Most helpful customer reviews
|
|
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Quick, stimulating, and a little mind-boggling, April 11 2007
Comparisons often drawn with Kafka are pretty immediately apparent; for about 180 pages (in translation, from the original Japanese) Abe successively stuffs his characters, himself, and ultimately his readers into the enigmatic cardboard box which so readily identifies the 'box man'. A somewhat unreliable narrator, through a series of scribbled notes and blurry photographs, describes his own transformation into a box man, its dangers and appeals, and the unique perspective it can bring to one's existence in the world. The style fits elegantly and seamlessly to its author's purpose, bringing to life the sliver of landscape, the naked leg, and the absence of sky so sparingly afforded the box man through his narrow peep-hole.
Despite one somewhat clumsy, facetious dialogue between two characters about just who is a figment of whom's imagination, the book unfolds in a pleasing, well-organized mess of philosophical musings and subtleties.
|
|
|
5.0 out of 5 stars
identity, Aug 17 2002
The Box Man delves into what it is to be seen and what it is to see, the phenomenon of looking and being looked at. There are many parallels with sartre's Being and Nothingness - the idea that one despises being looked at because he is forced to think about his imperfect facticity, and that the unseen viewer, be it at sartre's keyhole or abe's observation window, is put in the privledge position of remaining pure transcendance, or purely beings of the mental realms that are untouchable by the outside world. Abe's style of writing leaves the reader guessing whether or not he is the voyeur or the exhibitionist.
|
|
|
3.0 out of 5 stars
a title for your review, Mar 7 2002
Half the time I wasn't sure what the heck was going on so I consider this book to be, in part, a book questioning reality/ontology. The "box man" would ramble on about some scenario/reality/happening and then reveal that it was all his imagination. That's pretty much how my life goes about, more imagination than substance, so this book is a rather effective looking-glass. Given that, this plays a significant role in the play of "my dissatisfaction with the book." I don't want to be reminded of my anonymity and social lackings. I have little problem recommending this book to others--sometimes i recommend bad books to people for my own kicks--but there are other books I'd prefer to see sittin in my lap. In keeping with the question of reality, if its even addressed in this book (what the heck do i know--answer: nothing) I'd prefer to read Mark Daneilewski's House of Leaves or Joseph Heller's Catch-22 and definitely The Medusa Frequency by Russell Hoban (I list these books only to impress you. It's pure show.).There are elements of identity problems in this book, as far as I can see anyway. The person lives in a box, he/she doesnt have a name, and he/she usually only looks at people while they in turn, people, only see a box, if that. That's pretty cut n'dry. Again, there are other books that attack this idea more vicously. See: Fight Club My biggest problem with the book is this: I have no clue if the box man was a murder or not. I love biggest problems and I consider this to be a rather large one, unanswered questions. So, Ill give this my recommendation, but, will the joke be on you? Nah.
|
|
|
Most recent customer reviews
|
