This is a beautifully written novel centerd around the imagination and memories of August Brill. During one night of many nights of insomnia, the reader enter's the mind of August as he creates a story of a parallel America at war with itself as he tries to cope with his past and the struggles within his family.

This is the first time I have read a novel by Paul Auster and I will be sure to read more. ( )

El libro en si tiene su gracia, tiene estilo y la prosa funciona perfectamente, però el argumento es tramposo y estafador. Una penita, porque estaba disfrutando mucho con la novela y por culpa del tercio final es muy decepcionante. Un chasco. ( )

It had a lot of promise, but I just lost all heart for it today when I saw Auster had signed Bernard-Henri Levy's letter regarding Roman Polanski.

ETA: Interesting to note this has been flagged as 'not a review.' It seems a very clear review. The book had promise, but not enough promise to overcome my disappointment in the author's conduct. Other readers may wish to consider this information in their decision to purchase the book, which is why I mentioned it in the first place. I wonder if whomever flagged this review considers opinions about author conduct inappropriate for book reviews in general or simply disagreed with me on this issue and felt moved to censor me in some way. If the former, hey, a principle is a principle and I have to bow to your purist view of book review writing; if the latter, please reconsider your motive in relation to intellectual freedom and freedom of speech.

I detect a pattern in Paul Auster's novels, and that's bad, and after reading only two of his books! There is an older man who is writing something, but what he is writing of of no particular significance, even to himself. The women in his life are going through tough times, as is he. People have died, left them, cheated. The old guy most likely cheated on his either dead of ex wife or else he behaved like a schmuck in some other way. There is some kind of fantasy thread that runs through the old guy's head, or more than one, but they don't go anywhere. Everyone decides to just keep soldiering on because it isn't unbearable. Then the book ends.

I had heard an interview on the radio with Auster about this, his newest book, which is what got me interested in reading him. In the interview Diane Rhem made much of the alternate universe in which there was a civil war in the U.S. which started after, and because of, the way that George W. became President in 2000. That alternate universe is a story the the old guy in Man In The Dark is telling himself, it's not the thing that he's writing. About halfway through the book Auster gets tired of it and has the old guy kill off the character in his little story, who had crossed (back) between universes with orders to kill the old guy. Then the little story of the little civil war is just dropped.



Alternate history is a respectable sub genre of science fiction. Auster did not do justice to that sub genre. In fact it was a waste of time reading it. Repetitive, self referential writing about a fictional author who writes about himself is what turned John Barth from a brilliant novelist into a crashing bore. Auster is well on his way to joining Barth in that category.

I'll Never Forget The Day I Read A Book!

I've read all of Auster's novels and love his sensibility. This particular one is not his best; the plot is a little rocky, more of the seams show through than usual, but it had enough of his reflective musings about the stories we tell ourselves to keep me with him. Don't start with this one, but definitely read Auster. ( )

I've read all of Auster's novels and love his sensibility. This particular one is not his best; the plot is a little rocky, more of the seams show through than usual, but it had enough of his reflective musings about the stories we tell ourselves to keep me with him. Don't start with this one, but definitely read Auster. ( )

I've read all of Auster's novels and love his sensibility. This particular one is not his best; the plot is a little rocky, more of the seams show through than usual, but it had enough of his reflective musings about the stories we tell ourselves to keep me with him. Don't start with this one, but definitely read Auster. ( )

" The weird world rolls on."

Auster's musings on life and relationships. Typical Auster with the usual meta-fiction thrown in. I find Auster very thought provoking but this one was not as good as some other ones I've read. ( )

Unable to summarize the book, I will simply say that its transitions from the elderly narrator to the younger narrator are seamless, culminating in the end in a beautiful ending. I thought this novel was interesting, albeit a little strange. ( )

Bel romanzo ( )

Paul Auster's Man in the Dark turned out to be quite an interesting read with an unexpected ending. I enjoyed clear style and clever story telling. This was my first Auster novel and I am actually looking forward to reading more. ( )

This is my first foray into the world of Paul Auster, and I must say it was a pleasant foray as foray’s go. Man in the Dark was written in that seemingly new wave popular “no quotation” style that takes a minute to get used to but then becomes somewhat pleasing to the eye as you go. I don’t know if there is a name for this style, because I am but a simpleton; must be the reason I am dwelling on the style of the book rather than its substance.

Man in the dark is an interesting story within a story within a story. Auster has a wonderful talent for building strong and believable characters. He has mastered the show; don’t tell technique of character development and action. This book of a mere 180 pages, is chalk full of interesting little stories; maybe tidbits is a better descriptor about seemingly ordinary people. The main character is a man in his early seventies who is living with his daughter and granddaughter after a car accident has left him crippled. Each night he finds sleep as a mere desire rather than an actuality, so to pass the time he tells himself stories; so real and some fictional. It is a kind of one act, one set play where the main character examines his life and the lives of those who have touched him most deeply; especially his family.

This is an excellent story; I can’t wait to read more of this author. ( )

Slightly looser than the typical Auster. The metafictional strand of the dystopic US Civil War story was not fully-developed, I was half expecting an Auster twist whereby the manin character's invented characters came to kill him. That didn't happen though the novel was no weaker for that. It was more an exploration of age and family - regrests and consolations - and so perhaps shows a more subtle shift in Auster's work. ( )

Som sædvanlig er Paul Auster jo fantastisk! ( )

Maybe I'm just to accustomed to modern day formulaic plot lines in movies and books, but this novel just seemed lazy to me. I always enjoy his writing, so I read it through, but in the end, I thought: "what was the point?" If you're going to abruptly end a parallel story, end it after 5 pages, not 50. If you removed the story the lead character was conjuring in his head while trying to sleep, you would be left with a great opening to a larger novel. When I finished the book, I felt cheated. ( )

While I thought Auster's Invention of Solitude was wonderful, I became uninterested in this novel after the first sixty pages. There are some interesting narratives going on in the story, but at points I felt like I was just reading whatever film reviews Auster had recently read or some very vague fantasy of our country split apart.

I was particularly bored with the later admission of a "flaw" in our main character as the description seemed trite. It just wasn't worth reading about.

The only part that really spoke to me was the circumstance of Titus's death. Auster forced me to consider a reality for many families that I have fortunately never had to face. ( )

A gripping tale of loss, despair and escapes. Several lines of narration intertwine and despite this complexity the story seems to flow without effort. I was sucked in on the first page and gently let off some 180 pages later. ( )

Paul Auster’s novel Man in the Dark is an enigma. His intricate plot has numerous overlapping stories. So many and so overlapping that in a lesser hand this would be a mess, especially given the very short length of the novel. But Auster is such a good writer, that he mostly succeeds in pulling it off. The plot revolves around August Brill, a 70 year old writer who has insomnia. To keep his mind off the events in his life he doesn’t want to think about, he tells himself a fantastic story about an alternate America. An America that never went to war in Iraq because after the 2000 elections the country split apart into a civil war. Within Brill’s story we meet Owen Brick, who has been somehow transported from his bed into the alternate America to perform a task for the rebelling army. But, as with most insomniacs, Brill can’t concentrate on the story without drifting back to his own life. So we also here the story of how he came to be living with his daughter and granddaughter. We learn slowly about his wife’s death, and about the tragic circumstances of his granddaughter’s arrival in the home. Auster writes the novel from Brill’s perspective, and the whole novel takes place from Brill’s mind as he lies in bed trying to get to sleep. We jump from one story line to another, as Brill’s mind jumps around.
I recently read another novel (Ghostwalk by Rebecca Stott) where the auther had too many stories to tell and the novel became boring and tedious because of it. In that instance the writer seemed to not know what story line they really wanted to follow, so she just threw them all in together. Auster however has intentionally chosen several stories to tell, and he has done it exceptionally well. He is a writer on top of his game, as he kept me well interested until the end. The only problem I had was that one story line abruptly ended too soon. But all in all this was a great read. ( )

Obviously very well-written, obviously a book with a lot going on, on deeper levels, but unless it's obvious, it sails right over my head. Why the alternative history story? No idea. Neat, but no idea what it was doing there. Reminds me of Peace, by Gene Wolfe. A very upsetting ending, but justifiably so. ( )

this was really hard to get into on cd. he has 2 stories going. the main story is ok. the other one is ?. basically very sad. ( )

An old man can't sleep. He spends the night alternately reviewing his own history, and making up a story in his head of an alternate America. This novel is short and fractured with completely believable characters, and a realistic plot. Beautiful. ( )

For the most part, i love the way Paul Auster sweeps me into a story. I wasn't disappointed in this. Pulls you right into the story, totally absorbs the restless mind. Every once in a while, you remember you're sitting in a living room in SC, reading a book. It's not long, and has moments that made me think I was still reading Brooklyn Follies. Finished it in 2 sittings and now javaczuk is reading it. What is it about absurdist fiction I so like?

(Speaking of absurd, hazrabai was reading this series of books by Nora Roberts while she was here. Very apologetic about it, but said she really enjoyed them. Then a friend came to visit her and raved about the books, so I though I'd try them. Feh. There were some Irish legends woven in, which were interesting, but it was one of those "throw the book across the room" experiences, except I was afraid of breaking something. What is it about that writer that appeals to people? There are other romance writers who actually can engage the reader and make them think or give adventure. The sex scenes weren't even interesting. I get the concept of romance as a genre for escape, but this writer writes such formulaic pap-- or is that what people find comforting? Anyhow, I'll bookcross 'em and get them out of here without reading more.) ( )

"As the wired world rolls on."

- ข้อสังเกตอย่างหนึ่งของนิยายเรื่องนี้คือ หนังทุกเรื่องที่ถูกกล่าวถึงในเรื่องนี้เป็น non-english movies คือ 'Grand of Illusion' ฝรั่งเศส, 'Bicycle Thief' อิตาลี, 'World of Apu' อินเดีย และ 'Tokyo Story' แน่นอนญี่ปุ่น และนักเขียนนิยายสามสี่คนที่ถูกเอ่ยชื่อก็เป็น non-english authors Chekhov รัสเซีย, Calvino อิตาลี, Camus ฝรั่งเศส สามคนนี้ชิ่อขึ้นต้นด้วยตัว "C" หมด ทำไมถึงเลือกเอ่ยถึงสามคนนี้ ? ผมยังสงสัยอยู่ และอีกคน Tolstoy ก็รัสเซีย

- นิยายเรื่องนี้เป็นเรื่องซ้อนเรื่องที่ม้วนมาบรรจบกันเหมือนแหวน 'mobius' คนเล่าคนเดียวแต่ให้มุมมองทั้ง first-person และ third-person narrator

- Owen Brick ตัวละครที่ Narrator คือ August Brill สร้างขึ้นเป็น Kafkaesque คือพบเหตุการณ์แนวเดียวกับ Josef K หรือ Gregory Samson ใน The Trial และ Metamorphosis ของ Kafka คือตื่นมาแล้วต้องเจอเรื่องเหลือเชื่อ สถานการณ์ที่ถูกคุกคามจากโลกภายนอกทั้งที่ตัวเองไม่ได้ทำอะไร และในที่สุดก็ต้องตาย

- inanimate object ! การอ่านนิยายเรื่องนี้จะทำให้การดูหนังของผมเปลี่ยนไปตลอดการ เข้าใจภาษาหนังมากขึ้นโดยเฉพาะเรื่อง Inanimate object

- Auster เก่งมากแค่ 180 หน้าสามารถอัดเรื่องราวต่าง ๆ ได้เยอะมาก ( )

Runs out of steam towards the end ( )

Anything Auster pumps out, I pick up...I was introduced to his literary genius in college when I read 'The New York Trilogy'...I was immediately swept up in the language and flow of his works.This book, and Brooklyn follies are very similar in that they deal with a similar theme...Life goes on...I think it works a little better in Brooklyn, but I am a fan of story-within-a-story narratives...Quick, fun read, but not his best...Still, I would recommend it. ( )