@jimsbooksreadingandstuff - why are you here if you haven't read it, let alone refusing something you don't know based on two people's opinion? Seriously, great reasoning, the vast majority love it, but you'll be retarding yourself based on two people's opinion. (And Man Carrying Thing - when are you gonna talk about more books?)
Wow! Same! I read it at the start of the year. It was recommended everywhere, but I'm not from a english speaking country, so if I wanted a paper copy of the book I had to buy one outside, which would be SO expensive! I ended up... Getting one through illicit means (cofcofpirateditcofcof) and took me like THREE MONTHS to read and... I don't think the paper copy was worth it at all. I finished it and I ranted about it to my partner about how bad it was, hahahah! After that, I read some Terry Pratchett for a change. Pratchett is good.
Isn’t it fascinating how something can hit people so differently? I loved this book. But I personally didn’t interpret it as satire. I didn’t feel it disrespected me as a reader at all, I actually felt like the whole book was about MY experience inside the book. Like it was leading me on a bizarre and disorienting journey, as if I was the one going through the labyrinth. And that experience felt so unique. I don’t think it’s a matter of anyone being smart or not, no one’s opinion is more valid than anyone else’s. I think I just had a different experience. For whatever reason, it just hit me differently. 🤷🏼♀️
It's very brave of you to accurately compare Truant to a Murakami protagonist because now you'll have the House of Leaves fans and Murakami fans coming for you
Going to be honest. Most of the HoL fans I know are actually pretty chill people and I mean the people who have read the book and love to analyse it. They're not going to be "coming for you". I mean they might give some commentary on what they think of it but if you hang out in the subreddit, a lot of us are just interested in the journey of it and want to go on the journey of analysis For me, the sense of pain and tragedy was pretty obvious from the moment I read it. It's haunting and beautiful. But whatever your opinion is, that's cool too.
I love House of Leaves. However, it amazes me that people can’t just acknowledge criticisms of something they like. I agree with so much you say about the book, and that’s fine because some things click for some people and others don’t. Someone disliking something I like doesn’t take away from what it means for me. In a hilarious way, the up themselves intellectuals who wheel out this book as a means of putting themselves above others have failed to understand the most basic aspect of subjectivity, and I get the impression that the book is laughing at them as much as we are.
Great stuff, Willow. Literature needs critique like air. And this type of service you provide tends to be very rare. Thank you, it was a treat listening to you. Wish more would analyse books, rather than just arbitrarily rave about it, getting us all chocked up on hypes.
I hear your points. As a graphic designer i couldn't help but appreciate the efforts put behind the printing of the book, the multi-directional copy, copy going past the edge of the paper, different kind of inks, etc. All that alone kept me going. The story itself wasn't that memorable.
That's the kind of thing that makes me recommend house of leaves to everyone and just tell people to skip Johnny's bits. I love that it's obsessed with being a book, like the physicality of being a book. It makes it inherently interesting.
It's OK, babe! Don't listen to the boys. I'm a middle-aged mum, and it saved my sanity-but I read it at the right time in my life. My brain needed a huge puzzle to work on, to drown myself in. I can see its appeal to lost young men and English majors. I gasp when people show the book to me and caution them. It can steal your sanity. It may not be for you. And that... is... OK.
Oh gosh, and when I say "babe," I mean that in the most motherly way. Not in a shotty college boy way! Joined your patron because the video delighted me so much.
i'm crying about how you literally explained the exact way a man introduced this book to me when i was in college hahahaha. i read like 70% of it and didn't hate it, mostly just because it scratched a specific OCD/ADHD hyperfixation itch in my brain. i put it down because i got busy and just never got around to returning to it, but i agree people do talk about it in an insufferable way.
I mentioned on the short that I love this book and was so looking forward to this! I think I've also mentioned before that one of my favourite things is well-done critique of books I like, so I'm shamelessly going to consider this an early birthday pressie lol. Obvs it _super_ sucks that you ended up putting good time into a book that you can't stand, but I hope (really hope, because I feel you're 100% correct on your comments predictions for this one...) that people actually get excited to engage in discussion! It's amazing to think that someone with a 180-point-of-view to yours can either totally change your perspective on a book, or even help you appreciate it even more. I loved this book because I have a fascination and love for books that break the rules, or give a big ol' double middle fingers to the rules, and this is possibly the most well-known example. I appreciated how it absolutely takes the piss out of academia by being practically _nothing_ but bias and opinion from mainly Truant (who also super sucks), when of course that's the last thing you should be doing. I love how stupid it is that so much of the book is in footnotes, defeating the purpose of them entirely. Truant gets obsessed with Zampano's text instead of examining himself when I don't think I need to say how many problems he has going on in life. I've always interpreted the point of the book to be that of communication - the Navidsons have a break-down of communication within their family unit that takes shape in the House; Zampanò is basically all communication imo, drenched in writing via proxy as he no longer does it himself; Truant is a total lack of communication, with others but mostly himself. In a way it also fosters communication between the readers. I've no idea at all if Danielewski intended this, but that doesn't matter to me. Reading it that way, it's wild to think that people recommend just skipping the Truant bits, considering that's he's the the harshest example of non-communication in the book. I can't consider this a novel, and only lightly call it a 'book', as I generally consider it more of an art project that happens to take place in the form of writing. It's a pretty weird distinction because books & novels are, of course, art. This was a fantastic critique and I'm very glad that you made this video. I hope you get a chain of good books after this. 💚
Maybe I'm just stupid but this is one of my favorite books of all time. The disrespect for the reader I simply took as a satire of academic writing, with all the obtuse footnotes upon footnotes. On a more personal level, the book took on deeper meaning for me after the death of my own mother and the trauma she left in my life and it's a book that I sometimes still turn to for comfort when I think about those times. Again. Maybe I'm just dumb.
That's the thing about art. It can impact different people in radically different ways. And while there are many different interpretations, I too think the core of the book is his relationship with his mother.
I have never understood the idea that anyone might be stupid for liking or disliking something other people feel the opposite way about. You're allowed to like or dislike anything you want and that doesn't make you - or anyone else - stupid. If you like something that is unethical, that likely makes you unethical, but that's still not stupid. You might like something based on your own spiritual belief that someone else ascribe to. That makes you spiritual, not stupid.
FIRSTLY this is the best review I’ve ever seen for this book. I think I read somewhere that danielewski wrote house of leaves right after his dad died and the book was kind of a way for him to process it. I always thought the pointlessness of the book felt really sad and spiral-y in a way that freaked me out way more than the plot ever did. I love this book more than I can put into words and the anger you expressed in your review resonated a lot. I think that’s also part of what frightened me. Why is everything so pointless? Is Johnny truant a reflection of how danielewski views the reader? Is there something behind me? Also, danielewski’s sister is a music artist and she wrote an album inspired by this book and some songs sampled passages of it. It’s weird but interesting/kinda good. Two family members grieving their father together through art. “Hey Pretty” by, Poe (danielewski’s sister)
I came to read the book via Poe's CD, which I adored and had on heavy rotation in my Sony Walkman CD player. I still love Poe's music, but I literally can't remember a single word of that damn book. I just remember the casual case of breast cancer the author threw at the main female character for shits and giggles on the way out.
I am going to comment because I know it’s good for engagement, and I think Willow deserves a wider audience. Also, I always thought I was the problem with this book. Willow dispelled that notion. 🙏 thank you!
I enjoy seeing your takes. There are too many overt praises of this book on the internet. I enjoyed it when I read it, but admittedly didn't read the appendices. More than anything, I found it to be a really interesting and refreshing experience to read a book differently. The strangely organized footnotes, multiple voices and stories on the same page, and gradually limiting the text on the page until there is only one word per page made me wonder why playing with textual structure is so rarely done. Of course, I know it would be a nightmare for publishers to print all books like House of Leaves and it isn't the most environmentally conscious way to print a book, but it adds another layer of experience to reading that I found really interesting. It reminds me of some experimental classical music techniques like visual notation, 12-tone rows, pitch classes, etc. It's not too dissimilar to Scriabin's Prometheus performances with colored lights, or modular compositions like a lot of works by minimalist composers like Terry Riley and Steve Reich.
I like the book. Its just ergodic literature so its not for everyone. I honestly dont even think its satire personally. I never read it that way. I see it as a deep exploration of the authors relationship with his mom via writing this story about Johnny's mother and growing insanity, by creating an allegorical horror film metaphorically representing that relationship. The whole Navidson record parallels everything you learn about his mother and how that experience would feel to a child who doesnt understand but has to endure his mothers psychosis. I dont think its parody or satire at all honestly. The worst part is Johnny really sucks, which is unfortunate since i think hes a self insert lol. The worst thing ive ever read is 1Q84 by Murakami. That shit equally bores and infuriates me with how 90% of the book is people sitting alone in various rooms introspecting for hours on end. But the text itself framing the cult leader raping tweenage girls as the victim just cowering there terrified of these lascivious succubus 13yo girls fucking made my blood boil.
@WillowTalksBooks People love Murakami so much and I just don't get it. I'm occasionally tempted to try another book of his cause it feels bad discounting him off a single novel, but god damn, it was so fucking bad I don't know if i can bring myself to try another book. Aside from Murakami the worst things I've read are Robin Hobb's Soldier Son trilogy (sadly I hate all her books. I've read 7 and she's incredible at writing, but abysmal at storytelling) and The Sword of Kaigen by ML Wang which I read twice and everyone RAVES about but I think it is downright horrible. Thankfully I started Wang's new book last night and only have 90min left of it right now as it's actually incredible! I'm shocked. Willow have you seen Pugsr's House of Leaves video? It came out a month ago and they put into words the vague impression I had about the mom interpretation. Its worth checking out as it may give you an alternate perspective on what the book was trying to say. Just checked and you can skip to 1:24:00 in the video.
@@BooksRebound the convoluted "justification" for the cult leader ~ really ~ being ~ victimized ~ by lascivious teen girls got a wtf ew from me as well in 1Q84. If for whatever reason you STILL WANT TO read Haruki Murakami books, why, but also then maybe the short story collections instead-? But my Murakami phase was in grade school in the 1990's, so except for 1Q84 I haven't read his stuff since "After the Quake" and "The Elephant Vanishes", and those...were exceedingly "mid" short story collections. Later on I would read short story collections that blew my mind on what a short story can even be, aaaaand then the authors similarly but worse were revealed to have been atrocious people-and their short stories were engaging perspective-altering short stories so I am still going through stages of parasocial grief trying to get that sorted, not that the artistry is in any way more important than justice or recovery for their victims. Murakami's short story collections were a pass-the-time, I like the frog story in "Quake" and the elephant factory story and the fast food heist/stick-up story in "Elephant". Otherwise, mid, as I keep saying, but if you want to at least say you've read more Murakami...
“An aura of incel” absolutely sent me. I definitely got that vibe from forums about this book, and even though I enjoyed the horror aspect of the book, the way women are written in it is just… not great. If it’s trying to satirize misogyny it absolutely fails because it’s so self-serious especially in the Navidson storyline. The way Karen is characterized still makes me angry thinking about it.
I attempted to finish this book three times. Given so many claim it's so brilliant, I wanted to give it a fair shot. I finally decided it's just a pretentious pile of crap and there are better books to give my time. I donated it and haven't regretted it once.
This has given me flashbacks to being 17 years old in the late 90's and my bother and all his friends were raving about this book. I read it but I don't remember it now. I am 41 now. How I wish I did not grow up in that time period. Men were so horrible back then. Men are still horrible but now women, at least some of the time, can point things out. There was no way back then that anyone could say any of the very valid things you just said without getting devoured by a horde. And it makes me upset that you were scared of the horde coming after you. You should not have to feel that way. You should be allowed to say what you said without fear. I wish I could. Growing up around men in the late 90's and early 2000's has damaged me. All there tastes, when I reflect on it, were really, really bad and deeply misogynistic. And the ones who never grew out of it are the scariest because they are in their 40's now but still have the tastes of a 90's guy. They are horrifying. That's the real horror story in all this. I love your videos Willow.
You have expressed my feelings about this book exactly. I like your take on what a work of art should aim to do. This book makes no attempt at that goal, merely tries to impress with gimmicks and puzzles (like his name being spelt by the first letter of the words in the footnotes) which, once solved, add no edifying element whatsoever to the whole. Your rage at the wasted time (by the reader and by the author) is quite understandable.
You captured my exact sentiments! I absolutely despised this book!! Tried explaining to one of my guy friends why I hated it so much and was also met with “you just didn’t get it” 🙄
willow, i’ve been on YT for idk how many years, but this is BY FAR, the funniest video i’ve ever seen, by anyone. i’m in bed at 5:00am crying laughing and shaking the bed like im regan from the exorcist. you are a gem. i REALLY needed this laugh after the disaster that was our US election (i apologize on behalf of my deeply ill country). thanks for the laughter. thanks for the making me feel something other than dread for the first time in 3 days. 💜💜💜
I'm sorry you had a bad time with it, but your reaction was so fun to watch😂💖 I've read it a few years ago and remember really liking the endless house idea! But I don't remember anything else aside from the book being very long and difficult to finish.
I'm glad it exists because it challenges what a book can be. I think art that challenges the traditional definitions of a medium is always worthwhile. At least, for the artist and for the medium. I will probably never read House of Leaves. I love absurdism, I love arthouse, I love avant garde, I love putting in a bit of work to enjoy a piece of art more deeply. This book just feels a little dumb though. It's challenging the status quo without seeming to understand why, other than to be contrary. It's the online troll of books. Maybe that's the point. Maybe it's the self shredding Banksy critiquing art snobbery. Maybe it's Kurt Cobain singing 'He don't know what it means'. Maybe it exists to mock the pseudo-intellectuals who praise it. Maybe I'll pick up a copy from the library to flick through it one day. I might even appreciate it for its visual aesthetic.But at the end of the day, there are just far too many actually interesting books to invest my time in for this to be worthwhile. I dunno, maybe if I ever get around to ready the weirder Joyce stuff and somehow fall in love with that, but I doubt it.
I just finished a reread of House of Leaves 2 days ago! 4th read, still a 5 star, all time favorite book. It scratches a really particular itch for me with what it triggers horror-wise and the academic tangents (myth! religion! pop culture! I ignore the physics stuff 😂) and I also love the open endedness of the whole thing. I interpret it differently each read-through. Love your review anyway ❤ I’ve never read the academic bits as satire, but I can see how this view would make the book less effective and worth the bullshit. I interpret the book almost as (among other things) a cursed media concept, Zampano obsessed with the Record, then Truant becoming obsessed and self-destructive as well… it invites the reader to fall into the same trap.
That's my take on it too. Especially since the editors tell us this is a second printing and that the appendixes involving Johnny and his final chapter were added in this second edition. It implies that in universe there's a broader audience who *want* that. That the audience have themselves become obsessed with it.
I love you for this 🤩 This is one of my most hated books of all time. I understand what it’s trying to do, I just don’t think it’s doing it well. I remember throwing it away from me when I finished it and full-on raging to my partner about how I would never get those hours back. Thank you for your service 😂
Sounds like Ulysses. The Joker is not meant to be 'cool' he's meant to be terrifying, and he is, in the comics and the 90s animated series, if not the lousy films.
I liked House of Leaves when I read it almost 15 years ago, but I also absolutely agree with a lot of your points here! The Navidson Record core really was the most compelling part of it. While I love the concept of nested stories, ergodic literature, and the weird page formatting, all those things are SO HARD to execute well and I don't think HoL pulls it off nearly as well as a lot of people claim it does. It's just that it's the first/only example of that kind of book a lot of people have encountered, so the novelty factor is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
@@Ali94749 Sure! It's a pretty loose definition (you'll find more stuff if you look up "ergodic literature" though), but off the top of my head I would say to check out: - Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov. It's a story about a guy who is really obsessed with a poet, told through the footnotes/endnotes he's written for a really mediocre poem by said poet. - Adventures of Eovaai, Princess of Ijaveo by Eliza Haywood. This one is from the 1730s, so a bit of a caveat there, but it's sort of a fairytale/political allegory with a bunch of nested footnotes and framing devices that add a lot of depth to the story. Maybe one of the harder ones to grasp just because of how old it is, but if you get a scholarly/academic edition it'll at least explain some of the contemporary politics that influenced the book. But it's extremely impressive for how meta it was at such an early point in the development of the novel as a category. - Ship of Theseus (or S.) by Doug Dorst and J.J. Abrams. Hugest caveat with this one just because while I love it as an object and what it does with the format (it's a novel, but with another story told with margin notes being passed between two college students and it includes a bunch of stuff tucked into the book like a napkin with notes on it and postcards and stuff), I thought that the overall plot didn't stick the landing and was really cheesy compared to how dark/mysterious a lot of the rest of the plot is.
@@Ali94749you might want to look up ergodic literature. It's not exactly what you're after, but a lot of ergodic lit also feeds into this. I've heard good things about Ella Minnow Pea, it's not quite the same, but it might scratch the itch. Letters progressively fall out of use in the book as plot elements happen, down eventually to just LMNOP by the end.
I’m a man on the internet and I think House of Leaves was a dud. At least the parts I read. About 125 pages. I was in a reading group and the “smart” readers were cataloguing the spelling mistakes and typos because they thought there was a hidden meaning. I have no idea if that was true because I threw in the towel.
The typos are probably mostly intentional, if nothing else, because this book is a nightmare to print, and as such I expect the publishing house put a fair amount of work into getting it right first time. But that doesn't mean they mean anything.
I love this book. I am often very sensitive of critics about things I love, and I was afraid going in this video. But I really liked having your insight on it, it was much needed and doesn't affect my liking of the book in the end. (even, or beacause, I mostly agree with you ! ) It made me more aware of what it is in it, that works for me so much, despite being so purposefully a pain in the ass to read at some points. Ultimately, all this fluff the author adds, helps suspend the disbelief so well that the result is very immersive and scary, but that can be achieve without hurting the reader, certainly !
This review is fantastic! This review is also really funny when you talk about the man who gives this book to a date and she hates it!! Personally, I use The Wind in the Willows to decide who is likely to be a good friend.
I was so torn on House of Leaves. As a graphic designer I loved the typography and to this day I think it's ground-breaking. But the overwhelming academic waffle absolutely killed any sense of immersion and pulled me out of the narrative for long periods. That said, what little narrative there was in this book seemed underdeveloped, as did the characters. And yet, taking a different perspective, I do wonder if the academic style was intended to present this book as a work of non-fiction, with all the footnotes and references to make it feel legitimate. In which case it could have been incredibly chilling, like War of the Worlds or Ghostwatch. However, I went into the bookl knowing it was a work of fiction and I felt the exact frustration you discuss here. But still, there were brief moments that absolutely engaged me and left me eager to keep reading right until the end. To this day I don't know whether I love it or hate it. One thing I will say is that it's a unique addition to my collection and it makes a nice collector's item if nothing more.
You are making me feel better. I have had the book for 3 years after receiving it as a gift. I have sat down 3 times and never finished it. Reading Johnny's part are terrible. I kept stop caring around the same point. I still want to finish it one day but don't get the impression that I will enjoy it.
Willow this review is so great. I have picked this book up so many times while book shopping. It always looked like a clusterf#$k to read and I just wasn’t willing to put myself through that. Reading is such a pleasure for me and I would like it to remain that way. So refreshing to hear a review that is honest and true.
My own experience with this book was that usually people who mentionned it to me also had The Godfather as "the most brilliant movie ever made". The ones that would be like "I usually only read self-developpement books but this would be my exception" xD Kind of drove me away very quickly
Your review here just makes me want to read it even more. It sounds so intriguing. I need to know why people love it and why people hate it with my own first hand experience with the book.
I appreciate House of Leaves for what it is. And no, I'll never read it again. It is positively migraine inducing to try and follow the crazy formatting. Congrats to Mark Z. Danielewski for creating the one book you could never properly turn into an eBook.
As someone who read the book and found it pretty unique, weird, clever, and enjoyable, I really enjoyed hearing your perspective and review of it. You make a ton of sense, things that I hadn't thought about before, things that I will take into consideration the next time I pick it up. I really appreciated your honest review of House of Leaves, thank you, Willow.
Why does it seem that men equate difficulty/ complexity/ footnotes with excellence? I used to be this way and still feel the pull of books that are difficult and obscure for the sake of being difficult and obscure, but I have resisted House of Leaves and your review will help me continue to do so.
For me, I think that came from feeling like all of my worth was in achievement/grit/etc. I was definitely a lonely, sad man who wanted to feel clever when I read it. Obviously no one goes into that thinking that way consciously, but at the subconscious, there are definitely a lot of people feeling like, "if I read and understand this my dad will be impressed with me."
(sorry for my language, i'm French 😅) for me, this book is about depression, addiction and loss. It talk to me about sadness, hole in your heart and soul, grieving. It was also very terrifing for me. (And i'm a 45 yo woman...but ADAH. Er... Adha? Not neurotypical. So my brain love puzzle and rants about stuff 😊).
I liked House of Leaves. But, I do think it's way more work than what the reader gets out of it. It's a book I never recommend, but I do encourage people to try it when they are already interested. But, it is to this day, still the only horror novel that has actually made me scared. I was on the train reading it, and I was genuinely afraid in broad daylight and in a safe public place. So I will give the book its flowers for doing that to me.
@@eha440 suddenly changing my unaffiliated novel-writing project next month to a digital-gothic horror story about a cursed tome that gets very popular on a short-form video platform
I loved it. But *completely* understand why people would not, or would even hate it. At the very beginning, it says, "this book is not for you, " and that's abundantly clear. I also think most people who claim to love it don't understand it. Especially the people who say they don't like the Johnny Truant stuff and even say you can just skip those parts. Sure, many of the footnotes are clearly NOT meant to be read word for word. And it does have a toxic fandom. Read it earlier this month. Took my time with it. IMO, the most important part are the letters from Johnny's mother. I think it totally fails as satire. And still loved it. I see the Zampano pseudo-academia as an elaborate maze someone has created to trap something. To avoid confronting the pain at their core. It's like a clever person who retreats into complicated explanations to avoid emotion. But I won't defend it further. Because you are totally right that it's not as clever as most people give it credit for. And it doesn't respect the reader. It's not a work of genius. But it broke my heart.
OMG I just saw this and cannot WAIT until tonight when I'll have time to watch it. I hated this book and can't understand why it gets so much adulation. ETA: okay, I'm back 12 hours later and YES to everything you said. The thing is, I am a huge sucker for clever formatting in novels. I love "found footage", book-within-a-book, footnotes, things scribbled in the margins, all that shiz. But it's so self-indulgently done here. Like you said, it buries the story rather than enhances it, and if that's the "point" of the story, it's a stupid point.
Me watching this when I'm about to give it a 2nd shot in November. Thank you for bringing up how men love to say then women "don't get it" or aren't intelligent enough to comprehend something just because they don't like whatever said man likes. I'm not sure I will make it through this book....and I certainly won't force it. I love your top btw.
So I remember enjoying the parts about the house specifically when I read this. I just kinda skimmed over everything else if I'm being honest. But Piranesi exists now though and it's a *much* more enjoyable "MC-Escher-freaky-wtf-house" novel (at least for me). Tbh this book feels much like the experience of interacting with cis men on dating apps. Seems like it could be fun on the surface, but mostly frustrating and tedious with very little payoff in the end.
This is exactly the kind of book that my boyfriend from high school would base his whole personality on... Whenever i got a better grade than him he would stop talking to me because it hurt his ego
I thought the point of Johnny Truant's story is that it's Danielewski's spin on Nabokov's Pale Fire - asking the audience to consider how a poetic/academic work can be warped in the hands of the wrong custodian. Legacy, blah blah blah. The reason this doesn't feel like a total retread for me is that there's the editor in HOL who then puts their (admittedly limited) spin on Johnny's, balancing his warped perspective but solidifying that Johnny belongs in the conversation. Whatever a writer puts out can be mutated through an audience's lens, potentially creating a new work through their interaction (possibly a frustrating, wooden one?).
I've 3 copies of this book...just bought the hardback....still haven't read it...🤣🤣🤣 love your videos....was so excited to see you were talking about this book ❤
I would genuinely recommend just skipping Johnny's bits if he's too much for you. It's still a fun book with an interesting take on the physicality of being a book even ignoring Jonny
Wow! Wow! Wow! An excellent review! You were very brave in taking on this book and finishing it. You are to be applauded, and you summarized the narrative so clearly and spontaneously! I understand your perspective completely and agree with it -- even though I avoided reading the novel. Intellectual pretensions never interest me, and the book smelled badly of it, but your review and estimate of the book are so clear in this video. Your voice and message really gripped me. Thanks so much for your efforts here!
Hahahah! I have never read it and there are too many other pieces to consume. My Delight is This Post! You are so funny and lovely. ❤😂❤ I love books and I love the way you present.🤘♥️🤩
So interesting, great review! I read this book when I was a teenage girl in my first year of college, lent to me by another teenage girl. We both liked it a lot. I had no idea there was a whole online discourse about it until recently. Wonder how I’d feel about it now in my mid twenties. I bought a physical copy secondhand a while back because I like it as an art object, but when I tried to reread it I gave up a few chapters in. Not sure how much of that is me being out of practice reading books and wanting something lighter, but some of it is just that the truant and Zampano parts were… not super engaging
I always preferred Danielewski's sister's album that was inspired by House of Leaves ("Haunted" by Poe), but then again, I only really know of the album because of the end credits of "Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2", which is one of my favourite movies...so there's no accounting for taste. lol.
I have a feeling the Venn diagram of people who say "You have to read the foot notes or you won't get it" and people who say "That shirt you're wearing... name three songs!" is a circle. Also: nice glasses chain! Unfortunately I can't wear them as they would drive me nuts.
Most of the verbose footnotes and lists are only there to act as a distraction, in my opinion .... It's a labyrinth that wants you to get lost, just like the main character is lost. But I could be totally wrong. It's been over 20 years since I've read it, but I remember not reading a lot of the lists and footnotes. For me, The Whalestone(?) Letters were by far the scariest and most interesting part of the book, to me. (Especially when you know about Mark and his sisters (the singer Poe) upbringing. I started it again last night, to see whether or not I still enjoy it after all these years. ✌🏻🙏🏻
I found it fun as a Rosetta stone for modern horror. But I more admired the idea of it than actually connected with it. Basic af, but I wish the kids had gotten lost in the house. The idea of that makes my blood run cold. It's a cliche, but sometimes cliches exist for a reason. Also, darn it, it's NAY-vidson, not NAV-idson! That's why he's nicknamed Navy! Such a cleverly subtle bit of exposition and nobody seems to pick up on it. Not a slam against you - the biggest superfans in the world seem to miss it too.
I love ergodic literature and I respect your opinion, and agree with points! I also read The Silmarillion for fun, every year. Although not categorized as ergodic, first-timers will have to cross reference and search for A LOT. This is a book where you get credit for trying to attempt it. My favorite chapter? ...the map description.
I liked it, but also agree with what you're saying. When i say i like it, its the Navidson Record i enjoyed. That's what sticks with me. I love liminal horror. Nothing unsettles me more. But the rest of it I could have done without.
Ok this was such an interesting concept for the format but my god was this a chaotic ass book!! I mean I’m sure reading it as a neurotypical is hard enough but my ADHD ass could not get a grip on this book 😂
I appreciated the concept of a layered story, the weird house, and creative use of typesetting. Those ideas are fun to talk about and maybe that's part of why the book got popular on social media at some point. It's easy to talk up the book based on those ideas. But in the end, I just didn't enjoy reading the book. I found it disappointing, so it is nice to see a review that aligns with my experience.
It's so refreshing to hear that someone doesn't like this book. I have never read it and I don't intend to. All I have to do is see it on a shelf somewhere and my brain shuts down. Almost every tuber I have seen says that they love this book. I have seen only a minute of your review and I love the review. Thank you for posting this.
Girl, THANK YOU! I think I gave it a higher rating than I wanted to just because it was so hyped and I didn't know how to reconcile the fact that it sucked so hard. And I gave it 2 stars. I felt like the author pulled off a mashup of David Foster Wallace and the annoying Stuart character from Mad TV who is always saying "Look what I can do!" and it was not good. He really said, "I can make these readers read a bunch of footnotes and they'll hold the book up to a mirror to do it," but there's literally no point to it.
I read it this summer… loved it. It is more than a novel… the way it is written is the experience. It is confusing at first, but I didn’t rush going through each part, and slowly the story came together. The footnotes are endless, but a different layer of the story is being told in them. It won’t be for everyone… but for those willing to suspend how a story is told and just go with it, it can be an interesting experience.
Well-said, Willow! I only made it through about five pages of this atrocity before DNFing it out of frustration and rage. It’s disrespectful to the reader, indeed! I subscribe to reader response theory, and as such believe that the reader is equal to the author in creating the experience of reading a book. We readers deserve better than this pretentious crap.
No, no, no. Add it to the TBR pile. Then leave it there. Once you have a strange dream about walking down endless gray hallways, the book will have done its work, and you can remove it from your TBR.
I enjoy seeing more videos like this come out. The core problem I have with this book is that it's a 736 page nothingburger. If you've ever had a conversation with a stranger who really wants to tell you a story and wants to convince you the story is real but tells you a big, long winded lie. Below all of its narratives and complexity it doesn't actually have a real story to tell you, even in its own universe it's just a story told by someone trying to get you to like the story you're being told. The only thing to really gain from House of Leaves is the entertainment factor for people who enjoy the writing. If you don't like how the story is told, not entertained by the narrative, then this book probably doesn't have anything of substance for you. I didn't enjoy the writing and also didn't enjoy the book.
I haven’t read HoL but it sounds VERY much like “Pale Fire” by Vladimir Nabokov which I read years ago in college. As I recall, Pale Fire is a gorgeous epic poem interspersed with long rambling footnotes written by the poet’s neighbor, who rants about his problems and resentments and claims to “interpret” the poem but clearly doesn’t understand it at all. So PF also is satirizing academic criticism as well as exploring how the reader interacts with and processes art. I’m sure PF predates HoL, maybe an inspiration? PF invented this type of formal innovation, is considered a classic of great literature and I personally loved it- it’s both beautiful and very funny. It manages to do the thing that you said HoL couldn’t do, successfully combining a meaningful core (the poem) with a biting satire (the footnotes). You should read Pale Fire if you haven’t already, I think it’s a much better example of this kind of experimental novel.
I did read it years ago, and find it terribly boring. As if the author was showing how good he was...while he wasn't. I was happy to have taken it in the local library, so I wasted no money 😅
Sad to hear you didn't enjoy it. Your gripes are completely legit! I guess I have (or had - it has been some years) a higher tolerance for the BS Danielewski pulls; I was really fascinated by the ergodic aspect of the book, but I understand why you found it infuriating. My reading was also colored by all the pessimistic end existential philosophy I was reading at the time. So I read how the characters reacted differently to the cosmic horror of the house, as examples of the coping mechanisms Zapffe and Camus describes. That was totally me bringing something to the book, which gave it value for me, but it nonetheless made me like it.
“An artist has the right to do whatever they want.” Totally agree. But an artist can’t be surprised when people don’t want to buy what they are selling if they put something out there that few people want to consume.
"I saw the face of God." 😆Thank you, Willow. I bought a copy of this years ago, gave it a shot, and decided that, yes, indeed, it'd be a waste of time. I just feel validated. Lol. The hype for this book is crazy.
Okay I had to subscribe within the first minute of this lmao I've never encountered a book that felt so smug and self-satisfied; not the author, but the book itself Okay time to watch the rest of the video
Taken in the round as a work of art the book, especially the presentation, is interesting. The actual story itself left me rather cold but then I don't find most horror to be that interesting so this may partially be a me problem rather than a story issue.
I think this book works best when paired with his sister’s (the artist called Poe’s) album, Haunted. Both works were made following their estranged father’s death. He was a documentarian, and his work was his real love, even over his family, and when examined through that lens the works come across (to me) as different expressions of guilt over the same person. I know you’re done with the whole thing, but I’d recommend giving Haunted a listen at least, since I think it’s a good work in its own right.
My brother adores this book. His girlfriend likes it, too. For Christmas a few years ago, he got each of us (my dad, me, my wife, my sister) a copy of it. My sister hasn't tried reading it, my wife put her copy in the "to the used bookstore" bag, because we only needed one copy for the house, then didn't touch it, my dad started reading and noped out before the 100 page mark, and I took an entire July to read it cover to cover. It was difficult to read because it was academic satire, and I did read every single footnote as it came up, and then the notes at the end, and the photos and appendices after the story itself. I literally set a timer for an hour a day to read, because I couldn't focus on it for more than about an hour at a time. But because it is my brother's favorite book, and we have similar tastes in many things, I wanted to get through it. The story about the house is enjoyable, and some of the footnotes in that section. I kind of liked the playing with typeface (labyrinth being crossed out every time it's typed, spiraling the actual book, etc.), except when it got to be too much, like crossing out whole sections about the labyrinth. There's something good inside, like you said, but it takes digging to get to. And then there's the discussion afterward. First question my brother asked me was "did you read the end notes as they were referenced, or wait until the end, because that determines how you understand certain things and I need to know to talk about it with you?". Once we could talk actual story/plot/character, and not just about the neat tricks (like how the poems were all Danielewsky's actual poetry he scribbled on napkins in bars in Europe), it was fun to discuss. But, while I did like the story inside it, it didn't grab me like it did him. He rereads it every year or two as a comfort read. Which, cool, if that's his thing, that's his thing. I read problematic trashy fantasy romance as a comfort read (Anne Bishop). I don't think Danielewsky's the universe's gift to literature. I didn't love it, I didn't hate it. Overall, it's "meh" for me. But I like the enthusiasm my brother has for it, and let him talk about it to me, since he knows I've read it. Would I reread it? Nope. Not unless someone did an edit and just had the story about the house and got rid of all the other stuff. Then maybe, because the labyrinth especially was good stuff (I'm a Classics major, so that grabbed me right away), and the ending of that story was bittersweet. Otherwise, I can say I've read it, yay.
Hi Willow, I will not lie... I love "House of Leaves" but I really respect your opinion and enjoyed listening to you you are entertaining whatever you say
Never felt so vindicated by a book review - THANK YOU. I was scared I was the only House of Leaves hater
Man Carrying Thing validation! ✨
I think I shall avoid it.
@jimsbooksreadingandstuff - why are you here if you haven't read it, let alone refusing something you don't know based on two people's opinion? Seriously, great reasoning, the vast majority love it, but you'll be retarding yourself based on two people's opinion.
(And Man Carrying Thing - when are you gonna talk about more books?)
Wow! Same!
I read it at the start of the year. It was recommended everywhere, but I'm not from a english speaking country, so if I wanted a paper copy of the book I had to buy one outside, which would be SO expensive!
I ended up... Getting one through illicit means (cofcofpirateditcofcof) and took me like THREE MONTHS to read and... I don't think the paper copy was worth it at all. I finished it and I ranted about it to my partner about how bad it was, hahahah! After that, I read some Terry Pratchett for a change.
Pratchett is good.
omigod now we have to cancel mancarryingthing. 😢😢😢😢
Isn’t it fascinating how something can hit people so differently? I loved this book. But I personally didn’t interpret it as satire. I didn’t feel it disrespected me as a reader at all, I actually felt like the whole book was about MY experience inside the book. Like it was leading me on a bizarre and disorienting journey, as if I was the one going through the labyrinth. And that experience felt so unique. I don’t think it’s a matter of anyone being smart or not, no one’s opinion is more valid than anyone else’s. I think I just had a different experience. For whatever reason, it just hit me differently. 🤷🏼♀️
It's very brave of you to accurately compare Truant to a Murakami protagonist because now you'll have the House of Leaves fans and Murakami fans coming for you
Bring it on 😈
Going to be honest. Most of the HoL fans I know are actually pretty chill people and I mean the people who have read the book and love to analyse it. They're not going to be "coming for you". I mean they might give some commentary on what they think of it but if you hang out in the subreddit, a lot of us are just interested in the journey of it and want to go on the journey of analysis
For me, the sense of pain and tragedy was pretty obvious from the moment I read it. It's haunting and beautiful. But whatever your opinion is, that's cool too.
🤣🤣🤣
Madame, your rage is glorious to behold 🙌
I love House of Leaves. However, it amazes me that people can’t just acknowledge criticisms of something they like. I agree with so much you say about the book, and that’s fine because some things click for some people and others don’t. Someone disliking something I like doesn’t take away from what it means for me. In a hilarious way, the up themselves intellectuals who wheel out this book as a means of putting themselves above others have failed to understand the most basic aspect of subjectivity, and I get the impression that the book is laughing at them as much as we are.
Great stuff, Willow. Literature needs critique like air. And this type of service you provide tends to be very rare. Thank you, it was a treat listening to you. Wish more would analyse books, rather than just arbitrarily rave about it, getting us all chocked up on hypes.
I really appreciate this, thank you!
I hear your points. As a graphic designer i couldn't help but appreciate the efforts put behind the printing of the book, the multi-directional copy, copy going past the edge of the paper, different kind of inks, etc. All that alone kept me going. The story itself wasn't that memorable.
That's the kind of thing that makes me recommend house of leaves to everyone and just tell people to skip Johnny's bits. I love that it's obsessed with being a book, like the physicality of being a book. It makes it inherently interesting.
It's OK, babe! Don't listen to the boys. I'm a middle-aged mum, and it saved my sanity-but I read it at the right time in my life. My brain needed a huge puzzle to work on, to drown myself in. I can see its appeal to lost young men and English majors.
I gasp when people show the book to me and caution them. It can steal your sanity. It may not be for you. And that... is... OK.
I love this 💜
Oh gosh, and when I say "babe," I mean that in the most motherly way. Not in a shotty college boy way! Joined your patron because the video delighted me so much.
Haha don’t worry, I totally got it. And thank you!!
As someone once said: "House of Leaves is Infinite Jest for spooky people."
Kinda sums it up. I liked it myself....don't shoot me. 😧
Probably, i mean its a quality to get love or frustration reactiuons, i guess, and infinite jest isnt bad.
i'm crying about how you literally explained the exact way a man introduced this book to me when i was in college hahahaha. i read like 70% of it and didn't hate it, mostly just because it scratched a specific OCD/ADHD hyperfixation itch in my brain. i put it down because i got busy and just never got around to returning to it, but i agree people do talk about it in an insufferable way.
LOL predictable men are predictable
I mentioned on the short that I love this book and was so looking forward to this! I think I've also mentioned before that one of my favourite things is well-done critique of books I like, so I'm shamelessly going to consider this an early birthday pressie lol.
Obvs it _super_ sucks that you ended up putting good time into a book that you can't stand, but I hope (really hope, because I feel you're 100% correct on your comments predictions for this one...) that people actually get excited to engage in discussion! It's amazing to think that someone with a 180-point-of-view to yours can either totally change your perspective on a book, or even help you appreciate it even more.
I loved this book because I have a fascination and love for books that break the rules, or give a big ol' double middle fingers to the rules, and this is possibly the most well-known example. I appreciated how it absolutely takes the piss out of academia by being practically _nothing_ but bias and opinion from mainly Truant (who also super sucks), when of course that's the last thing you should be doing. I love how stupid it is that so much of the book is in footnotes, defeating the purpose of them entirely. Truant gets obsessed with Zampano's text instead of examining himself when I don't think I need to say how many problems he has going on in life. I've always interpreted the point of the book to be that of communication - the Navidsons have a break-down of communication within their family unit that takes shape in the House; Zampanò is basically all communication imo, drenched in writing via proxy as he no longer does it himself; Truant is a total lack of communication, with others but mostly himself. In a way it also fosters communication between the readers. I've no idea at all if Danielewski intended this, but that doesn't matter to me. Reading it that way, it's wild to think that people recommend just skipping the Truant bits, considering that's he's the the harshest example of non-communication in the book.
I can't consider this a novel, and only lightly call it a 'book', as I generally consider it more of an art project that happens to take place in the form of writing. It's a pretty weird distinction because books & novels are, of course, art.
This was a fantastic critique and I'm very glad that you made this video. I hope you get a chain of good books after this. 💚
14:50 Johnny Truant and the Footnotes is a solid band name haha
Johnny Truant actually was a bad lol. I listened to them back in the day
There's also two songs from The Fall of Troy based on the book - "The Hol[]y Tape" and "You got a death wish, Johnny Truant?"
Maybe I'm just stupid but this is one of my favorite books of all time.
The disrespect for the reader I simply took as a satire of academic writing, with all the obtuse footnotes upon footnotes.
On a more personal level, the book took on deeper meaning for me after the death of my own mother and the trauma she left in my life and it's a book that I sometimes still turn to for comfort when I think about those times.
Again. Maybe I'm just dumb.
If it was meaningful to you, nothing can take that away. You're not dumb, you just vibed with it in a way others didn't.
You are not dumb. It’s a great book and I agree, expresses trauma in a unique way.
Not at all. This is one of my favorite books of all time. To each their own :)
That's the thing about art. It can impact different people in radically different ways.
And while there are many different interpretations, I too think the core of the book is his relationship with his mother.
I have never understood the idea that anyone might be stupid for liking or disliking something other people feel the opposite way about. You're allowed to like or dislike anything you want and that doesn't make you - or anyone else - stupid. If you like something that is unethical, that likely makes you unethical, but that's still not stupid. You might like something based on your own spiritual belief that someone else ascribe to. That makes you spiritual, not stupid.
FIRSTLY this is the best review I’ve ever seen for this book. I think I read somewhere that danielewski wrote house of leaves right after his dad died and the book was kind of a way for him to process it. I always thought the pointlessness of the book felt really sad and spiral-y in a way that freaked me out way more than the plot ever did. I love this book more than I can put into words and the anger you expressed in your review resonated a lot. I think that’s also part of what frightened me. Why is everything so pointless? Is Johnny truant a reflection of how danielewski views the reader? Is there something behind me?
Also, danielewski’s sister is a music artist and she wrote an album inspired by this book and some songs sampled passages of it. It’s weird but interesting/kinda good. Two family members grieving their father together through art. “Hey Pretty” by, Poe (danielewski’s sister)
That’s super interesting!!
@@WillowTalksBooksthis book means so much to me, thank you for taking the time to review it!
I came to read the book via Poe's CD, which I adored and had on heavy rotation in my Sony Walkman CD player. I still love Poe's music, but I literally can't remember a single word of that damn book. I just remember the casual case of breast cancer the author threw at the main female character for shits and giggles on the way out.
The album is "Haunted" by Poe. The entire work is on RUclips on Poe's channel and it's haunting.👻😁
Thoroughly enjoyed your video, and thank you for sparing me any thought of reading this book.
I am going to comment because I know it’s good for engagement, and I think Willow deserves a wider audience. Also, I always thought I was the problem with this book. Willow dispelled that notion. 🙏 thank you!
I enjoy seeing your takes. There are too many overt praises of this book on the internet. I enjoyed it when I read it, but admittedly didn't read the appendices. More than anything, I found it to be a really interesting and refreshing experience to read a book differently. The strangely organized footnotes, multiple voices and stories on the same page, and gradually limiting the text on the page until there is only one word per page made me wonder why playing with textual structure is so rarely done. Of course, I know it would be a nightmare for publishers to print all books like House of Leaves and it isn't the most environmentally conscious way to print a book, but it adds another layer of experience to reading that I found really interesting. It reminds me of some experimental classical music techniques like visual notation, 12-tone rows, pitch classes, etc. It's not too dissimilar to Scriabin's Prometheus performances with colored lights, or modular compositions like a lot of works by minimalist composers like Terry Riley and Steve Reich.
I like the book. Its just ergodic literature so its not for everyone. I honestly dont even think its satire personally. I never read it that way. I see it as a deep exploration of the authors relationship with his mom via writing this story about Johnny's mother and growing insanity, by creating an allegorical horror film metaphorically representing that relationship. The whole Navidson record parallels everything you learn about his mother and how that experience would feel to a child who doesnt understand but has to endure his mothers psychosis. I dont think its parody or satire at all honestly.
The worst part is Johnny really sucks, which is unfortunate since i think hes a self insert lol.
The worst thing ive ever read is 1Q84 by Murakami. That shit equally bores and infuriates me with how 90% of the book is people sitting alone in various rooms introspecting for hours on end.
But the text itself framing the cult leader raping tweenage girls as the victim just cowering there terrified of these lascivious succubus 13yo girls fucking made my blood boil.
1Q84 is absolutely one of the most insulting and offensive novels ever written. I couldn’t agree more
@WillowTalksBooks
People love Murakami so much and I just don't get it. I'm occasionally tempted to try another book of his cause it feels bad discounting him off a single novel, but god damn, it was so fucking bad I don't know if i can bring myself to try another book.
Aside from Murakami the worst things I've read are Robin Hobb's Soldier Son trilogy (sadly I hate all her books. I've read 7 and she's incredible at writing, but abysmal at storytelling) and The Sword of Kaigen by ML Wang which I read twice and everyone RAVES about but I think it is downright horrible. Thankfully I started Wang's new book last night and only have 90min left of it right now as it's actually incredible! I'm shocked.
Willow have you seen Pugsr's House of Leaves video? It came out a month ago and they put into words the vague impression I had about the mom interpretation. Its worth checking out as it may give you an alternate perspective on what the book was trying to say. Just checked and you can skip to 1:24:00 in the video.
@@BooksRebound the convoluted "justification" for the cult leader ~ really ~ being ~ victimized ~ by lascivious teen girls got a wtf ew from me as well in 1Q84. If for whatever reason you STILL WANT TO read Haruki Murakami books, why, but also then maybe the short story collections instead-?
But my Murakami phase was in grade school in the 1990's, so except for 1Q84 I haven't read his stuff since "After the Quake" and "The Elephant Vanishes", and those...were exceedingly "mid" short story collections. Later on I would read short story collections that blew my mind on what a short story can even be, aaaaand then the authors similarly but worse were revealed to have been atrocious people-and their short stories were engaging perspective-altering short stories so I am still going through stages of parasocial grief trying to get that sorted, not that the artistry is in any way more important than justice or recovery for their victims.
Murakami's short story collections were a pass-the-time, I like the frog story in "Quake" and the elephant factory story and the fast food heist/stick-up story in "Elephant". Otherwise, mid, as I keep saying, but if you want to at least say you've read more Murakami...
“An aura of incel” absolutely sent me. I definitely got that vibe from forums about this book, and even though I enjoyed the horror aspect of the book, the way women are written in it is just… not great. If it’s trying to satirize misogyny it absolutely fails because it’s so self-serious especially in the Navidson storyline. The way Karen is characterized still makes me angry thinking about it.
I attempted to finish this book three times. Given so many claim it's so brilliant, I wanted to give it a fair shot. I finally decided it's just a pretentious pile of crap and there are better books to give my time. I donated it and haven't regretted it once.
This has given me flashbacks to being 17 years old in the late 90's and my bother and all his friends were raving about this book. I read it but I don't remember it now. I am 41 now. How I wish I did not grow up in that time period. Men were so horrible back then. Men are still horrible but now women, at least some of the time, can point things out. There was no way back then that anyone could say any of the very valid things you just said without getting devoured by a horde. And it makes me upset that you were scared of the horde coming after you. You should not have to feel that way. You should be allowed to say what you said without fear. I wish I could. Growing up around men in the late 90's and early 2000's has damaged me. All there tastes, when I reflect on it, were really, really bad and deeply misogynistic. And the ones who never grew out of it are the scariest because they are in their 40's now but still have the tastes of a 90's guy. They are horrifying. That's the real horror story in all this. I love your videos Willow.
You have expressed my feelings about this book exactly. I like your take on what a work of art should aim to do. This book makes no attempt at that goal, merely tries to impress with gimmicks and puzzles (like his name being spelt by the first letter of the words in the footnotes) which, once solved, add no edifying element whatsoever to the whole. Your rage at the wasted time (by the reader and by the author) is quite understandable.
You captured my exact sentiments! I absolutely despised this book!! Tried explaining to one of my guy friends why I hated it so much and was also met with “you just didn’t get it” 🙄
Uggggghhhhhh 🙄
willow, i’ve been on YT for idk how many years, but this is BY FAR, the funniest video i’ve ever seen, by anyone. i’m in bed at 5:00am crying laughing and shaking the bed like im regan from the exorcist.
you are a gem. i REALLY needed this laugh after the disaster that was our US election (i apologize on behalf of my deeply ill country).
thanks for the laughter. thanks for the making me feel something other than dread for the first time in 3 days.
💜💜💜
I’m sorry, I’m grateful, and I’m flattered. Thank you so much! 💜💜💜
I'm sorry you had a bad time with it, but your reaction was so fun to watch😂💖
I've read it a few years ago and remember really liking the endless house idea! But I don't remember anything else aside from the book being very long and difficult to finish.
I'm glad it exists because it challenges what a book can be. I think art that challenges the traditional definitions of a medium is always worthwhile. At least, for the artist and for the medium.
I will probably never read House of Leaves. I love absurdism, I love arthouse, I love avant garde, I love putting in a bit of work to enjoy a piece of art more deeply. This book just feels a little dumb though. It's challenging the status quo without seeming to understand why, other than to be contrary. It's the online troll of books.
Maybe that's the point. Maybe it's the self shredding Banksy critiquing art snobbery. Maybe it's Kurt Cobain singing 'He don't know what it means'. Maybe it exists to mock the pseudo-intellectuals who praise it.
Maybe I'll pick up a copy from the library to flick through it one day. I might even appreciate it for its visual aesthetic.But at the end of the day, there are just far too many actually interesting books to invest my time in for this to be worthwhile. I dunno, maybe if I ever get around to ready the weirder Joyce stuff and somehow fall in love with that, but I doubt it.
I just finished a reread of House of Leaves 2 days ago! 4th read, still a 5 star, all time favorite book. It scratches a really particular itch for me with what it triggers horror-wise and the academic tangents (myth! religion! pop culture! I ignore the physics stuff 😂) and I also love the open endedness of the whole thing. I interpret it differently each read-through.
Love your review anyway ❤ I’ve never read the academic bits as satire, but I can see how this view would make the book less effective and worth the bullshit. I interpret the book almost as (among other things) a cursed media concept, Zampano obsessed with the Record, then Truant becoming obsessed and self-destructive as well… it invites the reader to fall into the same trap.
That's my take on it too. Especially since the editors tell us this is a second printing and that the appendixes involving Johnny and his final chapter were added in this second edition. It implies that in universe there's a broader audience who *want* that. That the audience have themselves become obsessed with it.
I love you for this 🤩 This is one of my most hated books of all time. I understand what it’s trying to do, I just don’t think it’s doing it well. I remember throwing it away from me when I finished it and full-on raging to my partner about how I would never get those hours back. Thank you for your service 😂
Sounds like Ulysses. The Joker is not meant to be 'cool' he's meant to be terrifying, and he is, in the comics and the 90s animated series, if not the lousy films.
I liked House of Leaves when I read it almost 15 years ago, but I also absolutely agree with a lot of your points here! The Navidson Record core really was the most compelling part of it. While I love the concept of nested stories, ergodic literature, and the weird page formatting, all those things are SO HARD to execute well and I don't think HoL pulls it off nearly as well as a lot of people claim it does. It's just that it's the first/only example of that kind of book a lot of people have encountered, so the novelty factor is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
Do you have other examples of this sort of literature? Interested in trying them if you do.
@@Ali94749 Sure! It's a pretty loose definition (you'll find more stuff if you look up "ergodic literature" though), but off the top of my head I would say to check out:
- Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov. It's a story about a guy who is really obsessed with a poet, told through the footnotes/endnotes he's written for a really mediocre poem by said poet.
- Adventures of Eovaai, Princess of Ijaveo by Eliza Haywood. This one is from the 1730s, so a bit of a caveat there, but it's sort of a fairytale/political allegory with a bunch of nested footnotes and framing devices that add a lot of depth to the story. Maybe one of the harder ones to grasp just because of how old it is, but if you get a scholarly/academic edition it'll at least explain some of the contemporary politics that influenced the book. But it's extremely impressive for how meta it was at such an early point in the development of the novel as a category.
- Ship of Theseus (or S.) by Doug Dorst and J.J. Abrams. Hugest caveat with this one just because while I love it as an object and what it does with the format (it's a novel, but with another story told with margin notes being passed between two college students and it includes a bunch of stuff tucked into the book like a napkin with notes on it and postcards and stuff), I thought that the overall plot didn't stick the landing and was really cheesy compared to how dark/mysterious a lot of the rest of the plot is.
@@Ali94749you might want to look up ergodic literature. It's not exactly what you're after, but a lot of ergodic lit also feeds into this.
I've heard good things about Ella Minnow Pea, it's not quite the same, but it might scratch the itch. Letters progressively fall out of use in the book as plot elements happen, down eventually to just LMNOP by the end.
thank you for the warning. this book is not cheap in my country. i was curious about it and you just saved me a bunch of time and money.
I’m a man on the internet and I think House of Leaves was a dud. At least the parts I read. About 125 pages. I was in a reading group and the “smart” readers were cataloguing the spelling mistakes and typos because they thought there was a hidden meaning. I have no idea if that was true because I threw in the towel.
There are tons of typos! And I do wonder if it’s intentional because the books authors are characters. But 🤷🏻♀️ still feels sloppy
The typos are probably mostly intentional, if nothing else, because this book is a nightmare to print, and as such I expect the publishing house put a fair amount of work into getting it right first time.
But that doesn't mean they mean anything.
I love this book. I am often very sensitive of critics about things I love, and I was afraid going in this video.
But I really liked having your insight on it, it was much needed and doesn't affect my liking of the book in the end. (even, or beacause, I mostly agree with you ! ) It made me more aware of what it is in it, that works for me so much, despite being so purposefully a pain in the ass to read at some points.
Ultimately, all this fluff the author adds, helps suspend the disbelief so well that the result is very immersive and scary, but that can be achieve without hurting the reader, certainly !
This review is fantastic! This review is also really funny when you talk about the man who gives this book to a date and she hates it!! Personally, I use The Wind in the Willows to decide who is likely to be a good friend.
I was so torn on House of Leaves. As a graphic designer I loved the typography and to this day I think it's ground-breaking. But the overwhelming academic waffle absolutely killed any sense of immersion and pulled me out of the narrative for long periods. That said, what little narrative there was in this book seemed underdeveloped, as did the characters.
And yet, taking a different perspective, I do wonder if the academic style was intended to present this book as a work of non-fiction, with all the footnotes and references to make it feel legitimate. In which case it could have been incredibly chilling, like War of the Worlds or Ghostwatch. However, I went into the bookl knowing it was a work of fiction and I felt the exact frustration you discuss here.
But still, there were brief moments that absolutely engaged me and left me eager to keep reading right until the end.
To this day I don't know whether I love it or hate it. One thing I will say is that it's a unique addition to my collection and it makes a nice collector's item if nothing more.
You are making me feel better. I have had the book for 3 years after receiving it as a gift. I have sat down 3 times and never finished it. Reading Johnny's part are terrible. I kept stop caring around the same point. I still want to finish it one day but don't get the impression that I will enjoy it.
Willow this review is so great. I have picked this book up so many times while book shopping. It always looked like a clusterf#$k to read and I just wasn’t willing to put myself through that. Reading is such a pleasure for me and I would like it to remain that way. So refreshing to hear a review that is honest and true.
My own experience with this book was that usually people who mentionned it to me also had The Godfather as "the most brilliant movie ever made".
The ones that would be like "I usually only read self-developpement books but this would be my exception" xD
Kind of drove me away very quickly
I really enjoy the way you critique books. ❤
Your review here just makes me want to read it even more. It sounds so intriguing. I need to know why people love it and why people hate it with my own first hand experience with the book.
I appreciate House of Leaves for what it is. And no, I'll never read it again. It is positively migraine inducing to try and follow the crazy formatting. Congrats to Mark Z. Danielewski for creating the one book you could never properly turn into an eBook.
I’m reading Ursula La Guin’s Dragonfly. It’s about this kind of man. “Any weakening of her strength, her wholeness, was a gain for him.”
That's why I never show any weakness in front of a man. It enrages them. I love it.
Your review style is unmatched, there truly is no one like you on book tube ❤
I love your angry reviews the best 😂 That art being a reflection of what we’re feeling quote got me shooketh!
As someone who read the book and found it pretty unique, weird, clever, and enjoyable, I really enjoyed hearing your perspective and review of it. You make a ton of sense, things that I hadn't thought about before, things that I will take into consideration the next time I pick it up. I really appreciated your honest review of House of Leaves, thank you, Willow.
Why does it seem that men equate difficulty/ complexity/ footnotes with excellence? I used to be this way and still feel the pull of books that are difficult and obscure for the sake of being difficult and obscure, but I have resisted House of Leaves and your review will help me continue to do so.
For me, I think that came from feeling like all of my worth was in achievement/grit/etc. I was definitely a lonely, sad man who wanted to feel clever when I read it. Obviously no one goes into that thinking that way consciously, but at the subconscious, there are definitely a lot of people feeling like, "if I read and understand this my dad will be impressed with me."
@ That hits very close to the mark for me. Thanks for the great answer.
Savage takedown, Willow. I never wanted to read this lol.
(sorry for my language, i'm French 😅) for me, this book is about depression, addiction and loss.
It talk to me about sadness, hole in your heart and soul, grieving.
It was also very terrifing for me.
(And i'm a 45 yo woman...but ADAH. Er... Adha? Not neurotypical. So my brain love puzzle and rants about stuff 😊).
I liked House of Leaves. But, I do think it's way more work than what the reader gets out of it. It's a book I never recommend, but I do encourage people to try it when they are already interested. But, it is to this day, still the only horror novel that has actually made me scared. I was on the train reading it, and I was genuinely afraid in broad daylight and in a safe public place. So I will give the book its flowers for doing that to me.
I suggest an "infinite jest" in real life: write a book about a person aging and sagging and graying while reading House of Leaves
@@eha440 suddenly changing my unaffiliated novel-writing project next month to a digital-gothic horror story about a cursed tome that gets very popular on a short-form video platform
I loved it. But *completely* understand why people would not, or would even hate it. At the very beginning, it says, "this book is not for you, " and that's abundantly clear.
I also think most people who claim to love it don't understand it. Especially the people who say they don't like the Johnny Truant stuff and even say you can just skip those parts. Sure, many of the footnotes are clearly NOT meant to be read word for word.
And it does have a toxic fandom.
Read it earlier this month. Took my time with it.
IMO, the most important part are the letters from Johnny's mother.
I think it totally fails as satire. And still loved it. I see the Zampano pseudo-academia as an elaborate maze someone has created to trap something. To avoid confronting the pain at their core.
It's like a clever person who retreats into complicated explanations to avoid emotion.
But I won't defend it further. Because you are totally right that it's not as clever as most people give it credit for. And it doesn't respect the reader. It's not a work of genius. But it broke my heart.
I really like all of these points!
OMG I just saw this and cannot WAIT until tonight when I'll have time to watch it. I hated this book and can't understand why it gets so much adulation. ETA: okay, I'm back 12 hours later and YES to everything you said. The thing is, I am a huge sucker for clever formatting in novels. I love "found footage", book-within-a-book, footnotes, things scribbled in the margins, all that shiz. But it's so self-indulgently done here. Like you said, it buries the story rather than enhances it, and if that's the "point" of the story, it's a stupid point.
Preach! I read it 20 years ago and I’m still recovering.
Me watching this when I'm about to give it a 2nd shot in November. Thank you for bringing up how men love to say then women "don't get it" or aren't intelligent enough to comprehend something just because they don't like whatever said man likes. I'm not sure I will make it through this book....and I certainly won't force it. I love your top btw.
So I remember enjoying the parts about the house specifically when I read this. I just kinda skimmed over everything else if I'm being honest. But Piranesi exists now though and it's a *much* more enjoyable "MC-Escher-freaky-wtf-house" novel (at least for me).
Tbh this book feels much like the experience of interacting with cis men on dating apps. Seems like it could be fun on the surface, but mostly frustrating and tedious with very little payoff in the end.
The first 27 seconds is a gothic-vibe flashfiction.
The first 88 seconds. You are a full-fledged gothic heroine in real life, Willow.
So flattered
I tried reading this many years ago when I worked in a bookstore. Hated it. BTW, I love your shirt in this video!
This is exactly the kind of book that my boyfriend from high school would base his whole personality on...
Whenever i got a better grade than him he would stop talking to me because it hurt his ego
LMAO as if these men are real people 😭
I thought the point of Johnny Truant's story is that it's Danielewski's spin on Nabokov's Pale Fire - asking the audience to consider how a poetic/academic work can be warped in the hands of the wrong custodian. Legacy, blah blah blah. The reason this doesn't feel like a total retread for me is that there's the editor in HOL who then puts their (admittedly limited) spin on Johnny's, balancing his warped perspective but solidifying that Johnny belongs in the conversation. Whatever a writer puts out can be mutated through an audience's lens, potentially creating a new work through their interaction (possibly a frustrating, wooden one?).
I've 3 copies of this book...just bought the hardback....still haven't read it...🤣🤣🤣 love your videos....was so excited to see you were talking about this book ❤
I would genuinely recommend just skipping Johnny's bits if he's too much for you. It's still a fun book with an interesting take on the physicality of being a book even ignoring Jonny
I just got this for my birthday 😂 I am planning on reading it with friends though so misery likes company 😂
Great review as always ❤
Wow! Wow! Wow! An excellent review! You were very brave in taking on this book and finishing it. You are to be applauded, and you summarized the narrative so clearly and spontaneously! I understand your perspective completely and agree with it -- even though I avoided reading the novel. Intellectual pretensions never interest me, and the book smelled badly of it, but your review and estimate of the book are so clear in this video. Your voice and message really gripped me. Thanks so much for your efforts here!
Hahahah! I have never read it and there are too many other pieces to consume. My Delight is This Post! You are so funny and lovely. ❤😂❤ I love books and I love the way you present.🤘♥️🤩
This is my favorite book of all time lol. Definitely not for everyone though. It could have done with a few less Johnny parts
So interesting, great review! I read this book when I was a teenage girl in my first year of college, lent to me by another teenage girl. We both liked it a lot. I had no idea there was a whole online discourse about it until recently. Wonder how I’d feel about it now in my mid twenties. I bought a physical copy secondhand a while back because I like it as an art object, but when I tried to reread it I gave up a few chapters in. Not sure how much of that is me being out of practice reading books and wanting something lighter, but some of it is just that the truant and Zampano parts were… not super engaging
I always preferred Danielewski's sister's album that was inspired by House of Leaves ("Haunted" by Poe), but then again, I only really know of the album because of the end credits of "Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2", which is one of my favourite movies...so there's no accounting for taste. lol.
I didn't want to read it in the first place but thank you for confirming my initial feelings towards that book 😂
I have a feeling the Venn diagram of people who say "You have to read the foot notes or you won't get it" and people who say "That shirt you're wearing... name three songs!" is a circle.
Also: nice glasses chain! Unfortunately I can't wear them as they would drive me nuts.
What a way to put it! Love that
Most of the verbose footnotes and lists are only there to act as a distraction, in my opinion .... It's a labyrinth that wants you to get lost, just like the main character is lost.
But I could be totally wrong.
It's been over 20 years since I've read it, but I remember not reading a lot of the lists and footnotes. For me, The Whalestone(?) Letters were by far the scariest and most interesting part of the book, to me. (Especially when you know about Mark and his sisters (the singer Poe) upbringing.
I started it again last night, to see whether or not I still enjoy it after all these years. ✌🏻🙏🏻
I found it fun as a Rosetta stone for modern horror. But I more admired the idea of it than actually connected with it.
Basic af, but I wish the kids had gotten lost in the house. The idea of that makes my blood run cold. It's a cliche, but sometimes cliches exist for a reason.
Also, darn it, it's NAY-vidson, not NAV-idson! That's why he's nicknamed Navy! Such a cleverly subtle bit of exposition and nobody seems to pick up on it. Not a slam against you - the biggest superfans in the world seem to miss it too.
I love ergodic literature and I respect your opinion, and agree with points!
I also read The Silmarillion for fun, every year. Although not categorized as ergodic, first-timers will have to cross reference and search for A LOT. This is a book where you get credit for trying to attempt it. My favorite chapter? ...the map description.
I liked it, but also agree with what you're saying. When i say i like it, its the Navidson Record i enjoyed. That's what sticks with me. I love liminal horror. Nothing unsettles me more. But the rest of it I could have done without.
Ok this was such an interesting concept for the format but my god was this a chaotic ass book!! I mean I’m sure reading it as a neurotypical is hard enough but my ADHD ass could not get a grip on this book 😂
Thank you! I also really hated this book when I attempted to read it.
I appreciated the concept of a layered story, the weird house, and creative use of typesetting. Those ideas are fun to talk about and maybe that's part of why the book got popular on social media at some point. It's easy to talk up the book based on those ideas. But in the end, I just didn't enjoy reading the book. I found it disappointing, so it is nice to see a review that aligns with my experience.
It's so refreshing to hear that someone doesn't like this book. I have never read it and I don't intend to. All I have to do is see it on a shelf somewhere and my brain shuts down. Almost every tuber I have seen says that they love this book. I have seen only a minute of your review and I love the review. Thank you for posting this.
Girl, THANK YOU! I think I gave it a higher rating than I wanted to just because it was so hyped and I didn't know how to reconcile the fact that it sucked so hard. And I gave it 2 stars. I felt like the author pulled off a mashup of David Foster Wallace and the annoying Stuart character from Mad TV who is always saying "Look what I can do!" and it was not good. He really said, "I can make these readers read a bunch of footnotes and they'll hold the book up to a mirror to do it," but there's literally no point to it.
I read it this summer… loved it. It is more than a novel… the way it is written is the experience. It is confusing at first, but I didn’t rush going through each part, and slowly the story came together. The footnotes are endless, but a different layer of the story is being told in them. It won’t be for everyone… but for those willing to suspend how a story is told and just go with it, it can be an interesting experience.
Well-said, Willow! I only made it through about five pages of this atrocity before DNFing it out of frustration and rage. It’s disrespectful to the reader, indeed! I subscribe to reader response theory, and as such believe that the reader is equal to the author in creating the experience of reading a book. We readers deserve better than this pretentious crap.
I finished reading this on Monday and I couldn't agree with you more. I hated this book.
All I had to hear was "Men on the internet say" to know not to add it to the TBR pile.
sexist as hell
No, no, no. Add it to the TBR pile. Then leave it there. Once you have a strange dream about walking down endless gray hallways, the book will have done its work, and you can remove it from your TBR.
Me too.
I enjoy seeing more videos like this come out.
The core problem I have with this book is that it's a 736 page nothingburger. If you've ever had a conversation with a stranger who really wants to tell you a story and wants to convince you the story is real but tells you a big, long winded lie. Below all of its narratives and complexity it doesn't actually have a real story to tell you, even in its own universe it's just a story told by someone trying to get you to like the story you're being told. The only thing to really gain from House of Leaves is the entertainment factor for people who enjoy the writing. If you don't like how the story is told, not entertained by the narrative, then this book probably doesn't have anything of substance for you.
I didn't enjoy the writing and also didn't enjoy the book.
I haven’t read HoL but it sounds VERY much like “Pale Fire” by Vladimir Nabokov which I read years ago in college. As I recall, Pale Fire is a gorgeous epic poem interspersed with long rambling footnotes written by the poet’s neighbor, who rants about his problems and resentments and claims to “interpret” the poem but clearly doesn’t understand it at all. So PF also is satirizing academic criticism as well as exploring how the reader interacts with and processes art. I’m sure PF predates HoL, maybe an inspiration? PF invented this type of formal innovation, is considered a classic of great literature and I personally loved it- it’s both beautiful and very funny. It manages to do the thing that you said HoL couldn’t do, successfully combining a meaningful core (the poem) with a biting satire (the footnotes). You should read Pale Fire if you haven’t already, I think it’s a much better example of this kind of experimental novel.
I did read it years ago, and find it terribly boring. As if the author was showing how good he was...while he wasn't. I was happy to have taken it in the local library, so I wasted no money 😅
--- EXCELLENT REFERENCE TO . . . Max Headroom is the savong grace. Thank you.
I still have my copy, unread, sitting on my shelves. It has been there since 2001.
Loved this, thank you!
8:31 - 9:01
As someone who loves house of leaves, this is 100% nail on the head, and kinda why I love it XD
Sad to hear you didn't enjoy it. Your gripes are completely legit!
I guess I have (or had - it has been some years) a higher tolerance for the BS Danielewski pulls; I was really fascinated by the ergodic aspect of the book, but I understand why you found it infuriating.
My reading was also colored by all the pessimistic end existential philosophy I was reading at the time. So I read how the characters reacted differently to the cosmic horror of the house, as examples of the coping mechanisms Zapffe and Camus describes. That was totally me bringing something to the book, which gave it value for me, but it nonetheless made me like it.
Extra thumbs up for mentioning Zapffe.
this has been on my tbr forever becasue of all the hype, and this just made me happily take it off that list. because this sounds like my hell.
“An artist has the right to do whatever they want.” Totally agree.
But an artist can’t be surprised when people don’t want to buy what they are selling if they put something out there that few people want to consume.
THANK YOU FOR THIS REVIEW. I HATED this book. So pretentious, so overhyped
"I saw the face of God." 😆Thank you, Willow. I bought a copy of this years ago, gave it a shot, and decided that, yes, indeed, it'd be a waste of time. I just feel validated. Lol. The hype for this book is crazy.
Okay I had to subscribe within the first minute of this lmao
I've never encountered a book that felt so smug and self-satisfied; not the author, but the book itself
Okay time to watch the rest of the video
Taken in the round as a work of art the book, especially the presentation, is interesting. The actual story itself left me rather cold but then I don't find most horror to be that interesting so this may partially be a me problem rather than a story issue.
Oh oh, I removed "a dark and drowning tide" from my tbr because of your review, but I already own this one so I'll just hope i "get it". 🤣
It’s a book with a manufactured shtick. I enjoyed it while reading it and forgot it immediately.
I think this book works best when paired with his sister’s (the artist called Poe’s) album, Haunted. Both works were made following their estranged father’s death. He was a documentarian, and his work was his real love, even over his family, and when examined through that lens the works come across (to me) as different expressions of guilt over the same person. I know you’re done with the whole thing, but I’d recommend giving Haunted a listen at least, since I think it’s a good work in its own right.
My brother adores this book. His girlfriend likes it, too. For Christmas a few years ago, he got each of us (my dad, me, my wife, my sister) a copy of it. My sister hasn't tried reading it, my wife put her copy in the "to the used bookstore" bag, because we only needed one copy for the house, then didn't touch it, my dad started reading and noped out before the 100 page mark, and I took an entire July to read it cover to cover. It was difficult to read because it was academic satire, and I did read every single footnote as it came up, and then the notes at the end, and the photos and appendices after the story itself. I literally set a timer for an hour a day to read, because I couldn't focus on it for more than about an hour at a time. But because it is my brother's favorite book, and we have similar tastes in many things, I wanted to get through it. The story about the house is enjoyable, and some of the footnotes in that section. I kind of liked the playing with typeface (labyrinth being crossed out every time it's typed, spiraling the actual book, etc.), except when it got to be too much, like crossing out whole sections about the labyrinth. There's something good inside, like you said, but it takes digging to get to. And then there's the discussion afterward. First question my brother asked me was "did you read the end notes as they were referenced, or wait until the end, because that determines how you understand certain things and I need to know to talk about it with you?". Once we could talk actual story/plot/character, and not just about the neat tricks (like how the poems were all Danielewsky's actual poetry he scribbled on napkins in bars in Europe), it was fun to discuss. But, while I did like the story inside it, it didn't grab me like it did him. He rereads it every year or two as a comfort read. Which, cool, if that's his thing, that's his thing. I read problematic trashy fantasy romance as a comfort read (Anne Bishop). I don't think Danielewsky's the universe's gift to literature. I didn't love it, I didn't hate it. Overall, it's "meh" for me. But I like the enthusiasm my brother has for it, and let him talk about it to me, since he knows I've read it. Would I reread it? Nope. Not unless someone did an edit and just had the story about the house and got rid of all the other stuff. Then maybe, because the labyrinth especially was good stuff (I'm a Classics major, so that grabbed me right away), and the ending of that story was bittersweet. Otherwise, I can say I've read it, yay.
Oh thank you for this!!! I tried forever ago to read this and I just couldn’t get into it at all
Hi Willow, I will not lie... I love "House of Leaves" but I really respect your opinion and enjoyed listening to you you are entertaining whatever you say