Scan barcode
abbyslaney's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
imlfox's review against another edition
dark
sad
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
This book was uncomfortable in so many ways. Really compelling and well written but just so unpleasant.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Death, Murder, Self harm, Death of parent, Child death, Ableism, Rape, Child abuse, Cannibalism, Pregnancy, and Body horror
Moderate: Abandonment, Animal cruelty, Bullying, Emotional abuse, Infertility, Self harm, Incest, Suicide, Physical abuse, and Suicidal thoughts
Minor: Pedophilia, Abortion, and Fire/Fire injury
hadu's review against another edition
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
dhrutipathak's review against another edition
1.0
I have never read anything like this and never want to again. Freud would be proud of the level of fucked up-ness in this excuse of a book.
mkmiller's review against another edition
dark
funny
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
angievdbroeck's review against another edition
2.0
Lapvona is the car crash you cannot look away from.
Halfway through the book I knew this was going to be a three-star read for me. I was here for the grotesque atmosphere, foul language, hopelessness of the situation, unlikeable characters and general cruelness of the book. Moshfegh certainly did not disappoint in this regard!
There is no plot whatsoever in this book. Everything seems to happen randomly and without any real consequences or impact on the characters. The disconnect in the narrative made the atmosphere of the book even more peculiar and interesting, but in the long term it made it hard to stay invested or even care in the first place. However, I do think this is a very powerful narrative tool because it made me, as a reader, feel the same disconnect to the events in the book as the characters do. I love that Moshfegh was able to translate the emotions of the characters on paper into real-word emotions for the reader. This was quite confrontational at some points in the book!
The same point can be made for the (I hope deliberate) decision of Moshfegh to not provide commentary on the many difficult themes (such as The list is almost endless, really) handled in the book. Not a single character seemed to reflect upon their acts or their situation and just accepted life as it was. For me there was meaning in the meaninglessness, up until a certain point.
So, then why is this a two-star read? Because of the ending. Throughout the whole book I was in this almost numb mindset, slowly becoming desensitized to the horrible things happening. In the last 20 pages of the book Moshfegh snapped me out of this state of mind she so delicately crafted by with a very quick pace. Suddenly there are so many things happening all at once, which is in stark contrast with the rest of the book. I see what the author tried to do here, make things more shocking by picking up the pace in the storytelling, but it completely ruined the illusion for me.
I will draw a conclusion from all these thoughts later on and will update this review accordingly ✨
Halfway through the book I knew this was going to be a three-star read for me. I was here for the grotesque atmosphere, foul language, hopelessness of the situation, unlikeable characters and general cruelness of the book. Moshfegh certainly did not disappoint in this regard!
There is no plot whatsoever in this book. Everything seems to happen randomly and without any real consequences or impact on the characters. The disconnect in the narrative made the atmosphere of the book even more peculiar and interesting, but in the long term it made it hard to stay invested or even care in the first place. However, I do think this is a very powerful narrative tool because it made me, as a reader, feel the same disconnect to the events in the book as the characters do. I love that Moshfegh was able to translate the emotions of the characters on paper into real-word emotions for the reader. This was quite confrontational at some points in the book!
The same point can be made for the (I hope deliberate) decision of Moshfegh to not provide commentary on the many difficult themes (such as
Spoiler
rape, pedophilia, cannibalism, ableism, abuse, murder,...So, then why is this a two-star read? Because of the ending. Throughout the whole book I was in this almost numb mindset, slowly becoming desensitized to the horrible things happening. In the last 20 pages of the book Moshfegh snapped me out of this state of mind she so delicately crafted by
Spoiler
killing basically all the main characters, making Marek the new lord of Lapvona, letting Marek kill his sibling and so on.I will draw a conclusion from all these thoughts later on and will update this review accordingly ✨
luhos's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
anything ottessa moshfegh writes, i’ll read! this was soooo good, and i just love her writing style. weird in the best way possible.
daja57's review against another edition
1.0
Lapvona is a fantasy book. Marek is the crippled son of shepherd Jude, his mum Agata is missing presumed dead. There are peasants in the village, bandits in the mountains, and a lord in his castle on the hill.
But the prose style is very different from most fantasies. Lapvona is mostly written in short, declarative sentences: "They boiled lamb's milk and covered the pot with a cloth to keep the flies away while it cooled. Marek picked the bugs off some potatoes and plunged them and a few apples in the fire. They were old apples from the fall harvest. Jude had eaten only lamb's milk, bread, apples and potatoes, and wild grasses his entire life. Like the rest of Lapvona, he didn't eat meat. Nor did he drink mead, only milk and water. Marek are what Jude ate, always saving a few bites for Go: he knew that sacrifice was the best way to please him." This simple third person past tense narration included the explication of characters and their motives. There is very little left for the reader to infer.
Furthermore, the narration was done as a sequence of events: first this, then this. There seemed very little connection between the events; any causal connections were straightforward. There was never any nuance.
I quickly found this monotony of style extremely irksome; I was swiftly bored. It seemed to me that the only way the author could keep my interest was to ramp up the weirdness. The story is full of bizarre, frequently grotesque and horrible occurrences.
Yo be charitable, one could argue that the style suited the content. It reminded me of how Kafka narrates Metamorphosis ("As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.”). It had a fairy tale feel to it. Perhaps a deadpan, direct narration is the best way of recounting weird stuff, as if the plainness of the style is the only way to add verisimilitude to what would otherwise be unbelievable. And a lot of fairy tales are full of violence and childish, crude, cruel humour. So to write as if one is writing for young children (although the content is frequently adult, with sex, starvation, mutilation, death, cannibalism and spontaneous lactation) is perhaps the only way to persuade the reader to suspend their disbelief.
It didn't work for me. I began to long for a difficult word or even a subjunctive clause. I didn't care about the characters, I didn't believe the setting, I had no involvement. I did wonder why the author was so keen on the word 'pubis' but this was the most interesting aspect about this book.
But the prose style is very different from most fantasies. Lapvona is mostly written in short, declarative sentences: "They boiled lamb's milk and covered the pot with a cloth to keep the flies away while it cooled. Marek picked the bugs off some potatoes and plunged them and a few apples in the fire. They were old apples from the fall harvest. Jude had eaten only lamb's milk, bread, apples and potatoes, and wild grasses his entire life. Like the rest of Lapvona, he didn't eat meat. Nor did he drink mead, only milk and water. Marek are what Jude ate, always saving a few bites for Go: he knew that sacrifice was the best way to please him." This simple third person past tense narration included the explication of characters and their motives. There is very little left for the reader to infer.
Furthermore, the narration was done as a sequence of events: first this, then this. There seemed very little connection between the events; any causal connections were straightforward. There was never any nuance.
I quickly found this monotony of style extremely irksome; I was swiftly bored. It seemed to me that the only way the author could keep my interest was to ramp up the weirdness. The story is full of bizarre, frequently grotesque and horrible occurrences.
Yo be charitable, one could argue that the style suited the content. It reminded me of how Kafka narrates Metamorphosis ("As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect.”). It had a fairy tale feel to it. Perhaps a deadpan, direct narration is the best way of recounting weird stuff, as if the plainness of the style is the only way to add verisimilitude to what would otherwise be unbelievable. And a lot of fairy tales are full of violence and childish, crude, cruel humour. So to write as if one is writing for young children (although the content is frequently adult, with sex, starvation, mutilation, death, cannibalism and spontaneous lactation) is perhaps the only way to persuade the reader to suspend their disbelief.
It didn't work for me. I began to long for a difficult word or even a subjunctive clause. I didn't care about the characters, I didn't believe the setting, I had no involvement. I did wonder why the author was so keen on the word 'pubis' but this was the most interesting aspect about this book.
doreni_01's review against another edition
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.0