Sign in with Facebook
Meredith's Reviews > The Graveyard Book
The Graveyard Book
by
by
**SPOILER ALERT**
This book was entirely mediocre. The plot was disjointed and very loosely woven throughout the story, and much of it didn't make any sense. Details (what few details there were) seemed to be added at the last minute to make later events in the story make sense. It's almost as if Gaiman wrote the middle first, then the beginning, and then the end. I think he had a million ideas floating around in his head and had no idea how to connect them all, so he made up some stuff on the fly.
Also, I'm willing to accept a large amount of non-sensical information in a fantasy novel, but there has to be some sort of explanation behind it. For example--if a boy lives in a graveyard his entire life, what happens if he needs to go to the dentist or take a shower or get vaccinated? Somehow, everyone reacts completely normally to the protagonist, even though he must be a filthy, smelly toothless wreck. Also, at the end of the book, the ghosts just kind of release the main character into the world--the boy who is only 15 and has had almost no formal schooling in his entire life. What is this kid supposed to do with himself? He's been getting his education from people who've been deceased for at least 150 years and has nothing on him but a little money and a passport. Yeah, I'm sure he'll do REALLY well on his own.
Anyway, I didn't think it was a bad book, but it certainly wasn't a good one, and it was WAY below Neil Gaiman's usual standards.
This book was entirely mediocre. The plot was disjointed and very loosely woven throughout the story, and much of it didn't make any sense. Details (what few details there were) seemed to be added at the last minute to make later events in the story make sense. It's almost as if Gaiman wrote the middle first, then the beginning, and then the end. I think he had a million ideas floating around in his head and had no idea how to connect them all, so he made up some stuff on the fly.
Also, I'm willing to accept a large amount of non-sensical information in a fantasy novel, but there has to be some sort of explanation behind it. For example--if a boy lives in a graveyard his entire life, what happens if he needs to go to the dentist or take a shower or get vaccinated? Somehow, everyone reacts completely normally to the protagonist, even though he must be a filthy, smelly toothless wreck. Also, at the end of the book, the ghosts just kind of release the main character into the world--the boy who is only 15 and has had almost no formal schooling in his entire life. What is this kid supposed to do with himself? He's been getting his education from people who've been deceased for at least 150 years and has nothing on him but a little money and a passport. Yeah, I'm sure he'll do REALLY well on his own.
Anyway, I didn't think it was a bad book, but it certainly wasn't a good one, and it was WAY below Neil Gaiman's usual standards.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
The Graveyard Book.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
October 16, 2008
– Shelved
October 16, 2008
–
Finished Reading
August 14, 2010
– Shelved as:
male-protagonist
February 9, 2011
– Shelved as:
j-fic
Comments Showing 1-31 of 31 (31 new)
date
newest »
newest »
I heard he did write the middle first. I felt the same way you did, that you could tell he just filled in the rest to finish the job. Meh.
I was disappointed in it too, but more for all the "but WHY?" questions that I seemed to be left with. That and the only character I liked was barely in it, and then was killed.
I am still reading this book but I have to agree with you. And towards the beginning I find it very hard to people that Bod is only 5. The way the author has him talking makes him sound like he is at least 10. That is just my opinion though.. :)
I somehow think that your entire rant was because you didn't understand the book. It's fantasy, the doctors and the dentists are of no importance since anything can happen in the book. The boy could be perfectly healthy his entire life if the author wanted him to be. He could sprout wings and fly ( thus the mummy with wings and so on ) and he could grow up tutored by ghosts. I think you're reading a bit too much into things and should relax and just enjoy the book as it is. Plain fantasy.
I've had more comments on this review than I expected, which is awesome, and I love that some of you disagree with me! Sometimes it's just the wrong book at the wrong time. I love Gaiman as a storyteller, but this was not my favorite. When I held up the plot of this novel with some of his other stories, I felt that "The Graveyard Book" was unpolished and not up to his usual standard. As I said though, it could have been that I was simply not in the right mood to enjoy it. Sometimes a book strikes me completely differently reading it a second time through.
Yeah I was gonna say also, he wrote each chapter as a short story so that may be why it appears disjointed as well, but I get what you are saying...
I COMPLETELY AGREE! This book was filled with things that had extra little details added in random places and it just threw me off. And I read the back of the book and he did start on Chapter 4. That was a bad idea. This was the first Neil Gaiman book I've ever read, and its not a good start. I might read another of his books later on, but for now, I'm not impressed.
**** spoiler alertI love Gaiman and he is one of the most original writers alive, but I agree mostly with the critique. It's not so much that the conceit is not realistic: Silas is the answer to all that. It's more that the story is didactic and less original that anything Gaiman ever wrote. He himself acknowledges his debt to The Jungle Book, but alot of stuff he borrows from his own books. The interlude of the scary men in the hotel, the Lady in Grey as death and on and on. So you get a hodge podge of quirky ideas that don't hang together.
What the book lacks is a coherent vision of a world that could exist on it's own, even as fantasy (cf. The sandman, neverwhere etc) The dance macabre in the world of Facebook and twitter? I think not. Plus everything was predictable, including how (and the fact that he would) defeat Jack. And Scarlett turned out to be boring and whimpy.
Having said that, I read it in two evening sittings. Gaiman sure can keep your attention, even on a bad night....
I thought that it was mentioned that the boy had cold running water in the graveyard. Wasn't it said in the first or second chapter? At that point I just assumed he was adding that so people who wanted some realism to their fantasy could say "Ok, now he can brush his teeth and bathe."
the disjointedness is similar to the jungle book. There is a meta-narrative, but each chapter is almost a short story to itself. This novel is sort of a anthology of short stories. I was amazed by this book .
Agree with Kyle...he even talks about getting inspiration from The Jungle Book. FYI: Much different than Disney's version...like usual
I was looking for a review that rated this book low and was disappointed to find one, then even more disappointed because it was a well written critique by a more experienced reader than me and i couldn't just call you an idiot. You make some valid points but i do find them a tad nit picky. Harry Potter (maybe not a valid example according to some people,but also a lot of other children's fantasy novels) doesn't spend a single sentence of the book in a restroom either (and the only time he takes a bath, it's too advance the plot). It isn't relevant in most children's novels because it adds little layer to the characters and kids need less suspension of disbelief, i was even surprised to hear the ghosts mention that there was a toilet and bath in the cemetery(it hadn't even crossed my mind he'd need one). I do suppose it has a lot to do with how much the story sucks you in wether you are willing to believe.I totally loved this book to pieces but then again i'm not an expert on Gaimans books(i've only read coraline, which was okay and i'm a huge fan of the sandman comics). Because you said this was one of his lesser novels i'm very much looking forward to his other books.
If you find the time could you recommend some of his works you preferred? I'm sorry if my english or grammar wasn't perfect, it's not my first language
Hi Sam! I'd say that the difference between what was going on in "The Graveyard Book" and the Harry Potter series is that, as you stated, in Harry Potter details about basic hygiene and life skills are simply not relevant to the rest of the plot, but in "The Graveyard Book," in my opinion, they were. Really though, that's just how I feel, personally. To each his own, and lots of people loved the book. I mean, heck, it took the Newbery!My beef with book's composition really stems from the fact that it's coming from Neil Gaiman, who has spoiled me to no end with his usually fabulous writing and storytelling. The disjointed plot and unaddressed details are unlike him.
I also read and enjoyed the Sandman Comics! I liked "Coraline," as well. So far as his other kids' chapter books go, "Odd and the Frost Giants" was okay, and I really enjoyed "M is for Magic," which is a collection of short stories. (He's really quite masterful with short plot arcs.) He also has a few short stories mixed into a few anthologies. I'm just now getting into his adult fiction. I'm part of the way through "Stardust" and I'm dying to read "American Gods." I'm actually in the middle of "Good Omens" at the moment, which he co-authored with Terry Pratchett, and highly recommend that one!
awesome! high omens is on my bookshelf cause the books a tad damaged and they where going to throw it out of a library. So that's my next read. Thanks for the friendly response (which as you might know, is highly unlikely online especially if it's a conversation between two people with different opinions)
If you were looking for realism, then perhaps you should have looked elsewhere. Realism isn't the point. While some aspects of this book DID come across as unpolished (I.E. Bod and Scarlett's 5 yr old speech patterns, etc.), overall the fantastic vision and world-building feels complete to me. There's a difference between believability and portraying something that could actually happen today. If it felt unlikely, I think that was the point. But I don't think it violates its own parameters of believability for the most part.
Oh yes . i can most def. sum up with this. the whole time i was reading this book i got lost and confused.. i think Neil could have done a way better job. In my opinion, this book was a book that you can pick up, but put back down, in less than a minute. It doesn't have the potential most books do. The ability to keep your nose in it for at least a day, a never-ending journey into the wonders of literature.
I cant say i agree as a young reader... i completely understand his plot. You might just be reading a bit to hard. He has it throuly written, and if it wasnt woven together at the point it didnt make sense well enough, then why was and published and why did it win the newbery award?
I'm not sure if it helps to know that Gaiman based this on Kipling's "The Jungle Book" and the disjointedness of the story and lack of attention to details (how did a wolf mom make clothing for Mowgli anyway?) is part of the genre/homage that Gaiman is purposely engaging in.That doesn't make your critique any less valid, but it might provide some context.
I remember I randomly picked up this book in my elementary schools library in sixth grade. If I remember correctly, it wasn't too bad. At first I was kind of creeped out but something kept me drawn to it,(probably the fact that it seemed SCANDALOUSLY rebellious in a sixth graders mind, haha.) All I remember is doing an outside reading novel over it that same year. And it just came to mind today for some reason. Huh. Funny.
Completely agree, Meredith! When I finished this book, I had a distinct "meh" feeling about it. I thought the ending was poorly done.
as far as the dentist aspect....I never went to a dentist my entire childhood until I needed to have my wisdom teeth pulled at 20, so....
not true this is an awesome book
My only answers are: 1) It's meant as a short story anthology; and 2) The story relies on magical realism, where you just accept what's presented as fact and you don't look into the 'realistic' details.
Gaiman DID write the middle first. He admits that the first chapter written was chapter 4. :)
Your review made me crack up!!! Good points
that whole underworld situation could have been interesting, same with the honour guard stuff. instead, we hung out with some children.
Lol i know this thread is very old but I cannot resist the urge to point out that a huge chunk of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets took place in a restroom.
Yes, i agree with you! Finally, someone tells how chaotic was this book! Thank you
I mean, it’s a take on the Jungle Book� so�
Although the story dragged for me about 3/4s of the way in, overall I really enjoyed it. I was quite taken in by the nonsense.