Paul Auster: Invisible

[Mirabell]

It?s not as awful as I thought it would be. Paul Auster?s most recent novel, Invisible, frequently billed as a return to form, is, indeed, much better than what I read of his recent fare, especially when compared to his dismal Brooklyn Follies. This is not a good book but, in many places, it turns out, it?s a readable one, and while Auster is up to his usual tricks, at least they are well-rehearsed ones. Invisible teems with postmodern feints, with metafictional jabs and intertextual hooks, but like every single book of his I?ve so far read, it delivers a very weak punch. This is baffling in a book that not only takes up or references important issues like racism, but, on a very direct narrative level, throws a story at the reader that contains murder, great quantities of sex, incest and even, possibly, one (or two) secret agents. And there isn?t much else to distract the reader. Invisible displays an obsession with these themes, and it utilizes quite a few of the tricks of the trade to create enough suspense for the reader to read on and on, no matter how much other aspects of the book may annoy him. There are sudden surprises, a revelatory ending and each of the book?s sections ends on a cliffhanger. There is a definite connection of Invisible to many other specimen of the thriller genre. Sadly, this is true for Auster?s writing as well.The rest of my review is here Ghostly: Paul Auster?s ?Invisible? shigekuni. (http://shigekuni.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/ghostly-paul-austers-invisible/)


yay.

[Daniel del Real]

Invisible displays an obsession with these themes, and it utilizes quite a few of the tricks of the trade to create enough suspense for the reader to read on and on, no matter how much other aspects of the book may annoy him.


I agree and that is part of the mistery through Auster's books. This book I've read 4 Auster books (currently reading The Book of Illusions) and although the first one was the one I truly liked, The Country of Last Things, I kept reading him and even though the last three, The Red Notebook, Man in the Dark, and my current read, are only average three star books, I'm still willing to read more of his work. Difficult to explain why but although he is not a brilliant writer he just captures you as a reader.

[Mirabell]

eh. not so much capturing usually. i'm usually bored stiff. this one is just very much geared towards suspense. If you can be captivated and bored at the same time, I was, upon reading this pile of shit.

[Flower]

I actually liked "Invisible" a lot but hated the ending!

Having Mirabell's negative thoughts of Auster in my head when starting the book, I tried to look for bad stuff. But only a few pages in the book, I noticed that I like Auster's descriptions of the characters. Hard to say why, I just do.

To me its somewhere between 3 and 4 stars

[Mirabell]

I actually liked "Invisible" a lot but hated the ending!

Having Mirabell's negative thoughts of Auster in my head when starting the book, I tried to look for bad stuff. But only a few pages in the book, I noticed that I like Auster's descriptions of the characters. Hard to say why, I just do.

To me its somewhere between 3 and 4 stars

BUt then, you read it in danish. Like Coelho, Auster can't help but improve in translation, I wager.

[Flower]

BUt then, you read it in danish. Like Coelho, Auster can't help but improve in translation, I wager.

I think its VERY unfair to compare or even mention Coelho's name together with Auster! :(

[Daniel del Real]

I think its VERY unfair to compare or even mention Coelho's name together with Auster! :(

Of course it is unfair. I've read Auster in english and still like him. Of course he's not the best existing prosist but I like his agile style to tell a story

[Mirabell]

Of course it is unfair. I've read Auster in english and still like him. Of course he's not the best existing prosist but I like his agile style to tell a story


Hey, Dan Brown is agile. He's considered by many, even slow readers, to be a "pageturner". So Brown, rather than Coelho? I think Coelho and Auster take a similar approach to philosophy.

[Flower]

Hey, Dan Brown is agile. He's considered by many, even slow readers, to be a "pageturner". So Brown, rather than Coelho? I think Coelho and Auster take a similar approach to philosophy.

No, not Dan Brown either! :(

[Daniel del Real]

Hey, Dan Brown is agile. He's considered by many, even slow readers, to be a "pageturner". So Brown, rather than Coelho? I think Coelho and Auster take a similar approach to philosophy.

Haven't read Dan Brown and never will. I've read Coelho and there's nothing in common with Auster in the writing style. What I accept is that they both talk a lot about fate, coincidence, curiosities about life. If this is what you mean about philosophy, I agree. However Auster deals with those topics as things that actually happen in real life and they have no particular meaning or any sort of guidance in life, there are just facts while Coelho always has this dogmatic, religious point of view telling that everything that happens to you is there to help you make your dreams come truth. That just makes me wanna throw up everything I hear it.

[Flower]

Haven't read Dan Brown and never will. I've read Coelho and there's nothing in common with Auster in the writing style. What I accept is that they both talk a lot about fate, coincidence, curiosities about life. If this is what you mean about philosophy, I agree. However Auster deals with those topics as things that actually happen in real life and they have no particular meaning or any sort of guidance in life, there are just facts while Coelho always has this dogmatic, religious point of view telling that everything that happens to you is there to help you make your dreams come truth. That just makes me wanna throw up everything I hear it.

I agree completely! :)

Coelho is making everything into some newage religion...which is certainly not what Auster is doing!

Dan Brown steals other peoples work and writes like ....where is the shite...when you need it! :D