Scan barcode
captlychee's review against another edition
3.0
[a:Danny Peary|121050|Danny Peary|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png], in [b:Cult Movies: The Classics, the Sleepers, the Weird, and the Wonderful|598559|Cult Movies The Classics, the Sleepers, the Weird, and the Wonderful|Danny Peary|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1390343049l/598559._SX50_.jpg|585186] opines that this is one of the worst novels ever written. I wouldn't go that far; it's average, and a little significant based on its original publication date in 1965.
While the novel is not literary—by which I mean that it ha a significant use of langugage—it does make its descriptions clear, and sticks firmly to its basis in [b:Anabasis|20657855|Anabasis (The Persian Expedition)|Xenophon|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1391115479l/20657855._SY75_.jpg|309998] and incidents in the source material are adapted to 1960's New York. (One interesting bit is where Yurick mentions the Beatles in an off-handed way, which is pretty accurate given the time and place the novel is set.)
Much is made of the ignorance of the gang—the Dominators, not the Warriors—in that they have difficulty finding their way through the subway system, and dealing with complex interactions. There's also more graphic violence, with two rapes and a murder to deal with. Peary makes the point that in the movie, the Warriors are a competent group who can navigate their way through the complexities of getting home through a hostiel environment, whereas in the book Yurick seems to revel in how poor, ingorant and incompetent the Dominators are. It revels in squalor the same way [b:Paul Takes The Form Of A Mortal Girl|52206961|Paul Takes The Form Of A Mortal Girl|Andrea Lawlor|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1566272615l/52206961._SX50_SY75_.jpg|57346921] does, so that might be another reason to read it.
This edition contains an afterword by [a:the author|167274|Sol Yurick|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1436091993p2/167274.jpg] in which he explains some of these things and talks about his experience with the movie and its popularity. But an ideal companion to this afterword is the Peary work mentioned above.
Recently, I gave [a:Maureen Jennings|212730|Maureen Jennings|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1284750506p2/212730.jpg] two stars for [b:a better-written book|17566596|Cold Snap (Lucy Kincaid, #7)|Allison Brennan|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1366923591l/17566596._SY75_.jpg|24502250], but I hold her to a higher standard. I'm prepared to cut this guy a bit of slack.
While the novel is not literary—by which I mean that it ha a significant use of langugage—it does make its descriptions clear, and sticks firmly to its basis in [b:Anabasis|20657855|Anabasis (The Persian Expedition)|Xenophon|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1391115479l/20657855._SY75_.jpg|309998] and incidents in the source material are adapted to 1960's New York. (One interesting bit is where Yurick mentions the Beatles in an off-handed way, which is pretty accurate given the time and place the novel is set.)
Much is made of the ignorance of the gang—the Dominators, not the Warriors—in that they have difficulty finding their way through the subway system, and dealing with complex interactions. There's also more graphic violence, with two rapes and a murder to deal with. Peary makes the point that in the movie, the Warriors are a competent group who can navigate their way through the complexities of getting home through a hostiel environment, whereas in the book Yurick seems to revel in how poor, ingorant and incompetent the Dominators are. It revels in squalor the same way [b:Paul Takes The Form Of A Mortal Girl|52206961|Paul Takes The Form Of A Mortal Girl|Andrea Lawlor|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1566272615l/52206961._SX50_SY75_.jpg|57346921] does, so that might be another reason to read it.
This edition contains an afterword by [a:the author|167274|Sol Yurick|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1436091993p2/167274.jpg] in which he explains some of these things and talks about his experience with the movie and its popularity. But an ideal companion to this afterword is the Peary work mentioned above.
Recently, I gave [a:Maureen Jennings|212730|Maureen Jennings|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1284750506p2/212730.jpg] two stars for [b:a better-written book|17566596|Cold Snap (Lucy Kincaid, #7)|Allison Brennan|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1366923591l/17566596._SY75_.jpg|24502250], but I hold her to a higher standard. I'm prepared to cut this guy a bit of slack.
webslingingadam's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
czarczajko's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
sad
tense
fast-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
3.25
deathany's review against another edition
dark
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
I found it to be a bit slow with random bursts of high action that was usually rape or violence that felt gratuitous. I so rarely say this but the movie was better.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence, Rape, Murder, and Sexual violence
cnidariar3x's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.75
kimball_hansen's review against another edition
2.0
2.5 stars. An overrated book to go with an overrated movie, I'm glad the film wasn't as crude as the book. I studied up on the movie extensively as it was the theme for last year's SISU IRON. I liked the afterward. Even though he was the author, no one consulted him about the film or even invited him to the premiere. He had to do it all himself.
Darn, I had a good five book streak of 4-5 stars.
Darn, I had a good five book streak of 4-5 stars.
tittypete's review against another edition
3.0
The warriors are less awesome than the movie. Nobody is really chasing them. They only encounter one other gang member and the kill him. Then they have a pow wow-esque gang rape of a girl on top of the dead guy. There is no showdown with luther. It’s sadder and grosser than the movie. Meh.
matthewwester's review against another edition
3.0
This book is really hard to rate, especially because I absolutely loved the move that was based on it. The movie has such a unique style, seems to take place in a parallel reality, and has a cool punk attitude that makes you think there can be honorable behavior in that imagined landscape.
The book is more violent than the movie, more based in reality, more demonstrative of what a struggling social worker probably witnessed with gang youth culture in the 60's. The book still has a lot of style but it feels heartbreaking and (intentionally) gross. It's definitely not a bad read, I enjoyed it, but after much consideration I think it lands on a solid 3-star rating for me.
The book is more violent than the movie, more based in reality, more demonstrative of what a struggling social worker probably witnessed with gang youth culture in the 60's. The book still has a lot of style but it feels heartbreaking and (intentionally) gross. It's definitely not a bad read, I enjoyed it, but after much consideration I think it lands on a solid 3-star rating for me.
dazed_confused's review
dark
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
2.75
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence and Rape
Moderate: Police brutality, Sexual violence, and Murder
Minor: Racism, Addiction, Classism, Death, Gun violence, Blood, Alcohol, Sexism, and Homophobia
epl's review against another edition
3.0
If you liked the action, characters, and the theatrical vibe of the gangs in the movie, the book is probably going to disappoint you somewhat. It is a much grittier, violent, and disturbing depiction of the gang culture in New York City in the 50’s or 60’s.
While you probably won’t like or relate to The Dominators, the Coney Island gang that the novel follows, the book raises plenty of questions and commentary on the social issues of the time. Chief among these are the “other-ness” of the disgruntled and maligned youth and the power dynamics within hand between the gangs that mainly hinges on the masculinity and toughness of the gangsters. The book is more about The Dominators, or the Family as they are sometimes called, and their state of mind as they journey home, rather than their fight through the city as depicted in the movie. In fact, they only really “rumble” with one gang and the leader who calls the summit, Ismael (Cyrus in the movie) is only mentioned in passing after the initial meet-up.
In the end, I found the character of Hinton to be the only actually interesting or even semi-developed character in the whole story. I wish there had been a clearer focus on him as the main character from the start. Also, Yurick’s writing is just not very good. It’s almost stream of conscious, but as it is told from a 3rd person POV, it results in a bunch of run-on sentences and meaningless sentence fragments that rarely add value to the text. Yurick also flips between real, quoted dialogue and simply describing conversation as if he is recounting what happened to someone after the fact.
While I like the movie a lot, the book is still good in it’s own way. But, Yurick’s writing style and the lack of depth for the majority of characters cap this at 3 stars for me.
While you probably won’t like or relate to The Dominators, the Coney Island gang that the novel follows, the book raises plenty of questions and commentary on the social issues of the time. Chief among these are the “other-ness” of the disgruntled and maligned youth and the power dynamics within hand between the gangs that mainly hinges on the masculinity and toughness of the gangsters. The book is more about The Dominators, or the Family as they are sometimes called, and their state of mind as they journey home, rather than their fight through the city as depicted in the movie. In fact, they only really “rumble” with one gang and the leader who calls the summit, Ismael (Cyrus in the movie) is only mentioned in passing after the initial meet-up.
In the end, I found the character of Hinton to be the only actually interesting or even semi-developed character in the whole story. I wish there had been a clearer focus on him as the main character from the start. Also, Yurick’s writing is just not very good. It’s almost stream of conscious, but as it is told from a 3rd person POV, it results in a bunch of run-on sentences and meaningless sentence fragments that rarely add value to the text. Yurick also flips between real, quoted dialogue and simply describing conversation as if he is recounting what happened to someone after the fact.
While I like the movie a lot, the book is still good in it’s own way. But, Yurick’s writing style and the lack of depth for the majority of characters cap this at 3 stars for me.