1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars
Weak in the Middle (3.5 Stars), April 6 2007
Giving this book three stars is not really fair. It is a very good, but it also could be much better. The problem here is not necessarily what the book does, it conveys itself very well, the problem is that the beginning of the book sets you up for a spectacular and philosophically challenging plot that Rushdie just can't pull off.
Sure the outward storyline flows smoothly and unpredicatably, bouncing the reader through neat unexpected events and witty commentary, but for all its quick cadence and New York (where it is set) cool, it starts to grow stale. Like your tenth fizz candy, or juicy fruit that has been chewed to long, it begins to become a little bland.
The main problem is that Rushdie seems content to constantly tell you what his characters are experiencing, tell you what is wrong with the society, tell you what is upside down and backwards yet upfront and expected about New York; instead he needs to dramatize these concepts and experiences and show his characters living them, allow us to come to understand how they feel instead of having them go on a page long tangent in their subconscious so that he can pontificate on American youth, or his internal fury. His characters don't actually seem as alive as they should, his very interesting insights don't catpure our attention as they could, his book doesn't hurt when it ends like we wish it would. Because, there is no attachment created, no bond between character and reader.
I have read a few of Rushdie's books since 'Midnights Children' blew my mind, and I have come to the conclusion that Rushdie is just a little too clever for his own good. It is too easy. His book dances, but by the end of this short novel your feet hurt and you are tired of spinning around and around in circles, you feel like you have seen something interesting but it is all a blur.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1.0 out of 5 stars
A Waste of Time & Attention, May 28 2002
I disliked the book intensely and feel cheated of the time it took me to decipher it.
This is the first novel of Rushdie I have read and, based on this experience, I'll never
try another. The book leaves this reader completely disengaged. There is not a single human character
in it; they are all "dolls", cardboard cutouts. Occasional clever or witty remarks and asides do not redeem it.
Rushdie seems to collect book prizes like others do boxtops. I can only wonder why.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5.0 out of 5 stars
Salman Rushdie's Best Satirical Novel, May 24 2002
This is the same satirical Salman Rushdie I've read recently in his novel "Shame", replete with satirical, yet profound, comments on American culture in the months and days prior to September 11, 2001. Yet unlike "Shane", this elegant little book is purged of the former's memoiresque asides, and hence is a tighter, more gripping read. Admittedly "Fury" is the Salman Rushdie novel that is truly a roman a clef, with the hero and his girlfriend thinly fictionalized versions of Rushdie and his current love (I'm sure Rushdie's ex-wife, a noted American writer of fiction, isn't amused by her fictional counterpart.). Rushdie strongly criticizes the most virulent hedonistic aspects of American culture without sounding like an angry preacher; indeed, I couldn't help but laugh every time Rushdie's superb prose rendered sarcastic observations on prominent American politicans and media figures. I must confess that this novel isn't as well written or as captivating as Rushdie's "The Ground Beneath Her Feet", yet it does deserve recognition as one of his best works. Salman Rushdie is still at the height of his literary powers.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No