Re: RARA-AVIS: Re: Jack O'Connell's The Resurrectionist, long post

Date: 28 Mar 2008

Chris asked:

"I know you are a 'read the series in order' guy, but could an O'Connell novice jump in with The Resurrectionist ok?"

Yeah, I can be kind of anal about reading in order. As for this series, there is no narrative continuity. They stand alone completely except for their setting, so there is no narrative reason to read them in order. So I guess it comes down to your tolerance of weirdness, as they get increasingly out there as they go along, although this one isn't quite as extreme as the last one, Word Made Flesh, which got really surreal. So if you're the kind of guy who likes to immerse himself slowly, start at the beginning, but start anywhere if you don't mind jumping into the deep end.

That said, let me say a word about the weirdnes. Although some of the imagery might be decribed as Lynchian, the storytelling isn't. O'Connell's is not dream logic like Lynch's. His books are entirely internally consistent. For instance, even though some of his books have dealt with other frames of perception (say, drug hallucinations), it's entirely clear what is internal and what is external. It's just that that external can get kind of extreme and weird in an Expressionist/Gothic way.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 28 Mar 2008 EDT