What do you think?
Rate this book
Chicago Loop
He knifes silently through the shadows of the steamy Chicago summer night, prowling for lonely souls who need his help. The desperate come to him, answering his ads with promises of romantic evenings and possibly a future, never suspecting that they are the prey, chosen to satiate a twisted sexual desire.
Parker Jagoda is also a successful businessman with a wife, a child, and a house in the suburbs--respectable, health-conscious, and polite. Nobody knows about his jagged double life, his dark, hungry obsessions. He has fooled everyone except those who gasp their last dying scream. And, of course, he has not fooled himself--which may be the only glimmer of hope left inside the darkest of hearts....
From the Paperback edition.
Parker Jagoda is also a successful businessman with a wife, a child, and a house in the suburbs--respectable, health-conscious, and polite. Nobody knows about his jagged double life, his dark, hungry obsessions. He has fooled everyone except those who gasp their last dying scream. And, of course, he has not fooled himself--which may be the only glimmer of hope left inside the darkest of hearts....
From the Paperback edition.
196 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1990
7 people are currently reading
234 people want to read
About the author
Paul Theroux
230 books2,593 followersPaul Edward Theroux is an American travel writer and novelist, whose best known work is The Great Railway Bazaar (1975), a travelogue about a trip he made by train from Great Britain through Western and Eastern Europe, the Middle East, through South Asia, then South-East Asia, up through East Asia, as far east as Japan, and then back across Russia to his point of origin. Although perhaps best known as a travelogue writer, Theroux has also published numerous works of fiction, some of which were made into feature films. He was awarded the 1981 James Tait Black Memorial Prize for his novel The Mosquito Coast.
He is the father of Marcel and Louis Theroux, and the brother of Alexander and Peter. Justin Theroux is his nephew.
He is the father of Marcel and Louis Theroux, and the brother of Alexander and Peter. Justin Theroux is his nephew.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews
July 20, 2023
Wow, that was a terrible novel. So terrible. Easily the worst book I have read this year, perhaps for several years. I even went in with very low expectation purposely.
I have had a mixed bag of results with Theroux's fiction - his nonfiction - masterful, brilliant, and unmissable. His fiction - the kindest I can be is one I read was really good (Mosquito Coast) the other 3 or 4 were midrange 3 stars.
I don't even know what more to say about this one. It was supposed to be some sort of tense thriller, a lot of the action is off screen, and we are only fed clues as to actions or outcomes. The characters are unlikable (purposefully no doubt), annoying and make unexpected (and usually poor) decisions. The ending seemed choreographed from early on. For a theoretically sexually charged thriller it was lame and as mentioned above the miniscule amount was off screen, so it didn't even have the low level titillation that terribly written thrillers sometimes offer.
Maybe this was a common thing with 1990 published fiction? I don't really want to know.
I do know I regret the $2 I appear to have paid for it a few years ago.
1 sad star, and if we were allowed half stars it might have only got 1/2.
Recommend you give this a wide berth.
I have had a mixed bag of results with Theroux's fiction - his nonfiction - masterful, brilliant, and unmissable. His fiction - the kindest I can be is one I read was really good (Mosquito Coast) the other 3 or 4 were midrange 3 stars.
I don't even know what more to say about this one. It was supposed to be some sort of tense thriller, a lot of the action is off screen, and we are only fed clues as to actions or outcomes. The characters are unlikable (purposefully no doubt), annoying and make unexpected (and usually poor) decisions. The ending seemed choreographed from early on. For a theoretically sexually charged thriller it was lame and as mentioned above the miniscule amount was off screen, so it didn't even have the low level titillation that terribly written thrillers sometimes offer.
Maybe this was a common thing with 1990 published fiction? I don't really want to know.
I do know I regret the $2 I appear to have paid for it a few years ago.
1 sad star, and if we were allowed half stars it might have only got 1/2.
Recommend you give this a wide berth.
July 13, 2021
Paul and me are having trouble again.
*sigh*
It happens.
You can be in the most amazing relationship, and you'll still have problems from time to time.
Like, that time when we talked about O-Zone, which I, while not disliking it, wasn't too thrilled about. But that was okay, we talked about it, it was in the past (1986! as if anyone can actually be held accountable for what they did in 1986!), and besides, I have some dark secrets in my past as well (certainly darker than O-Zone, especially the ones that are still gathering dust on the top of my closet). Also, no one ever really said that O-Zone was outstanding, plus it had some excellent passages and ideas.
As far as our relationship goes, O-Zone was really just a glitch in the perfection.
But Chicago Loop?
No, sorry, Paul, I think it'll take a while until I forgive you for that one. I mean, it's one thing to write a novel in half a day, sometimes one IS bored, and one DOEs stupid things. But to then have it sold as practically the next coming, as your "most riveting novel yet", all the while knowing that the only thing that makes this novel even remotely worth talking about (notice how I don't say "reading"), is all the sex? (which, btw, was either offscreen or so unmentionable that I don't remember it, which is funny, since it was one of the things that annoyed me the most while I read the book.)
And don't come saying that it was "a long time ago." It was in 1990! I know, that 21 years, but the point is, unlike 1986, I remember 1990 clearly, it was the year of Pretty Woman, Blue Sky Mining and Total Recall, and even that last one was worth mentioning more that Chicago Loop (also, Tom Cruise divorced Minnie Rogers. Huh? He was married to Mimi Rogers? Yes, I didn't know that either, but that could very well have been the one part of 1990 where everyone was high, and for a good reason).
But.... despite all this, I read Chicago Loop. Because I love you, in good times and in bad times, and I don't regret any single minute of this.
Now let's never talk about this again.
(Note: this review will probably make a lot more sense to you if you've read my other reviews of Paul Theroux's books. Then again, maybe not.)
P.S. As you can see from the comments, 30 years later, we are still all a bit confused about the nineties, in particular about the fact that Tom Cruise may or may or not have been married to someone called Minnie or Mimi Rogers. I swear, this was on Wikipedia at the time, but I somehow feel that this is the kind of information that gets lost on the internet (surely influenced by that coughreligioncoughnoitsnotcough that Mr Cruise is a part of, so I feel that this harmless review of a book that I didn't even like will one day become an important testimony to, well, the nineties or Tom Cruise, or something at least.
It's going to be like virtual archeology out there one day. Come here, archealogists! In particlar if you are as hot as Daniel (from SG-1 you heathens) was back in the day.
Thank you for your kind attention, carry on.
*sigh*
It happens.
You can be in the most amazing relationship, and you'll still have problems from time to time.
Like, that time when we talked about O-Zone, which I, while not disliking it, wasn't too thrilled about. But that was okay, we talked about it, it was in the past (1986! as if anyone can actually be held accountable for what they did in 1986!), and besides, I have some dark secrets in my past as well (certainly darker than O-Zone, especially the ones that are still gathering dust on the top of my closet). Also, no one ever really said that O-Zone was outstanding, plus it had some excellent passages and ideas.
As far as our relationship goes, O-Zone was really just a glitch in the perfection.
But Chicago Loop?
No, sorry, Paul, I think it'll take a while until I forgive you for that one. I mean, it's one thing to write a novel in half a day, sometimes one IS bored, and one DOEs stupid things. But to then have it sold as practically the next coming, as your "most riveting novel yet", all the while knowing that the only thing that makes this novel even remotely worth talking about (notice how I don't say "reading"), is all the sex? (which, btw, was either offscreen or so unmentionable that I don't remember it, which is funny, since it was one of the things that annoyed me the most while I read the book.)
And don't come saying that it was "a long time ago." It was in 1990! I know, that 21 years, but the point is, unlike 1986, I remember 1990 clearly, it was the year of Pretty Woman, Blue Sky Mining and Total Recall, and even that last one was worth mentioning more that Chicago Loop (also, Tom Cruise divorced Minnie Rogers. Huh? He was married to Mimi Rogers? Yes, I didn't know that either, but that could very well have been the one part of 1990 where everyone was high, and for a good reason).
But.... despite all this, I read Chicago Loop. Because I love you, in good times and in bad times, and I don't regret any single minute of this.
Now let's never talk about this again.
(Note: this review will probably make a lot more sense to you if you've read my other reviews of Paul Theroux's books. Then again, maybe not.)
P.S. As you can see from the comments, 30 years later, we are still all a bit confused about the nineties, in particular about the fact that Tom Cruise may or may or not have been married to someone called Minnie or Mimi Rogers. I swear, this was on Wikipedia at the time, but I somehow feel that this is the kind of information that gets lost on the internet (surely influenced by that coughreligioncoughnoitsnotcough that Mr Cruise is a part of, so I feel that this harmless review of a book that I didn't even like will one day become an important testimony to, well, the nineties or Tom Cruise, or something at least.
It's going to be like virtual archeology out there one day. Come here, archealogists! In particlar if you are as hot as Daniel (from SG-1 you heathens) was back in the day.
Thank you for your kind attention, carry on.
February 13, 2025
Picked it up based on "Chicago" in the title. Horrible piece of 1990's men's lit. Not far off from "Looking for Mr Goodbar". Set in Chicago, and it names some places, but there is no sense of the city whatsoever. And no, single white women in their 20's did not live on S Cottage Grove in the '90's - especially one originally from Skokie. Thank God it is a short novel - I did not waste too much of my time on reading this.
April 21, 2012
American Psycho lite! Parker is a family man who nevertheless puts personal ads in the paper and murders the women who answer them. This had a pretty distasteful "the-ho-deserves-it" vibe at the very beginning, as Parker tells two women a story of a frat boy rapist that he used to know as a kind of test; the woman who finds this story distasteful gets to live another day, while the one who finds it exciting gets her face chewed off. That doesn't really come up again & Parker conveniently forgets what he's done to Sharon for a while. However, once Parker remembers that he's a vicious killer, it all devolves and he leaves his family, starts dressing as a woman, and I don't know, perpetuating some myth that transvestites are deranged? No thanks.
October 19, 2024
Kan jeg anbefale denne boken? Kan man synes en bok er godt skrevet, gi den en grei vurdering, og likevel fraråde lesere å bruke tid på den? Ja, noen ganger, som denne: Jeg er rett og slett usikker på om dere vil ha utbytte av den.
Jeg har lest Paul Theroux siden begynnelsen av 1980-tallet, og har helt til nå sett på ham som «min forfatter». Spesielt reiseskildringene hans er stort sett svært engasjerende og velskrevne. Han er dyktig på å beskrive og reflektere, og han åpner dørene til sitt indre liv - i så stor grad at jeg har blitt påvirket av ham personlig. Fan boy? Kanskje.
Romanene hans er ikke helt på det samme nivået som reiseskildringene, men han har noen innertiere der også: The Mosquito Coast og My Secret History er gode eksempler på det.
Felles mellom reiseskildringene og fiksjonen er at han skriver godt, han stimulerer med beskrivelsen og referansene han legger inn, jeg blir litt klokere av hver bok. Men ikke alltid, altså.
I en av bøkene sine (husker ikke hvor) forteller han om hva han gjør på deler av kveldene underveis - for å underholde seg selv, for å få tiden til å gå. Da driver han med skriveøvelser, korte noveller, leker med historier som *kan* bli til noe, som rene øvelser.
Jeg tror Chicago Loop er en av disse øvelsene. Når han øver seg i noveller syns jeg han lykkes, når tekstene blir litt lengre - som her, 183 sider, er det nettopp øvelser det virker som. Som Chicago Loop. Den er som vanlig med Paul Theroux sine bøker godt skrevet. Det er lett å følge med. Men det smaker ikke godt. En makaber fortelling om hvordan det rakner for en mann i middelalderkrise er ikke vakkert, ikke når det er drap og personlighetsforvangling og forsøplede amerikanske storbyer som er involvert. Slike ting *kan* være veldig spennende å lese. Hunter Thompson er vel et eksempel å nevne. Men Theroux fikser ikke dette helt. Det er en regel som heter «show, don’t tell». Her er det meste av historien telling, ikke showing. Det skjer ikke så mye skjer, men konsekvensene av det som skjer blir fortalt meg så jeg nesten blir deprimert av det.
Hvorfor? Kanskje det er noe med tidsånden? Boken ble utgitt i 1988. Det var en periode som for meg var intellektuelt og estetisk fattig. Det var som om verden var i en åndskrise. Elton John ga ut sine dårligste plater, Peter Gabriel surret seg vekk, Eric Clapton, Pink Floyd, Harry Belafonte, Paul Theroux, V. S. Naipaul, Graham Greene bare for å name droppe, leverte sjelløse ting, som om mennesket hadde brukt opp all sin kreative kapasitet, og i stedet kom maskinmusikken, Blade Runner, digital teknologi osv.
Det er denne spekulative sjelløsheten som skinner gjennom i Chicago Loop, og det er derfor jeg tenker meg at jeg ikke syns det er så bra som det meste annet Paul Theroux har skrevet er. At han var i en livskrise da, kan jo påvirke resultatet, men flere av bøkene hans i denne perioden har det samme preget. Mentale øvelser på reiser, øvelser uten sjel.
Jeg mistet i hvertfall helt lysten til å reise til Chicago.
Jeg har lest Paul Theroux siden begynnelsen av 1980-tallet, og har helt til nå sett på ham som «min forfatter». Spesielt reiseskildringene hans er stort sett svært engasjerende og velskrevne. Han er dyktig på å beskrive og reflektere, og han åpner dørene til sitt indre liv - i så stor grad at jeg har blitt påvirket av ham personlig. Fan boy? Kanskje.
Romanene hans er ikke helt på det samme nivået som reiseskildringene, men han har noen innertiere der også: The Mosquito Coast og My Secret History er gode eksempler på det.
Felles mellom reiseskildringene og fiksjonen er at han skriver godt, han stimulerer med beskrivelsen og referansene han legger inn, jeg blir litt klokere av hver bok. Men ikke alltid, altså.
I en av bøkene sine (husker ikke hvor) forteller han om hva han gjør på deler av kveldene underveis - for å underholde seg selv, for å få tiden til å gå. Da driver han med skriveøvelser, korte noveller, leker med historier som *kan* bli til noe, som rene øvelser.
Jeg tror Chicago Loop er en av disse øvelsene. Når han øver seg i noveller syns jeg han lykkes, når tekstene blir litt lengre - som her, 183 sider, er det nettopp øvelser det virker som. Som Chicago Loop. Den er som vanlig med Paul Theroux sine bøker godt skrevet. Det er lett å følge med. Men det smaker ikke godt. En makaber fortelling om hvordan det rakner for en mann i middelalderkrise er ikke vakkert, ikke når det er drap og personlighetsforvangling og forsøplede amerikanske storbyer som er involvert. Slike ting *kan* være veldig spennende å lese. Hunter Thompson er vel et eksempel å nevne. Men Theroux fikser ikke dette helt. Det er en regel som heter «show, don’t tell». Her er det meste av historien telling, ikke showing. Det skjer ikke så mye skjer, men konsekvensene av det som skjer blir fortalt meg så jeg nesten blir deprimert av det.
Hvorfor? Kanskje det er noe med tidsånden? Boken ble utgitt i 1988. Det var en periode som for meg var intellektuelt og estetisk fattig. Det var som om verden var i en åndskrise. Elton John ga ut sine dårligste plater, Peter Gabriel surret seg vekk, Eric Clapton, Pink Floyd, Harry Belafonte, Paul Theroux, V. S. Naipaul, Graham Greene bare for å name droppe, leverte sjelløse ting, som om mennesket hadde brukt opp all sin kreative kapasitet, og i stedet kom maskinmusikken, Blade Runner, digital teknologi osv.
Det er denne spekulative sjelløsheten som skinner gjennom i Chicago Loop, og det er derfor jeg tenker meg at jeg ikke syns det er så bra som det meste annet Paul Theroux har skrevet er. At han var i en livskrise da, kan jo påvirke resultatet, men flere av bøkene hans i denne perioden har det samme preget. Mentale øvelser på reiser, øvelser uten sjel.
Jeg mistet i hvertfall helt lysten til å reise til Chicago.
December 6, 2018
Inventive and disturbing. I'm surprised by all the "horrified" reviews since the violence in this book is suggestive not explicit. The main character seems to be searching for an identity that he himself lacks. He interrogates people wishing for certain reactions but also wishing for them to contradict that reaction. I somehow imagine this is the real "loop" the title was referring to, looping through the personalities of others looking for a runway to land on. His descent into the seedy underbelly of the Loop is done convincingly. The ending is spectacular and funny as hell.
February 17, 2013
I am not sure whether this is a genius literary treatise on the mental breakdown of an undiagnosed psychopath (bought on by the slow realisation of his own wretchedness), or simply the first-draft of a standard date-rape-killer novel that somehow slipped through the editorial re-draft net and ended up published in its never-revisited raw form. I have promised myself, one day, a re-read to decide for sure, but until then it remains an unresolved 3-star.
October 12, 2017
One of Theroux's rare duds. He doesn't capture either his protagonist or the city's personality very well. It's a shame because the plot itself propels the novel along pretty well.
May 24, 2018
What a crazy ride! Paul Theroux is unique and stunning. When a man says he wants it all. . . . run!
October 9, 2021
This is 200 pages in the life of Parker Jagoda and his hideous, self-loathing, insecure thoughts. He is a successful, happily married (well, married anyway) father who lives in a well-to-do Chicago suburb. At night he prowls the streets and bars of Chicago’s worst neighborhoods looking for…what, exactly? Sex, danger, nice girls, rough men, pain? It’s a creepy read that shows Chicago’s ugliest side.
August 15, 2017
I've enjoyed quite a few Theroux novels, but this one was disturbing, and not in a good way.
May 7, 2018
oh dear, what a clunker...
August 8, 2019
In het begin wordt het steeds spannender, maar tegen het eind wordt het wat vreemd. Jammer.
January 14, 2021
Read in 1991. An icy tale brilliantly imagined.
March 25, 2021
Cruel Chicago noir
December 29, 2021
first book i couldn’t finish this year
January 15, 2022
Many twists and unexpected turns..loved the ending.
June 15, 2022
A compulsive thriller and vivid portrayal of a man’s descent into madness
September 26, 2022
Easy enough read, bit like a prototype of American Psycho.
September 7, 2023
I kept waiting for it to get better... It didn't
September 8, 2024
Just really fucking weird
July 7, 2012
Another Theroux novel that thrilled me up front and felt a little slack at the end, though the thrills here lasted way longer than those in The Mosquito Coast. This book was great from page one. Dark, sexy, violent, mysterious/intriguing. I guess the lazy comparison would be to American Psycho, in that it concerns a rich/successful white dude with a secret penchant for violence. That's about where it ends, though. The problem with Chicago Loop is that after the protagonist, Parker, commits his single violent act, he descends not into madness and further violence (as Patrick Bateman spends his respective novel doing, much to the delight of this reader), but instead into sorrow and remorse and, unfortunately, self-pity. Parker's evil deed isn't really analyzed, and one comes away from the book wondering why he would do such a thing (i.e. not really understanding his character). Rather than spending the last fourth of the book exploring Parker's motivation (or, really, his character), it vaguely follows him around as he mutters and sobs about what a bad person he is for doing this thing, how he deserves to be punished, to die, etc. More specifically disconcerting is the frequency of pat, summary sentences containing information Theroux has already revealed to us through subtler, better writing. In short, this could have been an excellent book, but I don't think it is. I'm also inclined to call the ending a giant cop-out.
One interpretation of Chicago Loop might find Theroux conflating homosexuality with depravity—even moral depravity—though I'd have to read the book again to substantiate that. The same might be said for cross-dressing, or all of this may be a condemnation on Theroux's part of manhood and male-ness in general, which I'd be fine with. What he does and where he goes with Parker's character is interesting thematically, but overall I felt the book failed to live up to the promise offered by its first half.
One interpretation of Chicago Loop might find Theroux conflating homosexuality with depravity—even moral depravity—though I'd have to read the book again to substantiate that. The same might be said for cross-dressing, or all of this may be a condemnation on Theroux's part of manhood and male-ness in general, which I'd be fine with. What he does and where he goes with Parker's character is interesting thematically, but overall I felt the book failed to live up to the promise offered by its first half.
December 24, 2016
A 37-year-old real estate developer from Chicago has it all: money, a house, a BMW, a fashion model for a wife, a 6-month-old son. Yet this is not enough for him, so he places a personal ad in a paper, lying that he is single, goes on a date, and in a kinky sexual act gone wrong murders his date. It all goes downhill from there; although the police do not get on the man's tracks, the guilt over the murder demolishes his life, and neither his wife nor his mistress (yes, despite the murder he maintains this relationship until they swap wallets by accident and she discovers his true identity) can help him, so he ends up jumping off the Sears Tower.
I don't know why Theroux chose such a disgusting human being for this novel's protagonist. I have not read American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis but I know that its protagonist is even more disgusting. If I ever want to read a novel that delves into the mind of a psychopath, I will choose the Ellis book.
I don't know why Theroux chose such a disgusting human being for this novel's protagonist. I have not read American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis but I know that its protagonist is even more disgusting. If I ever want to read a novel that delves into the mind of a psychopath, I will choose the Ellis book.
September 11, 2013
Initially attracted by its Chicago setting, I really harbored no expectations for this novel. I had heard of the author, but this was my first introduction to his work. Ultimately, I found this to be a completely strange and fascinating book. It was a fast read, and a somewhat enjoyable dark character study. I actually enjoyed it more than I thought I would. Its plot certainly did not follow trite paths, and I particularly appreciated how Theroux brought a sort of late eighties gritty Chicago to life. It was an absorbing little volume, very well-written and certainly not the sort of novel I anticipated at all from its blurb. All in all, a pleasant discovery on the dollar shelves!
April 17, 2016
I like to read Paul Theroux 's novels that are based in particular geographical locales and I was excited to read the one based in my own fair city. But unlike any of the others I've read, the location was only incidental to the story in a minor way and not a central part of it. This story could have taken place anywhere, it just so happened to have Chicago street names, suburbs and landmarks in it.
The story itself was so-so. Like I said during my reading, Patrick Bateman but living in Chicago and more dissociated. That's all.
The story itself was so-so. Like I said during my reading, Patrick Bateman but living in Chicago and more dissociated. That's all.
December 16, 2009
Yet again, needed to trade in the last terrible book while traveling in hostels. This time, I was excited because I love Theroux's travel books. This one was really bizzare and worries me about the author. But it has some redeeming value, just is very twisted and really not that entertaining, but makes you feel sort of icky which is the point of getting into the deranged mind of the main character.
August 18, 2014
I liked Chicago Loop. As usual with Paul Theroux, lots of character and place descriptions. Very strange story. I liked all the allusions to life in the 80's and early 90's. One of these books that is hard to put down, yet hard to continue due to its intensity and strangeness. Not one of my favorites by this author, but not bad either. It's a dark, grim, and gritty read. Another one of Theroux's male oriented fiction pieces.
January 23, 2009
One heck of a strange book, about a mentally deranged killer that meets women via newspaper personals
The book is oddly written in that it feels like you’re actually inside the man’s head as opposed to the author writing about the man. Not sure I could recommend this but definitely not a boring or clichéd book
The book is oddly written in that it feels like you’re actually inside the man’s head as opposed to the author writing about the man. Not sure I could recommend this but definitely not a boring or clichéd book
March 21, 2011
Disturbing. Hard to put down. This book grabs you and sucks you in. The protagonist is a man with many different sexual fantasies. One leads him to do something that haunts him. Because of this, he changes dramatically. And where it leads him is hard to fathom. A bit like Crime and Punishment but gets to the point faster with modern details.
July 28, 2011
I think that I no longer like Theroux. In his travel books, he's depressed, narcissistic, cruel, and manipulative. The main character of Chicago Loop has the same qualities (personality defects?), as well as selective amnesia and the ability to murder in cold blood. I intensely dislike him. There are few books that have ever made me angry; this was one of them.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews