You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.59 AVERAGE
3.59 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
What a wonky book. I read the author’s novel, the Shards, prior to this and the writing style was just so different. There were so many nuances to what Ellis Easton is writing here, nothing is surface level, and it consequently felt like there was no plot for being a thriller.
Maybe that’s the point? That for all the author’s comments on the main character and American society, he also implicates the reader. There were some horrific passages and insightful commentary, and I still struggled to get through many of the passages.
Maybe that’s the point? That for all the author’s comments on the main character and American society, he also implicates the reader. There were some horrific passages and insightful commentary, and I still struggled to get through many of the passages.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Rape, Sexual violence, Violence, Murder
challenging
dark
funny
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I've been obsessed with the American Psycho film for years. Christian Bale's performance as a psychopathic Wall Street killer is unforgettable, so reading the novel was something I had to do eventually. I expected violence and satire, but the book is darker, more graphic, and far more psychologically intense than I imagined.
The story follows Patrick Bateman, a wealthy, narcissistic investment banker in 1980s Manhattan who leads a horrifying double life. On the surface, he is polished and successful, obsessed with appearance and control. But beneath that, he is detached from reality and humanity. What's chilling is how the violence is described in the same flat tone as his skincare routine or dinner reservations.
What really stood out to me is how cinematic the writing is. The film perfectly lifts key scenes, like the business card moment, to highlight the absurdity of status obsession. The structure and pacing feel like they were made for adaptation.
I also loved how the writing mirrors Bateman's mental state. His narration is cold, repetitive, and increasingly fractured. It's exhausting but brilliant to sit inside the head of someone so hollow and unmoored.
It's clearly satire and often genuinely funny in a dark, uncomfortable way. But the most terrifying part is how relevant it still feels. In a world full of toxic masculinity and influencer ego, Bateman doesn't seem that far off.
This is not an easy or traditionally enjoyable read, but it is absolutely a masterpiece. There’s so much to unpack that it's hard to fit into a caption. Thirty years on, its world still mirrors our own - and that's what makes it so disturbing.
The story follows Patrick Bateman, a wealthy, narcissistic investment banker in 1980s Manhattan who leads a horrifying double life. On the surface, he is polished and successful, obsessed with appearance and control. But beneath that, he is detached from reality and humanity. What's chilling is how the violence is described in the same flat tone as his skincare routine or dinner reservations.
What really stood out to me is how cinematic the writing is. The film perfectly lifts key scenes, like the business card moment, to highlight the absurdity of status obsession. The structure and pacing feel like they were made for adaptation.
I also loved how the writing mirrors Bateman's mental state. His narration is cold, repetitive, and increasingly fractured. It's exhausting but brilliant to sit inside the head of someone so hollow and unmoored.
It's clearly satire and often genuinely funny in a dark, uncomfortable way. But the most terrifying part is how relevant it still feels. In a world full of toxic masculinity and influencer ego, Bateman doesn't seem that far off.
This is not an easy or traditionally enjoyable read, but it is absolutely a masterpiece. There’s so much to unpack that it's hard to fit into a caption. Thirty years on, its world still mirrors our own - and that's what makes it so disturbing.
dark
funny
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I'm sure this will not surprise anyone, but "American Psycho" offers a critique on capitalism and materialistic, wealthy American society. All the characters are so self-absorbed, they completely miss Patrick confessing his desire to murder or the details he shares regarding actual murders he committed. Patrick can get away with this because:
A. he’s a rich, young, attractive white man, and
B. everyone is too self-absorbed to pay attention to what he’s actually saying, so
C. no one really cares enough to ask questions or really listen to him, even when presented with
glaring evidence and confessions.
D. Plus, he's rich, so like, why bite the hand that feeds ya, right? (e.g. Patrick's wasted two-year
relationship with Evelyn).
Patrick nonchalantly discusses his committed murders or plans, and it completely goes over the person's head. He confesses about his true, murderous self as a way of shaking up “the culture,” and no one acknowledges what he just said, thinks he must be joking, or mishears what he said. There’s a scene at one point where he talks about his interests in murders and executions, and the person he's talking to heard it as “mergers and acquisitions” and began talking about banking. These people either don’t want to hear him or are just so wrapped up within themselves that they aren’t actively listening to Patrick. He leaves a detailed voicemail for one person confessing to all his murders, and they think he's *joking* because Patrick could *never* do that; he's *too sweet*, too *goody two-shoes* and found the message hilarious . . .
Every conversation is surface level; these characters are surface level. They speak to be heard. "Surface, surface, surface was all that anyone found meaning in . . .” (p. 375). Characters have debates on the latest fashion styles and music that can sometimes go on for entire chapters. (There's a funny one where Patrick and his *friends* are on like a five-way call trying to decide where to eat for dinner that goes on for about ten pages). Everyone is reduced to their clothing, possessions, where they eat and what they eat, where they work, and who they know. Everyone dresses the same, looks the same, acts the same. Half the time none of the characters can tell each other apart (which is also hilarious). Patrick doesn't even correct them whenever he gets mistaken for someone else. It’s a scathing satire of America’s Wall Street, and I was 100% here for it.
"American Psycho" is told through Patrick’s inner monologue and critiques on the culture. Patrick reads as somewhat nihilistic. I’m not sure if that’s the right word, but he’s just there, doing a slight version of the same shit every damn day with the same damn people, meticulously dressing, working out, going out for lunch and dinner, and admiring his appearance. He just seems . . . bored. He sticks to a routine, meets up with cardboard cutout people he considers acquaintances that he clearly hates, and whom it's obviously a chore for him to interact with. A girl he's taken to lunch tells him that “You don’t need to work," to which he responds he does so because “I . . . want . . . to . . . fit . . . in.” He hates and mocks the culture while simultaneously is unable to extricate himself from it.
All these Wall Street professionals are interchangeable, and interacting with this world drains the soul. This might be set in the late ‘80s and was published in the ‘90s but nothing has changed, which begs the question: does American culture (and capitalism) aid in developing psychopathy, or are psychopaths simply able to thrive in the Wall Street setting because of our cultural values (e.g. wealth, youth, attractiveness, a drive for business, to stay relevant and on top, etc.)?
Patrick himself states:
"I had all the characteristics of a human being - flesh, blood, skin, hair - but my depersonalization was so intense, had gone so deep, that the normal ability to feel compassion had been eradicated, the victim of a slow, purposeful erasure. I was simply imitating reality, a rough resemblance of a human being. . . Something horrible was happening and yet I couldn’t figure out why . . ." (p. 282).
". . . there is an idea of a Patrick Bateman, some kind of abstraction, but there is no real me, only an entity, something illusory, and though I can hide my cold gaze and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable, *I simply am not there*. It is hard for me to make sense on any given level. Myself is fabricated, an aberration. . . My personality is sketchy and unformed, my heartlessness goes deep and is persistent. My conscience, my pity, my hopes disappeared a long time ago (probably at Harvard) if they ever did exist. . . . Is evil something you are? Or is it something you do? My pain is constant and sharp and I do not hope for a better world for anyone. In fact, I want my pain to be inflicted on others. I want no one to escape. And even after admitting this - and I have, countless times, in just about every act I've committed - . . . there is not catharsis" (pp. 376-377).
Patrick wants to be seen for who he is, not what he has, and because no one has taken his confessions seriously, he's frustrated and lacks purpose. He's just a yuppy, not the next Ted Bundy (whom none of the characters has heard of when Pat mentions him, which I just . . . huh? . . . ). He dressed up as a *serial killer* for halloween and used a *real* human finger and still loses the costume contest. *He was robbed!* He has to continue his facade. Again, "And even after admitting this . . . there is not catharsis."
I've seen two trains of analysis on this book. One, that all the murders never occurred, that Patrick just fantasized about it, with the other thought being that, yes, Pat did murder people. I think the murders really did occur. I interpret the scene where a character mentions that they have seen Paul Owen (who Patrick murdered) in England as mistaken identity, a common occurrence throughout the book. There are tons of instances where characters mistake others for different people all the time. Even Patrick confuses other people, and he himself gets mistaken for others. *All these Wall Street professionals are interchangeable*. Also, why would Owen's family hire a detective if Owen wasn't missing, and why would Patrick set Owen's messaging machine to say that Owen would be in England to make a cover, and then is "spotted" in England? (Again, I think Owen being "seen" in England was mistaken identity. Owen was definitely murdered). I do see the potential argument that the police shootout didn't happen, but later on a taxi driver says he's seen Patrick's face on a wanted poster, right? Which would confirm that Patrick did kill that other taxi driver, so it can be inferred that all the other murders also happened. Even though the zoo chapter where he murdered a child read as some weird dream because he murders the kid and then immediately switches to pretending to be a doctor and save him, it can be read as people being unobservant, which they've been portrayed as throughout this whole story.
Now, as much as I enjoyed this book on the whole, it can be very dense, and honestly, I could only read a few chapters at a time, especially after things started to get . . . spicy. (I knew going in that the murders are pretty graphic, but I had no idea *how* graphic. Be warned. The murders and rapes get increasingly detailed. I had to take breaks after those chapters). With that said, I was not expecting this to be so funny. I genuinely laughed out loud several times. I *can't believe* Patrick was *never* able to get reservations at Dorsia! Now, I, uh, have to go return some videotapes . . .
~~~~~~~~
It's been about a month and I'm still thinking about this book, so it's 5 stars and a favorite. I see myself re-reading it.
A. he’s a rich, young, attractive white man, and
B. everyone is too self-absorbed to pay attention to what he’s actually saying, so
C. no one really cares enough to ask questions or really listen to him, even when presented with
glaring evidence and confessions.
D. Plus, he's rich, so like, why bite the hand that feeds ya, right? (e.g. Patrick's wasted two-year
relationship with Evelyn).
Patrick nonchalantly discusses his committed murders or plans, and it completely goes over the person's head. He confesses about his true, murderous self as a way of shaking up “the culture,” and no one acknowledges what he just said, thinks he must be joking, or mishears what he said. There’s a scene at one point where he talks about his interests in murders and executions, and the person he's talking to heard it as “mergers and acquisitions” and began talking about banking. These people either don’t want to hear him or are just so wrapped up within themselves that they aren’t actively listening to Patrick. He leaves a detailed voicemail for one person confessing to all his murders, and they think he's *joking* because Patrick could *never* do that; he's *too sweet*, too *goody two-shoes* and found the message hilarious . . .
Every conversation is surface level; these characters are surface level. They speak to be heard. "Surface, surface, surface was all that anyone found meaning in . . .” (p. 375). Characters have debates on the latest fashion styles and music that can sometimes go on for entire chapters. (There's a funny one where Patrick and his *friends* are on like a five-way call trying to decide where to eat for dinner that goes on for about ten pages). Everyone is reduced to their clothing, possessions, where they eat and what they eat, where they work, and who they know. Everyone dresses the same, looks the same, acts the same. Half the time none of the characters can tell each other apart (which is also hilarious). Patrick doesn't even correct them whenever he gets mistaken for someone else. It’s a scathing satire of America’s Wall Street, and I was 100% here for it.
"American Psycho" is told through Patrick’s inner monologue and critiques on the culture. Patrick reads as somewhat nihilistic. I’m not sure if that’s the right word, but he’s just there, doing a slight version of the same shit every damn day with the same damn people, meticulously dressing, working out, going out for lunch and dinner, and admiring his appearance. He just seems . . . bored. He sticks to a routine, meets up with cardboard cutout people he considers acquaintances that he clearly hates, and whom it's obviously a chore for him to interact with. A girl he's taken to lunch tells him that “You don’t need to work," to which he responds he does so because “I . . . want . . . to . . . fit . . . in.” He hates and mocks the culture while simultaneously is unable to extricate himself from it.
All these Wall Street professionals are interchangeable, and interacting with this world drains the soul. This might be set in the late ‘80s and was published in the ‘90s but nothing has changed, which begs the question: does American culture (and capitalism) aid in developing psychopathy, or are psychopaths simply able to thrive in the Wall Street setting because of our cultural values (e.g. wealth, youth, attractiveness, a drive for business, to stay relevant and on top, etc.)?
Patrick himself states:
"I had all the characteristics of a human being - flesh, blood, skin, hair - but my depersonalization was so intense, had gone so deep, that the normal ability to feel compassion had been eradicated, the victim of a slow, purposeful erasure. I was simply imitating reality, a rough resemblance of a human being. . . Something horrible was happening and yet I couldn’t figure out why . . ." (p. 282).
". . . there is an idea of a Patrick Bateman, some kind of abstraction, but there is no real me, only an entity, something illusory, and though I can hide my cold gaze and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable, *I simply am not there*. It is hard for me to make sense on any given level. Myself is fabricated, an aberration. . . My personality is sketchy and unformed, my heartlessness goes deep and is persistent. My conscience, my pity, my hopes disappeared a long time ago (probably at Harvard) if they ever did exist. . . . Is evil something you are? Or is it something you do? My pain is constant and sharp and I do not hope for a better world for anyone. In fact, I want my pain to be inflicted on others. I want no one to escape. And even after admitting this - and I have, countless times, in just about every act I've committed - . . . there is not catharsis" (pp. 376-377).
Patrick wants to be seen for who he is, not what he has, and because no one has taken his confessions seriously, he's frustrated and lacks purpose. He's just a yuppy, not the next Ted Bundy (whom none of the characters has heard of when Pat mentions him, which I just . . . huh? . . . ). He dressed up as a *serial killer* for halloween and used a *real* human finger and still loses the costume contest. *He was robbed!* He has to continue his facade. Again, "And even after admitting this . . . there is not catharsis."
I've seen two trains of analysis on this book. One, that all the murders never occurred, that Patrick just fantasized about it, with the other thought being that, yes, Pat did murder people. I think the murders really did occur. I interpret the scene where a character mentions that they have seen Paul Owen (who Patrick murdered) in England as mistaken identity, a common occurrence throughout the book. There are tons of instances where characters mistake others for different people all the time. Even Patrick confuses other people, and he himself gets mistaken for others. *All these Wall Street professionals are interchangeable*. Also, why would Owen's family hire a detective if Owen wasn't missing, and why would Patrick set Owen's messaging machine to say that Owen would be in England to make a cover, and then is "spotted" in England? (Again, I think Owen being "seen" in England was mistaken identity. Owen was definitely murdered). I do see the potential argument that the police shootout didn't happen, but later on a taxi driver says he's seen Patrick's face on a wanted poster, right? Which would confirm that Patrick did kill that other taxi driver, so it can be inferred that all the other murders also happened. Even though the zoo chapter where he murdered a child read as some weird dream because he murders the kid and then immediately switches to pretending to be a doctor and save him, it can be read as people being unobservant, which they've been portrayed as throughout this whole story.
Now, as much as I enjoyed this book on the whole, it can be very dense, and honestly, I could only read a few chapters at a time, especially after things started to get . . . spicy. (I knew going in that the murders are pretty graphic, but I had no idea *how* graphic. Be warned. The murders and rapes get increasingly detailed. I had to take breaks after those chapters). With that said, I was not expecting this to be so funny. I genuinely laughed out loud several times. I *can't believe* Patrick was *never* able to get reservations at Dorsia! Now, I, uh, have to go return some videotapes . . .
~~~~~~~~
It's been about a month and I'm still thinking about this book, so it's 5 stars and a favorite. I see myself re-reading it.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual assault, Sexual content, Murder
dark
funny
tense
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:
Yes
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
“Is evil something you are? Or is it something you do?“
I’m a huge fan of Bret Easton Ellis and his writing style, and I’ve already seen the movie adaptation of this novel, so I wanted to read the book. The first chapter really sets the tone of this story. Set in Manhattan during the Wall Street boom of the late 1980s, American Psycho follows the life of wealthy young investment banker Patrick Bateman. The novel maintains a high level of ambiguity through mistaken identity and contradictions that introduce the possibility that Bateman is an unreliable narrator. The author does a good job at introducing the characters and defining their personalities and setting over a single dinner scene. Hearing Patrick Bateman’s routines alone made me understand that he was a psychopath. His internal monologues and dialogue with his colleagues is enough for anyone to identify that he’s insane. The incessant and relentless descriptions of brands and what everybody is wearing is enough to establish the kind of shallow and dark world that these characters inhabit. The language that Patrick Bateman uses to describe the people around him shocked me and made it a chore to get through, but it fit the character and served the story well. This entire book is a commentary on consumerism in our society and how Bateman and people like him obsess over things; how they only see people through the lens of what they have and how they dress, looking at women as nothing more than objects to use and abuse. I read The Rules of Attraction before this, so seeing Patrick’s brother Sean Bateman appear on this book was a small treat, and I love how Bret’s books all exist in the same universe. The violence and gore is filthy and there were many scenes I found myself disgusted by, and I think those scenes were done effectively. Patrick does not have a typical modus operandi, he simply tortures and kills men, women, and animals (and a child) whenever he sees fit and finds new and inventive ways to cause pain to others. I loved seeing how none of this brought him closer to happiness or fulfilment, and how his lifestyle was monotonous no matter how glamorous or luxurious it was. Patrick Bateman’s character has been idolized by many men online and is looked at like an idol for self-titled “alpha males”, but it’s clear that none of these people have read and truly understood this book and its themes on consumerism and capitalism. This was a sharp and brilliant satire, and the parts that meandered only served the greater narrative and themes; even the portions of this story that went in circles fit into this hyper consumeristic hellscape perfectly. Patrick’s world is a hell unto itself. He works and socializes with men who are so boringly identical that they can’t tell each other apart. He tortures and kills his victims but it only serves as a temporary reprieve from pure boredom. His glamorous life is only set dressing and serves to hide his own immense emptiness. While some could argue that all the murders were a product of Bateman’s imagination, I don’t think it matters. The reader could look at it either way and it would still be a look into a very sick mind. He has everything a man could want and yet it is still not enough. No amount of money or luxury or profound acts of violence will ever satisfy. Patrick consumes everyone and everything endlessly and he will never be able to fill the empty void inside of himself. He is capitalism’s apex-predator and nothing will ever be enough to satiate him, and there is no exit or escape from his pitiful existence, and that is exactly what makes this novel brilliant.
“My pain is constant and sharp and I do not hope for a better world for anyone, in fact I want my pain to be inflicted on others. I want no one to escape, but even after admitting this there is no catharsis, my punishment continues to elude me and I gain no deeper knowledge of myself; no new knowledge can be extracted from my telling. This confession has meant nothing.”
I’m a huge fan of Bret Easton Ellis and his writing style, and I’ve already seen the movie adaptation of this novel, so I wanted to read the book. The first chapter really sets the tone of this story. Set in Manhattan during the Wall Street boom of the late 1980s, American Psycho follows the life of wealthy young investment banker Patrick Bateman. The novel maintains a high level of ambiguity through mistaken identity and contradictions that introduce the possibility that Bateman is an unreliable narrator. The author does a good job at introducing the characters and defining their personalities and setting over a single dinner scene. Hearing Patrick Bateman’s routines alone made me understand that he was a psychopath. His internal monologues and dialogue with his colleagues is enough for anyone to identify that he’s insane. The incessant and relentless descriptions of brands and what everybody is wearing is enough to establish the kind of shallow and dark world that these characters inhabit. The language that Patrick Bateman uses to describe the people around him shocked me and made it a chore to get through, but it fit the character and served the story well. This entire book is a commentary on consumerism in our society and how Bateman and people like him obsess over things; how they only see people through the lens of what they have and how they dress, looking at women as nothing more than objects to use and abuse. I read The Rules of Attraction before this, so seeing Patrick’s brother Sean Bateman appear on this book was a small treat, and I love how Bret’s books all exist in the same universe. The violence and gore is filthy and there were many scenes I found myself disgusted by, and I think those scenes were done effectively. Patrick does not have a typical modus operandi, he simply tortures and kills men, women, and animals (and a child) whenever he sees fit and finds new and inventive ways to cause pain to others. I loved seeing how none of this brought him closer to happiness or fulfilment, and how his lifestyle was monotonous no matter how glamorous or luxurious it was. Patrick Bateman’s character has been idolized by many men online and is looked at like an idol for self-titled “alpha males”, but it’s clear that none of these people have read and truly understood this book and its themes on consumerism and capitalism. This was a sharp and brilliant satire, and the parts that meandered only served the greater narrative and themes; even the portions of this story that went in circles fit into this hyper consumeristic hellscape perfectly. Patrick’s world is a hell unto itself. He works and socializes with men who are so boringly identical that they can’t tell each other apart. He tortures and kills his victims but it only serves as a temporary reprieve from pure boredom. His glamorous life is only set dressing and serves to hide his own immense emptiness. While some could argue that all the murders were a product of Bateman’s imagination, I don’t think it matters. The reader could look at it either way and it would still be a look into a very sick mind. He has everything a man could want and yet it is still not enough. No amount of money or luxury or profound acts of violence will ever satisfy. Patrick consumes everyone and everything endlessly and he will never be able to fill the empty void inside of himself. He is capitalism’s apex-predator and nothing will ever be enough to satiate him, and there is no exit or escape from his pitiful existence, and that is exactly what makes this novel brilliant.
“My pain is constant and sharp and I do not hope for a better world for anyone, in fact I want my pain to be inflicted on others. I want no one to escape, but even after admitting this there is no catharsis, my punishment continues to elude me and I gain no deeper knowledge of myself; no new knowledge can be extracted from my telling. This confession has meant nothing.”
only two sentences:
it was a laugh riot!
THIS IS NOT AN EXIT
it was a laugh riot!
THIS IS NOT AN EXIT
may pick this up again at some point but I’m very bored and it’s sending me into a reading slump. I know it’s an intentional literary choice to show bateman’s personality but I’m finding the endless clothing/branding descriptions so so boring
dark
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes