Reviews with content warning for Antisemitism - American Psycho

Yeah. So. Don’t do the audiobook. Or do the front half of the audiobook, and once you get through the first Events (you’ll know when you’re there), switch to text.

It’s a lot of people’s favorite book and I get why. I have the strongest positive opinions on the writing style. The satire is hilarious (my favorite running gag is the bizarre food and fusion restaurants). But. This book needs every content warning under the sun. No reader should go into this book blind, and it’s widely known for the extremely graphic content, which is sexual, violent, and gory. There’s a type of person who finishes this book, and if you aren’t that person, do not force your way to the end. You’re going to have a terrible time.

I read this book fifteen years ago or something when I was an edgy teenager, and at first I was shocked at remembering mostly the Wall Street Guy stuff and not a lot about The Other Stuff, but I realized it must have been a hell of a lot easier to have a text and skim the super gross stuff. That’s just not possible with the audiobook. There’s also random stuff dropped throughout, so even if you skip sections, you’re still not really going to be able to avoid it. It’s often very abrupt, and hearing the words out loud makes me feel voyeuristic about stuff I don’t want to be voyeuristic about.

I’m not squeamish; I read plenty of things that are gross and gory and violent, and I watch plenty of movies and television in the same category. And I’d even argue that the amount of detail supports the consistency and structure of the text, and that it’s supposed to be there. But jfc.

It’s a love it or hate it situation, and to be clear, I love it. There’s obviously a lot of content in the book that isn’t, well, that. Some of which makes me literally laugh out loud. But yeah. Don’t listen to it. It’s excruciating. Honestly, you miss some of the best details about the book, but the movie is fine, and I don’t feel nearly as gross when I finish it.

Content Warnings

sarah_piette's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark sad tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

Content Warnings

levitatingnumeral's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark reflective slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

4.0

There’s no doubt this book has been controversial from its release, with readers torn between finding it boring/disgusting or a masterpiece. I… well, somehow I wanted more.
Let’s start from what I loved most: Bateman’s vapid monologues. I see many reviews saying they made the book incredibly dull, but I actually found them to be unbelievably valuable in showing just how superficial and self-obsessed Bateman is. It’s clear he is completely unaware of the utter indifference anyone else would show towards his obsession with himself, and Bret’s narration is flawless. It truly felt like I was hearing a narcissist talking, 100% immersion.
On the other hand, I must admit I struggled a bit to keep track of the level of Bateman’s unreliability. Since the characters were (purposefully) so similar, at times I would catch myself wondering if it truly was Bateman unreliably reporting the actions of his peers or if it was me mixing up the characters. I will give Bret the benefit of the doubt, though, because maybe this was the very effect he wanted to create. He has talked about how the core of the plot is something he himself is unsure of and left open for interpretation, so perhaps it was his intent to make us readers wonder at all times whether we were misremembering or if it was a lie. It would make perfect sense, in the context of Bateman’s constant manipulation.
What I definitely wanted more of, though, was… a certain kind of consistency in two specific aspects:
1. The effect of drugs on Bateman. We see him, at one point, break down and practically black out. But after the worst occurrence, it seems like this aspect was just left out.
2. The ending. It felt so abrupt I was completely lost. I wanted maybe a few more threads to be pulled tighter. I don’t want answers, but maybe I would’ve enjoyed if I had relevant, confusing points being weaved into a torn, fuzzy, mismatching fabric to drive home just how unsure I should be.

Content Warnings

evelyncore's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark funny mysterious reflective tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

Content Warnings

lord_cookie's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

“My pain is constant and sharp and I do not hope for a better world for anyone, in fact I want my pain to be inflicted on others.”
American Psycho is not a book I’d recommend easily to many people. It’s hostile and our main character Patrick Bateman is a misogynist, racist, superficial prick who spends far too much money and thoughts on clothes and beauty products. And as many critics, readers and Ellis said: It’s somewhat boring. There are many chapters simply listing which clothes people wear or what his beauty routine is. Further in it’s more and more violent gory depictions of torture often starting with hardcore pornography. Still I liked the book. FThe movie adaptation is my second favourite movie and I was pleased how many scenes were in the movie. Also Ellis himself said he wrote the book at a time when he lived this lifestyle and grew alienated and this book comes from anger and even though I’m really far from the lifestyle the anger here deeply resonated with me. Some moments are so absurd they are definitely funny. The big difference to the movie is the amount of violence and gore. Towards the end it grows more heavy. I’ve read a lot of horror books these last 3 months but this was the first that made me grimace because there are some really disgusting things happening. To top this all I’m a sucker for unreliable narrators and when something is left open like here. We never truly know if Patrick committed these crimes. There are hints but in the end it’s the reader who decides what happened.

Content Warnings

nadiajohnsonbooks's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.5

I truly don't know how to articulate my thoughts about this book.

Let's start with what I liked:

I loved the writing style: manic, rambling, and full of non sequiturs that give the genuine feel of intrusive thoughts. I liked the random chapters of music critique and the view into yuppie Manhattan in the late 80s.

The juxtaposition of mundanity and grotesque violence was jarring and really dialed up the horror in a satisfying way.

Elements of the satire (the absolute interchangeability of the Wall Street bros, the new Salvadorian bistro that everyone is excited about but no one ever seems to go to) worked for me.

But a few things didn't sit right with me even upon reflection.

Pat Bateman and all his compatriots are misogynists, racists, and general scumbags. Okay. But the overwhelming use of racial slurs and sexual violence as a plot device felt less like satire or character development and more like a fifteen year old edgelord trying to get his mom's attention.

I suspect my rating of this book will change a few times the more I consider it, but there's no question that it will stick with me.

I know that Ellis left it consciously ambiguous, but I don't get the impression that Bateman actually killed anyone. I think that he (both Ellis and Bateman) is just an edgelord with a uniquely complex inner life. Aside from a couple oblique references to dreaming and the fact that certainly purportedly murdered characters seem to still exist at the periphery of Bateman's social sphere, there doesn't seem to be much evidence to suggest that he did. The obliviousness of everyone around him could be read as a satire of "see something? Mind ya business" manhattanites, but even satire has its limits.

Content Warnings

michaelion's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

1.75

Maybe the real Psychos were the Americans we made along the way...

A book is bad when I have to question what purpose it served humanity. I am a person who fundamentally believes that all art can be made with no reason or goal in mind; art for art's sake; art because the person who made it felt something, felt they had to get it out, felt they had something to share with the world. I read this book because I wanted to watch the movie, yes I'm that kind of person, and I wish I could unread it. What purpose did this book serve to the greater good of humanity? Fuck the greater good, what contribution to humanity does this book give? It has no analysis, no deeper introspection into the era, the mindset of the people. There's no meat on the bone that is this book.

It has its moments and its beauty, for sure. I love the stream of consciousness and unreliable narration, I love the speaking to the audience, the break rom reality and seeing things in the perspective of a movie, sure. Those elements are great. But as a whole? I never question why art is made. There's art I like and art I don't like. It's easy for me to spot art I like, It's easy for me to spot art I don't like, and there are definitely things that lie in a middle grey area, but for all three of those things I almost never question why it was made. It's an inherently fascist idea to say art should have a purpose else it is a waste of time or attention but this is one of the few exceptions I've encountered. The movie better be good after the shit I just read.

And to be clear, I'm not just mad at the content of the book. It was very upsetting sure, but

about a quarter in is when you get to the first kill and it's mentioned nonchalant. So you read almost 100 pages and finally get to the part you came for.

Most of this book is a whole lot of nothing. It works, only because that's the style of this particular type of writing, but once the kills start to ramp up it's like Oh, you wasted my time, and now this is TOO intense. And I'm sure the whiplash was also purposeful, and I'm starting to get a little too nitpicky, but there are things that are more important / could have been more central to the plot that were not given any spotlight.

I tried to find it in my heart to give it a higher rating, I really did, but I can't lie to my future self who will reread this review and go "damn, the book was that bad?" Hi, future self. To answer your question: No. The book was much worse.

Content Warnings

More...