Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.36 AVERAGE
3.36 AVERAGE
funny
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
reflective
tense
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
Quick Thoughts on Day of the Locust by Nathaniel West
I must say that I am quite underwhelmed lol I thought it would be more interesting than it really was. I guess the concept was interesting but er execution left much to be desired! Writing style was very mid, a lot of telling, and also the random perspective shifts with no prior warning. Arguably stylistic choice but I don’t see what it accomplishes.
I guess it captures the feeling of Great Depression and Hollywood wannabes trying to thrive in a hopeless world with the onset of WWII but er abit weird to read, unlikeable characters but I think that’s the point. Title gave me 10 plague of Egypt vibes but there was literally no reference to locusts at all lmfao like I appreciate it when allusions aren’t directly in ur face but this one ah… never reference at all HAHA
Fell asleep so many times trying to complete this. People say this is one of the few instances where the film was better than the book, which I can see why (haven’t seen the film) mainly cos the set up is Hollywood and it’s difficult to envision something vividly when the author tells so much like “he swung a punch” Bruh
Too bad I’m using this for my comparison essay why are American lit module books so boring and dry thus far… this one is alr one of the better ones and even then it gets a 3.25/5 stars
One of the rare times the movie was better than the book; saw this film years ago, but Atherton, Black, Meredith, and Barty's performances have stayed with me all these years later. To be honest, now that I've read the book, Sutherland was miscast as Homer Simpson; they needed more of a doughy, Midwestern type.
The movie perfectly captured the desperation and tawdriness of "Hollywoodland" in the 1930s, and I suppose it was a look at the world as it descended into chaos with WWII.
The book did so too, but to a lesser degree; although I will concede that an author in 1939 could not flaunt meretriciousness to the extent that a filmmaker could in 1975.
The movie perfectly captured the desperation and tawdriness of "Hollywoodland" in the 1930s, and I suppose it was a look at the world as it descended into chaos with WWII.
The book did so too, but to a lesser degree; although I will concede that an author in 1939 could not flaunt meretriciousness to the extent that a filmmaker could in 1975.
challenging
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
reflective
medium-paced
funny
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
Rather a bizarre book, this. Spanning everything from depressing to absurd hilarity, it is a satire of 1930s Hollywood. A cast of hideous characters live their soul-less, sad, desperate lives on the fringes of the movie scene. There'a a terrible aspiring actress, a sell-out artist, a gambling dwarf, a depressed recluse, a shop window cowboy-for-hire. It's all very odd and not particularly coherent but there are some tremendously funny scenes. The tone sort of reminded me of A Confederacy of Dunces, though they are vastly different books. Absurd, is the word, I guess.
A tale of insanity. (I'd try to sketch out the meaning of this novel later)