Scan barcode
Reviews
Lord of the Barnyard: Killing the Fatted Calf and Arming the Aware in the Cornbelt by Tristan Egolf
jobustitch's review against another edition
5.0
This book blew me away with it's hilarious depicition of small town life and the people who happen to live there. I loved every second of it and have passed it on to many people.
mickeymole's review against another edition
5.0
It is sad that Egolf didn't live long enough to write more. This guy had something special as a writer. I had so much fun with this book. Even though it's way too long for the story, I wanted even more.
"Everyone knew that to the Catholics, Jesus was Mary's boy, to the Baptists he was the savior, to the Jews he was nothing, but to the Methodists he was a tax deduction."
Thanks to my buddy, Woods, for the gift of this book.
"Everyone knew that to the Catholics, Jesus was Mary's boy, to the Baptists he was the savior, to the Jews he was nothing, but to the Methodists he was a tax deduction."
Thanks to my buddy, Woods, for the gift of this book.
elisala's review against another edition
4.0
Je ne sais pas à quoi je m'attendais, mais pas à ça.
C'est crade, c'est violent, c'est injuste, c'est vachement bien.
Pourtant c'est un peu trop violent, crade et injuste, parfois. J'aurais même pu arrêter, mais je ne regrette pas de m'être accrochée, parce que c'est quand même une bien belle fresque.
Ça joue un poil trop sur cet espèce de suspens où l'auteur par sous-entendus pas très subtils te laisse comprendre que oulala il va se passer plein de choses. Mais comme, au final, il se passe en effet plein de choses, ça se complète assez bien. Faut juste être patiente.
Bref, un début assez long, assez lourdingue, mais une suite assez palpitante et qui rattrape bien le début.
Quand on y pense, même le fait que le début est anxiogène est assez révélateur de la qualité du récit: l'auteur fait passer tout un panel de sentiments et de ressentis, no problem.
C'est crade, c'est violent, c'est injuste, c'est vachement bien.
Pourtant c'est un peu trop violent, crade et injuste, parfois. J'aurais même pu arrêter, mais je ne regrette pas de m'être accrochée, parce que c'est quand même une bien belle fresque.
Ça joue un poil trop sur cet espèce de suspens où l'auteur par sous-entendus pas très subtils te laisse comprendre que oulala il va se passer plein de choses. Mais comme, au final, il se passe en effet plein de choses, ça se complète assez bien. Faut juste être patiente.
Bref, un début assez long, assez lourdingue, mais une suite assez palpitante et qui rattrape bien le début.
Quand on y pense, même le fait que le début est anxiogène est assez révélateur de la qualité du récit: l'auteur fait passer tout un panel de sentiments et de ressentis, no problem.
ericarothman's review against another edition
challenging
dark
funny
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal death
jennaarrrr's review against another edition
5.0
An uproarious tale of How It All Goes Wrong in Kentucky. This book has it all: farming prodigies, tornadoes, revenge, vampiric Lutherans, social resistance, greased pigs. The narrator talks like Foghorn Leghorn from Loony Tunes.
jennaarr's review against another edition
5.0
An uproarious tale of How It All Goes Wrong in Kentucky. This book has it all: farming prodigies, tornadoes, revenge, vampiric Lutherans, social resistance, greased pigs. The narrator talks like Foghorn Leghorn from Loony Tunes.
left_coast_justin's review against another edition
4.0
This is an easier book to admire than to love. When I search for comparisons, the only book that comes to mind is John Barth's Giles Goat-Boy, and I'm now smacking myself on the forehead for not realizing this connection sooner -- the hero of this book was indeed called (among other names) goat-boy. By rights, this fellow (called John Kaltenbrunner) should be as well-known as Paul Bunyon, though his story is decidedly less uplifting.
Both books are what can only be described as completely over-the-top tall tales. Barthes' book (which I read in my teens and recall only in the barest outlines) was a sendup of academia and Egolf's of smug Midwestern towns. Both involve messianic characters who start off just trying to live their lives in peace before events overtake them. Of the two, Giles was funnier, and Barnyard scarier, because the events in Barnyard, while brewed into a thick, lethal concentrate, were any one them plausible....The only implausibility was their accumulation into a single town in a single period of time.
That this book exists at all is somewhat miraculous, given its length, the quality of the writing, and the bravery of its conception. The author was all of 27 years old when it was published. My main complaint in the book is that it seems to have been written by somebody who is not lacking in experience, but lacking in exposure to alternate worldviews. Many of the ghastly details of life in small Midwestern towns are far too keenly observed to be wholly figments of his imagination, but I was left wishing he'd spent more time listening to other people with a more balanced sensibility. This book was a long revenge fantasy, the first half of which was the heaping of injustice upon injustice on young John Kaltenbrunner, and the latter half was the utter destruction of the town that had treated him so brutally. (This is not a spoiler, having been laid out in the opening paragraphs.)
It's a shame Egolf didn't live longer. His talents for storytelling, compelling prose and clarity of vision would have served him well in life if only he had more exposure to those things that make life worth living, rather than things he felt were worth dying for.
Thanks to Stephen for the suggestion and buddy read.
Both books are what can only be described as completely over-the-top tall tales. Barthes' book (which I read in my teens and recall only in the barest outlines) was a sendup of academia and Egolf's of smug Midwestern towns. Both involve messianic characters who start off just trying to live their lives in peace before events overtake them. Of the two, Giles was funnier, and Barnyard scarier, because the events in Barnyard, while brewed into a thick, lethal concentrate, were any one them plausible....The only implausibility was their accumulation into a single town in a single period of time.
That this book exists at all is somewhat miraculous, given its length, the quality of the writing, and the bravery of its conception. The author was all of 27 years old when it was published. My main complaint in the book is that it seems to have been written by somebody who is not lacking in experience, but lacking in exposure to alternate worldviews. Many of the ghastly details of life in small Midwestern towns are far too keenly observed to be wholly figments of his imagination, but I was left wishing he'd spent more time listening to other people with a more balanced sensibility. This book was a long revenge fantasy, the first half of which was the heaping of injustice upon injustice on young John Kaltenbrunner, and the latter half was the utter destruction of the town that had treated him so brutally. (This is not a spoiler, having been laid out in the opening paragraphs.)
It's a shame Egolf didn't live longer. His talents for storytelling, compelling prose and clarity of vision would have served him well in life if only he had more exposure to those things that make life worth living, rather than things he felt were worth dying for.
Thanks to Stephen for the suggestion and buddy read.
stevereally's review against another edition
2.0
So I wrote the review below in 2007 or something, after reading the book in 1999 and again in, I don't know, 2003 or something. Then I picked up a used copy for a dollar last week (2010) and read it again. I don't like it nearly as much as I used to. The story and the writing style are both deeply problematic. Several plot points are just completely implausible--for instance, crowds of people in a hospital waiting room viciously attack our hero for no particular reason; also, all the faculty of all levels of the public school fear and loathe him as if he's a horror movie villain, just because he's an unkempt misfit, basically. Also, the language (of the omniscient narrator, not dialogue--there isn't any direct dialogue) is almost constantly overwrought. This manifests itself in a few different ways, and I'm surprised it didn't bother me more in the first place.
--------------------------------------------------------
A confounding book---I love and dislike it all at once.
The story is tremendous fun, but I have some real issues with the way it's written.
The writing style is weird and troubling. The dialog is all indirect quotes, not direct. It seems throughout most of the story as though it's a kind of third-person omniscient narrator, or rather someone from the town but unidentified and with an omniscient view and literary voice. It ultimately becomes apparent, though, that it's being recounted from the perspective of someone from within a specific character set.
It seems impossible to account for such a narrator within that group of characters. He plainly places himself among them and yet accounts for all of them in such a way that the group can't actually include him. I suspect it's an oversight by the author, though I can't be sure. It pisses me off.
The language often used, in the narration and the dialog, is completely implausible coming from either this narrator or from the hero. Implausibility hurts the cause.
On the other hand, as irritating as that implausibility is, the language itself is frequently mighty fun to read. Also, I love the story. Love it. In some ways, it rings of truth, and in other ways, it's totally ridiculous, but it's consistently full of unconventional and interesting adventures of a peculiar protagonist, who suffers, endures, excels, and stirs some shit up.
--------------------------------------------------------
A confounding book---I love and dislike it all at once.
The story is tremendous fun, but I have some real issues with the way it's written.
The writing style is weird and troubling. The dialog is all indirect quotes, not direct. It seems throughout most of the story as though it's a kind of third-person omniscient narrator, or rather someone from the town but unidentified and with an omniscient view and literary voice. It ultimately becomes apparent, though, that it's being recounted from the perspective of someone from within a specific character set.
It seems impossible to account for such a narrator within that group of characters. He plainly places himself among them and yet accounts for all of them in such a way that the group can't actually include him. I suspect it's an oversight by the author, though I can't be sure. It pisses me off.
The language often used, in the narration and the dialog, is completely implausible coming from either this narrator or from the hero. Implausibility hurts the cause.
On the other hand, as irritating as that implausibility is, the language itself is frequently mighty fun to read. Also, I love the story. Love it. In some ways, it rings of truth, and in other ways, it's totally ridiculous, but it's consistently full of unconventional and interesting adventures of a peculiar protagonist, who suffers, endures, excels, and stirs some shit up.
alexatheking's review against another edition
5.0
I haven’t read a piece of fiction in a while. Lord of the Barnyard, hands down, is the weirdest and most wonderful book I’ve read in a long, long time. I don’t really know what more to say than give it a shot. It is delightful and disgusting and it will be worth your while.
mccordian's review against another edition
5.0
I up-nosed this book for 10 years because of the awful artwork (the back cover looks like Trainspotting meets Jackass) and now am kicking my ass for doing so. It's soooooo good. Ignooooore the look of the book.