Scan barcode
ladymirkwood's review against another edition
1.0
This is first book I have read where I've begrudged it the paper it was written upon. Far from being the clever, erotic masterpeice the blurb implies, it's more like the feverish, horny imaginings of a pubescent boy.
The story is oddly fragmented, the dialogue akin to bad 70's porn and there is nothing to propel the reader onwards ( unless you want deeply unsexy juvenille smut -then you're fine!).
I'm not sure what the Author was hoping to achieve, or what I as a reader was meant to get from it. It was not arousing in the least, just bewildering bad and worse, boring. The only entertainment to be derived from this book was to play a game of 'Spot-the-ridiculous-euphemism-for-genitals'. Yes, it's that bad.
So, all things told, it's a new literary low point in my reading life!
The story is oddly fragmented, the dialogue akin to bad 70's porn and there is nothing to propel the reader onwards ( unless you want deeply unsexy juvenille smut -then you're fine!).
I'm not sure what the Author was hoping to achieve, or what I as a reader was meant to get from it. It was not arousing in the least, just bewildering bad and worse, boring. The only entertainment to be derived from this book was to play a game of 'Spot-the-ridiculous-euphemism-for-genitals'. Yes, it's that bad.
So, all things told, it's a new literary low point in my reading life!
angus_mckeogh's review against another edition
1.0
One of the worst books I've ever read. I understand it's supposed to be raunchy and gratuitous. But it's rather just utterly moronic. Unsexy. And boring. The narrative makes no sense (and I love sex just like anyone else), and the sex scenes are just uninteresting. It's sad. Human Smoke might be one of the best books I've ever read and one of the best ever written. House of Holes is at the other end of the spectrum. One of the worst books I've ever read and I'd also say ever written. Did NOT surprise, amuse, or arouse.
neodem's review against another edition
4.0
This was an odd book and the narrative wasn't really there but I enjoyed it anyway. It was more like a collection of strange mystical fantasies..
lovegriefandgender's review against another edition
challenging
funny
lighthearted
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
3.0
annushka79's review against another edition
1.0
This book lost me at women flying around using their labia as gliders.
It's supposed to be "erotic" but it's just freaking weird and pervy. And written by a man who seems to know little about female side of the sexual experience.
It's supposed to be "erotic" but it's just freaking weird and pervy. And written by a man who seems to know little about female side of the sexual experience.
audaciaray's review against another edition
1.0
Very much like 1970s porn: plotless, nonsensical, full of heterosexual fucking that is more funny than hot.
I have read my share of erotica over the years, and it is interesting/frustrating that this book gets reviewed and talked about by the New York Times because it is (or its author is supposed to be) "literary," while tons of other more inventive and interesting (and even more literary!) erotic writing goes shunned or ignored. White dudes with big publishers reign supreme, I guess.
I have read my share of erotica over the years, and it is interesting/frustrating that this book gets reviewed and talked about by the New York Times because it is (or its author is supposed to be) "literary," while tons of other more inventive and interesting (and even more literary!) erotic writing goes shunned or ignored. White dudes with big publishers reign supreme, I guess.
mstoddart's review against another edition
3.0
A quick, quirky read. Got it from the library because of the NY Times review, and finished it in just a few hours. Very bizarre and entertaining, and very adult.