You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Talk » Message 4916818 (Thread)

2 vaginas

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:33, archived)
I recently finished reading American Psycho.
It disturbed me very much. Had to stop reading at one point.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:35, archived)
Yup
The nipples/nail trimmer incident messed me up.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:36, archived)
Is that the book in which someone fucks a decapitated skull?

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:38, archived)
He does it a lot.
The whole thing is pretty fucked up.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:39, archived)
that
more than the rat/drainpipe/acid bit?
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:39, archived)
I think that's where I had to put the book down for a while.

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:40, archived)
no, not in terms of brutality
but it just got me, in the same way that stubbing your toe is the most painful thing in the world.

If you see what i mean. What?

*dies*
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:40, archived)
This sounds dreadful
why? why? why?
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:41, archived)
because
.. and this is the official review here - Easton Ellis is one sick motherfucker.

it also should have been rat/draipipe/acid/hooker's vagina if you really want to know just how wrong it is..
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:44, archived)
The hungry rat
and the 80s music references
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:40, archived)
I couldn't read the whole Phil Collins/Genesis chapter.

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:41, archived)
Less Than Zero is quite nasty too

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:36, archived)
I read Glamorama, that was good - it did have it's gruesome parts.

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:38, archived)
American Psycho is somehow much worse though
I don't know why. I remember thinking less than zero was a good book - worrying, but good. But AP is just every fucking country of the wrongworld.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:38, archived)
oh really?
I do love a nasty book, I might pick it up.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:39, archived)
may I suggest
only reading alternate pages? every other page is his description of his and others clothes, glasses, mannerisms etc. It's meant to convey a kind of blase normality as a counter to the ultra-violence, and emphasise just how meaningless other's life and pain is to him ... but it just gets fucking irritating ;)
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:42, archived)
Some of those bits are my favourite moments in it.
The contrast is what makes it more effective, in my opinion.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:43, archived)
see below
I'm really just taking the piss. It's a fucking wrong book in so many ways though.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:46, archived)
I very much agree.

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:47, archived)
But that's the point.
You get him writing pages and pages of superfluous adjectives about meaningless things, and then half a page of crudely written torture and sexual violence.

You can't have one without the other, otherwise it's just porn for mentalists.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:43, archived)
I know
I wasn't really being serious. But fuck, I wished he'd shut up about oliver peoples fucking glasses for a bit.

anyway, arguably it is just porn for mentalists.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:45, archived)
i actually started to feel guilty for looking forward to the sick bits

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:47, archived)
haha
just finished Rant, the latest Chuck Palahniuk one - could have done with that advice towards the end. He does have a habit of repeating things a few too many times.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:44, archived)
I found it irritating at first, but then it amused me, and was a nice break
from reading about eating intestines and burning eyes with lighters...
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:44, archived)
oh i forgot about the eyeballs exploding

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:45, archived)
I've read a lot of bad things.
This is the baddest.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:42, archived)
I think American Psycho is
worse because you get quite involved with one person and the workings of his mind. Although I've not read Less than zero, I think this is why the violence in AP is worse than the violence in Glamorama.

/book club
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:42, archived)
I thought the film was weirder. I don't know.

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:38, archived)
I didn't think much of the film.
The book was great.
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:46, archived)
I haven't bothered with the film
9/10 ths of the book is totally unfilmable, at least legally. why did they bother?
(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:47, archived)
You are wise to not bother with the film.

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:48, archived)
The rat/fanny bit :s

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:39, archived)
An excellent book, albeit hard work.

(, Thu 15 May 2008, 14:41, archived)