Scan barcode
mefrost's review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
couuboy's review against another edition
4.0
(Relatively) Recently I’ve been thinking a lot about the social production of artist mythologizing and cultural real-estate. Do people still read John Barth? By the way, as of today he’s still alive, quietly doing his own thing (Perhaps one of the reasons why I first heard of him after reasearching a DFW short story). It doesn’t particularly bother me that the art/media/entertainment which occupies 99% of the cultural real-estate feels almost entirely like an industry of cultural diversion because I’m a little bit schizoid when it comes to social peer pressure. John Barth is smart, self-aware, etc., and can write dialogue that would bring DeLillo to tears. Perhaps I should’ve written ‘Will people continue to read John Barth?’ Perhaps it doesn’t ______. The first half of this book was really good and the second half was pretty good but mostly this is an edifying book if you’re willing to listen.
cruelspirit's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
reflective
tense
medium-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
5.0
I’ve been meaning to return to the works of John Barth for a while now. I read Lost in the Funhouse a few years back and since then I’ve been wondering what my next pick would be. Sometime last year I acquired a copy of The End of the Road and with the recent passing of John Barth last month, I decided to push this to the top of my list.
His second novel and a relatively short story, I was expecting a more succinct work. While less experimental than Lost in the Funhouse this is far from a simple novel. Our protagonist is an aimless and directionless young man. Finished with grad school, he enters the teaching world and is tasked with figuring out what he truly wants to do with his life.
This is quite a relatable place to be in life and there certainly are many books that take on this dilemma but I have yet to read one like this. Our protagonist, Jake Horner, sees a doctor who specializes in helping those who are paralyzed. Not necessarily a physical paralysis but one of being paralyzed in life not knowing what direction to take and what decision to make. This is a fantastic plot element and probably my favorite part of the book. It really explores these psychological concepts in a fun and unique way.
Horner gets involved in the lives of a few other people, particularly women (something his doctor recommends avoiding) and his aimless and distant nature begins to cause issues for him, culminating in a very intense and drastics course of events. It really shows that if someone is to truly take no course of action that eventually life will get in your way, forcing action. Interestingly enough Horner survives these events mostly unscathed, unlike nearly every other character in this book, continuing on in his directionless life. There is a lot of humor to this book which is also one of its many charms.
I was really impressed with this book. For such an early work in his career, you already get a really strong voice from Barth and a clear and unique method of storytelling. Published in 1958, this book feels far ahead of its time. There definitely were a handful of authors who captured the essence of the sixties long before the calendar hit January 1st, 1960, the beats come to mind, but this feels even a little different from that. I felt similarities to the works of Thomas Pynchon and Richard Brautigan while reading this. This was mainly in the characterization and dialogue of these characters but also the bouncing around of the plot that felt very in line with The Crying of Lot 49.
Overall, I was just really blown away with what Barth accomplished here with such a short novel. If this is what one of his short, early, lesser known novels is capable of, I'm intrigued to see what he does in his later works.
andyc_elsby232's review against another edition
4.0
When I started this book I was laughing. By the end I was shuddering, reeling from chills of discomfort and disgust. It's incredibly effective.
elspethm's review against another edition
challenging
dark
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? It's complicated
3.0
Another "why?" for me. In this book a Jacob Horner is convinced by a doctor to go for psychiatric treatments. After he is 'better" the doctor suggests he move to Wicomico, MD and work for the Wicomico State Teachers College.
Jacob starts at the school and for the first half there is endless discussion with his coworker Joe and his wife Rennie. it was soooo boring.
Then in the second half he has an affair with Rennie and it starts to get interesting, until Rennie and Joe seem to turn into an even less compelling set of people and continue punishing each other and then Jake for altering their relationship. Then it gets awful again, but I guess at least it wasn't boring.
TW: mental illness, suicidal ideations, domestic violence and explicit ongoing discussion of abortion.
Jacob starts at the school and for the first half there is endless discussion with his coworker Joe and his wife Rennie. it was soooo boring.
Then in the second half he has an affair with Rennie and it starts to get interesting, until Rennie and Joe seem to turn into an even less compelling set of people and continue punishing each other and then Jake for altering their relationship. Then it gets awful again, but I guess at least it wasn't boring.
TW: mental illness, suicidal ideations, domestic violence and explicit ongoing discussion of abortion.
poopydoopy's review against another edition
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Interesting!
stanb's review against another edition
A play of archetypes pushed to the extreme. It shouldn't work as a good novel, but it does. At times ridiculous in terms of character behaviour, often brutal, and somehow still honest.
esak's review against another edition
4.0
horner is nothing except the worst bits of everyone he encountered. horner is bad kirby.
delore's review
2.0
I've felt like my past couple of reads from John Barth have been somewhat of a let-down due to his focus on literary wordplay and structural experimentation at the expense of assembling a coherent narrative. 'The End of the Road', on the other hand, almost seems to go in the opposite direction: an almost too traditional rise-and-fall narrative lacking in the trademark wit and fourth-wall breaking that makes Barth's writing so distinct.
I think Barth is working from a pretty intriguing canvas of concepts here. There is the protagonist Jacob Horner constructed with the Hamlet-ian foible of choice paralysis - being literally incapable of deciding which location to travel to on a budget of $20 (and so spending an entire night rooted to the same spot at a train station in a state of perpetual indecision). This is contrasted against his foil Joe Morgan: who is predictably a character irrevocably sure of his own positions on just about every topic imaginable.
So although this seems like a fairly natural basis for a great Barth novel, to me, it's as though he doesn't follow through with the above setup in his approach to characterisation. It would make more sense (and be funnier in a Barth-ian sense) for Horner to be introduced (hyperbolically) as completely incapacitated, rather than the somewhat muddy 'he is incapacitated in some situations, but perfectly functional in others'. This way, his character could be developed to unravel over time with the progression of his treatment (the Doctor giving literal instructions for how to act in a variety of situations) and his interactions with Morgan. If this were the trajectory of the novel, I get the sense that the conflicts arising from the more complex ethical/social dilemmas that crop up later on could have been explored in a far more narratively consistent and less unsubtle way; rather than what I felt was 'look at this controversial social issue in 1960s America - my book is so controversial for addressing this controversial issue!'.
I obviously don't want to re-write the novel (and in many respects, I acknowledge that I might have misread what Barth was going for), but I feel like there were a number of more natural choices that Barth could have gone for with this book, which in my view would have made the novel ultimately more memorable and therefore ultimately more meaningful.
I think Barth is working from a pretty intriguing canvas of concepts here. There is the protagonist Jacob Horner constructed with the Hamlet-ian foible of choice paralysis - being literally incapable of deciding which location to travel to on a budget of $20 (and so spending an entire night rooted to the same spot at a train station in a state of perpetual indecision). This is contrasted against his foil Joe Morgan: who is predictably a character irrevocably sure of his own positions on just about every topic imaginable.
So although this seems like a fairly natural basis for a great Barth novel, to me, it's as though he doesn't follow through with the above setup in his approach to characterisation. It would make more sense (and be funnier in a Barth-ian sense) for Horner to be introduced (hyperbolically) as completely incapacitated, rather than the somewhat muddy 'he is incapacitated in some situations, but perfectly functional in others'. This way, his character could be developed to unravel over time with the progression of his treatment (the Doctor giving literal instructions for how to act in a variety of situations) and his interactions with Morgan. If this were the trajectory of the novel, I get the sense that the conflicts arising from the more complex ethical/social dilemmas that crop up later on could have been explored in a far more narratively consistent and less unsubtle way; rather than what I felt was 'look at this controversial social issue in 1960s America - my book is so controversial for addressing this controversial issue!'.
I obviously don't want to re-write the novel (and in many respects, I acknowledge that I might have misread what Barth was going for), but I feel like there were a number of more natural choices that Barth could have gone for with this book, which in my view would have made the novel ultimately more memorable and therefore ultimately more meaningful.