Okay, I just finished the novel, which I wanted to read before I saw the film. I have some thoughts. Nearly all of which are negative. The novel is INSUFFERABLE. GAWD. I didn't mind that the author shifted the narrative style from prosaic to poetic to nearly stream-of-consciousness, but it was so wildly inconsistent, it hindered the narrative rather than enhanced it. There would be natural style for a while, then suddenly long stretches of heavy-handed painstaking poetic descriptions of memories or moments or settings, jam-packed with metaphors for virtually every sentence. All momentum would be lost as you slog through pages and pages of this American Fiction college course writing assignment crap that would seem plausible if it was limited to just Edward's writing and even then, still to be used in some sort of consistent manner. But we get smacked with it at times in Susan's passages as well, while at other times, she just has a couple of informal sentences for each section. By the time we reach the climax of Edward's story, it is stretched out to such a mind-numbing degree, I was ready to throw in the towel, but then we get Susan's self-reflection and critique ramblings that seem to go on endlessly and ultimately results in nothing enlightening or substantial or even interesting. I almost want to see the film simply because I already know it will be a highly condensed version of events that couldn't possibly be more incoherent or unfocused. I might actually enjoy the story told by someone else entirely and may benefit from the extraction of the author's direct participation. UGH.
SPOILERS AFOOT: Why on earth would any sheriff force the victim in a crime to accompany him to any room in which the victim had to share space with his victimizers? Total garbage. How on earth would the sheriff ever have the victim hold a gun on the perps while the sheriff leaves the room? Stupidity like this in scene after scene convinces me that A.) Jake Gyllenhall's character Edward is a terrible writer, or B.) Tom Ford is a terrible writer, or C.) Both are true.
A.) Jake Gyllenhall's character Edward is a terrible writer
B.) Tom Ford is a terrible writer
C.) Austin Wright is a terrible writer
D.) All of the above
The bottom line is that most of the events in Edward's book are ridiculously unbelievable and are acknowledged as such by the characters themselves (in both worlds). As a result, it appears that this is sufficient excuse for Austin Wright to expect us to be on board with it. If the internal AND external characters of Tony & Susan question the ridiculousness of some of the circumstances, then clearly we should not need to question it ourselves, right? He's done the work for us!
FYI - In the novel, Susan is an English professor and lecturer. And completely unlikable.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
