What do you think?
Rate this book
Tell-All
For decades Hazie Coogan has tended to the outsized needs of Katherine "Miss Kathie" Kenton, veteran of multiple marriages, career comebacks, and cosmetic surgeries. But danger arrives with gentleman caller Webster Carlton Westward III, who worms his way into Miss Kathie’s heart—and boudoir. Soon, Hazie discovers that this bounder has already written a celebrity memoir foretelling Miss Kathie’s death in an upcoming musical extravaganza. As the body count mounts, Hazie must execute a plan to save Katherine Kenton for her fans and for posterity.
179 pages, Paperback
First published May 4, 2010
488 people are currently reading
10544 people want to read
About the author
Chuck Palahniuk
173 books132k followersWritten in stolen moments under truck chassis and on park benches to a soundtrack of The Downward Spiral and Pablo Honey, Fight Club came into existence. The adaptation of Fight Club was a flop at the box office, but achieved cult status on DVD. The film’s popularity drove sales of the novel. Chuck put out two novels in 1999, Survivor and Invisible Monsters. Choke, published in 2001, became Chuck’s first New York Times bestseller. Chuck’s work has always been infused with personal experience, and his next novel, Lullaby, was no exception. Chuck credits writing Lullaby with helping him cope with the tragic death of his father. Diary and the non-fiction guide to Portland, Fugitives and Refugees, were released in 2003. While on the road in support of Diary, Chuck began reading a short story entitled 'Guts,' which would eventually become part of the novel Haunted.
In the years that followed, he continued to write, publishing the bestselling Rant, Snuff, Pygmy, Tell-All, a 'remix' of Invisible Monsters, Damned, and most recently, Doomed.
Chuck also enjoys giving back to his fans, and teaching the art of storytelling has been an important part of that. In 2004, Chuck began submitting essays to ChuckPalahniuk.net on the craft of writing. These were 'How To' pieces, straight out of Chuck's personal bag of tricks, based on the tenants of minimalism he learned from Tom Spanbauer. Every month, a “Homework Assignment” would accompany the lesson, so Workshop members could apply what they had learned. (all 36 of these essays can currently be found on The Cult's sister-site, LitReactor.com).
Then, in 2009, Chuck increased his involvement by committing to read and review a selection of fan-written stories each month. The best stories are currently set to be published in Burnt Tongues, a forthcoming anthology, with an introduction written by Chuck himself.
His next novel, Beautiful You, is due out in October 2014.
In the years that followed, he continued to write, publishing the bestselling Rant, Snuff, Pygmy, Tell-All, a 'remix' of Invisible Monsters, Damned, and most recently, Doomed.
Chuck also enjoys giving back to his fans, and teaching the art of storytelling has been an important part of that. In 2004, Chuck began submitting essays to ChuckPalahniuk.net on the craft of writing. These were 'How To' pieces, straight out of Chuck's personal bag of tricks, based on the tenants of minimalism he learned from Tom Spanbauer. Every month, a “Homework Assignment” would accompany the lesson, so Workshop members could apply what they had learned. (all 36 of these essays can currently be found on The Cult's sister-site, LitReactor.com).
Then, in 2009, Chuck increased his involvement by committing to read and review a selection of fan-written stories each month. The best stories are currently set to be published in Burnt Tongues, a forthcoming anthology, with an introduction written by Chuck himself.
His next novel, Beautiful You, is due out in October 2014.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,166 reviews
January 4, 2026
Hazie Coogan has managed the mega diva-ish needs of one time huge old school era Hollywood screen star 'Miss Kathie' Kenton. Coming to the end of her career, they discover her current amour, Carlton Westwood III has penned his tell-all memoir which includes a detailed account of Miss Kathie's death! Hazie strives to do everything she can to protect Miss Kathie and her legacy. A book with a deluge of real celebrity star names in bold; a book driven primarily by the self congratulatory zeal of Hazie as 'Miss Kathie's fixer and power behind the throne; a book of short chapters; of a jealous Hazie; of smartness, cunning and duplicity; ultimately a book whose idea sounded a lot better than its implementation! Two Stars, 4 out of 12. On the plus side, on my first reading of this in 2012, I gave it a bottomed out One Star, 1 out of 12! I am currently rereading all my Palahniuk books.
2026, 2019 and 2013 read
2026, 2019 and 2013 read
July 11, 2014
Say what you will about Chuck Palahniuk, no one can claim that he’s scared of experimenting with different ways to tell a story.
In Rant, we got multiple character viewpoints as though they were reminiscences for a documentary. Haunted had a variety of characters telling fictional sort stories. Pygmy was written completely in the mutated broken English of the main character. And now in Tell-All Palahniuk is again playing with how the story is told. It’s like a hybrid between a screenplay and a gossip column with the narrator describing fade-ins and flashbacks while littered with bold-faced celebrity name-dropping.
Set in 1940s-60s Hollywood, Hazie Coogan is the assistant/secretary/maid/cook to aging movie star Katherine Kenton. Hazie thinks of Katherine as her life’s work, but she has to be on guard against Katherine’s tendency to collect unsuitable husbands. The latest candidate is young and handsome Webster Carlton Westward III. When Katherine falls for him, Hazie is pushed to the background, and she worries that Westward is just courting Katherine so that he can release a tell-all biography after her death.
While Palahniuk, has been playing with structure, he still sticks to a lot of his old themes. Here, we get another harsh indictment of celebrity culture, and the ways people will degrade themselves for fame. He still likes to pepper the main story with a series of flashbacks that eventually become plot twists.
Short, but a lot better than the horrible Snuff, this one is a decent read but doesn’t rank up there with my favorite Chuck P. books. My favorite parts are the hilarious twisted versions of Lillian Hellman screenplays that feature her as single-handedly winning World War II, inventing the atomic bomb, and saving the space program,
In Rant, we got multiple character viewpoints as though they were reminiscences for a documentary. Haunted had a variety of characters telling fictional sort stories. Pygmy was written completely in the mutated broken English of the main character. And now in Tell-All Palahniuk is again playing with how the story is told. It’s like a hybrid between a screenplay and a gossip column with the narrator describing fade-ins and flashbacks while littered with bold-faced celebrity name-dropping.
Set in 1940s-60s Hollywood, Hazie Coogan is the assistant/secretary/maid/cook to aging movie star Katherine Kenton. Hazie thinks of Katherine as her life’s work, but she has to be on guard against Katherine’s tendency to collect unsuitable husbands. The latest candidate is young and handsome Webster Carlton Westward III. When Katherine falls for him, Hazie is pushed to the background, and she worries that Westward is just courting Katherine so that he can release a tell-all biography after her death.
While Palahniuk, has been playing with structure, he still sticks to a lot of his old themes. Here, we get another harsh indictment of celebrity culture, and the ways people will degrade themselves for fame. He still likes to pepper the main story with a series of flashbacks that eventually become plot twists.
Short, but a lot better than the horrible Snuff, this one is a decent read but doesn’t rank up there with my favorite Chuck P. books. My favorite parts are the hilarious twisted versions of Lillian Hellman screenplays that feature her as single-handedly winning World War II, inventing the atomic bomb, and saving the space program,
May 28, 2010
Okay, not my favorite Chuck Palahniuk book. I'm a pretty big fan, read ALL of his books and have seen him speak twice, which is a blast if you ever get the chance.
Like always, he delivers in terms of a quick read, some social commentary, and a little bit of humor thrown in the mix (see: anything attributed to Walter Winchell in this book).
That said, the story is so-so. The book really hits its stride about a hundred pages in, which is over halfway.
If you're going to read this book, here are some things that might help you enjoy it more:
1. Feel free to completey ignore anything in boldface. These will be brand names and names of celebrities. Chuck Palahniuk does this sort of thing in books, for example, the inclusion of esoteric medical terms in Choke, to slow readers down and make them pay attention to what's going on. So, don't get caught up in the names is all I'm saying, don't let that ruin it for you the way it seems to for so many others. Take the boldface as a sign saying, "You do not need to remember this person."
2. Accept that this is not Fight Club. Everybody wants Chuck Palahniuk to rewrite Fight Club. Say what you will about his use of forumla, but Palahniuk is a writer who is constantly trying new things, sometimes with great success (for example, in the much-underrated Rant) and sometimes with less success. But if you love Fight Club for its testosterone, snappy angry youth one-liners, or ready-for-the-screen action, look to another book.
3. A book being short does not mean that you are being ripped off. His books tend to be short, faster reads. I like that. I don't see this as a laziness on the author's part or a disadvantage. He is a rabid revisionist, and edits each line over and over rather than stuffing a book with crap.
His last couple of books haven't been my favorite, but the amount of work that goes into them is evident and appreciated.
Like always, he delivers in terms of a quick read, some social commentary, and a little bit of humor thrown in the mix (see: anything attributed to Walter Winchell in this book).
That said, the story is so-so. The book really hits its stride about a hundred pages in, which is over halfway.
If you're going to read this book, here are some things that might help you enjoy it more:
1. Feel free to completey ignore anything in boldface. These will be brand names and names of celebrities. Chuck Palahniuk does this sort of thing in books, for example, the inclusion of esoteric medical terms in Choke, to slow readers down and make them pay attention to what's going on. So, don't get caught up in the names is all I'm saying, don't let that ruin it for you the way it seems to for so many others. Take the boldface as a sign saying, "You do not need to remember this person."
2. Accept that this is not Fight Club. Everybody wants Chuck Palahniuk to rewrite Fight Club. Say what you will about his use of forumla, but Palahniuk is a writer who is constantly trying new things, sometimes with great success (for example, in the much-underrated Rant) and sometimes with less success. But if you love Fight Club for its testosterone, snappy angry youth one-liners, or ready-for-the-screen action, look to another book.
3. A book being short does not mean that you are being ripped off. His books tend to be short, faster reads. I like that. I don't see this as a laziness on the author's part or a disadvantage. He is a rabid revisionist, and edits each line over and over rather than stuffing a book with crap.
His last couple of books haven't been my favorite, but the amount of work that goes into them is evident and appreciated.
December 5, 2018
L'ho letto tutto d'un fiato.
Abituarmi allo stile da sceneggiatura non è stato difficoltoso - alcune parti in effetti potevano essere tagliate - ma nel complesso l'ho adorato.
In Cavie a Chuck Palahniuk era stato attribuito l'appellativo di "genio del male" ed anche qui IL GENIO ritorna.
Abituarmi allo stile da sceneggiatura non è stato difficoltoso - alcune parti in effetti potevano essere tagliate - ma nel complesso l'ho adorato.
In Cavie a Chuck Palahniuk era stato attribuito l'appellativo di "genio del male" ed anche qui IL GENIO ritorna.
October 1, 2025
Bau, quack, glu-glu... complotto.
Oink,ih ooh, cip...tradimento.
Muu, miao, iiih...assassinio sul palcoscenico.
Hiss, ih-ooh, bau...Gesù Cristo.
Bau, muu, miao...Sipario
Grrr, roar, oink...Dissolvenza in nero.
Stacco su di me che leggo l'ennesimo Palahniuk, gli occhi che fremono per la smania di storia, le mani che girano le pagine ingiallite di un libro.
In controcampo vediamo la sottoscritta in preda a spasmi di piacere con in mano un libro.
Una carrellata mi segue mentre da una stanza all'altra spolvero, preparo da mangiare, do la pappa al cane, faccio pipì.....sempre con il libro in mano.
Eeeeee Chuckino, mi sei mancato un sacco!!!!!
Potrei iniziare a tessere le lodi verso questo autore che qualcuno potrebbe intendere "masturbrindisi" o "sviolindorare", altri addirittura "complimissili" e "scodinzolodi" o "sbrodolossequi".
Ma nessun complimento potrà mai soddisfare la sensazione che mi lascia un suo racconto.
La trama? Leggetevela e se non vi piace Palahniuk, non siete più miei amici!
Come direbbero i francesi...Adios!
Oink,ih ooh, cip...tradimento.
Muu, miao, iiih...assassinio sul palcoscenico.
Hiss, ih-ooh, bau...Gesù Cristo.
Bau, muu, miao...Sipario
Grrr, roar, oink...Dissolvenza in nero.
Stacco su di me che leggo l'ennesimo Palahniuk, gli occhi che fremono per la smania di storia, le mani che girano le pagine ingiallite di un libro.
In controcampo vediamo la sottoscritta in preda a spasmi di piacere con in mano un libro.
Una carrellata mi segue mentre da una stanza all'altra spolvero, preparo da mangiare, do la pappa al cane, faccio pipì.....sempre con il libro in mano.
Eeeeee Chuckino, mi sei mancato un sacco!!!!!
Potrei iniziare a tessere le lodi verso questo autore che qualcuno potrebbe intendere "masturbrindisi" o "sviolindorare", altri addirittura "complimissili" e "scodinzolodi" o "sbrodolossequi".
Ma nessun complimento potrà mai soddisfare la sensazione che mi lascia un suo racconto.
La trama? Leggetevela e se non vi piace Palahniuk, non siete più miei amici!
Come direbbero i francesi...Adios!
March 13, 2021
Eeeeh, okay.
I'm generally a huge fan of Palahniuk but he has this thing about doubling down on a THING and then going for the shock value, then the schlock value after that. No biggie, and it's sometimes quite funny.
Indeed, there are a number of really wonderful quips right out of the snarkiest Culture columns that could have come out of the forties or fifties, but in the end, this novel is a gorgeously made-up skull.
It's gourmet vomit.
That being said, it's PRETTY in some ways even though the basic plot is on par with the most lethargic and enervated aging starlet mystery-rags. The big shocker is only mildly amusing and it took too long to get there, and by the time we've got it, we're counting on our fingers the times we've seen this same variation on a theme.
But then, maybe I just don't care too much about aging stars and their dramas? That could be it, too.
And to think that I had to pick through the remains of this meal...
I'm generally a huge fan of Palahniuk but he has this thing about doubling down on a THING and then going for the shock value, then the schlock value after that. No biggie, and it's sometimes quite funny.
Indeed, there are a number of really wonderful quips right out of the snarkiest Culture columns that could have come out of the forties or fifties, but in the end, this novel is a gorgeously made-up skull.
It's gourmet vomit.
That being said, it's PRETTY in some ways even though the basic plot is on par with the most lethargic and enervated aging starlet mystery-rags. The big shocker is only mildly amusing and it took too long to get there, and by the time we've got it, we're counting on our fingers the times we've seen this same variation on a theme.
But then, maybe I just don't care too much about aging stars and their dramas? That could be it, too.
And to think that I had to pick through the remains of this meal...
April 20, 2012
This book only has 179 pages and yet i see that 13 of my magnetic clips ( thank you waterstones) cling to, self-evidently, 13 of the pages. They normally serve to mark things that I find particularly insightful or dates and details to remember but in this case they mark, to a large extent, places in this short book in which i have gasped in a none too controlled way over something particularly outrageous but funny.
Do not fear gentle reader, I have no intention of quoting them all but they do point out to me the fact that this is a book littered/graced with great one liners and more then its fair share of clever paragraphs.
It is a reflection on celebrity, fame and talent or lack of and centres around a Hollywood star, Katherine Kenton and her maid of all works and general dogsbody, Hazie Coogan, as they strain and struggle to maintain her postion as a star which is, if not rising, at least still glowing. She has made famous such ground-breaking roles as Mrs Caesar Augustus, Mrs Leonardo da Vinci, Mrs Pope Innocent VI, Mrs Gunga Din, Mrs Hunchback of Notre Dame, Mrs Man in the Iron Mask and my particular favourite Mrs Last of the Mohicans but is now moving into the roles such as mother of Captain Ahab or maiden aunt to John the Baptist. She has waded her way through a goodly number of husbands and has a tendency to launch herself at any prospective mound of flesh in which a pulse and a willy coincide. Hazie protects her from herself by pointing out
'erections are less likely a compliment than they are the result of some medical breakthrough'.
Suddenly on the horizon appears the handsome, fit and oxymoronically innocently-predatory Webster Carlton Westward III who seeks to endear himself into her affections and bed but Hazie is mightily suspicious of his intentions and so the scene is set for her uncovering of his plot to write a kiss and tell biography which would be bad enough except each draft which she uncovers hidden in his luggage under his pants...which are needed to contain his regularly praised magnificently enormous manhood, contains a last chapter in which he records how she is going to die. His plan, it seems, is to murder her so as to ensure his entry into the role of grieving young widow with a handy book ready typed and hot for publication. This info happens within a few pages and the rest of the book is the crossing back and forth, the flash backs to and fro across the troubled drug and face lifted history of a crumbling film star.
Palahniuk, why is that man's name so difficult to remember how to spell, writes a bizarre but clever reflection on fame, friendship and the confusion or otherwise of outward apppearances. He points out how truth, if we are not careful, can so easily be twisted into something violently different or how by just moving or shading a few details a whole scene can be subtley but totally changed. A long running image is that of the Dorian Gray like mirror in the crypt upon which Hazie grooves and marks, with Katherine's serially employed diamond engagement ring, the lines wrinkles and blemishes which should reside on Katherine's face but which she regularly has removed and hidden.
The blind traipsing after celebrity fad and fancy is dissected
'If Miss Kathie chose to wear a coat of red ermine or a hat trimmed in pelican feathers, no ermine or seabird was safe. One photo of her arriving at an awards dinner or premiers was enough to put most most animals onto the endangered species list.'
And linked to that is the emptiness of awards and half hearted professional pats on back when he points out the horror of
'every compliment you've ever received, made manifest, etched into metal or stone and filling your home'.
or even more dismissively
'earning applause, not for any performance, but for simply not dying.'
The most clever and insighful thought though is the one towards the end of the whole melee
'These tawdry, soft, sordid fictions would petrify and fossilize to become diamond-hard, carved-stone facts for all perpetuity. A salacious lie will always trump a noble truth.'
The book is mightily humourous but has a serious point in amidst its jokes and vicious slices of wit. What constitutes truth and how can it be protected and preserved ?
Do not fear gentle reader, I have no intention of quoting them all but they do point out to me the fact that this is a book littered/graced with great one liners and more then its fair share of clever paragraphs.
It is a reflection on celebrity, fame and talent or lack of and centres around a Hollywood star, Katherine Kenton and her maid of all works and general dogsbody, Hazie Coogan, as they strain and struggle to maintain her postion as a star which is, if not rising, at least still glowing. She has made famous such ground-breaking roles as Mrs Caesar Augustus, Mrs Leonardo da Vinci, Mrs Pope Innocent VI, Mrs Gunga Din, Mrs Hunchback of Notre Dame, Mrs Man in the Iron Mask and my particular favourite Mrs Last of the Mohicans but is now moving into the roles such as mother of Captain Ahab or maiden aunt to John the Baptist. She has waded her way through a goodly number of husbands and has a tendency to launch herself at any prospective mound of flesh in which a pulse and a willy coincide. Hazie protects her from herself by pointing out
'erections are less likely a compliment than they are the result of some medical breakthrough'.
Suddenly on the horizon appears the handsome, fit and oxymoronically innocently-predatory Webster Carlton Westward III who seeks to endear himself into her affections and bed but Hazie is mightily suspicious of his intentions and so the scene is set for her uncovering of his plot to write a kiss and tell biography which would be bad enough except each draft which she uncovers hidden in his luggage under his pants...which are needed to contain his regularly praised magnificently enormous manhood, contains a last chapter in which he records how she is going to die. His plan, it seems, is to murder her so as to ensure his entry into the role of grieving young widow with a handy book ready typed and hot for publication. This info happens within a few pages and the rest of the book is the crossing back and forth, the flash backs to and fro across the troubled drug and face lifted history of a crumbling film star.
Palahniuk, why is that man's name so difficult to remember how to spell, writes a bizarre but clever reflection on fame, friendship and the confusion or otherwise of outward apppearances. He points out how truth, if we are not careful, can so easily be twisted into something violently different or how by just moving or shading a few details a whole scene can be subtley but totally changed. A long running image is that of the Dorian Gray like mirror in the crypt upon which Hazie grooves and marks, with Katherine's serially employed diamond engagement ring, the lines wrinkles and blemishes which should reside on Katherine's face but which she regularly has removed and hidden.
The blind traipsing after celebrity fad and fancy is dissected
'If Miss Kathie chose to wear a coat of red ermine or a hat trimmed in pelican feathers, no ermine or seabird was safe. One photo of her arriving at an awards dinner or premiers was enough to put most most animals onto the endangered species list.'
And linked to that is the emptiness of awards and half hearted professional pats on back when he points out the horror of
'every compliment you've ever received, made manifest, etched into metal or stone and filling your home'.
or even more dismissively
'earning applause, not for any performance, but for simply not dying.'
The most clever and insighful thought though is the one towards the end of the whole melee
'These tawdry, soft, sordid fictions would petrify and fossilize to become diamond-hard, carved-stone facts for all perpetuity. A salacious lie will always trump a noble truth.'
The book is mightily humourous but has a serious point in amidst its jokes and vicious slices of wit. What constitutes truth and how can it be protected and preserved ?
May 4, 2010
Sigh. Oh Chuck. You're just convinced that you've found the magic formula, and you can churn out a book every year or two indefinitely, aren't you? I mean, this isn't as bad as Pygmy, or even Snuff, but it's on the same level as them. Ugh. First, it is barely a book; if we acknowledge that every new chapter has half a blank page to mark it, this is like a 150-page book. Second, why is the repetetive verbal tick in this book (they are in all of your books, Chuck) some random three-animal-noise blurt followed by a celebrity's name? That's stupid.
Third: this was your chance, Chuck. As the gay dude who represents straight dude masculinity in his books- and the one who I think still sells well enough that maybe you keep churning 'em out in an effort to keep the publishing industry afloat?- writing about a woman, from another woman's point of view, in the style of the gossip column- that famous, old-timey domain of ladies and gay men- you could have really made a point. Any fucking point! Something about camp and old-timey Hollywood glamour, or something about queeniness, or... I don't know, anything! But in every one of your last few books, I totally root for you to do something smart and awesome (because you did in Rant, which still fucking stands up, I read the synopsis on Wikipedia and get totally pumped), and then you don't really do anything.
Bummer, Chuck! Bummer.
Third: this was your chance, Chuck. As the gay dude who represents straight dude masculinity in his books- and the one who I think still sells well enough that maybe you keep churning 'em out in an effort to keep the publishing industry afloat?- writing about a woman, from another woman's point of view, in the style of the gossip column- that famous, old-timey domain of ladies and gay men- you could have really made a point. Any fucking point! Something about camp and old-timey Hollywood glamour, or something about queeniness, or... I don't know, anything! But in every one of your last few books, I totally root for you to do something smart and awesome (because you did in Rant, which still fucking stands up, I read the synopsis on Wikipedia and get totally pumped), and then you don't really do anything.
Bummer, Chuck! Bummer.
August 26, 2025
A worn-out assistant must do everything she can to protect an aging star from the next (con) man seeking her love (destruction).
It sounds good but it was not. I absolutely hated the name-drop crap it did throughout. The first few I looked up and then after that, I just skipped past them. The ending was predictable which only made the reading experience worse.
“…I say that no memory is anything more than a personal choice. A very deliberate choice. When we recall someone—a parent, a spouse, a friend—as better than they perhaps were, we do so to create an ideal, something to which we, ourselves, can aspire. But when we remember someone as a drunk, a liar, a bully, we’re only creating an excuse for our own poor behavior.”
My old memory of a few good books from this author is a positive one. The new memory forming about the rest of them is getting darker and darker with each passing read.
QUOTES THAT SHOW WHY I KEEP COMING BACK FOR MORE:
“When she’s in love, nothing can make her sad; however when she’s not in love, nothing can make her happy.”
“Such beautiful, false compliments—the male equivalent of a woman’s screaming fake orgasm. The first designed to get a woman into bed. The second to more quickly complete sexual intercourse and get a man out of bed.”
“My gaze fixed on nothing one can actually see.”
“All human beings search for either reasons to be good, or excuses to be bad.”
It sounds good but it was not. I absolutely hated the name-drop crap it did throughout. The first few I looked up and then after that, I just skipped past them. The ending was predictable which only made the reading experience worse.
“…I say that no memory is anything more than a personal choice. A very deliberate choice. When we recall someone—a parent, a spouse, a friend—as better than they perhaps were, we do so to create an ideal, something to which we, ourselves, can aspire. But when we remember someone as a drunk, a liar, a bully, we’re only creating an excuse for our own poor behavior.”
My old memory of a few good books from this author is a positive one. The new memory forming about the rest of them is getting darker and darker with each passing read.
QUOTES THAT SHOW WHY I KEEP COMING BACK FOR MORE:
“When she’s in love, nothing can make her sad; however when she’s not in love, nothing can make her happy.”
“Such beautiful, false compliments—the male equivalent of a woman’s screaming fake orgasm. The first designed to get a woman into bed. The second to more quickly complete sexual intercourse and get a man out of bed.”
“My gaze fixed on nothing one can actually see.”
“All human beings search for either reasons to be good, or excuses to be bad.”
December 30, 2024
I don’t write reviews.
And I never thought I’d hate a Palahniuk book so much, especially considering I’ve read it before and didn’t despise it so thoroughly back then. My god, it’s a stinker! There’s nothing going for it. No characters of any interest, no story of any consequence, no twist of any surprise. Even the clever repeats, that Chuck does for every book, weren’t fun, just annoying.
I couldn’t understand many aspects of the story. For example, how old was Katherine? She was said to have had liver spots appearing for decades, but then was said to be middle-aged. Then she was doing an action-based play and was hot enough to attract a much-younger man.
Or how did Hazie affect movie stars when she was an absolute nobody? Stars supposedly based everything off of her and everyone knew it, yet she wasn’t getting any acting roles.
When did it take place? Every actor of the 20th century was alive somehow.
What was the true nature of the relationship between Katherine and Hazie? Katherine didn’t seem created by Hazie, except that she said the stupid repeating joke about foreign language phrases meaning things they didn’t mean. Ok, I’m done. This is frustrating.
This really should’ve been a short story. Palahniuk padded this baby out. I thought the name dropping was really, really overdone to the extent that if you removed the lists of names, the book would be half as long. He actually repeated the same lines or changed the wording on a sentence, then restated it, obviously to stretch this into a novel. Barely.
Book 10 - The Year of Chuck
And I never thought I’d hate a Palahniuk book so much, especially considering I’ve read it before and didn’t despise it so thoroughly back then. My god, it’s a stinker! There’s nothing going for it. No characters of any interest, no story of any consequence, no twist of any surprise. Even the clever repeats, that Chuck does for every book, weren’t fun, just annoying.
I couldn’t understand many aspects of the story. For example, how old was Katherine? She was said to have had liver spots appearing for decades, but then was said to be middle-aged. Then she was doing an action-based play and was hot enough to attract a much-younger man.
Or how did Hazie affect movie stars when she was an absolute nobody? Stars supposedly based everything off of her and everyone knew it, yet she wasn’t getting any acting roles.
When did it take place? Every actor of the 20th century was alive somehow.
What was the true nature of the relationship between Katherine and Hazie? Katherine didn’t seem created by Hazie, except that she said the stupid repeating joke about foreign language phrases meaning things they didn’t mean. Ok, I’m done. This is frustrating.
This really should’ve been a short story. Palahniuk padded this baby out. I thought the name dropping was really, really overdone to the extent that if you removed the lists of names, the book would be half as long. He actually repeated the same lines or changed the wording on a sentence, then restated it, obviously to stretch this into a novel. Barely.
Book 10 - The Year of Chuck
June 25, 2014
I am disappointed. Father Palahniuk, this is trash. You had me at Fight Club but this one is just depressing.
disappointment #1: The plot was good. But it wasn't good enough. Predictable and boring. Miss Kathie's shit-filled Hollywood life is engagingly exxxagerated andbutso bitch, I give zero fucks.
disappointment #2: The Tourette Syndrome of infinite name-dropping killed me. Jesus I swear, it felt like I was being fucked by a thousand merciless rabbits the whole motherfucking time (bdsm - submissive: me, dominant: rabbits.) The name references were too deeply anchored to fathom. An oceanful list of Wikipedia names from 1940 to 1950. Goodness, my biological father was just a flippant sperm in some lousy balls that time. Well, A+ for Palahniuk's efforts of digging up a bajillion of obituaries. But no, most names weren't accessible.
disappointment #3: The writing felt like Thelma Ritter was holding a Lomo Cam narrating live cameos while at the same time, writing a letter expressing magnetic erections to her Casanova. It was all wrong. It was a mixture and collision of first and third person commentaries so really, I don't give a flying fuck whether I get shit or not.
disappointment #4: Onomatopoeia. Hazie's mind is a copulating zebra and anaconda but Kathie's mind is a zoo orgy. It had all sorts of annoying sounds from A to Z. Kathie all weird praying barks and hisses. Phony. I know Father could be all peculiar and creative but I had enough of shitty narration and bold name-dropping bullshit to have this tolerated.
disappointment #5: Chuck Palahniuk being the author.
disappointment #1: The plot was good. But it wasn't good enough. Predictable and boring. Miss Kathie's shit-filled Hollywood life is engagingly exxxagerated andbutso bitch, I give zero fucks.
disappointment #2: The Tourette Syndrome of infinite name-dropping killed me. Jesus I swear, it felt like I was being fucked by a thousand merciless rabbits the whole motherfucking time (bdsm - submissive: me, dominant: rabbits.) The name references were too deeply anchored to fathom. An oceanful list of Wikipedia names from 1940 to 1950. Goodness, my biological father was just a flippant sperm in some lousy balls that time. Well, A+ for Palahniuk's efforts of digging up a bajillion of obituaries. But no, most names weren't accessible.
disappointment #3: The writing felt like Thelma Ritter was holding a Lomo Cam narrating live cameos while at the same time, writing a letter expressing magnetic erections to her Casanova. It was all wrong. It was a mixture and collision of first and third person commentaries so really, I don't give a flying fuck whether I get shit or not.
disappointment #4: Onomatopoeia. Hazie's mind is a copulating zebra and anaconda but Kathie's mind is a zoo orgy. It had all sorts of annoying sounds from A to Z. Kathie all weird praying barks and hisses. Phony. I know Father could be all peculiar and creative but I had enough of shitty narration and bold name-dropping bullshit to have this tolerated.
disappointment #5: Chuck Palahniuk being the author.
December 21, 2018
Reading the reviews to this book was more puzzling than the book. Reading about how Chuck isn't compatible anymore with some readers, how Invisible Monsters is the reason people started reading him, how they read every single book he's ever put out but now they're not going to. A writer creates their art for themselves firstmost. Maybe Chuck loves this book. Maybe he hates it and he's fine with publishing it. Maybe he is enslaved to a book contract and just needed to throw something out there. Maybe this proves a point: Writers become brands and maybe one day they suddenly wake up and don't want to be a product producer anymore. Maybe this is one big F you to all these folks that buy up whatever he publishes just because his name is on it, (kind of like the way one popular British band from the 90s now puts out farts and beeps and everyone still buys it).
Did I enjoy the book? No, absolutely not. This just isn't my thing. I don't feel it. But it isn't junk, not if some people are still giving it 4s and 5s, even if it's farts and beeps they're buying. I'll respect him as an artist and that's why he gets one star, 1.5 if I could out of respect. The books I really really hate don't even get a star or a single word.
As for Invisible Monsters, I found it no more enjoyable than Tell All, so to hear that that was the book that hooked readers is funny. Invisible Monsters was a one star dismissal for me. Lots of other readers are waiting to experience Fight Club all over, which they're never going to get. For me, my thrill in the Chuck catalogue was 1. Survivor, 2. Choke, then 3. Fight Club. I honestly stopped reading after my distaste for Diary, only recently returning to a few newer titles. But nothing new has really grabbed me. Maybe he doesn't have any stories left. Maybe he's tired. Maybe he's changed, we've changed, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
Did I enjoy the book? No, absolutely not. This just isn't my thing. I don't feel it. But it isn't junk, not if some people are still giving it 4s and 5s, even if it's farts and beeps they're buying. I'll respect him as an artist and that's why he gets one star, 1.5 if I could out of respect. The books I really really hate don't even get a star or a single word.
As for Invisible Monsters, I found it no more enjoyable than Tell All, so to hear that that was the book that hooked readers is funny. Invisible Monsters was a one star dismissal for me. Lots of other readers are waiting to experience Fight Club all over, which they're never going to get. For me, my thrill in the Chuck catalogue was 1. Survivor, 2. Choke, then 3. Fight Club. I honestly stopped reading after my distaste for Diary, only recently returning to a few newer titles. But nothing new has really grabbed me. Maybe he doesn't have any stories left. Maybe he's tired. Maybe he's changed, we've changed, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
August 8, 2010
What I like about CP is how he is willing to experiment with different ways of telling a story. Rant is an example of a successful experiment. Tell All is an example of an unsuccessful experiment.
One major problem with the book is voice. The first person protagonist is just not fun to read. It is possible to write unlikable people as good narrators, and CP has done it before; he did this especially well in Choke. In this case, the voice was annoying, grating, nearly unreadable for the first half of the book. If his name had not been on the cover, I would not have read that far.
I say for the first half of the book because that is about when the author first introduced a plot. The plot was fun, but anyone who has read CP before knows by then what the plot twist will be, so there is no surprise, and when he spends a chapter explaining the plot twist after the fact, the reader is left wondering how stupid he thinks we are. Everybody saw this coming, and no explanation is necessary.
There is a point in the career of a successful author at which his editors stop editing, trusting in the innate brilliance and market power of the artist. This is a dangerous time, since very bad books can be published during this time. Since he has published both Pygmy (a stylistic success with a failed plot) and Tell All (a failure both in plot and style), I think it has become clear that it is time for his editors to start working again.
One major problem with the book is voice. The first person protagonist is just not fun to read. It is possible to write unlikable people as good narrators, and CP has done it before; he did this especially well in Choke. In this case, the voice was annoying, grating, nearly unreadable for the first half of the book. If his name had not been on the cover, I would not have read that far.
I say for the first half of the book because that is about when the author first introduced a plot. The plot was fun, but anyone who has read CP before knows by then what the plot twist will be, so there is no surprise, and when he spends a chapter explaining the plot twist after the fact, the reader is left wondering how stupid he thinks we are. Everybody saw this coming, and no explanation is necessary.
There is a point in the career of a successful author at which his editors stop editing, trusting in the innate brilliance and market power of the artist. This is a dangerous time, since very bad books can be published during this time. Since he has published both Pygmy (a stylistic success with a failed plot) and Tell All (a failure both in plot and style), I think it has become clear that it is time for his editors to start working again.
January 17, 2011
Oh man. I am in love. I know I say this with almost every Palahniuk book I read but I definitely mean it this time: THIS is my favorite Chuck book. No doubt about it. It is literally everything that I want from a book. It has the best characters I've ever read (Chuck wasn't kidding when he said in an interview that he loves Hazie. I know she's my favorite character. She seems like she's the good one and she's only doing things to help others but she's really not. She's cunning and devious and so far from perfect. And yet, she's a lot like all of us. And you don't quite realize it until it's too late.) I love how this book is a book of movies. It's a name dropping Tourette's syndrome. It's utterly fabulous and so very true. My favorite part is the genius Dorian Gray reference. That is one of the coolest and most genius things ever put on paper. Honestly, I can't dote on this book enough. It's beautiful and wonderful and Chuck's absolute best ever work. I know as soon as this book is released in paperback, I'm snapping it off the shelf, buying it and it's coming home to live with me. FOREVER. With that ending, how could I not fall utterly and totally in love with it? So if you're even the least bit of a Chuck fan, read this book. It's worth it. Most definitely.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 19, 2019
Despite the many negative reviews, I thoroughly enjoyed this book. The writing style is a bit different that other Palahniuk faves of mine but I actually quite liked it. I though the characters were great and quite hilarious actually, they’re really what make this story. I loved the way Palahniuk wove the story together and how it all came to together with a bang at the end! The ending didn’t quite surprise me like I would have wanted it to, I saw it coming from a mile away and that did spoil it a tad for me.
February 19, 2021
واسه فهمیدنش باید خیلی آمریکایی یا غرق در پاپکالچر قرن بیستم آمریکا باشی که من شکر خدا نیستم. بیست درصد میفهمیدم چی داره میگه، سی درصد اسمها رو گذری شنیده بودم و حدس میزدم چی میگه، ۵۰ درصد هم کلا نمیدونستم اینا آدم واقعیان، شخصیت فیلمن، از خودش ساخته یا چیان. البته چیز زیادی هم واسه فهمیدن نیست تااااا آخرش که دروغ چرا؟ من همونم نفهمیدم.
فقط سروصدای جانوران رو اون وسط خیلی دوست داشتم. ستارهی دُیُّم مال اوناست. کاش کتابهای بیشتری به این شکل نوشته شن، مخصوصاً اونهایی که به مسائل جدی جهان میپردازن؛ واقعاً عالی و برازندهست.
فقط سروصدای جانوران رو اون وسط خیلی دوست داشتم. ستارهی دُیُّم مال اوناست. کاش کتابهای بیشتری به این شکل نوشته شن، مخصوصاً اونهایی که به مسائل جدی جهان میپردازن؛ واقعاً عالی و برازندهست.
February 16, 2019
Me parecen exageradas las calificaciones en Goodreads, el libro no es malo, tal vez no tan "movido" como otros libros de Palahniuk, pero no por ello malo.
Y es que Palahniuk o lo amas o lo dejas, es tan ácido, pero a la vez muy crítico y certero, muy americano eso sí, aborda siempre en su obra la crítica social a su país natal, aunque siempre disfrazada.
Yo sí recomiendo esta lectura, no es la mejor de él ni mucho menos, pero esas calificaciones de 1 o 2 estrellas no le hacen justicia.
Y es que Palahniuk o lo amas o lo dejas, es tan ácido, pero a la vez muy crítico y certero, muy americano eso sí, aborda siempre en su obra la crítica social a su país natal, aunque siempre disfrazada.
Yo sí recomiendo esta lectura, no es la mejor de él ni mucho menos, pero esas calificaciones de 1 o 2 estrellas no le hacen justicia.
May 12, 2010
You can think of this as a vintage Hollywood version of "Glamorama" by Bret Easton Ellis. It's a constant barrage of celebrity name-dropping (and in bold print, no less) with a slew of camera directions and editing room speak. Instead of Christian Bale we get Mickey Rooney. Kate Moss is replaced with women like Monroe, Garbo, and Joan Crawford. So if you enjoyed that aspect of machine gun pop-culture in "Glamorama," then "Tell All" delivers the same thing in a nostalgic, grainy reel.
As if to build upon the old-timey setting, Palahniuk crafts a more traditional literary story. More subtlety. Less shock. Don't get me wrong, he's still using his same go-to methods: the choruses and clever-isms.
Someone who was your husband: a "was-band" (love it!!)
What he's not doing is going for the throat as seen in the "Guts" short story and "Snuff." I don't feel like the guy is trying to one-up himself anymore in regards to how far he can push the envelope. "Tell All" could very well be his most mature work yet. I say mature, not because we're lacking all things grotesque and filthy--but the use of subtlety regarding the theme of perceptions when applied to these characters. If "Fight Club" is about hitting bottom, "Tell All" would be its inverse, a story of ascent and how important the opinions of those surrounding us matter.
The drawback, as far as I can see, is "Tell All" isn't going to be for everybody. I'm 27, so I only recognized about 15% of the names. Personally, this didn't take away from the story, but the younger demographics might feel differently. The celeb aspect is either going to come off as exclusive or well-researched, depending on the reader. And even though the novel is well-crafted and beautifully written, it's a tad on the short side at only 179 pages.
After reading it, it's clear to me that Palahniuk is still experimenting, still trying new things regarding style, structure and format--and it was a breath of fresh air with this one. So don't expect another "Fight Club" or "Choke," and don't expect it to be "Glamorama" exactly, either. You're going to see some parallels, but "Tell All" takes a more traditional turn with the writing. It's a different kind of Palahniuk...so different that you may just be shocked. The guy can really lay down the beautiful prose when he wants to.
Still funny.
Still clever.
Just different.
Altogether, an enjoyable read. Much thanks to The Cult for throwing one my way and I hope you guys like the new direction he takes with this one.
-Brandon Tietz
As if to build upon the old-timey setting, Palahniuk crafts a more traditional literary story. More subtlety. Less shock. Don't get me wrong, he's still using his same go-to methods: the choruses and clever-isms.
Someone who was your husband: a "was-band" (love it!!)
What he's not doing is going for the throat as seen in the "Guts" short story and "Snuff." I don't feel like the guy is trying to one-up himself anymore in regards to how far he can push the envelope. "Tell All" could very well be his most mature work yet. I say mature, not because we're lacking all things grotesque and filthy--but the use of subtlety regarding the theme of perceptions when applied to these characters. If "Fight Club" is about hitting bottom, "Tell All" would be its inverse, a story of ascent and how important the opinions of those surrounding us matter.
The drawback, as far as I can see, is "Tell All" isn't going to be for everybody. I'm 27, so I only recognized about 15% of the names. Personally, this didn't take away from the story, but the younger demographics might feel differently. The celeb aspect is either going to come off as exclusive or well-researched, depending on the reader. And even though the novel is well-crafted and beautifully written, it's a tad on the short side at only 179 pages.
After reading it, it's clear to me that Palahniuk is still experimenting, still trying new things regarding style, structure and format--and it was a breath of fresh air with this one. So don't expect another "Fight Club" or "Choke," and don't expect it to be "Glamorama" exactly, either. You're going to see some parallels, but "Tell All" takes a more traditional turn with the writing. It's a different kind of Palahniuk...so different that you may just be shocked. The guy can really lay down the beautiful prose when he wants to.
Still funny.
Still clever.
Just different.
Altogether, an enjoyable read. Much thanks to The Cult for throwing one my way and I hope you guys like the new direction he takes with this one.
-Brandon Tietz
September 28, 2014
Leyendo contraportadas, sinopsis y críticas, sospechaba que Chuck Palahniuk no iba a ser un autor de mi agrado pero tenía que probarlo. Por un lado porque, siendo tan popular, quizás me estaba perdiendo a un autor brillante y, por otro, porque me gustó la película El club de la lucha. Sin embargo Al desnudo ha confirmado mis sospechas y definitivamente no volveré a leer nada de este señor.
El libro me ha parecido tedioso en su estructura y narrativa y la escritura profundamente desagradable y cansina. Empecemos por esto último. Chuck Palahniuk es de esos autores que gustan de soltar palabras de contenido sexual o corporal, especialmente femenino, con absoluta suciedad y desprecio. Imagino que así se sienten transgresores o modernos pero la verdad es que resultan provincianos y fuera de época. El sexo es natural, ya no da miedo, la sociedad no tiene tantos prejuicios y tabús, las mujeres hablamos de sexo abiertamente. Supéralo. Por otra parte el libro está plagado de nombres, de citas de artistas de Hollywood, y cuando digo plagado me refiero a que en un párrafo pueden aparecer 20 nombres. No aportan nada a la trama, ni son interesantes, ni divertidos. Del 90% de ellos ya no se acuerda nadie. Sólo sirven para hacer la narración tediosa, cansina, hartante.
Pasemos a la trama. El hilo principal, lo que queda cuando quitas todo lo innecesario, es interesante, contiene intriga y se desarrolla llevándote a un final hasta cierto punto inesperado. Sin embargo tengo que dar la razón a aquellos que apuntan que esta historia no da para más que un relato y el autor la ha querido alargar a base de paja hasta poder venderlo como novela. Así con tanto absurdo fuera de la trama, con historietas sin pies ni cabeza, con el relleno a base de citas y nombres, acabas aburrido y perdiendo el interés en esa historia o misterio principal.
Creo que este libro no le gusta ni a los fans del autor. No pierdas el tiempo con él.
El libro me ha parecido tedioso en su estructura y narrativa y la escritura profundamente desagradable y cansina. Empecemos por esto último. Chuck Palahniuk es de esos autores que gustan de soltar palabras de contenido sexual o corporal, especialmente femenino, con absoluta suciedad y desprecio. Imagino que así se sienten transgresores o modernos pero la verdad es que resultan provincianos y fuera de época. El sexo es natural, ya no da miedo, la sociedad no tiene tantos prejuicios y tabús, las mujeres hablamos de sexo abiertamente. Supéralo. Por otra parte el libro está plagado de nombres, de citas de artistas de Hollywood, y cuando digo plagado me refiero a que en un párrafo pueden aparecer 20 nombres. No aportan nada a la trama, ni son interesantes, ni divertidos. Del 90% de ellos ya no se acuerda nadie. Sólo sirven para hacer la narración tediosa, cansina, hartante.
Pasemos a la trama. El hilo principal, lo que queda cuando quitas todo lo innecesario, es interesante, contiene intriga y se desarrolla llevándote a un final hasta cierto punto inesperado. Sin embargo tengo que dar la razón a aquellos que apuntan que esta historia no da para más que un relato y el autor la ha querido alargar a base de paja hasta poder venderlo como novela. Así con tanto absurdo fuera de la trama, con historietas sin pies ni cabeza, con el relleno a base de citas y nombres, acabas aburrido y perdiendo el interés en esa historia o misterio principal.
Creo que este libro no le gusta ni a los fans del autor. No pierdas el tiempo con él.
May 25, 2010
Note: NO SPOILERS
I was slightly wary of reading Palahniuk's latest. The premise centered around an aging starlet and the troubles she endured seemed slightly cliche and too simple for one of Palahniuk's protagonists. However, within the first 20 pages of this book I was engrossed in the life of Miss Kathie (a character I immediately drew similarities to another violet-eyed starlet) and realized that that sordid life of a Hollywood actress is definitely Palanhiuk material. This is by no means a long book, I read it within a few hours, but it is an incredibly interesting story that takes you into the private world of a public face where you see all of their intimate details. His over-use of literary and cinematic name dropping as descriptors painted a perfect image of what one should be seeing if in the shoes of Miss Kathie or through the narration of her friend/maid/caretaker, Hazie Coogan. In typical Palahniuk fashion, there is obviously a twist ending. Even though I had figured out the ending about half way through the story, I was still doubting my logic right up to the last two scenes. Another interesting part of this book is the style in which he wrote it. Rather than typical chapters, this book is narrated as if the entire story was a movie. Split into Acts and Scenes.
As far as Palahniuk books go, this one made it to my top five. I recommend it to anyone who is a fan of old movies, Palahniuk, or just a clever tale.
I was slightly wary of reading Palahniuk's latest. The premise centered around an aging starlet and the troubles she endured seemed slightly cliche and too simple for one of Palahniuk's protagonists. However, within the first 20 pages of this book I was engrossed in the life of Miss Kathie (a character I immediately drew similarities to another violet-eyed starlet) and realized that that sordid life of a Hollywood actress is definitely Palanhiuk material. This is by no means a long book, I read it within a few hours, but it is an incredibly interesting story that takes you into the private world of a public face where you see all of their intimate details. His over-use of literary and cinematic name dropping as descriptors painted a perfect image of what one should be seeing if in the shoes of Miss Kathie or through the narration of her friend/maid/caretaker, Hazie Coogan. In typical Palahniuk fashion, there is obviously a twist ending. Even though I had figured out the ending about half way through the story, I was still doubting my logic right up to the last two scenes. Another interesting part of this book is the style in which he wrote it. Rather than typical chapters, this book is narrated as if the entire story was a movie. Split into Acts and Scenes.
As far as Palahniuk books go, this one made it to my top five. I recommend it to anyone who is a fan of old movies, Palahniuk, or just a clever tale.
November 2, 2014
-Dando nuevas presentaciones a platos más que conocidos y probados.-
Género. Novela.
Lo que nos cuenta. Katherine Kenton es una estrella cinematográfica de talla mundial que puede ver su cénit por el espejo retrovisor y cuya vida, igual que la de la mayor parte del Hollywood de los Años Dorados pero también la de políticos y otras figuras importantes de la época, vemos a través de los ojos de Hazie Coogan, empleada de Katherine durante la mayor parte de su vida y que hace las veces de madre, doncella, directora de carrera en la sombra, criada y cientos de cosas más. Cuando el joven y bello arribista Webster Carlton Westward III entra en la vida de la actriz, Hazie sabe que se avecinan problemas.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
Género. Novela.
Lo que nos cuenta. Katherine Kenton es una estrella cinematográfica de talla mundial que puede ver su cénit por el espejo retrovisor y cuya vida, igual que la de la mayor parte del Hollywood de los Años Dorados pero también la de políticos y otras figuras importantes de la época, vemos a través de los ojos de Hazie Coogan, empleada de Katherine durante la mayor parte de su vida y que hace las veces de madre, doncella, directora de carrera en la sombra, criada y cientos de cosas más. Cuando el joven y bello arribista Webster Carlton Westward III entra en la vida de la actriz, Hazie sabe que se avecinan problemas.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
September 10, 2024
⭐ - .5
It seems to me as if Chuck Palahniuk had every novel or text ever written by him liquified on a blender, then poured into a tall glass cup: a non-sugary, not-even-sour, nothing-flavored story: Tell-All.
This is a really lousy book. It has a hollow plot, it has poor/close-to-none character development, it's a nightmare. What was I thinking, seriously.
It seems to me as if Chuck Palahniuk had every novel or text ever written by him liquified on a blender, then poured into a tall glass cup: a non-sugary, not-even-sour, nothing-flavored story: Tell-All.
This is a really lousy book. It has a hollow plot, it has poor/close-to-none character development, it's a nightmare. What was I thinking, seriously.
August 26, 2018
Rewelacyjnego Fight Clubu NIC nie przebije :/
Więcej na kanale już wkrótce.
+ wyjściowy pomysł na fabułę
+ opisywanie historii w formie scenariusza filmowego
+ rewelacyjny, obsceniczny humor Palahniuka
- styl jednocześnie jest bardzo męczący i nieprzejrzysty co utrudnia lekturę
- imitowanie syndromu Tourrette'a narracją wyczerpuje czytelnika
- pierwsza połowa książki niewiele wnosi i ma słabe tempo
Ciekawy jestem po jaką książkę tego autora sięgnę w następnej kolejności! :)
October 5, 2010
(Reprinted from the Chicago Center for Literature and Photography [cclapcenter.com]. I am the original author of this essay, as well as the owner of CCLaP; it is not being reprinted illegally.)
Less a finished novel and more a writing-workshop dare grown out of control, Chuck Palahniuk's latest is almost too slight to deserve a write-up at all, although I suppose I'll try: it's essentially a fake kiss-and-tell biography of a 20th-century Hollywood starlet as told by her longtime put-upon assistant, actually written as a book-length Walter-Wintchell-style corny gossip column, complete with boldfaced type every time a person of note is mentioned (which is hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of times). As such, then, Palahniuk's attempt here at campy Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? fun clashes badly with the usual Palahniukian touches present in all his books -- from the transgressive exaggeration of sex and violence to his ever-increasingly annoying habit of picking a random phrase and then repeating it thousands of times throughout a manuscript -- resulting in scenes that typically start in a promising retro Hollywood style, but then always get interrupted by a jarringly out-of-place reference to Viagra overdoses or bloody dildos, then will segue into an outrageously fake reminiscence of some Lillian Hellman script that never in a million years would exist in the real world (Joan Crawford invents the atomic bomb! Then has a torrid affair with Albert Einstein!), teetering drunkenly between realistic drama and gonzo fairytale in a clumsy, ugly way sure to offend fans of either. Shame on you, Chuck, for releasing this nearly unreadable piece of garbage just so you could stick to your book-a-year schedule, when I suspect that you actually knew much better than to do so but did it anyway. We'll see if this holds true, but this might possibly be the book to change my policy of automatically reading every new novel that Palahniuk publishes.
Out of 10: 1.3
Less a finished novel and more a writing-workshop dare grown out of control, Chuck Palahniuk's latest is almost too slight to deserve a write-up at all, although I suppose I'll try: it's essentially a fake kiss-and-tell biography of a 20th-century Hollywood starlet as told by her longtime put-upon assistant, actually written as a book-length Walter-Wintchell-style corny gossip column, complete with boldfaced type every time a person of note is mentioned (which is hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of times). As such, then, Palahniuk's attempt here at campy Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? fun clashes badly with the usual Palahniukian touches present in all his books -- from the transgressive exaggeration of sex and violence to his ever-increasingly annoying habit of picking a random phrase and then repeating it thousands of times throughout a manuscript -- resulting in scenes that typically start in a promising retro Hollywood style, but then always get interrupted by a jarringly out-of-place reference to Viagra overdoses or bloody dildos, then will segue into an outrageously fake reminiscence of some Lillian Hellman script that never in a million years would exist in the real world (Joan Crawford invents the atomic bomb! Then has a torrid affair with Albert Einstein!), teetering drunkenly between realistic drama and gonzo fairytale in a clumsy, ugly way sure to offend fans of either. Shame on you, Chuck, for releasing this nearly unreadable piece of garbage just so you could stick to your book-a-year schedule, when I suspect that you actually knew much better than to do so but did it anyway. We'll see if this holds true, but this might possibly be the book to change my policy of automatically reading every new novel that Palahniuk publishes.
Out of 10: 1.3
September 9, 2010
I give Chuck Palahniuk credit for having a vivid imagination and writing stuff on topics that I wouldn't necessarily find any interest in and making them (somewhat) interesting. Such is the case with his latest, "Tell-All", a novel (well, novel is kinda stretching things...it's really not much more than a kernel of an idea that was stretched and puffed, Chuck-style, into a "novel") about the golden era of cinema and its vain personages, and the public's love for these personages, often written about with "tell-all" unauthorized "biographies" and memoirs that have a penchant for stretching the truth.
The three stars I've rated this novel is charitable; I happen to be a pretty big fan of Mr. Palahniuk's work, and (well, for the last 50 pages, anyway) I was somewhat entertained by it. A huge caveat for the uninitiated Chuck reader: of late he's been taking a subject (with even the flimsiest hope of novelworthiness) and puffing and padding it for all its worth, taking what would probably be a good short story and trying to make a marketable novel. The core story in "Tell-All": an acolyte of famed actress Lillian Hellman (er Lillian Hellman!...), Katherine Kenton, on the downward slope of her own acting career, is courted by a suitor that her housekeeper/personal assistant Hazie has designs on for future plans with forwarding Ms. Kenton's career. Saying anything more would constitute a spoiler, given that that's just about all the plot there is...the rest is an onslaught of name-dropping (a la Patrick Bateman in "American Psycho") of prominent personages (actors, producers, costume designers,etc.) in Hollywood in the 20s and 30s and jokes repeated ad nauseam until no longer remotely funny...just to take the 15 pages of plot and balloon it into 175.
And, yet, I still (somewhat) enjoyed this fluffy bit of nonsense...go figure.
The three stars I've rated this novel is charitable; I happen to be a pretty big fan of Mr. Palahniuk's work, and (well, for the last 50 pages, anyway) I was somewhat entertained by it. A huge caveat for the uninitiated Chuck reader: of late he's been taking a subject (with even the flimsiest hope of novelworthiness) and puffing and padding it for all its worth, taking what would probably be a good short story and trying to make a marketable novel. The core story in "Tell-All": an acolyte of famed actress Lillian Hellman (er Lillian Hellman!...), Katherine Kenton, on the downward slope of her own acting career, is courted by a suitor that her housekeeper/personal assistant Hazie has designs on for future plans with forwarding Ms. Kenton's career. Saying anything more would constitute a spoiler, given that that's just about all the plot there is...the rest is an onslaught of name-dropping (a la Patrick Bateman in "American Psycho") of prominent personages (actors, producers, costume designers,etc.) in Hollywood in the 20s and 30s and jokes repeated ad nauseam until no longer remotely funny...just to take the 15 pages of plot and balloon it into 175.
And, yet, I still (somewhat) enjoyed this fluffy bit of nonsense...go figure.
May 13, 2010
Chuck's new book follows in the overly stylized vein used in Pygmy and Rant. I have to admit that while I love Chuck, I wasn't crazy about either Pygmy or Rant. Luckily, the uber-stylization works for not against Tell-All. I found this send-up of Hollywood insider biographies to be very funny, exceedingly clever, and downright witty. Sure it was overly repetitive at some points, but it was a fun ride nonetheless.
I'm curious to see how Tell-All goes over with typical Chuck fans. As a bookseller, most of the readers I meet who like Chuck are 20 and 30-somethings who like stories of disenfranchisement told with dark humor. While Tell-All is certainly dark and certainly about a disenfranchised character, it is ... well, let's just say it: it's a gay book. It is a campy book told in high camp style about vintage Hollywood camp. It is, as I stated before, exceedingly funny, but most of the humor will probably only appeal to gay men OF a certain age or gay men who understand things FROM a certain age (i.e., Hollywood's Golden Years). The Lillian Hellman leitmotif, for example, is hysterical. Will it be funny for someone who has no idea who Lillian Hellman is, though? Not sure.
I had a great time with Tell-All, but I don't know if it's for everyone.
I'm curious to see how Tell-All goes over with typical Chuck fans. As a bookseller, most of the readers I meet who like Chuck are 20 and 30-somethings who like stories of disenfranchisement told with dark humor. While Tell-All is certainly dark and certainly about a disenfranchised character, it is ... well, let's just say it: it's a gay book. It is a campy book told in high camp style about vintage Hollywood camp. It is, as I stated before, exceedingly funny, but most of the humor will probably only appeal to gay men OF a certain age or gay men who understand things FROM a certain age (i.e., Hollywood's Golden Years). The Lillian Hellman leitmotif, for example, is hysterical. Will it be funny for someone who has no idea who Lillian Hellman is, though? Not sure.
I had a great time with Tell-All, but I don't know if it's for everyone.
June 11, 2011
I added an extra star considering this isn't written in the same exact style of every other Palahniuk book prior to Rant with the exception of Snuff. This weakness of his was most prevalent in Haunted, which included great stories and the wonderful gimmick that each story was written by a different character who was each trapped in the writing retreat from hell. Unfortunately, every story was written in the same exact way and obviously by the same exact character: Chuck Palahniuk. It's really not such a good thing when nearly all of your books are written in first person and all of your protagonists sound exactly the same. But this came to an end with Rant, which was a really great book. Then he went back to doing the same old thing with Snuff, which is his worst book. Then he used a radically different voice in Pygmy, which I had mixed feelings about. And now another different voice for this book, although it's not a good book. Nevertheless, I appreciate his attempts to get away from "the voice" and look forward to his next novel, Damned.
May 26, 2018
Dear C.P,
I see what you were trying to do here Mr. Palahniuk, what with all the name-dropping, and the monotony, the repetition and the redundancy. “Hollywood has glutted itself on its own over-inflated self-worth, it’s all just one big masturbatory circle-jerk, this disgusting American idea of cinema and celebrity… blah, blah.”
It’s not that I disagree with you. Point of fact, I don’t. But I did find all the bolded names of long-dead cinema stars, and the champagne, and all the laborious purple prose sex… a bit much. Even for you. Tell-All was okay, but it was certainly not your best work.
Until I read your next novel...
I see what you were trying to do here Mr. Palahniuk, what with all the name-dropping, and the monotony, the repetition and the redundancy. “Hollywood has glutted itself on its own over-inflated self-worth, it’s all just one big masturbatory circle-jerk, this disgusting American idea of cinema and celebrity… blah, blah.”
It’s not that I disagree with you. Point of fact, I don’t. But I did find all the bolded names of long-dead cinema stars, and the champagne, and all the laborious purple prose sex… a bit much. Even for you. Tell-All was okay, but it was certainly not your best work.
Until I read your next novel...
May 8, 2010
Chuck does it again! This book is fiction, but it sounds like something out of old Hollywood. Words alone cannot describe how AWESOME this book is. Don't listen to the naysayers when they say this book is weak, it is amazing and deserves to be read.
May 9, 2012
I have never been more grateful to see the end of a Palahniuk book. I also cannot believe I have nothing more to say about this book, but there you go. Just... Yeah. Go read Invisible Monsters and remember why we love Chuck.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,166 reviews