Scan barcode
jwall0804's review against another edition
dark
funny
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
squirrelsohno's review against another edition
3.0
This high rise needs Judge Dredd.
Also, I found the premise ridiculous, and the portrayal of rape as disgusting and forgettable by the victim, but it was...interesting?
2.5/5
Also, I found the premise ridiculous, and the portrayal of rape as disgusting and forgettable by the victim, but it was...interesting?
2.5/5
jon288's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting and weird and dystopian in an odd enclosed way. People behaved in somewhat broken ways. Decent but not amazing
margocandela's review against another edition
5.0
I checked out under five books from my college library and this one made the trip outside its doors with me twice. After living in a large apartment complex not too long ago, I can see how something like what happens in the book could happen in real life. Count me in if it does!
I actually want to read it again and plan to do so very soon.
I actually want to read it again and plan to do so very soon.
tabindatouseef's review against another edition
4.0
I came across an audiobook read by Tom Hiddleston on youtube and all types of book readings had to be stopped. Immediately. Because... reasons.
Half of the book defines 'the debris on the floor,' and the colour of the swimming pool water. The other half pure genius. Unsettling, psychotic and the ending inevitable.
Half of the book defines 'the debris on the floor,' and the colour of the swimming pool water. The other half pure genius. Unsettling, psychotic and the ending inevitable.
bigbookslilreads's review against another edition
4.0
I was on the fence about this book's rating for reasons that I will elaborate on below. Nonetheless! This was a fine good read, tension-filled and action-packed. A bit gorey and definitely messed up, but I was always looking forward to picking up the audiobook (narrated by Tom Hiddleston by the way) and finding out what shenanigans the inhabitants of the high-rise would get into next.
This is a story of the fast degeneration of the human 'modern' condition when faced, in a limited space, with the anonymity, escapism and isolation that a 1000-apartment, 40-storey building provides. Is it realistic? I wouldn't say so. Is it predictable in its premise? If what you are predicting is violence, abuse and utter lunacy without consequences (for the most part), then yes. Is it still an interesting read? Definitely. Especially when infused with the psychological and physiological analysis provided by the author (through the descriptions or the characters).
The high-rise has been built as a wonder of modern architecture, that same one in the 70s that prized functionality and the rigid and "blocky" design of its buildings. People of medium-high incomes flock to the newly built high-rise, the first of many in the area, seeking to seize this modernity, as well as the opportunity for some distance and convenient independence that the high-rise - equipped with gym, grocery shop and every other possible service you can imagine - provides them. However, the seeming homogeneity of inhabitants disguises a class division imbued in the construction of the building itself, with the richer up top, and the larger and lower income households in the first floors. In the middle, an uncertain class emerges, and as conflicts escalate (*pun intended*) we see how each group is trying to break free of its shackles and, so doing, gives in to their most base, animalistic instincts.
We follow three POV characters, though their introduction and alternation in the audiobook was a bit sudden. Each one represents a "class" of the high-rise: Wylder, living on the lower floors who becomes obsessed with upscaling and moving "up" in life; Royal, the architect of the building living in a penthouse, who is conflicted between this degeneration occurring of his own doing, and the privileged position he can assume; and Laing, right in the middle and the most content and passive in his position.
I was expecting this to be a slow degeneration into madness, but it was not so. I was surprised by how quick conflicts started emerging. I am not sure if this is a detriment to the pacing, as it is a short book. However, I would've liked more of a slow burn, if I can use that term. It also didn't feel like there was a climax. Each chapter had its own conflict and because of that the story fell a bit into repetition. The ending resolution was a climax in itself, though I would say too quick to feel eventful.
The interaction between characters as well as the analysis of events throughout was the most interesting part for me. I was constantly on the edge of my seat, wondering how people would adapt, pull through, etc. Ballard is quite a good writer, and he was able to captivate me even though some events felt like repetitious violence. While some may wonder why people in the high-rise chose to stay when such horrible things were happening, I felt like Ballard did a good job in creating this atmosphere of intrigue and primitive wonder that the characters themselves couldn't help but be pulled into. They wanted to stay because they wanted to give in. And I was wondered right next to them. I mean, who doesn't want to see upper class people going at each others' throats? (*ahem* maybe more realistic than at first thought).
There is, however, a strong argument against this book, that even though I think it is partly excused, it makes for a very uncomfortable read. That is the depiction of women. They are portrayed as passive and are constant victims of abuse. I saw this as a way for Ballard to say that we have a long way to go to create a healthy and balanced society, as without consequences none of the men controlled their sexual and violent impulses. When I think of the ending, I can also see how Ballard tried to provide a message of "nothing like this can happen without consequence", but I think it was very much brushed off, so I wish he could've explored that aspect a bit more. He also fails to give us a female POV, which I feel could've enriched the story quite a bit, but tbh, I don't think he could have pulled it off. Because in the end, while I think he was purposeful in parts of his writing and story about violence against women, he was still very much fixated on sexual abuse, breasts, and "heavy loins" and men exposing themselves... So I chose to deduce a star from the rating because of this.
Overall, I really enjoyed stepping out of my comfort zone and picking this up. It was a quick, easy and enjoyable (if I dare use that term) read. Despite its more unrealistic aspects, it still provided me with some food for thought, and so I would recommend it.
This is a story of the fast degeneration of the human 'modern' condition when faced, in a limited space, with the anonymity, escapism and isolation that a 1000-apartment, 40-storey building provides. Is it realistic? I wouldn't say so. Is it predictable in its premise? If what you are predicting is violence, abuse and utter lunacy without consequences (for the most part), then yes. Is it still an interesting read? Definitely. Especially when infused with the psychological and physiological analysis provided by the author (through the descriptions or the characters).
The high-rise has been built as a wonder of modern architecture, that same one in the 70s that prized functionality and the rigid and "blocky" design of its buildings. People of medium-high incomes flock to the newly built high-rise, the first of many in the area, seeking to seize this modernity, as well as the opportunity for some distance and convenient independence that the high-rise - equipped with gym, grocery shop and every other possible service you can imagine - provides them. However, the seeming homogeneity of inhabitants disguises a class division imbued in the construction of the building itself, with the richer up top, and the larger and lower income households in the first floors. In the middle, an uncertain class emerges, and as conflicts escalate (*pun intended*) we see how each group is trying to break free of its shackles and, so doing, gives in to their most base, animalistic instincts.
We follow three POV characters, though their introduction and alternation in the audiobook was a bit sudden. Each one represents a "class" of the high-rise: Wylder, living on the lower floors who becomes obsessed with upscaling and moving "up" in life; Royal, the architect of the building living in a penthouse, who is conflicted between this degeneration occurring of his own doing, and the privileged position he can assume; and Laing, right in the middle and the most content and passive in his position.
I was expecting this to be a slow degeneration into madness, but it was not so. I was surprised by how quick conflicts started emerging. I am not sure if this is a detriment to the pacing, as it is a short book. However, I would've liked more of a slow burn, if I can use that term. It also didn't feel like there was a climax. Each chapter had its own conflict and because of that the story fell a bit into repetition. The ending resolution was a climax in itself, though I would say too quick to feel eventful.
The interaction between characters as well as the analysis of events throughout was the most interesting part for me. I was constantly on the edge of my seat, wondering how people would adapt, pull through, etc. Ballard is quite a good writer, and he was able to captivate me even though some events felt like repetitious violence. While some may wonder why people in the high-rise chose to stay when such horrible things were happening, I felt like Ballard did a good job in creating this atmosphere of intrigue and primitive wonder that the characters themselves couldn't help but be pulled into. They wanted to stay because they wanted to give in. And I was wondered right next to them. I mean, who doesn't want to see upper class people going at each others' throats? (*ahem* maybe more realistic than at first thought).
There is, however, a strong argument against this book, that even though I think it is partly excused, it makes for a very uncomfortable read. That is the depiction of women. They are portrayed as passive and are constant victims of abuse. I saw this as a way for Ballard to say that we have a long way to go to create a healthy and balanced society, as without consequences none of the men controlled their sexual and violent impulses. When I think of the ending, I can also see how Ballard tried to provide a message of "nothing like this can happen without consequence", but I think it was very much brushed off, so I wish he could've explored that aspect a bit more. He also fails to give us a female POV, which I feel could've enriched the story quite a bit, but tbh, I don't think he could have pulled it off. Because in the end, while I think he was purposeful in parts of his writing and story about violence against women, he was still very much fixated on sexual abuse, breasts, and "heavy loins" and men exposing themselves... So I chose to deduce a star from the rating because of this.
Overall, I really enjoyed stepping out of my comfort zone and picking this up. It was a quick, easy and enjoyable (if I dare use that term) read. Despite its more unrealistic aspects, it still provided me with some food for thought, and so I would recommend it.
kayteeem's review against another edition
All the reviews that call it "Lord of the Flies" for adults, in an apartment building instead of on an island, hit the themes and the tone of the book dead on.
Even without looking at the copyright page, you can tell this was written in the '70s. It's not just the absence of modern technology, or the presence of Polaroid cameras, but the cocktail parties, the smoking and the attitude toward women. The women barely have a voice, and mostly don't rise to the level of fellow-human for the three narrators.
I'd read this because I was intrigued by the trailers for the Tom Hiddleston movie, and now I can't decide if I want to see the movie just to see how the screenplay could possibly capture the content of the book, or to stay as far away from it as possible because I probably won't enjoy it.
I hadn't read any Ballard before (except possibly some of his short stories), and the writing here reminded me of Ira Levin or Anthony Burgess.
Even without looking at the copyright page, you can tell this was written in the '70s. It's not just the absence of modern technology, or the presence of Polaroid cameras, but the cocktail parties, the smoking and the attitude toward women. The women barely have a voice, and mostly don't rise to the level of fellow-human for the three narrators.
Spoiler
In fact, I think the only women who take much action on their own behalf is the murder-cult that ends up taking residence in the rooftop playground. Other than that, they're initially treated as status symbols, and later as property. In some ways, I found that worse than all the casual violence, which seemed a more deliberate choice used to display the descent into savagery. How women fit into society was just a base assumption.I'd read this because I was intrigued by the trailers for the Tom Hiddleston movie, and now I can't decide if I want to see the movie just to see how the screenplay could possibly capture the content of the book, or to stay as far away from it as possible because I probably won't enjoy it.
I hadn't read any Ballard before (except possibly some of his short stories), and the writing here reminded me of Ira Levin or Anthony Burgess.
evie5120's review against another edition
challenging
dark
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
stockholm_syndrome's review against another edition
challenging
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.0
chlosophis's review against another edition
2.0
When that lady starts feeding her cat from a wound on her wrist - I was out.