much of that in the story (perhaps it'll reveal itself when my bookclub discusses it). I mostly picked up on the abuse that happens when someone asks you to "haze yourself", as they say in the military, because you know the consequences will be worse if you don't. When do fight back? How do you fight back? How much do you take? Will it go away on its own?
The prose is mid-century, with its paragraphs slowly describing settings and its sentences shorter than the ambling prose of yesteryear but longer, more relaxed than what you might find today. But I'm basing this on feeling — nothing concrete.
I was prepared to be unsatisfied with the ending, but it ultimately came together pretty nicely. I think the dialogue could've been done a little differently, maybe the ending scenes could've been paced a little slower, but I'm overall happy with it.
The book is centered on justice: what happens when you endure something that you deem to be unfair, what happens when you see other people enduring unfairness, and how do you change it.
The epilogue by the author's husband (since the author died 5 months after publishing) highlights parallels to Trump. I don't personally see them, but I can understand the linking of the the two with the threads of injustice and unfairness.
literallly_the_guy's review against another edition
4.0
For a first (and unfortunately, only) book, this blew my socks clean off my body. A vision of the possible drawbacks of small town, rural life, The Auctioneer presents the reader with a dilemma: how far would you let someone push you before you push back? When someone gets hurt? When someone dies? The sinister figure of Perly Dunesmore, a perfectly normal human being, strikes more fear than any number of heinous slavering beasts simply because he could, and probably does, in some form, exist. Combine this plausibility with some of the bleakest atmosphere this side of Cormac McCcarthy and you have a stone cold classic on your hands.
Well written and brilliantly paced, this is a classic that is, deservedly, becoming more known and appreciated as time goes by.
4/5 iron grey skies looking down on us poor sinners, read in the sunshine if at all possible
Well written and brilliantly paced, this is a classic that is, deservedly, becoming more known and appreciated as time goes by.
4/5 iron grey skies looking down on us poor sinners, read in the sunshine if at all possible
mbrutzman's review against another edition
4.0
Gonna go with a 3.8, it was a good read but felt like stories I've heard before, some of those being a bit better
ccfrostybits's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
3.5
Honestly just what the doctor ordered after reading Absalom, Absalom!. Just a short, tense read that's plot really sneaks up on you. I'm really into watching a small town turn on itself so this was definitely right up my alley. I feel like it could have done for having some more compelling characters, but their actions do make it authentic and interesting none the less. Would definitely recommend. The most western book ever set in New Hampshire.
joshjorgz's review against another edition
5.0
A new Barnes and Noble opened up in my neighborhood and while making the appropriate pilgrimage, I stumbled upon this novel. It had been on my radar before--the Paperbacks from Hell, Grady Hendrix, and the re-issues of particular titles are all extremely exciting to me--and it was the right time to pick it up.
The Auctioneer is the only novel written by Joan Samson--she died a few months after it was published. Blurbs compare it favorably to Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," and it is celebrated as one of the few 70s horror novels to sell 1 million copies.
I think it is a slow-burning masterpiece. The story centers on John, Mim, their daughter Hildie, and John's mother, Ma. They are farmers in Harlowe, New Hampshire, and they live off the land and their humble community resources (neighbors, shops, exchanges, etc.).
When a man named Perly Dunsmore--the Auctioneer--infiltrates their community, things seem to be both harmless and exciting. The items that he sells during his Auctions are funneled into the community--more police (because crimes are rising) and other necessary resources. But when the Auctions refuse to stop--John and Mim are thrust into a situation that is more than they, and the Harlowe community, bargained for.
This is definitely a pot-will-boil novel. I found the details and the set-up fascinating. It is like a time-capsule from the 1970s in rural America. The character development is gradual yet stark. As you go along, things become more and more unsettling.
The ending is fierce, bleak, and ultimately deflating--not because it is a let-down, but because there is no mistaking how easily a community can come to ruin.
The Auctioneer is the only novel written by Joan Samson--she died a few months after it was published. Blurbs compare it favorably to Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," and it is celebrated as one of the few 70s horror novels to sell 1 million copies.
I think it is a slow-burning masterpiece. The story centers on John, Mim, their daughter Hildie, and John's mother, Ma. They are farmers in Harlowe, New Hampshire, and they live off the land and their humble community resources (neighbors, shops, exchanges, etc.).
When a man named Perly Dunsmore--the Auctioneer--infiltrates their community, things seem to be both harmless and exciting. The items that he sells during his Auctions are funneled into the community--more police (because crimes are rising) and other necessary resources. But when the Auctions refuse to stop--John and Mim are thrust into a situation that is more than they, and the Harlowe community, bargained for.
This is definitely a pot-will-boil novel. I found the details and the set-up fascinating. It is like a time-capsule from the 1970s in rural America. The character development is gradual yet stark. As you go along, things become more and more unsettling.
The ending is fierce, bleak, and ultimately deflating--not because it is a let-down, but because there is no mistaking how easily a community can come to ruin.
merricatjackson's review against another edition
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
amandamlyons's review against another edition
4.0
I don't think I can say much without spoiling it. Highly recommended as a satisfying and thoughtful take on the horror genre. Go into it with as little information as you can.
pfracassi's review against another edition
3.0
Look, with all due respect to Joan Samson, who tragically died of cancer within weeks of this book's publication, and who is a wonderful writer, this book is more theme than story. Here's what I mean by that:
The whole premise of this story is based on the idea that a bunch of farmers with acres and acres of land they've owned for generations would allow an outsider to "smooth-talk" them into giving away a) All their earthly belongings b) All their cattle and livestock c) All their GUNS d) Their children???
I totally get that Samson was trying to make a point. But even with the idea that the whole book is an allegory for XYZ, you still need to base the tale in some sort of rooted reality. Either that, or go straight allegory so it reads as more of a fable.
But Samson tried to have it both ways. Creating a realistic thriller / horror novel with "real" characters struggling to overcome an evil interloper, and a heavily-themed allegory on material possessions or modern vs tradition or blah blah blah.
Point is this. If you ever worked on a farm, or ever knew an actual farmer, this story is as laughable as it is infuriating. Because folks, if you think a farmer would let you so much as put a fingertip on his or her belongings without catching a cloud of buckshot in the process, than you're out of your mind.
Samson would have us believe that a whole community of farmers would stand idly by while the villain and a bunch of "deputies with sidearms" take their furniture, their most sacred belongings, their tools, their livestock, inappropriately fondle their wives and seduce their children... while they all just sort of fret and pace and wonder what to do.
Yeah, okay.
Sorry, but like I said, even the most outlandish fantasies need some basis in reality, especially when they're actually shooting for realism, and this book is so frustratingly impossible that you spend the entire time mentally screaming at the characters (and the author) to show a tiny bit of realistic, empathetic humanity. (I personally know of two uncles that would have happily gunned-down and secretly buried the antagonist and his cronies by the end of chapter two).
And by the time they do finally stand up for themselves, you don't care anymore because it's been drawn out too long and you no longer believe a word of the story or care about these unrealistic people.
That all said, the writing is wonderful, and the basic premise is actually interesting, and the themes are worth exploring, but the blind eye to reality is ultimately too much to overcome.
The whole premise of this story is based on the idea that a bunch of farmers with acres and acres of land they've owned for generations would allow an outsider to "smooth-talk" them into giving away a) All their earthly belongings b) All their cattle and livestock c) All their GUNS d) Their children???
I totally get that Samson was trying to make a point. But even with the idea that the whole book is an allegory for XYZ, you still need to base the tale in some sort of rooted reality. Either that, or go straight allegory so it reads as more of a fable.
But Samson tried to have it both ways. Creating a realistic thriller / horror novel with "real" characters struggling to overcome an evil interloper, and a heavily-themed allegory on material possessions or modern vs tradition or blah blah blah.
Point is this. If you ever worked on a farm, or ever knew an actual farmer, this story is as laughable as it is infuriating. Because folks, if you think a farmer would let you so much as put a fingertip on his or her belongings without catching a cloud of buckshot in the process, than you're out of your mind.
Samson would have us believe that a whole community of farmers would stand idly by while the villain and a bunch of "deputies with sidearms" take their furniture, their most sacred belongings, their tools, their livestock, inappropriately fondle their wives and seduce their children... while they all just sort of fret and pace and wonder what to do.
Yeah, okay.
Sorry, but like I said, even the most outlandish fantasies need some basis in reality, especially when they're actually shooting for realism, and this book is so frustratingly impossible that you spend the entire time mentally screaming at the characters (and the author) to show a tiny bit of realistic, empathetic humanity. (I personally know of two uncles that would have happily gunned-down and secretly buried the antagonist and his cronies by the end of chapter two).
And by the time they do finally stand up for themselves, you don't care anymore because it's been drawn out too long and you no longer believe a word of the story or care about these unrealistic people.
That all said, the writing is wonderful, and the basic premise is actually interesting, and the themes are worth exploring, but the blind eye to reality is ultimately too much to overcome.