Fabulous title and an interesting premise, writing is easy to read and follow, but ultimately unsatisfying. Sam Pulsifer (nice name choice, btw) is the unfortunate narrator, with an even more unfortunate history of killing two people accidentally in a house fire.

Thie is supposed to be funny in the way that "all of life is trying to kill me" sort of way, but I got only a few smirks out of this book, and no belly laughs. The guy is too pathetic. Laughing at him is, for me, like crushing a slug.

For those who like a pathetic anti-hero who has life continue to fall on him, this would be a fun read. It is well-written and makes internal sense. It simply isn't to my taste.

I did enjoy the series of people who really wanted to line up to burn down writer's homes. I would have liked more on why they felt so strongly about their destruction. Lots of funny stories in there.... ( )

Well, I completely agree with everyone who was annoyed by this novel, BUT I also completely agree with those who liked it. It was not a bad book by any means, though the plot seemed overly contrived and there are plenty, plenty of moments where you think, "Why doesn't he just tell the truth?" "Why didn't he just DO that?" and other moments that are similar to those in movie theaters showing horror movies. You want to yell (well, maybe I wasn't so passionate about the book to yell) at the screen and tell them what to do. Ugh. But! I thought the book held some great stuff, and, had the writing not been so ... heavy-handed, so treated-me-like-I'm-not-smart-enough-to-catch-on-without-having-things-over-explained-to-me-esque, perhaps I really would've felt strong emotions toward the especially beautiful writing in the last couple of pages.

However, I was affected by this book. In a good way. I DID enjoy it. Clarke has some good insights, there are some quotable lines, there is a lovable character or two in there (Sam's mother, for example), but I wish I could've gotten to know Sam better. I wish the MAIN character could've been more personalized, more attractive as a human being, more sympathetic. Regardless of all the negative criticism, though, I am glad I read this book. I was engaged in it (some times more than others ... another point I won't delve into is the consistency of the book on a few different levels), it really had some good stuff in it, and Clarke clearly is a talented writer.

Lastly, I'll say this: I think Clarke hits the reader over the head with/re-re-re-states things that are, to most, abundantly clear and obvious parts of the plot, but remains vague and slightly ambiguous on the emotional specificity and background of his main characters and their motives. And I always prefer character-richness to plot-richness (especially in cases such as these, where the plot is so ... plotty).

So, that's my mixed and all-over-the-place review of a novel that was, well, likewise, much the same. ( )

Overwritten for my taste--too purposefully eccentric, too self-conscious, too full of quirky 'wisdom'. ( )

Plus the every illusive half star. I got the humor; I just got bored. ( )

Plus the every illusive half star. I got the humor; I just got bored. ( )