Is AG overrated?

Impossible question. It really is.

I remember a month back or so Sports Illustrated ran an Overrated/Underrated issue. With things like Most underrated rivalry/Most overrated rivalry and stuff like that. Most of their points were well made and seemed to follow true to the meaning of the article.

So they looked at things that are better than people give them credit for and things that get too much credit. Most of the things they could say were backed up with the odd fact or two that would seem objective(The USC/Notre dame rivalry is overrated, mainly because neither team has been very good for 20 years)

But books aren't sports are they? Barring mistakes in grammar and syntax there's very little objective you can say about works of fiction.

American Gods received lots of praise. That's true. No argument there.

But is it overrated? Well that can only be answered by drawing the line between how good the book was acclaimed to be and how much you, as an individual, enjoyed it.

I liked it a lot. So did most critics. So my answer is no.

Its unfair to make a comparison between Stephen King and Neil Gaiman unless you decide what to compare. The Dark Tower Series is better than Stardust. Sandman is better than probably anything King wrote. American Gods reads, sometimes, like a decent Stephen King book.
And by overrated, I didn't mean overpublisized. I meant that almost every review I read was wonderously glowing, and I didn't think he deserved that much praise.
Quite frankly, its been 6 months since I read the book. Its hard for me to discuss something I remember so faintly.

the (dosnen't have a great memory) floyd

I don't have a great memory either, but I agree....even the bit on the main page....yah, it's a bit much

Myself, I just finished "American Gods" a few days ago, so I'm on the other end of the spectrum. I am still working small details out in my head, forming the whole picture. Right now though I feel left with the same afterglow I felt so many year ago upon completion of "Good Omens". Like I've just been privy to something meaningful. I have not read "Stardust". I enjoyed "Neverwhere". Dispite an unsatisfying ending, Croup and Vandemar were purely delicious. But compared to AG it falls far short in regards to depth and range. "The Sandman" will forever be the measuring post that all Neil's work is held to, which I don't think is quite fair, for reasons a good critic will see. I think AG is strong enough to support a second book, which would expand it's mythos, or combination there of. It was a bit slow going at first, but by the end of Part II the coaster had reached it's summit and I was holding my breath. I also felt the "Coming to America" diversions could have been more structured, or useful, or something... Was it Ibis writing all those?

Is "American Gods" overrated?
Nope, it's essential Gaiman.

JT

Also, for the fun of nit-picking, I found three instances of "through" being misspelled as "though" in AG. Sadly two of them were on backing pages 353 & 354.

JT

I was touched by this book, truly. I think most folks who are affected by Neils work would probably admit to a comfort with their darker side. That's not to say we're all locked into a world of doom and gloom, it's more that we know that place.
American Gods has got to me in the same way Sandman did in '94, when I was 23 and starting on my journey of maintaining being misunderstood. (re:Blink 182 - what's my name again)
From that you can probably work out that I'm a bit of an old scrote, but still quite transfixed with Gaiman's stunning work.
So on with the book, this tale holds your hand through finding the way to letting everything go and then realising that's when you most need to hold on.
Gods are what we make them, I know who mine are, do you know yours and will they stay that way? Probably and we still have room for more.

I just want to say Neil
I actually liked that alice cooper
comic you did .
I did not know of you ,
maybe i am simple
untill you did that work
but i will always know the japing devil ,allways.
Anyhow i hope you take 3 millon from that
ToDD mcfardownthe lane
does not know win to quit
miserly excuse for a loser
with no talent..
gets his wife to draw spawn goofball
CAnt wait to see you
if you ever return to vIctoria
I can not believe i fell for that
Todd the loser crap
and missed meeting you
but i saw you on a talk show.
anyways people lie about everybody.....
I would like to write a story about that guy losing his wife first
kids next
and then all his money drowns him
and still it is not enough

quote:

---

Originally posted by IndieQueen:
"American Gods" is the first Neil Gaiman book I've read. It's also the first book I've read in a long time that I had trouble putting down. I loved it!! I don't think it is overrated at all. Neil and this book deserve the praise they've gotten.

---

I was about to post exactly the same thing. I've just started reading the book, bought it yesterday and am just glued to it at the moment.

I too haven't picked up a book in ages and hadn't intended buying a book of this nature when I went into the bookstore. Ok, so I really went in for a hot chocolate, yeah, well they do great hot chocolates, so there.

So right now, I'm loving the book, but as far as the "blurb" thing goes... didn't read them, never do. I find them too corny. I read a few pages and the snippet on the back cover and that decides it.

However, what nearly did put me off buying the book was the sticker on the front which relates to the "money back" offer. Now this did worry me, "As good as Stephen King, or your money back". Well SK bores the shit outta me, so had it not been for the fact that I read a page or so and realised that Neil's writing is nothing like King's, I would've put the thing back on the shelf right there and then.

Ok, back to AG

It's not a bad book, but comparing it to Neverwhere or the Sandman series.....it's just a little too hyped up is all.

Bethany,
I think of the money back guarantee as a bit of a joke. Surely they know that under it's limits their profits are safe. I'm glad you decided to pick it up nonetheless.

JT

There was an article in the Indie about the refund scheme from November 3 2001 that said

A brilliant money-making scheme from Hodder Headline. The publisher is running a promotion on American Gods by Neil Gaiman, promising it to be "as good as Stephen King or your money back". The offer has so far elicited only two responses, reports The Bookseller, and neither has grasped the refund principle. One customer did not want to return the book but asked for a refund anyway, while the second wrote: "I simply cannot justify spending only pounds 10 on the novel, it was that good. I therefore enclose a cheque for pounds 7.99, bringing the amount I have paid up to the full pounds 17.99 cover price."

(((smile)))

When I searched for it I also found
http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=119807

which says Neil wrote "From Hell"

For all those of you who don't like blurbs, you should come to England! My copy has no blurb whatsoever (and a better cover than the US version). It also got no hype at all, as Neil's practically unheard of over here.

Absolutely brilliant book! Who else but Neil could go from a story about African slaves to a metallic spider-like Search Engine in the space of a few pages?

Oooh it's so great! I could go on, but I won't.

Maybe I could make a statement by buying the book, holding on to it for a week, returning it, and, if they give me the money, using it to buy a copy of "The Gunslingr." That should sum my feeling up about it very nicely....

Floyd,

...have you thought of writing to complain to the British SF Association and the International Horror Guild to complain about American Gods being nominated as Best Novel? Or to Locus for listing it first in all the best of the year roundups?

Maybe that would get your message across better.

kim

In reading all these postings I just felt the need to point out that Gaiman is an author who favors a subtle, anticlimatic ending over a big apocalyptic one. When executed correctly, the former are potentially far more mind-blowing than the latter. However, it also needs to be noted that in using a subtle ending, the storyteller immediately shifts the attention of the reader from the destination (the ending) to the journey there. The problem I have with American Gods is that the journey there is just not worth it to me. I loved all the myth, I loved the way he played around with names and identifying all the different gods was a lot of fun, and even if I didn't know a lot about mythology, I still would've really enjoyed that aspect. I loved the play on names Gaiman used. But seriously, he underused that aspect with regards to Shadow; now a lot of that can be interpreted as leaving threads up to the reader, but frankly, america is the "land of dreams and fire" and what does fire throw on the wall of a cave? exactly. There's a wealth of unexplored story there, and maybe Gaiman has bigger plans, maybe there will be a sequel, but the ending doesn't suggest that and it seems to me like Gaiman would've written a far better piece had he allowed the story to develop more. Gaiman it seems, has difficulty paring a story down to a moderate length. After all, the man is a master of the short story and he's also very good at long stories, I mean aside from A Game of You, The Kindly Ones is the best Sandman has to offer-it brings everything together and beautifully at that. Oh and by the way, I totally disagree with the statement that writing a novel is harder than writing a short story, I for one, feel that it is always easier to build a story up than to strip it down to its barest essence, wasting no words and getting your point across in the process. So do I like AG? yes, it is well written, but I feel that the short stories and Sandman are so incredibly superior, it's almost dissapointing. Maybe that marvel comics project he's working on will shock him out of the funk he's in. peace.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mephistopheles Huxtable:
Maybe that marvel comics project he's working on will shock him out of the funk he's in. peace.

---

Yeah! We want him to do funnybooks with pictures in them! GAIMAN BACK TO COMICS! GAIMAN BACK TO COMICS!

If I wrote letters to award comitees, i'd have flooded the AMPAS (the guys who give out Academy Awards) with letters asking "Where the hell are Memento and Ghost World, you idiots?" a long time. Nah, i don't care enough to complain. I didn't dislike the novel. I don't even know what the other ones were like. So... yea... thats that.
And yes, I hope he does come back to comics. Which he is. And now I can go back to my first love, the home of New York City and nerdy superheroes, the company with the friendliest Bullpen and nicest chief around, the one, the only, Marvel comics! Face front, true believers, 'cause until Garth Ennis starts writing Spider-Man, Make Mine Marvel!
God, that felt good...

the (excelsior!) floyd

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr.Punch:
Guess u all r right. Everyone got his own unique opinion. I just wanted to add, that I think this book isn't that great. It's not Gaimanesk enough. I liked Neverwhere much more as it comes up with newer ideas. The godswalktheearth-thing is nothing new in Neils books, so I guess the praise it received is to much. I loved the book, but on the other hand, I kinda enjoyed "the day I swapped my dad for 2 goldfish" more, cause it was more inventive (bit short though :-) )


In the end: Who cares anyway, Neil is the best fantasy-author around these days, and we all can call ourselves lucky, that we are able to read his works. Praise be to Neil and not to a specific piece of work from his hands.

Oh, and yes, the Sandman still keeps my mind rocking...

---

Same here,i liked Neverwhere better,even though i laughed with AG.Just the ending is too happy.

Ah... silly boy, to call Sandman one of, what did you say? I can't even be bothered to look it up, but one of the paramount works of English literature, tantamount to Shakespeare?

God, you have *got* to be kidding me, I love Neil dearly, but I think if he heard that, he might blush a little bit himself. It is pretty clear from your posts, maybe you need to get a few more years and learn to appreciate depth and subtlety a little bit more.

If you are a comics fan (make mine marvel?) that explains a lot of it, but I am a bookie kid, and Neil is a rare master of short stories these days who still has some commercial success when everything else is pulp and poor prose.

I think Neil is definitely in his element so far in the short story, and I have no doubt he will come into his element in the Novel, I feel like he was just cutting his teeth here. He has the ability to write the 'great' novel someday I think, the kind that will have my crying at the end, something dark and rich and creamy.

As much as the short story is difficult, to parse and such, I think the novel will always be the gold standard for judging great authors, to write a work of some length, to really flesh out characters, to add a touch of humanity... Anyway, I've read such ridiculous praise for so many other works of gibbering crap (I dare you to read the back covers of gamy fantasy/romance/sf genre novels) that I can't see how AG would be overrated, no matter what.

Blurbs are so overdone these days that its literally impossible to be overrated by blurbs if you are an author of any talent, and I truly believe Neil will come through with something at least approaching a permanent masterwork someday, unless he is too modest to try.

I hope I didn't give the wrong impression. I like both comic books and novels. I was just saying that 'cause it was late and I felt silly.