Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.63 AVERAGE
3.63 AVERAGE
dark
emotional
funny
inspiring
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
Content Warnings
Moderate: Child death, Homophobia, Mental illness, Pedophilia, Rape, Sexual assault, Sexual content, Sexual violence, Terminal illness, Violence, Medical content
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Intriguing enough to make me stay up a few hours late to finish because I wanted to be sure of the ending. Well researched, though of course with it being quasi-autobiographical some of it would be experience instead. Feelings are had, which can be rare in books by/about men. There's a very good line at the end, something like (mild spoiler) that I think was important and tied it together.
I bought this book, for a dollar, based on title and cover alone, and then it sat on my shelf for years with all the other books I impulse-bought for a dollar based on title and/or cover. Then I heard/read the name Armistead Maupin somewhere -- NPR? Newspaper list of famous birthdays? -- and figured I'd finally get around to reading it.
"Ergh," I said, "'A Novel'." That's usually not my kind of book.
"Nooo not an unreliable narrator," I sighed early on as he described himself as such.
"Ughhh this is going to be a dead kid sobfest," I said, "I dunwanna read that."
But I kept going! And it was not a dead kid sobfest, and it was not "I am riddled w ennui shall I cheat on my wife perhaps" like many "A Novel" books. And "unreliable" in this case meant "tells a story" and not "is hallucinating" as it sometimes does. So if you're balking based on any of those, you're clear.
Spoiler
the reality of the kid didn't matter, because it was the reality of the feelings that affected himI bought this book, for a dollar, based on title and cover alone, and then it sat on my shelf for years with all the other books I impulse-bought for a dollar based on title and/or cover. Then I heard/read the name Armistead Maupin somewhere -- NPR? Newspaper list of famous birthdays? -- and figured I'd finally get around to reading it.
"Ergh," I said, "'A Novel'." That's usually not my kind of book.
"Nooo not an unreliable narrator," I sighed early on as he described himself as such.
"Ughhh this is going to be a dead kid sobfest," I said, "I dunwanna read that."
But I kept going! And it was not a dead kid sobfest, and it was not "I am riddled w ennui shall I cheat on my wife perhaps" like many "A Novel" books. And "unreliable" in this case meant "tells a story" and not "is hallucinating" as it sometimes does. So if you're balking based on any of those, you're clear.
The very best of Maupin. Warm, courageously honest and compulsively page-turning.
I LOVE Armistead Maupin and the Tales of the City. This book is very autobiographical (but may be fictionalized a bit, I'm not sure.) Really interesting story of connection between the author and a sick boy and the deceit he comes to discover.
Much better, IMO, than the Tales from the City, though I liked them too. There was just some really good twists and I loved the POV character.
This is the first of Maupin's work that I've read, but I don't think it will be the last. I enjoyed his style and found it easy to read, allowing me to focus on the characters and relationships instead of on big words and clever phrasing. I think that sort of writing has its place and I do love it but I think when you're trying to pack an emotional punch, simpler language is so much more effective. And the thing that I love about this story is that it's an absolute emotional roller coaster.
Writing partially from personal experience, Maupin gives his readers characters that you love or hate or love to hate, that you want to hug or slap or both in quick succession, that are sympathetic or at least understandable even if you want to give them a swift kick in the ass. Emotions and motivations are presented and explored in a manner that will keep you thinking about them between reading sessions, if you can bring yourself to put it down for that long.
What I took away from this book is something that I had already learned quite a while ago from Neil Gaiman: Things need not have happened to be true. Truth and fiction are sometimes so closely related that you really can't separate them, and sometimes fiction can be the truest thing in the world. Sometimes it just doesn't matter.
Writing partially from personal experience, Maupin gives his readers characters that you love or hate or love to hate, that you want to hug or slap or both in quick succession, that are sympathetic or at least understandable even if you want to give them a swift kick in the ass. Emotions and motivations are presented and explored in a manner that will keep you thinking about them between reading sessions, if you can bring yourself to put it down for that long.
What I took away from this book is something that I had already learned quite a while ago from Neil Gaiman: Things need not have happened to be true. Truth and fiction are sometimes so closely related that you really can't separate them, and sometimes fiction can be the truest thing in the world. Sometimes it just doesn't matter.
Hooks my emotional interest. I'm still unsure of the 'truth' at the end. It kept my interest even when the author got a little annoying! You understand why he gets a little 'stupid' and he becmoes even more compelling.
Okay. Within the first five pages, it became apparent that this book was about storytelling and truth and falsehood and embellishment. Not only does the narrator, Gabriel Noone, tell the reader this point blank, but Armistead Maupin tells us that himself, by making the parallels between himself and his main character extremely easy to draw. Okay, we think, here we have an equivalent Armistead Maupin, who has written an equivalent Tales of the City series, in which equivalent characters act out a story equivalent to that of the author and his partner. Fine.
Then in waltzes A CHARACTER FROM TALES OF THE CITY, Anna (not Madrigal, but Anna of Edgar and Anna, DeDe Halcyon's twins). Instead of a toddler, she is now a 21 year old bookkeeper, which makes sense with the publication date and the original time frame of Tales of the City.
At this point, the entire story within a story about another story based on a story based on a true story thing goes completely out the window. All these wires are crossed, and that potential confusion (potential, because only a handful of readers may even pick up on any of this) paves the way for the actual confusion of the plot.
The mystery at the center of the book was very well done. Even though there is nothing particularly frightening about Gabriel Noone's predicament, I got shivers down my spine more than once, mostly after the halfway mark when his phone conversations with Pete and Donna start occurring on multiple levels.
Why four stars? As much as I like Maupin--and he himself alludes to this through his stand-in Gabriel Noone--his prose doesn't blow me out of the water. Also, truck stop sex seems pretty unnecessary in a book that's all about intangibility.
Plus, obviously, I was hoping against hope for Brian Hawkins to wander through. But that would be too much confusion, even for this book.
Then in waltzes A CHARACTER FROM TALES OF THE CITY, Anna (not Madrigal, but Anna of Edgar and Anna, DeDe Halcyon's twins). Instead of a toddler, she is now a 21 year old bookkeeper, which makes sense with the publication date and the original time frame of Tales of the City.
At this point, the entire story within a story about another story based on a story based on a true story thing goes completely out the window. All these wires are crossed, and that potential confusion (potential, because only a handful of readers may even pick up on any of this) paves the way for the actual confusion of the plot.
The mystery at the center of the book was very well done. Even though there is nothing particularly frightening about Gabriel Noone's predicament, I got shivers down my spine more than once, mostly after the halfway mark when his phone conversations with Pete and Donna start occurring on multiple levels.
Why four stars? As much as I like Maupin--and he himself alludes to this through his stand-in Gabriel Noone--his prose doesn't blow me out of the water. Also, truck stop sex seems pretty unnecessary in a book that's all about intangibility.
Plus, obviously, I was hoping against hope for Brian Hawkins to wander through. But that would be too much confusion, even for this book.