Scan barcode
taylormccoy's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Gaslighting, Medical trauma, Schizophrenia/Psychosis , Suicide, Alcoholism, Drug use, Emotional abuse, Mental illness, Suicide attempt, Terminal illness, Torture, Cursing, Medical content, Self harm, and Sexual harassment
savaging's review against another edition
3.0
This book tore me apart.
On one side was its astonishing depiction of mental illness, trauma and post-traumatic stress, the brutality of attempts to control other people, and the centrality of rebellion in being a full human. Characters with severe mental disorders are revealed as full, beautiful humans, deserving of dignity and autonomy, without being sentimentalized. Yes, hooray, yes.
On the other side was the book's relentless misogyny and anti-black racism, warping societal power structures into a kind of Nietzschian whine that the lady-folk are cutting off our balls. Every woman is an evil, controlling force (except for those with names like Candy, obedient sex objects who go through immense risks to give any guy a good time, and thank strangers for the cat calls. The good woman is, as her name suggests, entirely sweet and edible). Every black person in the book is a lackey to a wicked-woman and waiting to murder or rape someone. In addition to being offensive, and promoting a societal analysis which only scapegoats other people at the bottom of the ladder, this is bad writing, filled with flattened caricatures of some boogey(wo)man. Seeing Kesey's talent of showing depth of character in neuro-atypical people, it kind of makes you wish he had flexed that literary muscle for any woman or black person in the book.
I found my brain automatically switching the gender and race of the characters in the book. Give it a try -- it makes the story ten times better.
On one side was its astonishing depiction of mental illness, trauma and post-traumatic stress, the brutality of attempts to control other people, and the centrality of rebellion in being a full human. Characters with severe mental disorders are revealed as full, beautiful humans, deserving of dignity and autonomy, without being sentimentalized. Yes, hooray, yes.
On the other side was the book's relentless misogyny and anti-black racism, warping societal power structures into a kind of Nietzschian whine that the lady-folk are cutting off our balls. Every woman is an evil, controlling force (except for those with names like Candy, obedient sex objects who go through immense risks to give any guy a good time, and thank strangers for the cat calls. The good woman is, as her name suggests, entirely sweet and edible). Every black person in the book is a lackey to a wicked-woman and waiting to murder or rape someone. In addition to being offensive, and promoting a societal analysis which only scapegoats other people at the bottom of the ladder, this is bad writing, filled with flattened caricatures of some boogey(wo)man. Seeing Kesey's talent of showing depth of character in neuro-atypical people, it kind of makes you wish he had flexed that literary muscle for any woman or black person in the book.
I found my brain automatically switching the gender and race of the characters in the book. Give it a try -- it makes the story ten times better.
Spoiler
I also kind of hated the ending -- not because it was sad, but because it seemed to undo all the work Kesey had done to show that people with different mental abilities still have dignity and humanity. Suddenly murder is preferable to letting someone live with a severe mental disability. I'm interested in how disability theorists read this move.xmirthemarije's review against another edition
dark
funny
informative
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
kimmatos1's review against another edition
4.0
This book was most definitely a personal challenge to read but I thoroughly enjoyed it. There were a lot of parts of the book that were described to the smallest detail and it made it feel like this book was never going to conclude. The ending was definitely a shocker. Definitely would recommend.
lilliannn's review against another edition
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
The prose is good, as is the messge of standing up to "the combine" and rulers of society.
However, by using rampant misogyny, racism and moments that can only be described as written fanservice, Kesey's implied personal views on the feminism movement "emasculating" men and the representation of the societal leaders in the book defeats the overall message.
Sure, nurse Ratched is detestable, as are her staff, yet every single woman in this book is either oversexualised or only powerful because she's seen by the men as a sexual object and the black men are made out to be violent, stereotypical monsters. In the end, take a look at the supposed government leaders around the 1960s and later (Jfk, Johnson, Nixon etc and that's just the usa). There's an obvious pattern, one the book seems to dismiss. It almost seems like Kesey blames the wrong people for the mistreatment of mentally ill men instead of the government leaders who are right there who, ultimately, couldn't have given less of a shit at the time. Still, fuck the people who work on the ward.
Also, the sexualisation was almost so exaggerated that it was hard to take the message of some of the scenes seriously (the end scene-the strangulation on its own would've been much more effective but, of course, might as well see her naked too while we're at it). Sexual assault is almost written as a way to stand up to the supposed (but nonexistent) matriarchy and the only female characters in the book who have the free power that mcmurphy seems to hold are the hookers who, of course, are objectified to no end. The rest are just constantly sexualised uncomfortably and this is okay because they're standing up to society so yeah very good (now lets just gloss over the fact that mcmurphy is a rapist). I understand the uncertainty towards the feminism movement in the 60s and the influences this may have had but it doesn't mean I will just nod my head and agree at how it's portrayed here.
This probably makes no sense (im writing it at 1am) but the chief was a good fucking narrator and the characterisation was brilliant. However, still a clear product of it's time. Would definitely still recommend as the focus on the mistreatment of the mentally ill is really interestingly written and now i can watch the film!
However, by using rampant misogyny, racism and moments that can only be described as written fanservice, Kesey's implied personal views on the feminism movement "emasculating" men and the representation of the societal leaders in the book defeats the overall message.
Sure, nurse Ratched is detestable, as are her staff, yet every single woman in this book is either oversexualised or only powerful because she's seen by the men as a sexual object and the black men are made out to be violent, stereotypical monsters. In the end, take a look at the supposed government leaders around the 1960s and later (Jfk, Johnson, Nixon etc and that's just the usa). There's an obvious pattern, one the book seems to dismiss. It almost seems like Kesey blames the wrong people for the mistreatment of mentally ill men instead of the government leaders who are right there who, ultimately, couldn't have given less of a shit at the time. Still, fuck the people who work on the ward.
Also, the sexualisation was almost so exaggerated that it was hard to take the message of some of the scenes seriously (the end scene-the strangulation on its own would've been much more effective but, of course, might as well see her naked too while we're at it). Sexual assault is almost written as a way to stand up to the supposed (but nonexistent) matriarchy and the only female characters in the book who have the free power that mcmurphy seems to hold are the hookers who, of course, are objectified to no end. The rest are just constantly sexualised uncomfortably and this is okay because they're standing up to society so yeah very good (now lets just gloss over the fact that mcmurphy is a rapist). I understand the uncertainty towards the feminism movement in the 60s and the influences this may have had but it doesn't mean I will just nod my head and agree at how it's portrayed here.
This probably makes no sense (im writing it at 1am) but the chief was a good fucking narrator and the characterisation was brilliant. However, still a clear product of it's time. Would definitely still recommend as the focus on the mistreatment of the mentally ill is really interestingly written and now i can watch the film!
bookishbrighton's review against another edition
2.0
I didn’t read the book first - I had no chance! I adore the film and the book is just too different for me to give it a fair go so this review is a warning to those who love the film - if you are going to read this book, go into it without the film in your mind because otherwise you are setting it up for failure. For starters it is written from Chief’s perspective and there’s a lot more ‘what is real and what is in his mind?’ going on, which I’m not really a fan of in general as I like things to be a bit more clear cut. This was actually a DNF for me which usually automatically get 1 star, but I couldn’t do that to this book as I feel like, as I said, I couldn’t give it a fair chance, so I bumped it up to a 2.
annashiv's review against another edition
3.0
3.5 stars.
Just hard to get through for me, possibly because I 'read' it as an audiobook. The narrator was very good, especially with all the voices of each character. Really helped give them their true voice and helped me remember the characters. I'm just not much of an audiobook fan overall. I don't like listening as it's too easy for me to lose track and get distracted, especially with this book as any time i drifted in thought, when I'd return, I wouldn't be sure if someone was dreaming, having a psychosis, or portraying true events. That's kind of the point, but listening made it even harder and made it hard to care too much.
The story was interesting, but I'm still not sure what I think about it. I'm not sure who's side I'm on. I always took everything the narrator said with a grain of salt as he is clearly disturbed, at least for the first half or three quarters. I'm not so sure Nurse Ratchett is the villain he sees her as, but at the same time, I don't think she did a good job as a nurse by suppressing them as she clearly did, delusional psycho lenses or no.
Overall, I'd recommend it. Especially to high school aged kids. It just feels like the kind of thing you'd read for a literature class. Its writing, even the subjects it was writing of, reminded me of Cather in the Rye and The Great Gatsby and just somehow felt classic. Definitely not for everyone, but I'm glad I tried it. Perhaps if I read it again, I'll stick to reading (rather than audio).
Just hard to get through for me, possibly because I 'read' it as an audiobook. The narrator was very good, especially with all the voices of each character. Really helped give them their true voice and helped me remember the characters. I'm just not much of an audiobook fan overall. I don't like listening as it's too easy for me to lose track and get distracted, especially with this book as any time i drifted in thought, when I'd return, I wouldn't be sure if someone was dreaming, having a psychosis, or portraying true events. That's kind of the point, but listening made it even harder and made it hard to care too much.
The story was interesting, but I'm still not sure what I think about it. I'm not sure who's side I'm on. I always took everything the narrator said with a grain of salt as he is clearly disturbed, at least for the first half or three quarters. I'm not so sure Nurse Ratchett is the villain he sees her as, but at the same time, I don't think she did a good job as a nurse by suppressing them as she clearly did, delusional psycho lenses or no.
Overall, I'd recommend it. Especially to high school aged kids. It just feels like the kind of thing you'd read for a literature class. Its writing, even the subjects it was writing of, reminded me of Cather in the Rye and The Great Gatsby and just somehow felt classic. Definitely not for everyone, but I'm glad I tried it. Perhaps if I read it again, I'll stick to reading (rather than audio).