I recently went through a harvest of Listmania lists on Amazon, from those I found on the page for China Meiville's "Perdido Street Station". It seemed like a promising way to break into reading the current "New Weird" fantasy sub-genre movement, uh, thing. (New Weird. It's a fairly ambiguous term, but generally, think Fantasy (often dark fantasy) with a more "modern" viewpoint and usually an urban (modern or pseudo-steampunk) setting, that sidesteps Tolkien's legacy when tracing its lineage (which manifests itself, in the books I've read at least, in attempting to include an element of psychological realism despite the fantastic setting and events, as opposed to the more archetypal characterizations one finds in Tolkien and other writers of Epic Fantasy.)All of the above is true of the first book from the Amazon lists that I've gotten from the library, "Shriek: An Afterword" by Jeff Vandermeer. Shriek takes place in the fictional city of Ambergris, in an unnamed fictional world. It is ostensibly an Afterword to another work (which does not exist in real life), written by the sister of the other work's author (who has gone missing). The brother and sister duo are named Duncan and Janice Shriek (thus the title), and the story involves Duncan's two obsessions: first, his obsession with the mysterious fungus-filled world of tunnels beneath the city, and second his obsessive love for a girl named Mary Sabon, who is at first his student and, in the end, the person who discredits and ruins his name in the public mind. But of course all of these are almost secondary characters compared to the city itself, its history, its current state of politics and turmoil, and the tensions with and fear of the original inhabitants of the area, the Gray Caps: beings who live in the world Underground, having been driven there by the first human colonists, who may or may not secretly control the minds of the human populace of the city (this is where Mary and Duncan differ in their theories), and who are never given concrete physical description within the course of the novel.One of the critiques leveled at the New Weird from the more traditional fantasy is that the New Weird is Ugly. This is the same critique that I have heard one of my favorite authors, John C. Wright, level against the "traditional" "literary" genre (you know, the one that claims not to be a genre). Novels concerned with psychological realism tend to include a lot of psychological baggage, which in turn means not flinching away from the faults (and underlying reason for the faults) of their characters. Which means that essentially a lot of dirty laundry is aired, even on the part of the protagonists. This is certainly the case in Shriek, where certainly none of the characters are treated as being blameless in their actions. There are no "good guys" or "bad guys" in the novel; and sometimes just when you expect someone to be a caricature (such as the supposedly narrow-minded religious leader that tries to ban one of Duncan's early books), Vandermeer surprises you (as when the religious leader, himself having suffered a scandal, becomes one of Duncan's closest friends, though no less a religious man). I'm not going to fall on either side of this argument: I can see both sides of the argument, and enjoy books written by those on both sides. (Which side I would rather write like myself remains to be seen.)(The other "ugly" aspect of the New Weird is that it often draws on influences from the horror genre. There are some disturbing or shocking images in Shriek, which you may want to watch out for if you're not a fan of being disturbed or shocked. Mostly it is more dark than gruesome, though there are a couple violent images at certain points.Literarily, Shriek exists in that lovely world of "suggesting" meaning, where the metaphorical (or mythopoeic?) elements are there to "wake" a meaning rather than to "convey" a meaning, as George MacDonald once said. Shriek is an excellent example of this. The Underground, perhaps the most powerful metaphoric image in the novel, can be seen from any number of potent angles. It's exactly the sort of technique that I want my own work to employ.In all, then, I would heartily recommend the book to anyone interested in works of the fantastical, but who aren't necessarily looking for mere escapism. This is a tough, complex, and ultimately rewarding book, and one that I devoured with much excitement. I'll be reading more of Vandermeer in the future.
A review on the back of this book name-checks Nick Cave and "Hitchhikers Guide" -- please ignore the back of the book. I can't imagine anything less like Douglas Adams than this book. If I had to write a review of this book based primarily on name-checks, my list would include: Mervyn Peake, Edward Gorey, H.P. Lovecraft, China Mievelle, and Tom Waits. VanderMeer's Ambergris setting has echoes of Gormanghast's crumbling antiquity, but with more of Amphigories twisted, Gothic humor thrown in (think "The Insect God"). The entire wold is spun over a shadow background of an unknown, violent horror lurking beneath the surface of things (see: Cthulhu), and the Waits I have in mind is less "Romeo is Bleeding" than "The Earth Died Screaming" (I will admit that the Nick Cave reference is accurate if what the reviewer was thinking of was "The Carney"). I picked this up mainly because I absolutely LOVED City of Saints and Madmen and this is the only other VanderMeer I've found in my multi stops at B&N since finishing that book. It was good - as well conceived and developed as CoSaM - but something about the premise seemed to drag a bit when stretched over the length of an entire novel; perhaps had it been 50 to 75 pages shorter it would have carried the same punch-to-the-gut as its surreal predecessor. At first I was worried about the premise being too clever: the text proports to be an afterward to Ambergris historian Duncan Shriek's "History of Ambergris," written by his sister Janice Shriek, but discovered and edited with notes by Duncan himself. However, this conceit is very well executed, and the two voices play off one another very nicely without intruding too much into the text -- the result if very "Pale Fire," but successful to an extent that surprised me.The reason I gave it three rather than four stars is simply that something about the book struck me as somewhat false, or distant, as if the book was part of an elaborate in-joke that VanderMeer only partially let the reader in on. I can't really explain it, as it was just a vague sense of unease or detachment that set in from time to time. Whole chapters would be utterly gripping, but then there would be some bizarre detail that left me cold, almost as if he was writing an allegory and I was missing the cultural basis to understand the elaborate symbolism, or that if I was one of his college buddies I'd get how he'd cast their least favorite professor as the head of a church. Think of the wonderful stories you've told a small child, working their friends and family and neighborhood into the narrative, and later you realize with a slight disappointment that no one other than that child would really appreciate the story. I felt like that from time to time (if this makes sense to anyone other than me).Still, 90% of the book was great, and the restrained use of senseless and utter violence brings this books an edge of urgency and horror I've seldom experienced outside of Mieville. Well worth reading for those who like weird-fiction.
What do You think about Shriek: An Afterword (2006)?
The history of a weird city, told in the form of a rambling memoir, from the point of view of an aged author/socialite, with parenthetical comments written after the fact by her historian/explorer brother. There is really no plot. Some big events are eluded to but never really explained. Many of the sections are just memories of the narrator's childhood, which sounds crushingly boring, but they're interesting because of the setting and the WEIRDNESS that is around the edge of everything that happens in the setting. All of the characters' relationships with each other ring really true, which I don't feel is usually the case in books that I read, at least. Also, IT'S ALMOST LIKE THE CITY ITSELF IS A CHARACTER™I don't think I would have enjoyed this book as much as I did had I not previously read City of Saints and Madmen, which is a collection of stories and reference material (it's weird) that take place in the same city as Shriek. Stuff is explained there that is not explained here, so it's pretty much required reading.Flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace flesh necklace
—Jordan
tCholernie obawiałem się tej książki, bowiem przyzwyczaiłem się, do tego, że Jeff VanderMeer, podobnie, jak M. John Harrison, lubuje się w "dręczeniu" czytelnika na wiele rozlicznych sposobów: od prowadzenia fabuły niezwykle splątanymi ścieżkami - którymi podążając, nie wolno w żadnym wypadku pozwolić sobie na rozproszenie uwagi, należy zachować pełną koncentrację i czujność - poprzez kreację bohaterów, których motywacje są niejasne, losy zagmatwane a czyny irracjonalne, aż do doprowadzanie do kompletnego "skołowacenia" w końcówce, w której nie wiemy, co jest prawdą a co tylko imaginacją tychże postaci.A jednak udało się autorowi całkowicie zawładnąć wyobraźnią - "Shriek: Posłowie" jest doskonałym uzupełnieniem "Miasta szaleńców i świętych" a jednocześnie jestem pewien, że ponownie sięgnięcie po pierwszą z książek z cyklu o Ambergis, całkowicie zmieniłoby jej odbiór, nadałoby nowy sens i głębię temu, co zostało tam wcześniej spisane.Ponadto książka jest - oczywiście - bardziej spójna (w przeciwieństwie do "Miasta szaleńców i świętych" mamy tu do czynienia z bardziej tradycyjną formą opowieści, która mimo zaburzeń chronologii i narracji w często polemicznym dwugłosie, ma swój wstęp, swoje rozwinięcie i zakończenie), bardziej wciągająca fabularnie (zwłaszcza w drugiej połowie) i "okraszona" licznymi nawiązaniami do "Miasta..." (znani bohaterowie pojawiają się w dalszym, lub bliższym tle, znane wydarzenia poznajemy z nowej, często zaskakującej perspektywy). Wszystko to sprawiło, że po raz kolejny dałem się porwać VanderMeerowi w tą oniryczną podróż do Ambergis. Chociaż, trzeba dodać, do najłatwiejszych ta wycieczka nie należała.I jeszcze drobna uwaga: uważam, że "Shriek: Posłowie", można czytać bez znajomości "Miasta szaleńców i świętych", a kto wie, czy nawet nie lepszym zabiegiem byłoby zacząć właśnie od drugiej książki? Tego jednak, niestety, już się nie dowiem...
—Rafal Jasinski
I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this book. A "dark" urban fantasy with a weird thing about fungi. Not generally my thing, but it was done well, and I simultaneously loved and despised both of the protagonists-narrarators. (Which I suppose only goes to show how three-dimensional the characters are.) The format of biography/memoir/history was actually really neat and well-done as well. That said, I found it frustrating how few solid answers there actually were; it worked well for the story being told, but it left me unsatisfied. I think that's all the points I have.(view spoiler)[(Okay, also, I kept really amusing myself with the thought that one of the main characters is literally 1000 fungi in trench coat.) (hide spoiler)]
—Sarah
