Sharp Practice

by John Farris

First edition. A fine copy in a VG dust jacket. The DJ is tanning at the edges. Its rear panel has small tears at the upper edge and a tear/crease at the lower edge.

Genres: Horror

286 pages, Hardcover

First published October 29, 1974

About the author

Librarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name

American writer and screenwriter of both adaptations of his own books (e.g. 'The Fury'), of the works of others (such as Alfred Bester's 'The Demolished Man') and original scripts. In 1973 he wrote and directed the film 'Dear Dead Delilah'. He has had several plays produced off-Broadway, and also paints and writes poetry. At various times he has made his home in New York, Southern California and Puerto Rico; he currently resides near Atlanta, Georgia. Early in his career he also wrote under the name Steve Brackeen.

Reviews

[Grady Hendrix · Rating 2 out of 5]

So much incest, maybe too much incest? Still, it's hard to totally dismiss a book that ends with the killer chasing a woman around a Southern mansion in a camper van.

[Ben Boulden · Rating 4 out of 5]

Top-notch psychological terror from the underappreciated master of suspense.

[Derek Rutherford · Rating 2 out of 5]

Many many years ago, probably late 70s / early 80s, at the height of my Stephen King phase, I read Farris's The Fury. I recall being absolutely blown away - it was like Firestarter, only way better. Which, back then, was big praise. I subsequently read a few more of JF's horror books - Son of the Endless Night and All Heads Turn When The Hunt Rolls By - but they've not left the impression over the subsequent 35 years that The Fury did. I simply don't recall those books or my reaction to them.

Then, spookily, a few Farris books starting appearing in my Amazon recommendations list. These turned out to be early JF crime novels. I did a bit of research and read a few articles and felt it was time to revisit JF.

Alas, Sharp Practice did nothing for me. Put simply, I didn't enjoy it. The form, the construction, (clearly deliberate, but very disjointed), did nothing for me. Characters whom I thought would be main characters came and went (permanently), leaving a very unbalanced feel to the novel. Others appeared midway through the tale and turned out to be main characters. Everyone was "brilliant" -whether at writing, at maths, at music, at art - which felt totally unrealistic. The big final set-piece, although very well written, just didn't didn't ring true. There's no doubting that individual sections were superbly written, but I'm afraid it just didn't hang together for me.

I guess the bottom-line is that I didn't like the form / construction and I was unable to suspend my disbelief, but I did enjoy much of the writing.

[Paul · Rating 3 out of 5]

I know Farris would become one of the biggest forces in the genre. But, he isn't there yet. This book meanders horribly, with no main character to focus on it has no center. You can do a book like that, but it has to have drive behind it. This jumps on the timeline, clumsily sets up a red herring that takes up a large portion of the book, and when it's revealed that it was a red herring you know immediately who the bad guy is. Unfocused and jumpy. If you want to read some early work to watch the writer develop, by all means, but if you want him at his best....

[Michelle’s Vintage Library · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first half of this book was a well written and engaging thriller.

I think halfway through the writing process the author might have gotten tired of writing a thriller and decided he would rather write something entirely different. Maybe a campus novel or a spoof on academia.

It was interesting in its own way, but not exactly what I expected.

[Brett]

Horror

[Spike · Rating 1 out of 5]

What a disappointment. The main trouble here is the author does not seem to know how to put a book together. Narrative drive is weak, and the focus on the protagonist so fuzzy at times I forgot who that was supposed to be. And that is a shame, because the man can write. I mean, there are moments of outright brilliance, such as the long rambling diatribe delivered by Phillip Rackstraw about 3/4 of the way through. It was as if Farris unleashed his talents, and let Rackstraw go. But as a reader, this was medicine delivered too late--the patient was already terminal at this point.
With so many great authors, and so little time, I doubt I'd give Farris another chance.