Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Only Revolutions

by Mark Z. Danielewski (Goodreads Author)

3.19 of 5 stars 3.19 · rating details · 2,821 ratings · 361 reviews

They were with us before Romeo Juliet. And long after too. Because they're forever around. Or so both claim, carolling gleefully "always sixteen." Sam and Hailey, powered by an ever-rotating fleet of cars, from Model T to Lincoln Continental, career from the Civil War to the Cold War, barrelling down through the Appalachians, up the Mississippi River, across the Badlands,...more

Hardcover, 384 pages

Published September 12th 2006 by Pantheon

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield

Best Book Cover Art

52nd out of 3,825 books — 3,998 voters

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark Haddon

Best Experimental Books Ever

90th out of 398 books — 705 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Nov 08, 2009 Michelle rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: novels, disappointments

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. For every bit of love I felt for Danielewski’s House of Leaves, which was quite a bit, I felt an equal amount of dislike for this one. For me this book embodies a word I have recently seen thrown around Goodreads: Gimmicky. It was gimmicky with a capital G. Gimmicky with all caps. GIMMICKY. It was just bad, man. Bad, bad, bad.

The book tells the story of Sam and Hailey, eternal sixteen-year-old road-tripping Romeo and Juliet types who drive across country and through history. Their story is told...more For every bit of love I felt for Danielewski’s House of Leaves, which was quite a bit, I felt an equal amount of dislike for this one. For me this book embodies a word I have recently seen thrown around Goodreads: Gimmicky. It was gimmicky with a capital G. Gimmicky with all caps. GIMMICKY. It was just bad, man. Bad, bad, bad.

The book tells the story of Sam and Hailey, eternal sixteen-year-old road-tripping Romeo and Juliet types who drive across country and through history. Their story is told by each of them, and is printed on two sides so that each cover of the book could be either the front or back cover. One side is the story told in Sam’s point of view, and if you flip the book upside down and to what would be the back cover, you can read it from Hailey’s point of view. I guess the layout of the book was a…unique idea. An…interesting concept. The problem was that Sam and Hailey’s story wasn’t interesting to read. At all. The dreamy, often misspelled kiddie speak which they used reminded me a little bit of Francesca Lia Block’s books, but she does it oh-so-much better.

I almost never do this, but after I read the book I read its Wikipedia page. I don’t know what I was looking for exactly. Maybe I was looking for a special meaning that I must have missed because surely it couldn't have been that bad, right? Wrong. Incidentally, the most interesting things about the book were found on its Wiki page, which leads me to believe that either the author himself or a huge fan must have written it. But, nothing was enough to sway my opinion or call myself a dumbass for missing some earth-shattering motif that another smarter reader would have picked up on. The information below is quoted directly from Wikipedia:

The first letter of each 8 page "section" is larger and bold when compared to the other letters. When the reader puts the single letters together from Hailey's side they spell out "Sam and Hailey and Sam and Hailey..." etc. When read from Sam's side, they spell out "Hailey and Sam and Hailey and Sam..." etc.

{Huh. Didn't catch that.}

Each half-page contains exactly 90 words. When both stories are combined, the words add together for a total of 180 words per page, perhaps to symbolize the 180 degrees the reader must turn the book to read the opposite volume. Also, with both pages open, the full word count is 360, essentially making a revolution (360 degrees) with every open page.

{Didn't catch that either. But...someone actually counted that shit?}

Get it? Only Revolutions.

Yeah.

The only reason I gave Only Revolutions one star instead of zero was because I was so elated after I turned the last page.(less)

like 23 likes · see review

Sep 08, 2007 Adam rated it 1 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Pre-teen boys desperate to feel like they're deep

This book was like a cross between Da Vinci Code and something by Palahniuk. And I mean that in the most insulting way possible.

The summaries and reviews I read before getting the book had all focused on how it's the same story about two people told from each of their perspectives. Therefore, I hoped going in that it would have some interesting and thought-provoking juxtapositions.

There were no interesting juxtapositions. When reading one character's take on a situation, the question was not in...more This book was like a cross between Da Vinci Code and something by Palahniuk. And I mean that in the most insulting way possible.

The summaries and reviews I read before getting the book had all focused on how it's the same story about two people told from each of their perspectives. Therefore, I hoped going in that it would have some interesting and thought-provoking juxtapositions.

There were no interesting juxtapositions. When reading one character's take on a situation, the question was not in what subtle way would the other character's view of it differ, but rather in what way would the other character's view be the exact opposite. If he said that he drove the car with great skill, would she say he drove poorly, or would she say that SHE drove the car with great skill?

To give an idea of the degree to which this book sucked, here's the summary of a typical scenario from each character's perspective. And as much as you may think that I'm making this up because you don't believe that something this bad could possibly have been published, let me assure you that I am not. Let me repeat - you may find this scene summary to be offensive. It is Danielewski's scene, straight out of the book, not embellished, not made up:
He says: he has a big penis, she has small breasts, he satisfied her sexually and ejaculated massive quantities of come all over her, and then he drove the car with great skill, and she got car sick.
She says: he has a small penis, she has large breasts, he performed poorly sexually and ejaculated a tiny amount of come on the ground next to her, and then she drove the car with great skill, and he got car sick.

It was all so juvenile and formulaic that I had a hard time believing it was really happening and a much harder time believing that anyone could get through more than a few pages of this without dismissing it as total shit. How could any review of this book not trash it completely? I suffered through to the end of the book just so that I could assure myself that it did not, in fact, get better at some point. It did not. This book was horrible.

I gave this book a chance for the same reasons that I gave House of Leaves a chance - mostly that they seemed unique, and I like unique books and writing styles. Both books turned out to be without substance and poorly written by someone who appears to have the maturity of a teenager.

I'm done with Danielewski. He's a hack.(less)

like 21 likes · see review

Mar 21, 2009 Michael rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: tomb-of-dead-books

I have learned that something can be structurally interesting and yet completely unappealing. I read about 24 pages each direction before I realised that reading more would be a chore and not worth my time.

like 12 likes · see review

Apr 24, 2012 Stevie rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: dustbunnied

I dont mind working to read a book. I loved "House of Leaves" and I dont mind being a bit 'lost' in a book - Umberto Eco's "Focault's Pendulum" was a truly difficult read that required work to read and research to fully comprehend. But this one... lost me WAY before it could hook me.

I don't mind the gimmick, really. "House of Leaves" was gimmicky - but it had a great story, an interesting story, a story that sucked you in and kept you reading, and turning, and looking, and puzzling. "Only Revol...more I dont mind working to read a book. I loved "House of Leaves" and I dont mind being a bit 'lost' in a book - Umberto Eco's "Focault's Pendulum" was a truly difficult read that required work to read and research to fully comprehend. But this one... lost me WAY before it could hook me.

I don't mind the gimmick, really. "House of Leaves" was gimmicky - but it had a great story, an interesting story, a story that sucked you in and kept you reading, and turning, and looking, and puzzling. "Only Revolutions" is beautiful to look at, its puzzle is well constructed and its fun to see how it all fits together (180 pages, 180 degrees... etc.) but like someone else said - thats the art of it. It may be art but it still has to be a book. After all the title of the 'art' is "Only Revolvtions: A Novel . Unfortunately it seems Danielewski forgot about that part because as far as story goes - this was AWFUL. The lack of narrative and story and aetherical characters makes the art/puzzle frustrating instead of fun. It is written in a kind of stream of consciousness prose.. ugh.

I'll save most of you some time. From the books wiki entry:

Only Revolutions is printed in such a way that both covers appear to be the front of the book. The side with the green cover is the story as told by Sam, and the side with the gold cover is the story as told by Hailey. Every page contains upside-down text in the bottom margin, which is actually later pages of the opposite volume. For example, the first page of Hailey's story contains the last several lines of Sam's story, apparently upside down. When you reach that page while reading Sam's story, those lines will appear to be the only right-side-up text on the page.
The first letter of each 8 page "section" is larger and bold when compared to the other letters. When the reader puts the single letters together from Hailey's side they spell out "Sam and Hailey and Sam and Hailey..." etc. When read from Sam's side, they spell out "Hailey and Sam and Hailey and Sam..." etc.
Each half-page contains exactly 90 words. When both stories are combined, the words add together for a total of 180 words per page, perhaps to symbolize the 180 degrees the reader must turn the book to read the opposite volume.[original research?:] Also, with both pages open, the full word count is 360, essentially making a revolution (360 degrees) with every open page.
The publisher recommends the reading of eight pages from one story, then the other, and so on.
In addition, every page contains a sidebar with a date and a list of world events that happened between that date and the one which appears on the next page. Dates in Sam's story run from Nov 22, 1863 to Nov 22, 1963, while dates in Hailey's story run from Nov 22, 1963 to Jan 19, 2063. This chronological sidebar, which offers a mosaic of 19th - 21st Century historical quotations, becomes blank after Only Revolutions' own publication date. The diverging point between Sam's line and Hailey's line is set at the date of the John F. Kennedy assassination, November 22, 1963.

And with that you have read the most interesting thing about this book. If you want to you could even print out the above quote and take yourself to a bookstore - find the book and check out the art, hold it, turn it, look at it. Then do yourself a favor and put it back on the shelf.(less)

like 8 likes · see review

Feb 21, 2008 Matthew rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Oh, what a gimmick! Two stories, sharing the page, meeting at page 180, and continuing on to page 360 where the ending of each story is also the beginning of the next. If you follow the publisher's recommendation, you'll turn the book over every eight pages to weave the two stories together. There's different colored ink, puns and riffs that would make Joyce jealous, and a list of dates in the sidebar that serves as a kind of Cliff's Notes of American History. It's all very exciting and exhausti...more

like 9 likes · see review

May 17, 2011 heather rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2007, fiction

reread: may 14, 2011-

(1/1/07): the best book i've read in a while is now out in paperback and as an audio book and mzd has announced his fall tour. what better time to update my review of this gorgeous, personal, political work? plus, who doesn't love a book that so prominently features american cars and asks to be read like a steering wheel?

only revolutions succeeds at a nigh-impossible feat: it is a modern epic poem. it is a novel. a love story. a history. a myth. it is lewis carroll, jack ker...more reread: may 14, 2011-

(1/1/07): the best book i've read in a while is now out in paperback and as an audio book and mzd has announced his fall tour. what better time to update my review of this gorgeous, personal, political work? plus, who doesn't love a book that so prominently features american cars and asks to be read like a steering wheel?

only revolutions succeeds at a nigh-impossible feat: it is a modern epic poem. it is a novel. a love story. a history. a myth. it is lewis carroll, jack kerouac, t.s. eliot, vladimir nabokov, ralph ellison. (i am stunned, actually, that so few reviews compare danielewski's diction to carroll's - the wordplay similarities might as well be wet fish smacking you in the face. unsurprisingly, no shortage of joyce and pynchon comparisons with which i disagree.)

yes, yes, the presentation of this story is unusual. and reviewers seem to either love or loathe the mobius design. like all the best writing, one reading will not suffice. with that in mind, i jettisoned the historical documentation on the first trip through, referring only to the dates. yes, there is a lot on the page. but it doesn't have to be daunting.

sam and hailey's story is timeless and boundless - it is a story as old as human civilization. the narrative is free and uprooted. and danielewski creatively honors that. the work both relies upon and transcends its formatting.

i'm looking forward to my second pass, to letting hailey and sam attach themselves to the ebb and flow of events and then cast themselves away. the sidebars, and to some degree the typography, allow danielewski to be innovative with this doomed-romance, to superimpose the story of america. the characters are not 'everyman.' they are every possibility. they are the unending potential of a nation that has steadfastly clung to the brink. with these perpetual teens, danielewski paints a portrait of our national character- of our haughty isolationism, our delusions of grandeur, our energetic whirl of morebetterfasternow, and our tentative relationship to everything outside ourselves.(less)

like 8 likes · see review

Mar 21, 2007 M rated it 1 of 5 stars

An epic poem, told from the point of view of two people, with lots of footnotes and other Danielewski tricks anyone who read the interesting, if flawed, 'House of Leaves' will be familiar with. When I read this book I felt like it would probably be good for me to finish it, like eating Cheerios or Wheaties, but that's not why I read books (as a general rule). It's also supposed to be read 10 pages at a time, from each protagonist's point of view, and that definitely got annoying after about page...more

like 6 likes · see review

Sep 16, 2011 Sean rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 2009, college, fiction, romance

Howdy there, O happy reader!
It is of the utmost
and most sincerest importance
that you understand
what kind of adventure
you will bestow upon your self
by undertaking and reaping
the novel that HOUSE OF LEAVES'
very own Mark Z. Danielewski has sown.

Sam and Hailey and Hailey and Sam
are two star-crossed lovers
driving across America and
through time as their love
blossoms and grows and yet
so do the country and times
they invade most irreparably.

It is the ambition and the bravery
that makes this labyrinthian p...more

like 19 likes · see review

Dec 21, 2007 Amber rated it 2 of 5 stars Recommends it for: people with ritalin handy

I really wanted to like this book as I LOVED House of Leaves, and furthermore, I wanted to be the elitist one that could espouse, "ohhhh, you didn't like it??? well, it was a difficult boooook..."

but

I just didn't like it. I mean, I get the concept. I get the format, I get the epic quality.... but I think the entire thing could have been done in half the length with twice the impact. After a while the "flip the book" gimmick because almost unbearable as I would get distracted and forget in which...more

like 8 likes · see review

Jan 04, 2009 Paul added it

Shelves: 2007

Zero stars. That's right. Zero of them. This is the worst book I've ever read. It was appallingly bad. Again, it was the worst book I have ever read.

Here's my longer review of it:

Writing by Numbers:
Mark Danielewski’s Only Revolutions

The age-old love-struck teenaged social pariah theme gets a new spin in Only Revolutions, Mark Z. Danielewski’s latest meretricious undertaking. Told by two sixteen-year-olds, Hailey and Sam, the book begins from both ends, “allowing” the reader to flip it over every...more Zero stars. That's right. Zero of them. This is the worst book I've ever read. It was appallingly bad. Again, it was the worst book I have ever read.

Here's my longer review of it:

Writing by Numbers:
Mark Danielewski’s Only Revolutions

The age-old love-struck teenaged social pariah theme gets a new spin in Only Revolutions, Mark Z. Danielewski’s latest meretricious undertaking. Told by two sixteen-year-olds, Hailey and Sam, the book begins from both ends, “allowing” the reader to flip it over every eight pages, alternating between characters. Danielewski claims to have conceived of the format after having separately written Sam’s and Hailey’s stories, though this is difficult to believe considering the two tales are hardly distinct. Nor do their voices differ; solipsistic Sam asserts, “I am astounding,” egocentric Hailey declares, “I am astonishing,” and aside from such slight dictional variances, the book essentially repeats itself each time it is flipped.

A strong sense of rhythm and an ability to generate momentum are evident immediately as Sam and Hailey race about in a polynymic car, fornicating, eating HONEY and defecating, all the while extolling themselves to the point of absurdity. The car, however, remains undescribed, their driving is aimless, the shitting grandiose and, to say the least, excessive. Further, puerile phrases like chillin, no biggie, bouncing gazongas, and phat props, plus apocopic colloquialisms dis, sitch, and sesh are unengaging and detrimental to the notion of timelessness, a supposed major theme of the novel. All seems consequently quite desultory, the constant book-turning serving no purpose but to prohibit the momentum from really taking off. And while a mollified pace eventually makes room for conflict, even this seems forced: the two try desperately to get married, a social convention such outsiders would surely eschew. Somehow they succeed, and later each holds the other in his/her arms, all vitality inexplicably drained therefrom. The entire narrative is devoid of any setting and context, unless one is inclined to read the so-called history margins, a running compendium of cryptic non-sequiturs obtained largely via fan submission to the author’s web forum. These exist as a separate text alongside the story proper, serving only, really, to distract. Though they do, according to the author, evoke the look of a road. Neat.

While he may lack linguistic maturity, Danielewski excels in graphical flourish and gimmick. Giant Ulyssesesque initials commence both characters’ halves, although, despite several critics’ claims, this is as Joycean as the novel gets. Drop caps indicate the breaks at which the book is meant to be turned over; these follow a rigid pattern of two, three, or five lines in height. Black dots in page corners act as cinematic cigarette burns, harbingers of each expositionally insignificant five-line cap. Type shrinks from 20 to 12 points over the narrative course, a visual representation of Hailey and Sam’s collective quietus. On Sam’s side, fauna is set in bold and fades puzzlingly to gray; Hailey’s repeats the trick with flora. Page numbers revolve around each other in flip-book fashion and the pronoun US is set always in narcissistic capitals, reading as an initialism like a note sung off-key. Though none of this adds anything to the reader’s experience, Danielewski clearly believes an overdeveloped structure can supersede content. Typefaces are numerous, have apposite names—Life, Perpetua, Tempo, Myriad, Spectrum, Univers—and are listed “in order of arrival” as if playing an active role. Within the text though, proper characters clash with Sam and Hailey only visually, via their small-capped monikers, and not through any sort of literal development. Indeed the only memorable one of the bunch is THE CREEP, and only because his handle appears throughout in arbitrary purple ink.

The paperback edition makes small improvements. An appropriate, if obvious, road adorns each cover, replacing the marginally relevant pupils of the hardback. Gone is the further incongruous case, a photocollage of dead birds, insects and plants, and while the eliminated double-ribbon means the reader will have to supply her own bookmarks, these are easy enough to come by. The cryptic endsheets, an apparent concordance set in reverse and arranged in an odd pattern of various overlapping ovals, remain only in part, suggesting dispensability. Rest assured, though, fans; each O and zero are still set in either green (in Sam’s portion) or gold (in Hailey’s). The text itself remains unchanged.

Though specious, House of Leaves, Danielewski’s experimental debut novel, showed ambition. Here, however, he forgoes sentiment for numerical allusion, filling each of his 360 pages with 36 lines and exactly 180 words but not a trace of genuine emotion. Perhaps he’s hoping this paucity of substance will be missed for the constant book-flipping. Indeed, as Hailey claims 67.8% of the way through her half of the novel, “If you can’t fix it, give it a spin.” (less)

like 5 likes · see review

George Did you read the whole thing? If so, you can't have played close attention, because the characters' "solipsism" soon evolves into admiration for each...more
updated Sep 15, 2012 11:12am

Paul I definitely read the entire thing -- all 64,800 words of it. I wasn't claiming that the characters remain narcissistic throughout, only that when one...more
Jan 04, 2009 10:13am

Chris Worst book ever read? Surely it cant be as irritating as Catcher in the Rye?
Aug 31, 2012 02:53pm

Feb 11, 2008 Alex V. rated it 2 of 5 stars

I think a lot of people pick up Finnegan's Wake and fall in love with the perverse but precise architecture of that book and figure, "shit, I can do that."

Well, they can't.

I positively adore Danielewski's House of Leaves equally for its compelling structure and the stories stretched up on those frames, but this one is all stretcher and no canvas. It's a he-said she said, both stories glind through the book, upside down from each other. The letter O appears in green everywhere in the book. The fo...more

like 5 likes · see review

Aug 20, 2007 Rachel Chamberlain rated it 3 of 5 stars

This book is somewhat irksome...not for reasons pertaining to its "prosetry," rotating, double reading, etc; but because I really want to like this book, but can't quite bring myself to give it a sterling review. I liked the themes, and the concept -- tying together American history with flora and fauna with rebellion, youth, travelling cross country, sex, minorities, love, written to show how these things revolve around each other, work upon each other, and are even ingrained within not only th...more

like 3 likes · see review

Apr 25, 2008 Erin Beck rated it 1 of 5 stars

I’m on the bus for 2 hours a day. It’s where I do all of my reading. It’s like being in the bathroom and reading the back of shampoo bottles – Almost anything is better than just looking out the window – But not this book.

I really wanted to like Only Revolutions. I thought the idea was great. The same story told from the male and female perspective. You read 8 pages of the male side then flip the book over and read 8 pages of the female side.

But I thought I would be reading prose - not an epic...more

like 4 likes · see review

Feb 08, 2009 Darrell rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: reviewed

After Danielewski's first novel House of Leaves, my expectations were high for Only Revolutions. Unfortunately, I was severely disappointed.

The book is about two young lovers, Sam and Hailey, who each tell their own side of the story (you flip the book upside down to switch between their viewpoints.) Their story takes the form of a poem, with arbitrary line breaks and indentation, puns, inconsistent rhyme, alliteration, intentionally misspelled words, made-up words, and so forth.

It's an interest...more

like 3 likes · see review

Mar 16, 2008 Michael Alexander rated it 5 of 5 stars

I think I'm one of very few people actually set up to love this book. Obtuse pointless internal rhymes, a romp through history for some vague reason hanging on the Kennedy assassination as fulcrum, an obsessive parallelism as metaphor for love, a total overstuffing of reference as a way of talking about Americanness, and a bunch of Finnegans Wake references--yes, this is one of those things where taste is defined by what kinds of silliness you'll tolerate.

But for me, anyway, it's like reading a...more

like 5 likes · see review

Feb 20, 2008 Emily rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: fiction

addicting to read in terms of its flow, its form, etc. mindbending in terms of its perfect execution of mirror-image layout. (even the page numbers, inscribed in circles, move around each other if you skim throught the pages like a flip-book.) 'an infernal machine,' one complimentary reviewer called it.

and yet. (and yet.)

despite all of this, i was lukewarm to it throughout, basically just heading to the end to see what it looked like. to be fair, the physicality/spirituality of the end of the st...more

like 1 like · see review

Jun 18, 2007 J rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: favorites

An incredible reading experience that works more as a novelistic slam poem than a typical novel. Danielewski creates two timeless characters whose youth never dies as their love continues to grow. Written in perfect rhythm and pace, reading the book outloud adds to the experience. The movements of the words and the power of Danielewski's language could be dampened by just looking at the book and letting it work interiorly. However, by saying the words, the story is brought to life even more to l...more

like 4 likes · see review

Dec 27, 2007 Brendan rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This read like a dream. It was confusing, then clear and then confusing again. The story seemed to inch, jut, and leap forward, and then with a flip of the book an instant replay revealed a different perspective.

I loved Danielewski's use of two voices to tell a story. His understanding of the two main characters and their insatiable need for each other showcased the madness of love in a remarkable form of suggestion, saturation and passion.

I was often confused and amazed by the intricacies, la...more

like 3 likes · see review

Apr 29, 2013 Tom added it

Shelves: english, poetry

Zero stars. Yeah, you got that right. Zero.

I must start off by admitting I haven't read the book in its entirety. However, considering I'll never get any further than I already have, I might as well write my review right now.

I do not mind putting in a little effort when reading a book. Danielewski's debut novel House of Leaves was extraordinary, and left me numb. Needless to say I was looking forward to the follow-up, which turned out to be an epic poem written from two perspectives. The idea is...more

like · see review

Apr 19, 2012 Bianca rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

"Only Revolutions" ist eine Herausforderung. Das ist das Beste was mir nach dem Lesen zu dem Buch einfällt.

Ich hatte viele Erwartungen an "Only Revolutions". Die Beschreibung versprach eine spannende Geschichte, außerdem hatte ich noch nie ein Buch in der Hand gehalten, welches man von vorne und von hinten lesen kann. Nach der Leseprobe gefiel mir auch die Art der Sprache sehr gut; als Sprachbegeisterte gefallen mir Autoren, die noch mit Sprache zu spielen wissen. (Nachdem ich es gelesen habe: R...more "Only Revolutions" ist eine Herausforderung. Das ist das Beste was mir nach dem Lesen zu dem Buch einfällt.

Ich hatte viele Erwartungen an "Only Revolutions". Die Beschreibung versprach eine spannende Geschichte, außerdem hatte ich noch nie ein Buch in der Hand gehalten, welches man von vorne und von hinten lesen kann. Nach der Leseprobe gefiel mir auch die Art der Sprache sehr gut; als Sprachbegeisterte gefallen mir Autoren, die noch mit Sprache zu spielen wissen. (Nachdem ich es gelesen habe: RESPEKT an die Übersetzer!).

Only Revolutions besteht pro Doppelseite aus vier Cantons zu je 90 Worten. Es wird vom Verlag empfohlen, das Buch nach jeweils 8 Seiten umzudrehen und von der anderen Seite 8 Seiten zu lesen. Ich muss leider dazu sagen, diese Information findet sich nur ganz klein auf dem Umschlag. Wenn ihr wie ich seid, ist das Erste was ihr tut, den Umschlag abnehmen. Wenn ihr dann mit einem so wunderschönen Hardcover konfrontiert werdet, geht die kleine Information schon mal unter.
Als jemand der also beides versucht hat, in einem Rutsch durchlesen und nach 8 Seiten umdrehen, kann ich euch sagen: dreht das Buch nach 8 Seiten um. Das stört ein wenig den Lesefluss und die Konzentration, aber es erleichtert das Lesen ungemein.

Konzentration ist dabei aber eigentlich das Stichwort. Für mich war das Lesen unheimlich anstrengend. Am Anfang ging es noch, aber so nach 50 Seiten aus jeder Richtung mit ständigem hin und herdrehen, ist es richtig anstrengend noch etwas von der Geschichte zu verstehen. Irgendwann versteift man sich so sehr darauf, dass jetzt irgendwie zu lesen und zu verstehen, dass man dann doch gar nichts mehr versteht. Legt man das Buch aber zu lange zur Seite, ist es auch schwer sich wieder in die Situation einzulesen in der man vorher war. Es ist also alles nicht so einfach.

Deswegen mein Fazit: "Only Revolutions" ist eine Herausforderung. Ich würde vorschlagen: lest es und findet dabei einen Rhythmus, in dem euch das Buch Spaß macht. Ein Buch wie "Only Revolutions" werdet ihr kein zweites Mal in der Hand halten.

Für die ganze Aufmachung gibt es von mir einen Stern extra, ich könnte mich in dem Hardcover verlieren. Bei jedem Blick darauf entdeckt man etwas Neues.(less)

like 1 like · see review

Dec 19, 2010 Kerry rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: tried-and-gave-up

5 stars for exploring the physical form of a "book" but only 1 star for plot, character, dialogue.

Physical form: The impressive layout and design drew me to give this book a try. Every physical element of this book has been designed - there is nothing arbitrary. Two front covers; no back cover. A gorgeous, detailed photograph on the cover underlying the dust jacket. Themed-color ribbon bookmarks. Shrinking typefaces as the story progresses, implying to me gathering speed. Sidebars providing hist...more

like 1 like · see review

Apr 30, 2010 Colin rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Seriously literate people who enjoy a challenge, or people who cherish odd books

Shelves: four-star

Make no mistake about it--this book is *not* for everyone. Even those who managed to conquer Danielewski's House of Leaves (or at least finish it--conquering it is perhaps another matter altogether), may find themselves ultimately beaten or annoyed by Only Revolutions. Taking structural formalism to an extreme, Danielewski weaves the story of two seemingly immortal and un-aging sixteen year old kids, Hailey and Sam, as they trek across the United States on the run from the enigmatic character Th...more Make no mistake about it--this book is *not* for everyone. Even those who managed to conquer Danielewski's House of Leaves (or at least finish it--conquering it is perhaps another matter altogether), may find themselves ultimately beaten or annoyed by Only Revolutions. Taking structural formalism to an extreme, Danielewski weaves the story of two seemingly immortal and un-aging sixteen year old kids, Hailey and Sam, as they trek across the United States on the run from the enigmatic character The Creep, in pursuit of that which occupies every true sixteen year old's thoughts: complete freedom.

Along the way they fall in love, party like it's 1999 (several times over), take way too many drugs, work to make their ends meet at a city diner, and creep into what seems to be the end of the world--wherein the book's most beautiful and tearful passages are to be found. It's a shame that most readers won't make it this far--the entire story is told in manic free-verse poetry filled to the brim with obscure words and even obscurer etymologies, purposeful misspellings, and a healthy dose of pure adolescent gibberish--on top of which the story is split into dual narratives, soaked in Danielewski's trademark playful typological manipulations and use of colour, and rife with strange symbols, vague historical allusions, and compelling puzzles to be solved. A lot of readers dismiss the whole package as a postmodern gimmick of rather epic proportions, and it's hard to blame them.

So, if all of the above sounds like too much to slog through in pursuit of what is ultimately just a Romeo and Juliet sort of story, my recommendation is to avoid reading it like the plague. But please, please, even if you don't ever plan on attempting to read the thing, at least find a copy to flip through and admire. A lot of hard work obviously went into the planning and structure of this peculiar novel, and it's rare to behold a mass-produced book that so obviously begs to be admired even just as a physical object. Whatever Danielewski's faults as a writer may be, he pours what must be nearly all of himself that he has to give into every little detail of his books, and it really shows.

How lucky are the persistent and open-minded readers out there who have gotten the bulk of this book's text under their belts then and love it--they love it not only as a curious and bizarre object, but also as a curious and bizarre love story. For me, five stars is too few--for most, five stars is far too many. The truth about this amazing and flawed book lies somewhere in the middle. Let's call it a solid four.

Notes: Nominated for the 2006 National Book for Fiction.

(less)

like 5 likes · see review

Aug 09, 2009 Susan rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: ugh

Clever in concept; awful in execution. The characters are as thin as the gimmicks are thick. Revolvings devolve into revolting. Only Revolutions can't really make up its mind what it is -- bad fiction or bad poetry -- circling tediously from cartoon to pornography to B-movie dialogue to quest narrative (though what is sought is never made clear and I use "narrative" losely), to alternative and parallel worlds. The idea of a book that can be read in both directions has potential and the flip-book...more

like 1 like · see review

Jul 12, 2010 Steve Betz rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2008

I read “Only Revolutions” by Mark Z. Danielewski a little at a time. It’s a book that needs to be digested.

The plot is an American classic: two teenagers find each other, fall in love (well, more like lust at first), hit the open road, get into hijinx, with things sometimes getting serious. Not so hard to grasp.

It’s the structure of the book that is so fascinating. The story is told from both protagonists’ perspectives – Sam’s and Hailey’s – from opposite ends of the book. Each cover is actually...more I read “Only Revolutions” by Mark Z. Danielewski a little at a time. It’s a book that needs to be digested.

The plot is an American classic: two teenagers find each other, fall in love (well, more like lust at first), hit the open road, get into hijinx, with things sometimes getting serious. Not so hard to grasp.

It’s the structure of the book that is so fascinating. The story is told from both protagonists’ perspectives – Sam’s and Hailey’s – from opposite ends of the book. Each cover is actually a “front” cover. Literally, you read one perspective for a while, then invert and flip the book over and read the other person’s account. The accounts are clearly of the same events, but Sam’s and Hailey’s viewpoints differ enough to keep you on your toes. Clever.

But there’s more. Each half page is 90 words and each section is eight pages long. 720 words per section, which I took to be one revolution of two people (if words were equal to degrees). The book has 360 pages. Also, running down the margin on each half-page are events surrounding a date (think like a ticker on the bottom of Headline News) – Sam’s starts in November 1863 and runs until November 1963. Hailey’s starts immediately after Sam’s and runs (curiously) to January, 2063. (The “news tickers” after 2006, when the book was published, are blank – I suppose we can fill them in as time marches on). The inflection point is the Kennedy Assasination. The events are in tiny print and I think the story against the running course of events is supposed to show that when two people are in love, the rest of the world goes on in the background, but they don't notice. (Or maybe it's supposed to be something else.)

And yet, there’s more. Each page is not written in prose, but a style that I would call verse – and occasionally rambling. Danielewski plays with sound, language and grammar to produce a very fluid read. The only thing in my experience I can compare it to is going to a Shakespearean play – for the first five minutes, I can’t understand anything the actors are saying, and then the cadence and language sinks in and you can follow it. This book is sort of like that.

Is it for everyone? I don’t think so. Is it for you? It’s certainly worth a try – especially if you like language, fonts, poetry, and finding little clues and differences in each character’s accounts. This strikes me as the kind of work that will develop (maybe it already has) a substantial cult-following as folks try to interpret a greater meaning. To me, its a weird cross of Shakespeare and Rashamon.

I can’t say that I found great existential meaning, but in terms of “craft” this is pretty phenomenal, and if you’re looking for something different, this is probably it.(less)

like · see review

Sep 06, 2011 kingshearte added it

Shelves: 2011, effed-up, fiction

The last time I finished a book with my head spinning, wondering just what the flying fuck just happened was Gravity's Rainbow. I truly never believed that I would ever read another book as confusing, and with so much of its meaning completely buried that it left only snippets of surface meaning. To this day, I cannot even begin to attempt to tell you what Gravity's Rainbow was about, and although I could cop out and say that Only Revolutions is about Sam & Hailey, that's really about as muc...more

like · see review

May 02, 2013 Jill rated it 3 of 5 stars

Exactly halfway through this book, my opinion of it changed completely.

Up to that point, I wasn't enjoying it. I was tired, as I am always tired, of arrogant adolescents getting into misadventures, scampering about having sex and consuming exorbitant amounts of drugs (aside: when you teach high school, glamorous nostalgia for the teenage years kinda loses ANY AND ALL power). I was irritated with the writing style -- choppy sentences and constant references to wildlife (what? I still don't get th...more Exactly halfway through this book, my opinion of it changed completely.

Up to that point, I wasn't enjoying it. I was tired, as I am always tired, of arrogant adolescents getting into misadventures, scampering about having sex and consuming exorbitant amounts of drugs (aside: when you teach high school, glamorous nostalgia for the teenage years kinda loses ANY AND ALL power). I was irritated with the writing style -- choppy sentences and constant references to wildlife (what? I still don't get that) -- and with the fact that you have to constantly flip the book over and around. You're supposed to alternate between the confluent narratives of the two main characters, Hailey & Sam, every 8 pages -- this, while being a brilliant example of why a paper novel still has unique relevance, is also supremely annoying.

But exactly halfway through, the narrative starts repeating itself. Slightly differently. Things are different, now; Hailey and Sam have evolved a little, now. But if you skim back a few pages, you realize the same scene is being revisited -- slightly differently. And then, if you look at the mirror narrative below, you realize there are connections there, too.

And then it hit me how brilliant, how ambitious, Danielewski really is.

He doesn't succeed fully; this is not Cloud Atlas, though the 'nesting doll' structural metaphor works well here, too (but you could argue, probably more realistically, for that whole Nietzsche's-'eternal return'-thing). Still -- this book feels like uncharted territory, something to explore and inhabit, hate and love. It recalls all the Romeo & Juliet angst you could ask for, and it does it both timelessly and oh-so-contemporarily. And as for the physical experience --- well, you won't soon forget it. You might be happy to read a book where you can turn the page without having two bookmarks flapping around ---- but you also might miss Only Revolutions, and how after you read it -- it sort of becomes yours.

Ultimately: a gorgeous testament to the power of FORM, and the power of paper books. A not-so-gorgeous testament to the intensity and impetuousness of adolescence. (less)

like 1 like · see review

Feb 05, 2009 Bookmarks Magazine added it

Critics heap praise on Only Revolutions, Mark Danielewski's second novel and a tour de force of writing that challenges readers' assumptions about storytelling. Reviewers similarly lauded the author's initial effort, House of Leaves (2000), which also questioned notions of traditional narrative. The author's fiction is mentioned in some pretty heady company__stylistically, formally, and as part of the long tradition of the Great American Road Narrative__including the work of e. e. cummings, Jame

...more

like · see review

Jul 14, 2011 edward rathke rated it 5 of 5 stars

Everyone lauds House of Leaves, as they should, but Only Revolutions seems to be always overlooked are castigated for its difficulty.

It is a difficult book and part of its difficulty is that one must learn to read it, which is no easy task as the only instructions are to start at both ends and work inward and on past to the opposite covers, alternatingly. I was ready to give up after about sixty pages, but, for some reason, didn't. Maybe it was the delight of the prose, fanciful and poetic, titt...more

like 2 likes · see review

Jul 28, 2012 Julian Stropes rated it 3 of 5 stars

I enjoyed Only Revolutions. While writing this I noticed that most people loved or hated this book. Each side usually stating why the other was ridiculous and wrong (the 'five-stars' claiming that this is just as interesting and complex as House of Leaves and the 'one-stars' saying the five-stars are pretentious hipsters who like to pretend that they “get” everything and everyone else is stupid). I can see the points that both bring up. I adamantly stand against the idea that art should be made...more I enjoyed Only Revolutions. While writing this I noticed that most people loved or hated this book. Each side usually stating why the other was ridiculous and wrong (the 'five-stars' claiming that this is just as interesting and complex as House of Leaves and the 'one-stars' saying the five-stars are pretentious hipsters who like to pretend that they “get” everything and everyone else is stupid). I can see the points that both bring up. I adamantly stand against the idea that art should be made simple because some people won't understand it (because, well, some people don't want to). At the same time I adamantly stand against the idea of making something purposefully complex and impenetrable and then saying that people who can't understand it are stupid (this is Foucault's supposed critique of Derrida.) Whether Foucault actually said it or not I think it brings up a valid point about contemporary art and thought in general. Simple ideas are sometimes conveyed in overly complex ways to make the person saying it seem better or smarter than the people they just purposefully confused. Does Danielewski do this in Only Revolutions? I'm not entirely convinced one way or the other. My opinion on this book revolves as much as its format (I don't think that fact makes it incredible, or terrible, for that matter).

There's an element of this that is similar to when someone explains their own joke, or when an art student explains to you why their art is significant and full of hidden meanings and, because of this, you should think some thing about it (this is not meant as a pejorative, just as a descriptor, sometimes the explanations offered by those students are interesting - sometimes they're not). But if you don't like this kind of thing then you probably won't like Only Revolutions and I would suggest you check out something else by Danielewski instead.

Only Revolutions contains a revolving mathematical format and these elements relate in a very complex way (a way that I will admit I don't fully understand and would not have understood if I didn't venture into the internet). The story itself is told in stream of consciousness and the dust jacket is more coherent than anything you will glean from the pages. Even the elements that appear on the jacket could be contested since the events that occur in the narrative(s) are slightly different, time place and everything else easily flip with each page turn (meaning certain elements and commonalities between the narratives are often the only way to tell anything is going on at all). Most books have some sort of plot to follow - Only Revolutions has certain themes that repeat and repeat. For these reasons there are tons of theories about what it means, what it's saying, if you can say anything about it at all and everything in between. Thankfully I didn't look any of these up before I read the book (I would suggest you don't either, why spoil things?)

I enjoyed Only Revolutions because I don't mind stream of consciousness writing and I like the way that Danielewski writes. Some of these passages are written incredibly well, others aren't, them's the breaks. Danielewski is capable of using language in a very visceral way and when I read through this book my mind comes up with repeating images and draws connections between different themes and elements (that other people may or may not have seen, I don't think this matters. Not to me at least). I approach it kind of like how I approach the world – it's some sort of strange thing and it just keeps going around and around and some things can be made to make sense to me while other things make sense to other people. Some people claim they know everything about how it works and some people claim the other people are crazy. I don't know, I just have fun while reading through it and I don't need any other reason. Reading can be fun, right?
Right?!

Here's a quote from the first page, there's 360 more like it, you'll know what you want to do:
“Samsara! Samarra!
Grand!
I can walk away from anything.
Everyone loves the dream but I kill it.
Atlas Mountain Cedars gush over me: -Up Boogaloo!
I leap free this spring.
On fire. How my hair curls.
I'll destroy the world.
That's all. Big ruin all around. With a wiggle.
With a waggle. A spin.
Allmighty sixteen and freeeeee.”(less)

like · see review

Mar 10, 2011 Miles Baxter rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: bizarre, non-fiction-all

There were parts of this book that i loved. There were parts that i hated. There were parts when i had no idea of what was going on.
This book is brilliant. I can see that, although it is not an easy read and at times i just wanted it to be over. But i can appreciate its beauty.
Can you classify it? What genre is it? Fiction? Romance? Poetry? Philosophy? ... i love that it doesnt fit into a category and challenges the way i read and perceive a "good" book. I think that this book is ahead of its...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Weird question on how to read it	6	125	May 26, 2011 01:45am
This book	1	56	Apr 29, 2008 10:19am

combine
Other Editions (7)

More editions...

Genres

Poetry

21 users

Literature

18 users

Novels

15 users

Romance

10 users

Fantasy

9 users

Contemporary

8 users

Literary Fiction

7 users

Surreal

5 users

Science Fiction

4 users

Horror

3 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Mark Z. Danielewski

Mark Z. Danielewski is an American author. He is the son of Polish avant-garde film director Tad Danielewski and the brother of singer and songwriter Annie Decatur Danielewski, a.k.a. Poe.

Danielewski studied English Literature at Yale. He then decided to move to Berkeley, California, where he took a summer program in Latin at the University of California, Berkeley. He also spent time in Paris, pre...more

More about Mark Z. Danielewski...

Books by Mark Z. Danielewski

We Dropped a Bomb on You: The Best of Slake I-IV

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Only Revolutions

1 trivia question

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from Only Revolutions

“We're the unmended, the untended,
cold soldiers of the shoe. We're the neglected,
the never resurrected, agonies of the few.
We're the once kissed, unmissed and always
refused. Because we're the unfinished
and feared and we're never pursued.

And just that easily, on my behalf,
I come around. Because I'm burning.
The beast of War feeds only on the meats of War.
And now I'm for carnage.
Here's how my anguish frees.
Destroy everyone of course. Because I'm unwanted
and unsafe. And I'll take tears away with torments and rape,
killings and fears not even the dead will escape.
Encircling the Guilty, Ashamed, Blameless and
Enslaved. Absolved. Butchering their prejudice.

Patience. Their Value. Because I'm without value.
I'm the coming of every holocaust. Turning no lost.
Rending tissue, sinew and bone. Excepting no suffering.
By me all levees will break. All silos heave.
I will walk heavy.
And I will walk strange.

Because I am too soon.
Because without Her, I am only revolutions
Of ruin.

Because I am too soon.
Because without You, I am only revolutions
Of ruin.

I'm the prophecy prophecies pass.
Why need dies at last.
How oceans dry. Islands drown.
And skies of salt crash to the ground.
I turn the powerful. Defy the weak.
Only grass grows down abandoned streets.

For a greater economy shall follow Us
and it will be undone.
And a greater autonomy shall follow Us
and it too will be undone.
And a greater feeling shall follow Love
and it too we will blow to dust.
For I am longings without trust. The cycloidal haste
freedom from Hailey forever wastes.
Dust cares for only dust.
And time only for Us.

Because I am too soon.
Because without Her, I am only revolutions
Of ruin.

Because I am too soon.
Because without You, I am only revolutions
Of ruin.

We are always sixteen...” — 60 people liked it

“I will walk heavy, and I will walk strange.” — 29 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Only Revolutions
avg rating	preview: Only Revolutions Goodreads rating: 3.19 (2821 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40152.Only_Revolutions?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1285310946l/40152.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40152.Only_Revolutions?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Only Revolutions by Mark Z. Danielewski[/url]

Only Revolutions

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website