Scan barcode
anonblueberry's review against another edition
2.0
I didn't dislike it, but for something that I was told (admittedly a couple of years ago) that I really ought to read, it didn't actually grab me.
Even though it's not that old, it felt a little dated in its depictions, and to be honest it felt like most of the time Duncan was trying too hard to be shocking and disgusting, to the point where it fell flat (or possibly I'm just cynical).
Technically, it's not a bad piece of work. It's vivid in description (possibly too vivid in places) and Duncan obviously knows how to tell a story, I just wasn't all that bothered to finish it.
Even though it's not that old, it felt a little dated in its depictions, and to be honest it felt like most of the time Duncan was trying too hard to be shocking and disgusting, to the point where it fell flat (or possibly I'm just cynical).
Technically, it's not a bad piece of work. It's vivid in description (possibly too vivid in places) and Duncan obviously knows how to tell a story, I just wasn't all that bothered to finish it.
greatlibraryofalexandra's review against another edition
1.0
This book was a mess. Truly. The main problem being that the author, in what I can only assume is an attempt to appear as intelligent beyond belief, swallowed a thesaurus and then regurgitated the most convoluted collection of obscure vocabulary words that I've ever seen, so much so that entire paragraphs were so pretentious that they bordered on incomprehensible. "Micturition" - really? Dear God (no pun intended). On that note, the over-the-top vocabulary was more often than not right alongside the crudest, most childish vulgar descriptions of things - this book wins awards for using the term "vadge" as many times as possible (short, of course, for vagina - the d really isn't needed).
Prose aside, the actual plot of the novel was nonexistent, and I do not complain from a standpoint of irritated Christian sensibilities. After reading Good Omens and The Gentleman this year, I went in search of comical stories that centered around Lucifer/hell et cetera, and this seemed promising. However, Duncan's devil is shallow and heinous without having any depth behind those characteristics; he's not "evil" apparently, but he frequently uses slurs and delights in things like rape and murder, but at the same time there are half-formed, thin attempts at very well-deserved critique of the Christian concept of God/the creation story - for a much better, much richer, and altogether more complex exploration of such, read Anne Rice's "Memnoch the Devil."
There's no impetus for anything Lucifer does in this novel, the human characters are hollow nothings who have no purpose at all except to be the targets of an increasingly crude string of metaphors riddled with groan-worthy SAT words and increasingly shock-jock language. Even the bits that looked like they would get interesting...didn't. Then the book ended quite abruptly as if the author had either gotten tired of writing it, or simply exhausted himself with how painfully hard he was trying to be clever.
The awards really ought to go to whoever so cleverly wrote the blurb describing the book, because they made it sound thrilling, cheeky, and wily. Instead it was absolute drivel.
Prose aside, the actual plot of the novel was nonexistent, and I do not complain from a standpoint of irritated Christian sensibilities. After reading Good Omens and The Gentleman this year, I went in search of comical stories that centered around Lucifer/hell et cetera, and this seemed promising. However, Duncan's devil is shallow and heinous without having any depth behind those characteristics; he's not "evil" apparently, but he frequently uses slurs and delights in things like rape and murder, but at the same time there are half-formed, thin attempts at very well-deserved critique of the Christian concept of God/the creation story - for a much better, much richer, and altogether more complex exploration of such, read Anne Rice's "Memnoch the Devil."
There's no impetus for anything Lucifer does in this novel, the human characters are hollow nothings who have no purpose at all except to be the targets of an increasingly crude string of metaphors riddled with groan-worthy SAT words and increasingly shock-jock language. Even the bits that looked like they would get interesting...didn't. Then the book ended quite abruptly as if the author had either gotten tired of writing it, or simply exhausted himself with how painfully hard he was trying to be clever.
The awards really ought to go to whoever so cleverly wrote the blurb describing the book, because they made it sound thrilling, cheeky, and wily. Instead it was absolute drivel.
simplyfutile's review against another edition
3.0
Decent fluff - good for a chuckle here or there, but not necessarily the most well conceived book. I enjoyed it, but at times felt it was missing something. The flashbacks are works of art on their own - would loved to have had more of those.
citybound13's review against another edition
5.0
I absolutely adored, loved, and cherished every word of this genius book.
nodroz's review against another edition
2.0
Uhh, where to begin?
OK, the first thing I noticed about this book is that there are a lot of pop-culture references. And when I say a lot, I mean A LOT. For someone reading this when it was first published in 2002 I'm sure it would have been an enjoyable read. I read it in 2018. Putting too many pop culture references in a book is basically giving it a short shelf life. While people of that generation will get it, what about the next generation? I was 9 when this was first published, so most of them went over my head (truth be told I googled most of them). Most of the references were very British, so I don't know how this book was received internationally. If you do put pop culture references in, make them noteworthy rather than obscure.
Other than that Lucifer was quirky to start off with, but he soon became complaintive and dull.
I didn't hate this book, but I may have liked it better if I read it a decade ago.
OK, the first thing I noticed about this book is that there are a lot of pop-culture references. And when I say a lot, I mean A LOT. For someone reading this when it was first published in 2002 I'm sure it would have been an enjoyable read. I read it in 2018. Putting too many pop culture references in a book is basically giving it a short shelf life. While people of that generation will get it, what about the next generation? I was 9 when this was first published, so most of them went over my head (truth be told I googled most of them). Most of the references were very British, so I don't know how this book was received internationally. If you do put pop culture references in, make them noteworthy rather than obscure.
Other than that Lucifer was quirky to start off with, but he soon became complaintive and dull.
I didn't hate this book, but I may have liked it better if I read it a decade ago.
brhillmann's review against another edition
3.0
Crests and breaks with humor and dry passages in a retelling or the falling of Satan form Lucifer's perspective.
Satan gets a chance at redemption if he can withstand 30 days in a human body, adding humanity to the eternal damnation he feels. Zany antics ensue, some misogyny thrown in for laughs, but Eve is supposed to have come out better off (she trots around Eden using her brains, but there is a righteously awful rape-y scene involved, so it cancels out IMO, for the apologism and slut-shaming).
There were a lot of fun highlights, and a lot that really left me wanting. I would re-read it if I was bored and without anything else to read, and may yet again to decide if I would fully recommend it. I wouldn't not recommend it.
Satan gets a chance at redemption if he can withstand 30 days in a human body, adding humanity to the eternal damnation he feels. Zany antics ensue, some misogyny thrown in for laughs, but Eve is supposed to have come out better off (she trots around Eden using her brains, but there is a righteously awful rape-y scene involved, so it cancels out IMO, for the apologism and slut-shaming).
There were a lot of fun highlights, and a lot that really left me wanting. I would re-read it if I was bored and without anything else to read, and may yet again to decide if I would fully recommend it. I wouldn't not recommend it.
jude_holmes_'s review against another edition
5.0
I first read this as a recommendation from a friend and loved it, the second read was almost as good, though it took me a while to get into it.
marnieluna's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
1.0