Blair's Reviews > White
White
by
by

This book has already stirred up controversy � as the author no doubt intended � but a week after reading it, I already find myself without much to say. It's a loosely-strung-together set of essays that are part cultural critique, part rant and part memoir; mostly chaotic, with some (not enough) good bits.
'Acting' is probably the best of the bunch � Ellis writes so beguilingly about the film American Gigolo that I was immediately dying to see it. 'Post-Sex' also has its moments. The author's analysis of [an overrated film I daren't even name] is spot on. He writes brilliantly about film in general, especially depictions of male sexuality and the gay male gaze in cinema. If this had been a whole book of film criticism and film-based essays, it would have earned a much higher rating from me.
The political stuff... well. I normally hate it when someone criticises a piece of writing by saying it's 'like a blog post', as though a blog post is an inherently bad/poorly written thing. But reading some of the essays in this book, I began to grasp what people mean when they use that comparison. The worst bits of White are rambling and unfocused; they repeat the same points numerous times; they contradict themselves; they make assertions without any evidence. According to online hearsay, much of the book is adapted from transcripts of Ellis's podcast; I can well believe that.
And I was completely lost every time he started going on about his idea of 'Empire', which is never clearly defined. (Looking it up online and reading part of an interview gave me a better understanding than anything that's actually in the book!) It feels like you're expected to know what he's talking about already � so perhaps White is, after all, intended for hardcore fans only.
But, for all its messiness, I did actually find this entertaining to read for the most part. It's difficult to be offended by Ellis even when he's trying very hard to be offensive, mainly because so many of his arguments are based on a) absolutely nothing, b) something he read on Twitter once, or c) something a very rich and famous friend of his said over dinner. He's best when writing about what he actually knows, i.e. has direct experience/insider knowledge of (queer cinema, the film industry, his own novels) and at his worst when writing about things he doesn't (politics, millennials).
I received an advance review copy of White from the publisher through .
| | |
'Acting' is probably the best of the bunch � Ellis writes so beguilingly about the film American Gigolo that I was immediately dying to see it. 'Post-Sex' also has its moments. The author's analysis of [an overrated film I daren't even name] is spot on. He writes brilliantly about film in general, especially depictions of male sexuality and the gay male gaze in cinema. If this had been a whole book of film criticism and film-based essays, it would have earned a much higher rating from me.
The political stuff... well. I normally hate it when someone criticises a piece of writing by saying it's 'like a blog post', as though a blog post is an inherently bad/poorly written thing. But reading some of the essays in this book, I began to grasp what people mean when they use that comparison. The worst bits of White are rambling and unfocused; they repeat the same points numerous times; they contradict themselves; they make assertions without any evidence. According to online hearsay, much of the book is adapted from transcripts of Ellis's podcast; I can well believe that.
And I was completely lost every time he started going on about his idea of 'Empire', which is never clearly defined. (Looking it up online and reading part of an interview gave me a better understanding than anything that's actually in the book!) It feels like you're expected to know what he's talking about already � so perhaps White is, after all, intended for hardcore fans only.
But, for all its messiness, I did actually find this entertaining to read for the most part. It's difficult to be offended by Ellis even when he's trying very hard to be offensive, mainly because so many of his arguments are based on a) absolutely nothing, b) something he read on Twitter once, or c) something a very rich and famous friend of his said over dinner. He's best when writing about what he actually knows, i.e. has direct experience/insider knowledge of (queer cinema, the film industry, his own novels) and at his worst when writing about things he doesn't (politics, millennials).
I received an advance review copy of White from the publisher through .
| | |
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
White.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Comments Showing 1-5 of 5 (5 new)
date
newest »


Yes, I enjoyed that review � I love a good hatchet job, and firmly believe they shouldn't die out! (Which, funnily enough, is something BEE also says in this book.) After reading the film essays I thought it was going to be very good, but the second half of it is nothing new or interesting at all, except for those who still think 'millennials are snowflakes' is a scorching hot take.

May not actually be the case! It's something I've read elsewhere, but can't confirm (as I haven't listened to the podcast myself).
He writes brilliantly about film in general, especially depictions of male sexuality and the gay male gaze in cinema. If this had been a whole book of film criticism and film-based essays, it would have earned a much higher rating from me.
The political stuff sounded (on the basis of that review, and yours does nothing to change the impression) simply boring and clichéd: opinions that can be found all over the place, and for free. Yet inevitably he will sell copies to people who read him when they were younger and now feel that way as well. It is a shame he isn't bringing a somewhat more original response to the table.