Scan barcode
ocurtsinger's review against another edition
1.0
At one point, the author may have had a great idea for a story that takes place in an interesting pseudo-Icelandic alternate reality, but the actual novel is bogged down by dull characters, dull dialogue, dull storyline, and worst of all: a metaphysical structure that attempts to make a statement about the structure of the novel but really just comes off as annoying and pretentious. In a nutshell.
nationofkim's review against another edition
4.0
it took me a little while to get into what was going on, but once i did i couldn't put it down. i was looking for something different and as always mcsweeney's delivered just that.
dantastic's review against another edition
3.0
When Shirley MacGuffin is found murdered, everyone looks to Our Heroine to find her killer. Our Heroine, however, only wants to find her missing dog. Since evil has no interest in her lack of interest, she gets drawn into the mystery anyway...
After reading [b:The Boy Detective Fails|102504|The Boy Detective Fails|Joe Meno|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348110907s/102504.jpg|2269040] and enjoying it, someone recommended this book to me since the two were similar.
Icelander is a postmodern, meta-fictional mystery that is a funhouse mirror reflection of the cozy mysteries of a bygone age. Our Heroine is the daughter of a famous detective whose cases have been fictionalized as the Memoirs of Emily Bean. She wakes up after a one night stand to find her friend murdered. Despite her best efforts to the contrary, she gets drawn into the mystery anyway.
The writing in Icelander is beautiful, with Wodehousian wordplay and clever dialogue throughout. The background of the Vanaheim and the Refurserkir was pretty interesting and the motivation of the villains made sense. The characters were fairly colorful and read like twisted Agatha Christie characters. While footnotes in fiction normally annoy me, the ones in this book were justified and usually amusing. Not Terry Pratchett footnote amusing but amusing none the less.
However, it seemed like the book was too occupied with its own cleverness to actually have things happen. Halfway through the book I was still waiting for something to actually happen. For my money, delightfully clever and witty prose doesn't amount to much unless it serves the story.
Overall, I'd say I liked it more than I thought it was just okay. Three out of five stars.
After reading [b:The Boy Detective Fails|102504|The Boy Detective Fails|Joe Meno|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348110907s/102504.jpg|2269040] and enjoying it, someone recommended this book to me since the two were similar.
Icelander is a postmodern, meta-fictional mystery that is a funhouse mirror reflection of the cozy mysteries of a bygone age. Our Heroine is the daughter of a famous detective whose cases have been fictionalized as the Memoirs of Emily Bean. She wakes up after a one night stand to find her friend murdered. Despite her best efforts to the contrary, she gets drawn into the mystery anyway.
The writing in Icelander is beautiful, with Wodehousian wordplay and clever dialogue throughout. The background of the Vanaheim and the Refurserkir was pretty interesting and the motivation of the villains made sense. The characters were fairly colorful and read like twisted Agatha Christie characters. While footnotes in fiction normally annoy me, the ones in this book were justified and usually amusing. Not Terry Pratchett footnote amusing but amusing none the less.
However, it seemed like the book was too occupied with its own cleverness to actually have things happen. Halfway through the book I was still waiting for something to actually happen. For my money, delightfully clever and witty prose doesn't amount to much unless it serves the story.
Overall, I'd say I liked it more than I thought it was just okay. Three out of five stars.
roseannmvp's review against another edition
3.0
Si I've decided that I don 't enjoy reading books when characters and places in it have strange names that I can't wrap my brain or tongue around.
I also am now reading yet another book about a Shakespeare conspiracy right after this, so.....too weird!
Overall, a decent read, but a little too strenuous for bedtime reading....maybe lunch would have been better, if I had the time!
I also am now reading yet another book about a Shakespeare conspiracy right after this, so.....too weird!
Overall, a decent read, but a little too strenuous for bedtime reading....maybe lunch would have been better, if I had the time!
magnetgrrl's review against another edition
1.0
This book had so many elements that I love - metanalysis, examination of genre - specifically the mystery genre, farce, mythology, Iceland.... that it's been tough to figure out why it was such an utter disappointment.
Then I realized this was put out by the McSweeney's crew, who I am consistently disappointed with. They're never as funny or as clever as they think they are or they appear to be, judging from the adulation of fans.
There was a sort of meta- thing trying to happen - some kind of nascent attempt at a self-critical mystery about the mystery genre - that just was not coming off right. There were a lot of footnotes; a somewhat annoying if not inherently pretentious tactic that's sadly becoming quite popular lately and one which I've seen used before to better effect. None of the characters were interesting, realistic, likeable, or even that smart. Nor were they funny, despite what I can only assume to be attempts to make them so (especially in the case of the "metaphysical detectives" who struck me as poor knock-offs of simultaneously Croup and Vandemar from Neverwhere and the existential detectives in I Heart Huckabee's.) I think part of this might be that the characters were less supposed to be people and more supposed to fill typical mystery 'roles' or some kind of Archtypes, but that falls pretty flat. I'm kind of ashamed, actually, that this book is even associated with Iceland. Lots of liberties were taken with the mythology as well as the ... feel of Iceland as a place, and its people.
Then I realized this was put out by the McSweeney's crew, who I am consistently disappointed with. They're never as funny or as clever as they think they are or they appear to be, judging from the adulation of fans.
There was a sort of meta- thing trying to happen - some kind of nascent attempt at a self-critical mystery about the mystery genre - that just was not coming off right. There were a lot of footnotes; a somewhat annoying if not inherently pretentious tactic that's sadly becoming quite popular lately and one which I've seen used before to better effect. None of the characters were interesting, realistic, likeable, or even that smart. Nor were they funny, despite what I can only assume to be attempts to make them so (especially in the case of the "metaphysical detectives" who struck me as poor knock-offs of simultaneously Croup and Vandemar from Neverwhere and the existential detectives in I Heart Huckabee's.) I think part of this might be that the characters were less supposed to be people and more supposed to fill typical mystery 'roles' or some kind of Archtypes, but that falls pretty flat. I'm kind of ashamed, actually, that this book is even associated with Iceland. Lots of liberties were taken with the mythology as well as the ... feel of Iceland as a place, and its people.
clarkness's review against another edition
4.0
I was attracted to this book's cover art a long while back and had been meaning to read it since then. Glad that I finally did. I expected this novel to focus on the increasingly popular theme of generational malaise related to peaking too early, but I was surprised to find a story that was mostly about the richness of literature itself. Nothing overly serious, but it was a fun noir about a grown up Nancy Drew-esque character trying not to get embroiled in the murder of her best friend. Also, Iceland.
There's a secret society of underground native Icelanders, some metaphysical detectives, some regular detectives, and a strong artisanal beer community. And a dachshund!
There's a secret society of underground native Icelanders, some metaphysical detectives, some regular detectives, and a strong artisanal beer community. And a dachshund!
ohhkatrina's review against another edition
1.0
I didn't finish this but it was way too weird. I only got it because of the title, I didn't realize it was published by McSweeney's but it was just trying too hard.
randrenfrow's review against another edition
3.0
I think this book tries to be an interesting homage to classic mystery stories, like Sherlock Holmes, or even Hardy Boys (you'd understand if you read it), but it sort teeters between being a full-fledged homage and it's own thing entirely. I applaud Dustin Long for his interesting ideas and devices, and it was an exciting story, but left something to be desired literarily.
larsinio's review against another edition
3.0
Icelander is an interesting book that think its a lot clever than it winds up being.
This is a novel for writers, which i guess makes sense since its on Dave Eggar's. There are winks at the reader throughout - from story driver "Shirley MacGuffin" (funny the first time, ugh by the 500th time) to the unreliable narrators, to the unreliable "editor", to the unrealiable "author". These are all "clever" machiniations that any writer would enjoy, in theory.
For the first third of hte book, when Our Heroine is the the sole narrator, this works well. I liked hte ideas of person involved in real-life mysteries then subject to mystery novels hating her own fame. I liked the two literary investigators. I liked the plot about the origins of Macbeth. I liked the bookish plot, the bookish characters, 5 stars at this point.
Then it becomes a mess in the middle. Multiple voices, multiple timelines, it just loses its cohesion. The sum of the parts in the middle is less than the whole. Not much plot actual advance,s but just a lot of scattered background.
This goes on for a while and then act III kicks in when ALL THE PLOT HAPPENS IMMEDIATELY. Too much action, too late, with no real pay off. You dont really care about the characters because after switching narrator so many times in the middle, it just becomes a tastesless blur. Characters utlimtaely have no arc - its just to a race to reveal the "mystery" sorta. And then the book ends with the editor clashing with the author clashing with the content of the story, so nothing really conclusive can be said. uh ok? its "clever" i guess.
Other tidbits:
The dramatis personae was needed but it forgets to include like half the characters.
I like the idea of this book and its play on conventions, but i feel someone else could have done a better job.
For a book about Iceland there is almost 0 here about iceland. Id expect every character to have an icelandic name. The icelandic setting never really comes into play other than steam tunnels - which isnt unique to iceland. It should be called Nordicer because its a non-researched mishmash of Scandinavia.
Finally - this is an interesting book that i think should be read in a class about writing plots, as a way to give you ideas about turning conventions on its head. But way too ambitious for Dustin Long to handle
This is a novel for writers, which i guess makes sense since its on Dave Eggar's. There are winks at the reader throughout - from story driver "Shirley MacGuffin" (funny the first time, ugh by the 500th time) to the unreliable narrators, to the unreliable "editor", to the unrealiable "author". These are all "clever" machiniations that any writer would enjoy, in theory.
For the first third of hte book, when Our Heroine is the the sole narrator, this works well. I liked hte ideas of person involved in real-life mysteries then subject to mystery novels hating her own fame. I liked the two literary investigators. I liked the plot about the origins of Macbeth. I liked the bookish plot, the bookish characters, 5 stars at this point.
Then it becomes a mess in the middle. Multiple voices, multiple timelines, it just loses its cohesion. The sum of the parts in the middle is less than the whole. Not much plot actual advance,s but just a lot of scattered background.
This goes on for a while and then act III kicks in when ALL THE PLOT HAPPENS IMMEDIATELY. Too much action, too late, with no real pay off. You dont really care about the characters because after switching narrator so many times in the middle, it just becomes a tastesless blur. Characters utlimtaely have no arc - its just to a race to reveal the "mystery" sorta. And then the book ends with the editor clashing with the author clashing with the content of the story, so nothing really conclusive can be said. uh ok? its "clever" i guess.
Other tidbits:
The dramatis personae was needed but it forgets to include like half the characters.
I like the idea of this book and its play on conventions, but i feel someone else could have done a better job.
For a book about Iceland there is almost 0 here about iceland. Id expect every character to have an icelandic name. The icelandic setting never really comes into play other than steam tunnels - which isnt unique to iceland. It should be called Nordicer because its a non-researched mishmash of Scandinavia.
Finally - this is an interesting book that i think should be read in a class about writing plots, as a way to give you ideas about turning conventions on its head. But way too ambitious for Dustin Long to handle
librarianguish's review against another edition
3.0
Hmmmm. Quirky, yet this just didn't quite succeed at what it was trying to do. Oh well.