You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.64 AVERAGE
3.64 AVERAGE
Richard Flanagan's writing is brilliant as always, but I had trouble connecting with this story.
Ratings:
Writing 5
Story line 3
Characters 4
Emotional impact 3
Overall rating 3.75
Ratings:
Writing 5
Story line 3
Characters 4
Emotional impact 3
Overall rating 3.75
When a young Australian con artist discovers a book titled Gould’s Book of Fish, a book with paintings of fish as well as a man’s story as a convict on Van Diemen’s Land in the 1830’s, he becomes obsessed with it. And so, begins the story of William Buelow Gould, his adventures before and after his incarceration on Van Diemen’s Land, the people he meets and how he becomes a reluctant painter of fish.
Gould’s Book of Fish is a weird one. It’s funny and gruesome and fantastical and sometimes makes very little sense at all. William Buelow Gould is a witty narrator as he recounts his life and his exploits, the way he notes his limitations and then straightaway goes against any common-sense is often farcical and hilarious. The situations he gets himself in are almost like watching a car-crash in slow-motion, you cant look away and instead are captivated and horrified.
The historical setting is an interesting yet brutal one. The descriptions throughout the novel are incredibly vivid, for instance, the way the prisoners are punished is cruel and disgusting and it doesn’t shy away from the brutalities that the prisoners experienced. Also, the way the landscape of Van Diemen’s Land (what we now call Tanzania) is described makes the location seem just as harsh and unforgiving as the people who are living there.
A lot happens in Gould’s Book of Fish and it doesn’t always seem believable. In fact, the way the story ends leaves you wondering what’s real and what’s not and even if the character of William Buelow Gould was actually a real character in the story or was he a stand in for someone else. It’s a fantastical story, especially with the prominence of the fish, each of them being related to either a significant character or event in Gould’s life. The fish are a part of him and his connection to them ends up being an almost magical thing. Though, a magical thing that’s not always logical.
I listened to Gould’s Book of Fish on audiobook, which I think certainly helped me follow the story thanks to the brilliant narrator Humphrey Bower. I don’t think I would have got on with the book if I was reading a physical copy. So much happens, and not always in a linear order, that it would perhaps be a bit of a dense book to get through. The audiobook had a great narrator though and made the nonsense story just a bit more understandable.
Gould’s Book of Fish is a weird but enjoyable read. It’s got some bizarre characters and the situations Gould ends up a part of are often bonkers and farfetched, but they’re certainly not forgettable.
Gould’s Book of Fish is a weird one. It’s funny and gruesome and fantastical and sometimes makes very little sense at all. William Buelow Gould is a witty narrator as he recounts his life and his exploits, the way he notes his limitations and then straightaway goes against any common-sense is often farcical and hilarious. The situations he gets himself in are almost like watching a car-crash in slow-motion, you cant look away and instead are captivated and horrified.
The historical setting is an interesting yet brutal one. The descriptions throughout the novel are incredibly vivid, for instance, the way the prisoners are punished is cruel and disgusting and it doesn’t shy away from the brutalities that the prisoners experienced. Also, the way the landscape of Van Diemen’s Land (what we now call Tanzania) is described makes the location seem just as harsh and unforgiving as the people who are living there.
A lot happens in Gould’s Book of Fish and it doesn’t always seem believable. In fact, the way the story ends leaves you wondering what’s real and what’s not and even if the character of William Buelow Gould was actually a real character in the story or was he a stand in for someone else. It’s a fantastical story, especially with the prominence of the fish, each of them being related to either a significant character or event in Gould’s life. The fish are a part of him and his connection to them ends up being an almost magical thing. Though, a magical thing that’s not always logical.
I listened to Gould’s Book of Fish on audiobook, which I think certainly helped me follow the story thanks to the brilliant narrator Humphrey Bower. I don’t think I would have got on with the book if I was reading a physical copy. So much happens, and not always in a linear order, that it would perhaps be a bit of a dense book to get through. The audiobook had a great narrator though and made the nonsense story just a bit more understandable.
Gould’s Book of Fish is a weird but enjoyable read. It’s got some bizarre characters and the situations Gould ends up a part of are often bonkers and farfetched, but they’re certainly not forgettable.
Really didn't like this. Broke the reading up in three parts, because I just couldn't take spending so much time with the nasty characters. Dashed through to the end on a waiting-room day.
Did not like the use of language, the slang making it sometimes incomprehensible.
Did not like the use of language, the slang making it sometimes incomprehensible.
This is about the most brutal read a person can come across. It's human degradation, brutality, and fecal matter from start to finish. It's supposed to be somewhat funny (I think), like a literary hoax of some kind, but instead I think it turned me off "literature" for a while. Some reviewer said this book is the first masterpiece of the 21st century. Come on. Don't read this book unless you have a morbid curiosity.
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
medium-paced
Let me start by saying there needs to be registered support groups for people who have read this novel. Not just willy-nilly chat rooms, but certified psych support and medication ... lots of medication. For it is a lonely world when you've read those last few bitterly beautiful lines, left with but one thought, 'Whaaaaa?' There is no one to comfort you, you float alone in a metaphorical ocean, accusing family members when they don't pick up on your book references, 'What manner of fish are you?!'
I could refer to the structure of the story, the depth of character and the visual imagery (poor man's Umber), but what would be the point? Trust that those things are all present and the author has made good use of all twenty-six letters, rearranging them as necessary. So cleverly revealing in such a deceptive way was this story that at first I was saddened by the notion I should never write a novel this despairingly hopeful, but then again, maybe I did? For isn't there a little of Billy Gould in all of us? And don't we all try to lock him deep down in a little cell that fills with water once a day?
So for now, I'll float alone, until my pod return, having experienced the trials and tribulations of Billy Gould, painter of fish. And when they do, we shall greet each other and ask, 'What manner of fish are you? What manner of fish am I?' And perhaps they'll know the answer to my real question, the one that plagues my sleep, 'Does evolution turn full circle, or reach a predetermined point and then hit reverse?' Come to think of it, as time goes on, I do feel some of my accomplishments becoming unaccomplished.
Hello. What manner of fish are you?
I could refer to the structure of the story, the depth of character and the visual imagery (poor man's Umber), but what would be the point? Trust that those things are all present and the author has made good use of all twenty-six letters, rearranging them as necessary. So cleverly revealing in such a deceptive way was this story that at first I was saddened by the notion I should never write a novel this despairingly hopeful, but then again, maybe I did? For isn't there a little of Billy Gould in all of us? And don't we all try to lock him deep down in a little cell that fills with water once a day?
So for now, I'll float alone, until my pod return, having experienced the trials and tribulations of Billy Gould, painter of fish. And when they do, we shall greet each other and ask, 'What manner of fish are you? What manner of fish am I?' And perhaps they'll know the answer to my real question, the one that plagues my sleep, 'Does evolution turn full circle, or reach a predetermined point and then hit reverse?' Come to think of it, as time goes on, I do feel some of my accomplishments becoming unaccomplished.
Hello. What manner of fish are you?
Flanagan has been added to my list of 'Favorite Authors'. This books is amazing...funny, bitter, oddly poetic, and always always entertaining. It reminds me of House of Leaves for some reason (although it's only real similarity with that book is the device of the narrator finding a mysterious book and then incorporating it into the book itself). I can't recommend this highly enough.
I found this book to be at times impenetrable and at others un-put-downable. The book definitely teetered on the edge of being pretentious in its poetic and confusing state, but equally the unreliable narrator and twisting, blurry world he presents is fascinating and highly effective. Flannagan has a mastery in descriptions of people, creating vivid characters in unexpected ways. I liked the farcical elements scattered throughout - the Commandant's railway and Mah Jong Hall, and his mistaking Gould's behind for a footstool, for example. I found it to be funny, but rarely one to laugh out loud at. More strange and confusing. I kind of liked how by the end you really were not sure what, if anything, was actually true (within universe). Overall, I am very glad I read it, although its density will make me hestitate to pick it up again.
Gould’s Book of Fish by Richard Flanagan is a disturbing read. It is brutal in description and honest in its portrayal of convict life.
The book has been earmarked by many critics and reviewers as a masterpiece and an extraordinary piece of imagination. It is all these things but I found the book not disappointing or lacking but there was something missing for me, some connection that I could not make with the book. I am going to put that disconnect down to the paperback version of the book I have. The reason being that the fish paintings are shoved up the back and from what I have seen of other versions of the books the paintings and colours are integral to the read.
The protagonist of the story is William Gould who has been imprisoned on Sarah Island for 49 years. On a simple level the novel tells the fiction story of Gould, as imagined by Flanagan, who tells about his quest to survive the harsh conditions of a prison island. On the more complex level the novel can be seen as the colonisation failure of Tasmania.
However you want to see the book the themes are big and complicated and can sometimes detract from the novel. The story of Twopenny Sal was something I also struggled with. From Gould’s point of view Sal is almost complicit in her position as woman used as she sleeps with whatever man can provide her with tobacco and alcohol.
I am not bothered about the criticisms about the lack of plot and dialogue but what I did find annoying was the characters. To be honest I found them on the main very one dimensional. Gould remains the same from page one to the end and the other manifestations that Gould relates to us are just as linear.
I found that towards the end of the novel the continual waxing on by Gould just boring. Sorry to all the lovers of the book but I did. It went on and on and I was screaming ‘shut up and just die will you’ Now I normally do not react that way to a character in a novel but I could not empathise with Gould at all.
I struggled with this book as to whether I loved it or loathed it.
The book has been earmarked by many critics and reviewers as a masterpiece and an extraordinary piece of imagination. It is all these things but I found the book not disappointing or lacking but there was something missing for me, some connection that I could not make with the book. I am going to put that disconnect down to the paperback version of the book I have. The reason being that the fish paintings are shoved up the back and from what I have seen of other versions of the books the paintings and colours are integral to the read.
The protagonist of the story is William Gould who has been imprisoned on Sarah Island for 49 years. On a simple level the novel tells the fiction story of Gould, as imagined by Flanagan, who tells about his quest to survive the harsh conditions of a prison island. On the more complex level the novel can be seen as the colonisation failure of Tasmania.
However you want to see the book the themes are big and complicated and can sometimes detract from the novel. The story of Twopenny Sal was something I also struggled with. From Gould’s point of view Sal is almost complicit in her position as woman used as she sleeps with whatever man can provide her with tobacco and alcohol.
I am not bothered about the criticisms about the lack of plot and dialogue but what I did find annoying was the characters. To be honest I found them on the main very one dimensional. Gould remains the same from page one to the end and the other manifestations that Gould relates to us are just as linear.
I found that towards the end of the novel the continual waxing on by Gould just boring. Sorry to all the lovers of the book but I did. It went on and on and I was screaming ‘shut up and just die will you’ Now I normally do not react that way to a character in a novel but I could not empathise with Gould at all.
I struggled with this book as to whether I loved it or loathed it.