Scan barcode
A review by afterplague
The Fury by Alex Michaelides
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.25
I read the Silent Patient, and I enjoyed it, so when I saw another book by Alex Michaelides I was definitely excited to give it a read. I think unfortunately The Fury and I just didn't connect with each other. The reader is warned explicitly that this is not a whodunit murder mystery, so if that's what you're expecting I would advise you to avoid this book. What is doesn't warn you, however, is that it's structured like a play.
Our narrator is a playwright and the book is separated into acts, which is a style I've seen in other books (specifically If We Were Villains). However, The Fury handles this a little differently where is also incorporates the structure of scenes within a play. Each chapter is unbearably short, only two or four pages usually, and this made it impossible to sink into the narrative. There's a reason people usually watch plays and don't read them. In a novel, this choice is extremely misguided.
There are good elements to it, but I don't think the structure contributes to the story at all. I don't really recommend The Fury for that, and many other reasons.
I'm going to go into more detail below, so please beware of spoilers.
Our narrator, Elliot, is insufferable. He's pretentious, snobby, and so present throughout the first few chapters. He's so irritating I had to put the book down and SLEEP to relax before I could continue. This is the point of his character. He's an obnoxious writer who found immense success for a play he wrote. He's got friends in high places now and slots into their friend group even though he doesn't really fit in. Elliot speaks often of loving one's inner child and having empathy for oneself because all our worst actions come from that inner child attempting to avoid pain.
Elliot's whole life is a lie.
Elliot isn't even his real name. He didn't write the play that made him famous, and he murdered the old woman who did. He's a narcissistic "nice guy" who believes that his best friend should have married him instead of her husband. All his friends dislike him and find him annoying, and they're right. He's a stalker and a manipulator and the entire novel is his attempt to manipulate the reader into being on his side of the horrible events he planned.
His character does kind of work, and he's explored well, as is Lana. She's the center of all his obsessions. The other characters don't achieve very much depth, but they are all still memorable and have their own parts in the plot.
The twist is both shocking and not at the same time. I had predicted that Elliot was not a good man, but I didn't predict the way the plot would shake out in the last fifty pages. I liked the twist, but the author has this horrible habit where anytime something exciting is happening he immediately takes you away into an EXTENDED series of flashbacks and explanations and diatribes about human nature. It kills the pacing of the story incredibly. I can understand why that was done on a practical level, that this is a story about the characters and not the events, so we need to flash back to learn more about the characters. However, 80-85% of this book is just those long winded character explanations.
The structure is a real problem. We continuously return to the same moments to see them from different characters perspectives with new knowledge, but I don't think it's justified. The plot of this story is a tangled yarn ball and I get a headache just thinking about it. The writing is also pretentious and odd. The descriptions are fine for the most part, but Elliot is not a great writing, and I'm not sure if the writing I don't like is Elliot or Alex Michaelides.
It's supposed to feel like a Greek tragedy, and it succeeds in some ways, but it just feels so pretentious, smug, and self-satisfied that I couldn't enjoy it. I suppose I would recommend this book if you're interested in the way stories can play with structure. I'm just not sure I enjoyed it.
Our narrator is a playwright and the book is separated into acts, which is a style I've seen in other books (specifically If We Were Villains). However, The Fury handles this a little differently where is also incorporates the structure of scenes within a play. Each chapter is unbearably short, only two or four pages usually, and this made it impossible to sink into the narrative. There's a reason people usually watch plays and don't read them. In a novel, this choice is extremely misguided.
There are good elements to it, but I don't think the structure contributes to the story at all. I don't really recommend The Fury for that, and many other reasons.
I'm going to go into more detail below, so please beware of spoilers.
Our narrator, Elliot, is insufferable. He's pretentious, snobby, and so present throughout the first few chapters. He's so irritating I had to put the book down and SLEEP to relax before I could continue. This is the point of his character. He's an obnoxious writer who found immense success for a play he wrote. He's got friends in high places now and slots into their friend group even though he doesn't really fit in. Elliot speaks often of loving one's inner child and having empathy for oneself because all our worst actions come from that inner child attempting to avoid pain.
Elliot's whole life is a lie.
Elliot isn't even his real name. He didn't write the play that made him famous, and he murdered the old woman who did. He's a narcissistic "nice guy" who believes that his best friend should have married him instead of her husband. All his friends dislike him and find him annoying, and they're right. He's a stalker and a manipulator and the entire novel is his attempt to manipulate the reader into being on his side of the horrible events he planned.
His character does kind of work, and he's explored well, as is Lana. She's the center of all his obsessions. The other characters don't achieve very much depth, but they are all still memorable and have their own parts in the plot.
The twist is both shocking and not at the same time. I had predicted that Elliot was not a good man, but I didn't predict the way the plot would shake out in the last fifty pages. I liked the twist, but the author has this horrible habit where anytime something exciting is happening he immediately takes you away into an EXTENDED series of flashbacks and explanations and diatribes about human nature. It kills the pacing of the story incredibly. I can understand why that was done on a practical level, that this is a story about the characters and not the events, so we need to flash back to learn more about the characters. However, 80-85% of this book is just those long winded character explanations.
The structure is a real problem. We continuously return to the same moments to see them from different characters perspectives with new knowledge, but I don't think it's justified. The plot of this story is a tangled yarn ball and I get a headache just thinking about it. The writing is also pretentious and odd. The descriptions are fine for the most part, but Elliot is not a great writing, and I'm not sure if the writing I don't like is Elliot or Alex Michaelides.
It's supposed to feel like a Greek tragedy, and it succeeds in some ways, but it just feels so pretentious, smug, and self-satisfied that I couldn't enjoy it. I suppose I would recommend this book if you're interested in the way stories can play with structure. I'm just not sure I enjoyed it.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Alcohol, Blood, Toxic friendship, and Gun violence
Moderate: Gaslighting and Murder