In Good News, Edward Abbey's acclaimed underground classic, the West is wild again. American civilization as the twentieth century knew it has crumbled. In the great Southwest, a new breed or settler, white and Indians together, is creating a new way of life in the wilderness - a pastoral economy - with skills and savvy resurrected from the pre-industrial past. Meanwhile, in a last surviving bastion of urban life, the remnats of the power elite are girding their armed forces to reimpose the old order. This is a land of horses and motorcycles, high-tech weaponry and primitive courage, and the struggle for the American future is mounting in intensity. No quarter is asked or given, and the outcome hangs in perilous balance against a background of magnificent nature and eternal human verities.
Edward Paul Abbey (1927–1989) was an American author and essayist noted for his advocacy of environmental issues, criticism of public land policies, and anarchist political views.
Abbey attended college in New Mexico and then worked as a park ranger and fire lookout for the National Park Service in the Southwest. It was during this time that he developed the relationship with the area’s environment that influenced his writing. During his service, he was in close proximity to the ruins of ancient Native American cultures and saw the expansion and destruction of modern civilization.
His love for nature and extreme distrust of the industrial world influenced much of his work and helped garner a cult following.
Abbey died on March 14, 1989, due to complications from surgery. He was buried as he had requested: in a sleeping bag—no embalming fluid, no casket. His body was secretly interred in an unmarked grave in southern Arizona.
Minor Abbey. Portrait of the Monkeywrencher as an old man. Neo-fascists on motorcycles, torture rooms blasting elevator muzak, a climactic battle overcome using real, world-altering magic. Bizarre, but less exciting than it sounds in miniature.
I agree with many of Abbey's opinions. I enjoy when he's being provocative and pessimistic and sarcastic.
But his fictional style is ludicrous. Ludicrous! I don't know, maybe it's not him, maybe it's me. Why is it adorable when Vonnegut says something silly and inane, and cheesy when Abbey does it? I feel like those dudes would have been buddies. Why am I annoyed by Abbey's lengthy descriptions of the barmaid? Why do I retch at the romantic story-line? Why does the backdrop feel more believable than the actions of the actual characters? Who the hell decided that was a good-looking cover for the book? Honestly, yes, I'm that shallow. It was embarrassing to inflict that gruesome art on the public whenever I was able to stomach the cheese and enjoy the substance (ouch, that was bad).
Really, I like Abbey's thoughts. But I don't want to read of characters purring at one another and swapping necklaces and love under the desert sun ever again.
I can't give Abbey less than 5 stars. I get it, this is not his best book, the story is looser than most, but his prose still has me reaching for the nightstand pencil, and his characters are, as always, unforgettable.
Great story telling as always from Abbey. And the great classical pianist Glenn Gould makes an appearance as a broken down pianist in a broken down bar in a post-apocalyptic Phoenix Arizona.
This is a post-apocalyptic work. Society has largely collapsed but one particular warlord has big dreams to revive civilization to meet his criteria on what humans should be like. Very nicely written. Loved the language here. The story was just so-so. It started off well, with interesting characters, but it kind of meandered and the denouement was relatively inconclusive. It almost seemed like it could be the first in a series, although I'm not aware of him writing any more about this world.
Good News is a spiritual successor to Brave Cowboy, but Jack Burns should have died with dignity and freedom on the highway at the end of the latter book. Good News reads like only half of Abbey's heart is in it. He probably should have written it and thrown it out, and it goes to show that great story ideas can still be DOA unless the effort is put into it to flesh the ideas out. And he had some good ideas for this one... the lone cowboy taking on a post-apocalyptic army, shamanic magic, father searching for lost son (and maybe finding a new one). But all these ideas and themes needed about 200 more pages to be fleshed out. Abbey just gives us the barest of psycho-skeletal outlines of each character, the quests are over too quickly and too easily, and the bad guys have all the depth and threat of a 1980s action movie. Even the cover and the title are cringe. Good News is meant to be a reference to the gospel, but it's unclear (based on the story alone) what gospel Abbey is referring to. Brave Cowboy went deep into living with the consequences of one's beliefs and the courage it takes to do more than talk about them; the scene between Jack and Paul in the cell, when Jack is trying to convince Paul to escape with him but Paul explains his inability to leave with him, needs to be read at night, alone, in a contemplative mood. Good News never even tries to hit these depths, instead Abbey contents himself with a long, unanswered monolog wherein the big baddie tries to justify himself to his old colleague, who sits there dumb and mute through the whole chapter. In the end, Good News is as barren and lifeless as the desert, and that's a shame considering the material and talent Abbey had to work with.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
This was my first Edward Abbey read, and not my last. I made a list of writers from interviews of Wallace Stegner, and Abbey was an intriguing mention.
I loved the characters, the pace, and the world imagined - If we don't take care of our planet and each other, and if we allow thugs to use immorality to moralize for us. Things haven't changed much since 1980 when Abbey wrote this, heck since T Roosevelt had to fight for our land.
We need to take care of the Earth - that should be our only politics and all else will follow.
It took me a little while to figure out what was going on here; whether the machismo steampunk Western vibes were a surreal Cormac McCarthyish past but just with awkwardly modern vernacular or... no! It's a post-apocalyptic future, of course. I don't know why its **so** depressing to see the role of women in retrograde in the future when everything else is already ruined. The ending here is ambiguous, but that could be because I didn't latch on to anyone specific as a "hero" figure till very late and thus wasn't sure what counted as a vindication.
Truly a terrible book. Gets two stars because somehow I felt like finishing it. Almost reads like a classic western, with less character development, a terrible, predictable plot, and an ending that wraps up almost every detail with a very bland Cinderella type of post apocalyptic justice. Thinking I might burn this one, because I feel bad for anyone who accidentally finishes it like I did...plus I could use the tinder I suppose.
After Desert Solitude, I get the sneaking suspicion that Abbey secretly hoped for this kind of societal collapse. Roaming the ruins of civilization, living on what you can scavenge with a team of morally upright oddballs, the only thing keeping humanity human.
It was funny, I was entertained, but it's not terribly poignant or nuanced. The bad guys were bad, the good guys were good, and never was that line crossed.
Abbey’s take on a dystopian/post-apocalyptic tale is outstanding. Lyrical and fast paced, bleakly futuristic yet still full of the West that he loves, this is worth reading.
Abbey classic. Interesting view of where he thinks the US is going. Mixed emotions on if I liked it. Just a classic abbey with a classic storyline and characters and ending.
This is a bit of a departure from Abbey's norm. While the typical themes of the desert southwest and a disdain for development continue, Good News dives deeper into Abbey's imagination and uncomfortably accurate estimations of the deterioration of American society.
The heroes, of course, are a mix of politically apathetic and anarchistic, fighting against an oppressive and militaristic local government occupying the city of Phoenix. What ensues is a highly unrealistic and unbelievable tale of heroism.
While Good News is a decent enough and fun read, especially for fans of Abbey, it is far from his best work of fiction, ranking well below Monkey Wrench Gang/Hayduke Lives! and Black Sun.
My biggest complaint with this is the unfinished story of two of the main characters and another unrealistic (read: impossible) and open-ended conclusion. Perhaps I missed something something important. There was a bit hinted at in the second to last chapter, but nothing conclusive. Viva la libertad.
"...In the effort to compensate for losses abroad, each industrial nation attempted to supply its needs by exploiting to the limit its own resources of land and forest, water and metals and minerals. The fuel needs of the machine were considered paramount, but the effort to keep the machine operating led to destruction of basic resources needed for the production of food. Agriculture itself had long before been mechanized, industrialized, assimilated into the corporate empire, the farmland submerged beneath the growing cities or mined and stripped to produce the power needed to keep the cities functioning, the machines in motion, agribusiness alive. The immediate result, as certain cities vanished, was the economic strangulation of others. Religious fanaticism joined with nationalism and secular ideologies to destroy and sometimes to self-destroy the sources of power on which the overindustrialized nations depended. Invisible poisons spread through the atmosphere, borne by the winds from the guilty to the innocent. But all were innocent, all were guilty.
"The majority of nations had lost the ability to be self-sufficient. Now every nation was losing this ability. Those who suffered least were those accustomed to poverty and hunger; those who suffered most were the inhabitants of the rich nations. And in the richest nation of them all the harshest changes came to the few but precarious, monstrous cities that had once appeared, briefly, in that nation's arid West; in those desert lands where, as the cautious had foreseen, 'cities were not meant to be'. Most of the people had disappeared, fleeing to the greener regions from which, as everyone knew, their packaged food came."
I love Edward Abbey! Published in 1980, Good News is relevant today in our culture obsessed with post-apocalyptic meltdown, environmental degradation, and survivalism. Although the apocalypse didn't happen in this book, the world is dramatically different, suffering from an economic and societal collapse by overindulgence of natural resources. America is more The Road in this story than it is The Walking Dead and the bleakness of the American southwest is the perfect setting for a book that offers political commentary, typical Abbey-esque characters (Jack Burns, the tough old cowboy who never dies, outshoots sharpshooters even though he only has one eye, singularly focused on his mission, always helping the helpless with a sense of duty), renegade academics and students (enemies of the state), a stereotypical Hopi (a character written with all due respect and reverence for the sacred), and pretty incredibly spot-on predictions for the future. Some of the references are clearly dated but most of the time, it's hard to tell if Abbey wrote this in 1960, 1980, or 2010.
Having read and enjoyed Desert Solitaire and The Monkey Wrench Gang, I decided that I would give another one of Edward Abbey's stories a try. Although the genre of a dystopian society has been over explored, it is also one of my favorite type of novels to read.
This one was average, nothing more nothing less. The only thing which made it stand out as unique was it's US Southwest setting, where most of the novel takes place in or around Phoenix, AZ, which is ruled by a dictator referred to only as 'The Chief'
The story is too short with too many characters to adequately explore any of them, as a result they all seem about a deep as a ditch. As with Monkey Wrench Gang, an unlikely love story springs up out of nowhere, ceases to pertain to any importance of the novel, only to show up again at the end.
Overall it was an enjoyable story, but it lacks too much in character development and little is ever explained as to WHY this is what became of America, only crude and incomplete allusions to it are made by characters throughout the story.
I have to read Edward Abbey when I'm in the desert. What could be better? Well, maybe any of his other books. I prefer his nonfiction, especially [Desert Solitaire], his best. Good News is another of his anarchist romps through the desert, man against the establishment, kind of fun but not his best. Lots of philosophizing: the main protagonist, a man attempting to reestablish government control in this dystopian story, in defending a sidekick who is a criminal who likes to torture people, "....An historical note: Without criminal and torturers like Sergeant Brock--there could be no gentlemen like us."
Edward Abbey was probably the grumpiest motherfucker ever. He loved the natural world and hated people. He was also married 5 times and was open about being an anarchist, all-be-it kind of a confusing one. He was also arguably one of the most important environmental writers. This is his dystopian novel about a fascist army trying to reform the united states and people on horses in the desert just not have'n it. Pretty solid. Plus, it features a completely destroyed Phoenix, AZ. That, I can get behind.
At first, I wasn't grasped by this book by any means. I was confused, things were unclear, and it wasn't in a "must keep reading!" sort of way. But I persevered, and about 1/4 of the way in, I found my self eagerly reading. Something changed. The story started to reveal itself. And it's "Abbey-ness" started to come through. Upon completion, I immediately turned back to the beginning to read those first few chapters that were so vague and unmenaingful to me at the beginning so that I could now fit them into the context of the story.
Not my favorite Edward Abbey book. It paints a picture of a really violent, disgusting (post-apocalyptic) world where women are sex slaves and men are power-hungry and killing-happy. I know that this is a pretty accurate reflection of parts of the real world, but it made me a little sick inside to read it sometimes. There one good chase scene at the end that satisfied some place in me that missed the excitement of "The Monkey Wrench Gang."
Another glorious desert escapade novel by Ed Abbey. Only this time, it was set in my home town--Phoenix. If you are unfamiliar with his social-anarchy themed books, I encourage you to read The Monkey Wrench gang first, and most definitely The Brave Cowboy before you read Good News, as it has some character back story. If you picked up this book as a first introduction to Abbey's work, chances are you'll enjoy the glimpse at how a dystopian society comes to be, particularly in southwest America.
Ed Abbey is always worth a read, and while this isn't his best, it's still Ed Abbey. A few more cliches than necessary keeps the book from being brilliant (although the first chapter is brilliant), but the book is thought provoking and an interesting, quick read. An intersection of climate-induced dystopia, the meeting between intellectualism, instinct, violence, art, love, hate, fear. Why is it called Good News?
Post-apocalyptic cowboy yarn. A few insigtful phrases. The story is kinda weak. Characters not developed enough. Not Abbey's best, but for an Abbey fan you'd better read this one too. I guess the Good News is the military-complex left Pheonix. So things can go back to the way they were - simple life without all the gadgets and complexities of modern life.
Started slow, began to build, and then just seemed to end. There could have been so much more developed here, but maybe the sparseness of it is a reflection of the landscape that Abbey was trying to create. While it may fit the tone of the story, the book ends up lacking substance because of it.