American Psycho

flyswatter

Just finished this book, I enjoyed it. Liked the way it conveyed the self-absorbed yuppie lifestyle of the 1980's. The violence was graphic but I was expecting it and I wasn't shocked too much. I'd like to know other peoples opinions on this novel.

mrsdewinter

urgh, I hated it. It's very well written and, OP, you're right - it conveys extremely well the spiritually empty, consumer-focused lifestyle of a certain type of person. But it's soooo violent - almost pornographic. I actually found it quite depressing and it took me to a really unpleasant place. For quite a while, it put me off anything marketed as 'dark comedy'.

tHE vAGGABOND

I really liked it, totally off the wall and something different

homerun_homer

Great book, I've read it twice, the first time when I was 16. When I read it as a young lad I couldn't understand how people could be like that, not as in being a brutal murderer but so numbed to life and uncaring about anyone but themselves. As I grew up I understood it a lot more, especially the confusion with the characters getting other characters mixed up. I used to remember every face and couldn't understand how people could forget anyone and get them mixed up like in the novel. Again, life catches up with you and your mind begins to go and I now see how all that works for the characters.

I need to start playing the Brain game on the nintendo DS to combat this:D

Very interesting read. At some point I will read it again but I've still to get around to reading the Informers - the one novel of Brett's that I've not read.

girlbiker

flyswatter wrote: »

Just finished this book, I enjoyed it. Liked the way it conveyed the self-absorbed yuppie lifestyle of the 1980's. The violence was graphic but I was expecting it and I wasn't shocked too much. I'd like to know other peoples opinions on this novel.

Love it, although there was times when I was reading it at arms lenght while trying to cover my eyes and continue reading at the same time.
His other books are great too, Lunar Park? Thats was scarey.

The thing is; Bateman was obsessive complusive and Ellis conveyed that by letting us see through Batemans eyes...every...single...little...thing that he saw, so the violence was described in the same way, graphic,gross but cool.

girlbiker

mrsdewinter wrote: »

For quite a while, it put me off anything marketed as 'dark comedy'.

Was it supposed to be a dark comedy? I dont think so

homerun_homer

girlbiker wrote: »

His other books are great too, Lunar Park? Thats was scarey.

Lunar Park is brilliant. Probably his most well put together novel for narrative, dark humour and plot.

girlbiker wrote: »

Was it supposed to be a dark comedy? I dont think so

Yeah!! The film catches the humour well also.

flyswatter

girlbiker wrote: »

Was it supposed to be a dark comedy? I dont think so

I think it is known as a dark comedy.

homerun_homer

Is there a difference between Dark Comedy and Black Comedy?

buck65

Great book. Lunar Park is dross in comparison.

HalloweenJack

I love this book.

I think it's a fascinating read and very well-written. I think BEE really gets Bateman's character across well. You can see how, slowly, Bateman slips from reality (I'm thinking in particular of the bit where he steals the taxi and the narrative voice shifts) and becomes something otherwordly. BEE did an outstanding job of creating and describing the complex character of Bateman.

The violence is graphic but I for one was glad that BEE didn't shy away from it. He had the balls to go there and he did a good job of it.

I've read Rules of Attraction and Glamorama but neither come close to American Psycho, imo.

aghastlrbaboon

I really enjoyed the gradual drive towards the admission of guilt on Bateman's part (the old cliche of criminals wanting to be caught maybe) and how it fell on deaf ears with the violence only intensifying... but only after i had finished the book.

When other posters talk about life catching up with you the ties between my life experience and the concept of blindness to guilt or wrong doing only caught up with me when i thought about the book afterwards. It struck a cord with me and i distinctly remember grinning thinking it was nice achievement on Ellis' part.

Id sympathise with others who felt the book a little hard-going. I found the confusion over character identities hard going and the violence and consumerism difficult to digest. Now that i think about it the only other book i ve had similar problems with was Disgrace by Coetze though without the same positive conclusions afterwards.

Klingon Hamlet

At times Ellis seemed to relish describing just how horrid Bateman's actions were, as if Bateman were Ellis' way of exorcising (and indeed exercising) his own inner dark desires. I felt dirty putting the book down, felt a little guity.

Was it me or did Bateman seem less a human being and more a cypher, a channel through which all the disgusting human desires could be funnelled through. Here's why:

Duing working hours he was almost hibernating in his office like a nocturnal beast...and like that beast he came alive and went crazy during the night, revealing his true needs and actions. Like a walking talking personification of his colleague's inner thoughts and wants.

He confused himself with others and vice versa. Kind of difficult to do. One thing to confuse two people. But yourself?

Got away with murder (literally) despite doing nothing to hide the evidence. And that weird bit with the estate agent? Surreal beyond explanation.

Reached almost orgasmic levels of violence at the end, only to anticlimax in the stern face of his own lawyer. Like crashing back down to reality, a dream-bubble burst.

Oh boy I ramble.

aghastlrbaboon

flyswatter wrote: »

Liked the way it conveyed the self-absorbed yuppie lifestyle of the 1980's.

was wondering does this book appeal more/less/as much to those familiar with the above as it does to those it does not. question arose watching a few clips of the film. feel i want to see the whole thing, reread the book now.

Paddy Samurai

Did'nt read the book ,but the film is one of my favourites.Love "the hip to be square" scene,christian bale is the business in this film.

Focus6

Apparently American Psycho influenced the Ross O'Carroll Kelly series of books.
Check the link -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_O'Carroll-Kelly#Influences

orangecake

Usually no matter what problems I have with a book I have to finish it. Even if I hate it. But I could not finish American Psycho. It makes me feel like Joey from the episode of Friends where he hides The Shining in the freezer. I could not sleep with this book in the room.

Crucifix

I felt it made it's points early on (except I suppose for the fact that

he gets away with it all

), then it just meandered along repeating them between increasingly horrific scenes.

grames_bond

Paddy Samurai wrote: »

Did'nt read the book ,but the film is one of my favourites.Love "the hip to be square" scene,christian bale is the business in this film.

funny thats the only scene that bret easton ellis HATED!

i absolutley loved the book and the movie, but i love all his books, he links them all together brilliantly! from pat batman in A.P. to sean in rules, to clay in less then zero, and victor in glamorama, they all know each other (and/or are related to each other) and the same things are discussed.....BEE is a legend!

flyswatter

grames_bond wrote: »

funny thats the only scene that bret easton ellis HATED!

i absolutley loved the book and the movie, but i love all his books, he links them all together brilliantly! from pat batman in A.P. to sean in rules, to clay in less then zero, and victor in glamorama, they all know each other (and/or are related to each other) and the same things are discussed.....BEE is a legend!

I've rented Glamorama from my local library, will read it after I've finished Maximum Impact by Jack Henderson.

grames_bond

flyswatter wrote: »

I've rented Glamorama from my local library, will read it after I've finished Maximum Impact by Jack Henderson.

it takes a while to get into it.....stick with it, its amazing!

shotgun mike

is bateman not meant to a metaphor for capitalism itself, killed, destroy and consuming everything along the way. that was the point of making him so violent and nasty

grames_bond

shotgun mike wrote: »

is bateman not meant to a metaphor for capitalism itself, killed, destroy and consuming everything along the way. that was the point of making him so violent and nasty

Yeah its a take on capitalism and the money hungry, materialistic individuals capitalism creates!

but he still is a person himself...hence the links with other books!