From the Bookshelf of What's the Name of That Book???…

House of Leaves

Mark Z. Danielewski

Why we're reading this: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

https://www.goodreads.com …more
[close] https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Find A Copy At

Group Discussions About This Book

No group discussions for this book yet.

What Members Thought

Apr 06, 2009 Kate rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: age-adult, literary, 2010

Once there was a strange house. Then a man named Navidson who lived in the house with his family made a film about the house. Then a blind man named Zampano wrote a dissertation about the film about the house. Then a guy named Johnny Truant found the manuscript about the film about the house. What you end up reading is the manuscript with Johnny's notes, complete with Zampano's footnotes and other additional material in the back.

I had heard a lot about this book, often with it appearing on lists ...more

6 likes · Like · see review

Oct 22, 2017 Tiffany rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Shelves: recommendedby-a, 1001-books, nancysruleof50

I'm sorry. I tried. I really did. But ...

I've read a number of reviews that say this is an INTENSE book, and if you don't get it, it means you didn't try hard enough. Well, on the one hand, I took that as a challenge; on the other hand, don't judge me! I TRIED, I did. And I was really excited about the story: a guy's house grows and shifts on the inside, while the outside never looks any different (Yes, that's the quick-and-easy description of the plot). I was told and have read that this is a S I'm sorry. I tried. I really did. But ...

I've read a number of reviews that say this is an INTENSE book, and if you don't get it, it means you didn't try hard enough. Well, on the one hand, I took that as a challenge; on the other hand, don't judge me! I TRIED, I did. And I was really excited about the story: a guy's house grows and shifts on the inside, while the outside never looks any different (Yes, that's the quick-and-easy description of the plot). I was told and have read that this is a SCARY book, so I made sure to read it in October, during the stormy season, when Halloween is coming, because I wanted to thoroughly enjoy the spooky and scary and creepy.

But ... other than the times when I WORKED to make myself spooked and scared and creeped, where was the spooky/scary/creepy? Apparently it's after page 94 (where I finally called it quits), because I still never got spooked/scared/creeped. I mean, the idea that this guy's house randomly expands and there are noises, and that someone can get lost in these appearing and expanding rooms and hallways is kinda creepy, but I wasn't *creeped out* as I read.

I think part of the problem for me was all of the side comments. House of Leaves is set up as 1. a critical examination of The Navidson Record, this guy's video journal of his creepy house, with 1a. lots of critical theory crap and analysis, quotes from others who have reviewed and analyzed The Navidson Record, and 1b. the writer's (Zampano) footnote comments, 2. this other guy's (Johnny Truant) comments on this manuscript, which he found, as well as his own personal life (women, work, getting drunk, being spooked by what he's read), and 3. the editor's notes on Zampano's and Truant's notes. Holy crap! Can I just follow one story, please? Now, don't get me wrong: I don't mind stories that wander, or have multiple perspectives, or play with time. That's not my problem. My problem is that all of the critical analysis is TOO MUCH, and Truant's stories, for the most part, aren't interesting. Now, granted, I quit reading his footnotes around page 70, so maybe they became more relevant. But some time after the story with the ladies where he made up a story about being a boxer...zzzZZZzzzzZZZ. I did read one footnote where he was totally freaked out one day, but .... zzzzZZZZzzzZZZ. And all of the critical analysis text and footnotes completely took away from the actual story of The Navidson Record. Just when I'd start to get into the story of the creepy house, it would turn back into an analysis of the film -- the shooting techniques, the people, their lives, etc. -- and suddenly you're sitting in a boring English or film studies class, and not reading a scary story. I understand that House of Leaves is supposed to be mainly Zampano's description of The Navidson Record, and there would be some amount of analysis in it if it were a typical scholarly work, but there's just TOO MUCH. If there had been less, or none at all (if Danielewski had gone that direction with his book), I think I could have stayed engaged longer.

So yes, people who say you have to WORK at this book, I DID work at this book. And I just couldn't do it. I even started flipping pages to look for scary, but as soon as I'd find something I thought might be scary, blahblahblah analysis!

I tried, I did. But it just didn't grab me and hold me, so on to the next book. Too many books in the world -- and not enough time -- to keep forcing myself through this one in the *hope* of being scared and seeing the great genius of this that others have claimed to see. ...more

2 likes · Like · see review

Oct 12, 2009 Rachel rated it liked it

The premise is interesting: a man's house consistently measures larger on the inside than the outside. Later a mysterious hallway appears which leads to a huge abyss, and a team sets off to explore. Actually it's more complicated than that, but you get the idea.

Pros: Terrifying, commentary on nihilism and relationships?, pushes the envelope on what a novel or hypertextual novel can contain.
Cons: Ridiculously erudite/snobbish, dirty, confusing, gimmicky/meaningless things thrown in for cult follo ...more

1 like · Like · see review

Sep 08, 2007 Mandy rated it it was amazing

Shelves: bookdiscussion

I literally could not put this down, despite the fact that it sent perpetual shivers down my spine while reading it. It is truly like no other book I've ever read and I doubt Danielewski will ever be able to top it. (I didn't even get past the second page in his overly pretentious, gimmicky second book). ...more

1 like · Like · see review

Nov 10, 2007 Melissa rated it it was ok

I thought the premise of this book was very interesting and creative, but sometimes it read like a text book. It was tedious in some places but picked up again right before I lost interest.

Like · see review