I made a really grave mistake of reading reviews of this book on a certain other site, and it created a very humorous reaction in me. I personally have found this book lacking in something as I've gotten older, but reading people just completely whiff on House of Leaves raised my esteem for it almost overnight.
For reference though, this was my favorite book when I was 19. I was staying with some friends in Omaha during summer vacation and picked up a copy of the book from Barnes & Noble based on its reputation alone. I proceeded to read through the entire book over 2 nights. When I tell you I was addicted to reading this book, I mean it.
That's probably House of Leaves biggest strength, is that it has a hook unlike any other. The hook is the format, the way the story is told, it's so fascinating that you might almost think that the story comes second, and to a certain extent you might be right. Danielewski's follow-up novel Only Revolutions I did find completely impenetrable, more of a chore to read than the addictive page-turner of House Of Leaves.
The Navidson Record is really what holds this book together, as the document of the house is infinitely more fascinating than Zampano and certainly more interesting than Johnny Truant, and the building tension presented within the Navidson Record is such a well-constructed haunted house story that you almost start resenting the constant interruptions from Truant.
I suppose that is kind of an idea presented herein; a text being hijacked and misinterpreted by an in-universe character, along with Johnny's footnotes having their own footnotes of a professional editor correcting him. It's one of the more interesting ideas presented by House of Leaves that unfortunately I find doesn't really go anywhere. The book is a smattering of great ideas but I really think the haunted house is what's the most interesting. Mark seems like he'd be a fantastic genre writer.
Still, I find the book an easy recommendation because it's such a fun and creative art collage, and it's fun to see a book try and break conventions in a way only a book really can. This would an incomprehensible audiobook, a really confusing film, but it makes for a one-of-a-kind book. Plus, Mark's sister Poe made a really great companion album for it, if you want something fun to listen to.
It was also my favorite book as a teenager, and the first “challenging” thing I read at 14. Also at 14 I thought the sex scenes were dope but now they’re just kind of a slog/corny. I agree that he would be a fantastic genre writer, I picked up Only Revolutions after I finished HoL and dropped it almost immediately. Without the hook of the house and the horror story his little typographic experiments are not very interesting. I think it’s a great book to introduce people to what other things books can do, there’s better/more literary examples of this format (Pale Fire, The Tunnel?) but HoL is pretty simple, has a fun hook, and isn’t that long all things considered.
i'm not sure where i read it, perhaps an old Reddit comment after my read or something, but i saw somewhere an allusion between Truant's storyline and the story of Minos+Theseus+Minotaur (something to do with his red footnotes tracing a path like Ariadne's yarn through the labyrinth of the text). idk the full extent of the comparison and i'm due for a re-read after a few years but i remember that being a big skeleton key for my enjoyment of the book at the time
I've avoided this book in the way I avoid most things which receive acclaim immediately upon publication. If memory serves me this is from the early 2000s, so not long enough for a literary consensus to really have formed about it. In my mind if something as supposedly obscure/dense/esoteric as this finds an audience without any trouble, it implies the market already exists critically and popularly for it, which means it's maybe not pushing boundaries as much as it says it is. My sister bought a copy and I remember flipping through it once and it not leaving an impression. If it's more than a gimmick I might borrow it at some point.
also read this at 19, the sex scenes were the worst, the Australian girl one was the one in particularly silly, 'her breasts bouncing around like giant pacman' what are pacman tits? are they bright yellow? Like pacman isn't even known for bouncing around, he moves in a straight line that's the entire point of the game. Danielewski can come off pretty porn brained in some parts of the book, and not in a meta/ironic way like american psycho or something, just pure vapidness. did help get be back into reading though so i'll give mark that.