Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lil_poundcake 's review for:
Sacré Bleu: A Comedy d'Art
by Christopher Moore
Moore is usually cranked up to 11: if the joke can be crasser, bawdier, more profane, the better; dialogue should make the reader's head spin; the plot should move at breakneck speed, with every paragraph serving to hurtle the reader forward through the narrative. And I love this! His books are deliciously witty and I love tearing through them.
'Sacre Bleu' is definitely a departure, stylistically, for Christopher Moore, which is part of the reason I loved it. It's definitely one of my favourites of his -- right up there with 'Lamb' and 'Bloodsucking Fiends'.
'Sacre Bleu' is much, much slower and has a subtle tone of reverence, which is why some of his fans have been complaining that it's a bit of a slog. I, for one, loved that he toned himself down for this "fairy tale about the colour blue"; told through the eyes of painters, it only makes sense that the narrative is slightly more reverential than, say, the blasphemy-fest of 'Lamb' or the Ivy League frat-house literature of 'Fool'.
This is not to say that Moore's signature wit is missing entirely; no, the dialogue is snappy as ever, and he never fails to make a joke about balls or boobs. It's just less so.
I wasn't a huge fan of the tangents (I think they're called "studies in blue"; I don't have the book with me to check), but they're not frequent or long enough to really bug.
I honestly hope that Moore continues in the vein of slightly (just slightly!) more serious books like 'Sacre Bleu'. For every romp like 'Fool' or, going even further back, 'The Lust Lizard', I'd love to devour something like this book.
'Sacre Bleu' is definitely a departure, stylistically, for Christopher Moore, which is part of the reason I loved it. It's definitely one of my favourites of his -- right up there with 'Lamb' and 'Bloodsucking Fiends'.
'Sacre Bleu' is much, much slower and has a subtle tone of reverence, which is why some of his fans have been complaining that it's a bit of a slog. I, for one, loved that he toned himself down for this "fairy tale about the colour blue"; told through the eyes of painters, it only makes sense that the narrative is slightly more reverential than, say, the blasphemy-fest of 'Lamb' or the Ivy League frat-house literature of 'Fool'.
This is not to say that Moore's signature wit is missing entirely; no, the dialogue is snappy as ever, and he never fails to make a joke about balls or boobs. It's just less so.
I wasn't a huge fan of the tangents (I think they're called "studies in blue"; I don't have the book with me to check), but they're not frequent or long enough to really bug.
Spoiler
I really liked Bleu and her many iterations. The Colorman was equal parts creepy and hilarious, and I actually kind of enjoyed his backstory in spite of myself. Lucien was a bit of drip, but he was solid compared to the circus of his supporting characters.I honestly hope that Moore continues in the vein of slightly (just slightly!) more serious books like 'Sacre Bleu'. For every romp like 'Fool' or, going even further back, 'The Lust Lizard', I'd love to devour something like this book.