Reviews with content warning for Infidelity - American Psycho

Reviews tagging 'Infidelity'

American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis

79 reviews

lord_cookie's review against another edition

challenging dark mysterious slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

“My pain is constant and sharp and I do not hope for a better world for anyone, in fact I want my pain to be inflicted on others.”
American Psycho is not a book I’d recommend easily to many people. It’s hostile and our main character Patrick Bateman is a misogynist, racist, superficial prick who spends far too much money and thoughts on clothes and beauty products. And as many critics, readers and Ellis said: It’s somewhat boring. There are many chapters simply listing which clothes people wear or what his beauty routine is. Further in it’s more and more violent gory depictions of torture often starting with hardcore pornography. Still I liked the book. FThe movie adaptation is my second favourite movie and I was pleased how many scenes were in the movie. Also Ellis himself said he wrote the book at a time when he lived this lifestyle and grew alienated and this book comes from anger and even though I’m really far from the lifestyle the anger here deeply resonated with me. Some moments are so absurd they are definitely funny. The big difference to the movie is the amount of violence and gore. Towards the end it grows more heavy. I’ve read a lot of horror books these last 3 months but this was the first that made me grimace because there are some really disgusting things happening. To top this all I’m a sucker for unreliable narrators and when something is left open like here. We never truly know if Patrick committed these crimes. There are hints but in the end it’s the reader who decides what happened.

Content Warnings

nadiajohnsonbooks's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark slow-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

2.5

I truly don't know how to articulate my thoughts about this book.

Let's start with what I liked:

I loved the writing style: manic, rambling, and full of non sequiturs that give the genuine feel of intrusive thoughts. I liked the random chapters of music critique and the view into yuppie Manhattan in the late 80s.

The juxtaposition of mundanity and grotesque violence was jarring and really dialed up the horror in a satisfying way.

Elements of the satire (the absolute interchangeability of the Wall Street bros, the new Salvadorian bistro that everyone is excited about but no one ever seems to go to) worked for me.

But a few things didn't sit right with me even upon reflection.

Pat Bateman and all his compatriots are misogynists, racists, and general scumbags. Okay. But the overwhelming use of racial slurs and sexual violence as a plot device felt less like satire or character development and more like a fifteen year old edgelord trying to get his mom's attention.

I suspect my rating of this book will change a few times the more I consider it, but there's no question that it will stick with me.

I know that Ellis left it consciously ambiguous, but I don't get the impression that Bateman actually killed anyone. I think that he (both Ellis and Bateman) is just an edgelord with a uniquely complex inner life. Aside from a couple oblique references to dreaming and the fact that certainly purportedly murdered characters seem to still exist at the periphery of Bateman's social sphere, there doesn't seem to be much evidence to suggest that he did. The obliviousness of everyone around him could be read as a satire of "see something? Mind ya business" manhattanites, but even satire has its limits.

Content Warnings

michaelion's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious slow-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

1.75

Maybe the real Psychos were the Americans we made along the way...

A book is bad when I have to question what purpose it served humanity. I am a person who fundamentally believes that all art can be made with no reason or goal in mind; art for art's sake; art because the person who made it felt something, felt they had to get it out, felt they had something to share with the world. I read this book because I wanted to watch the movie, yes I'm that kind of person, and I wish I could unread it. What purpose did this book serve to the greater good of humanity? Fuck the greater good, what contribution to humanity does this book give? It has no analysis, no deeper introspection into the era, the mindset of the people. There's no meat on the bone that is this book.

It has its moments and its beauty, for sure. I love the stream of consciousness and unreliable narration, I love the speaking to the audience, the break rom reality and seeing things in the perspective of a movie, sure. Those elements are great. But as a whole? I never question why art is made. There's art I like and art I don't like. It's easy for me to spot art I like, It's easy for me to spot art I don't like, and there are definitely things that lie in a middle grey area, but for all three of those things I almost never question why it was made. It's an inherently fascist idea to say art should have a purpose else it is a waste of time or attention but this is one of the few exceptions I've encountered. The movie better be good after the shit I just read.

And to be clear, I'm not just mad at the content of the book. It was very upsetting sure, but

about a quarter in is when you get to the first kill and it's mentioned nonchalant. So you read almost 100 pages and finally get to the part you came for.

Most of this book is a whole lot of nothing. It works, only because that's the style of this particular type of writing, but once the kills start to ramp up it's like Oh, you wasted my time, and now this is TOO intense. And I'm sure the whiplash was also purposeful, and I'm starting to get a little too nitpicky, but there are things that are more important / could have been more central to the plot that were not given any spotlight.

I tried to find it in my heart to give it a higher rating, I really did, but I can't lie to my future self who will reread this review and go "damn, the book was that bad?" Hi, future self. To answer your question: No. The book was much worse.

Content Warnings

downcircles's review against another edition

Go to review page

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.5

So accurately and well written that it becomes very frustrating to read. If you want a look into a twisted violent self absorbed mind you'll get it but it comes at the cost of having to stand listening to that guy through the entire book. I understand why it is deemed so iconic but it is simply so hard to get through despite it not being that long. Did not find it worth the read but if you like whole chapters detailing luxuries to point out the shallow nature of the main character then this is the book for you.

Content Warnings