We have been in need of a series like Continuum Contemporaries for a long time. Unlike the watered-down reader's guides produced by York Notes (and in the US 'Cliff's Notes') these little books tackle text's which have gained something of a cult status in the late twentieth century, and do so from a perspective which is at once approachable enough for the recreational reader, and rigorous enough for the advanced student. It is therefore fitting that a text so widely, and wildly, misunderstood as Bret Easton Ellis's 'American Psycho'. should be included amongst the Continuum survey.

Julian Murphet is one of the foremost critics of Ellis's work, and what you get here are all the benefits of the breadth and depth of his knowledge, boiled down into a slim and precise volume. He provides us with a short biography of the author; an exploration of the narrative voice at work within the text; a discussion of the themes of alienation and reification and a survey of critical responses. He is, however, at his most engaging in his discussion of violence and politics, the real heart of the novel itself.

He tackles the central, consuming question of whether the protagonist Patrick Bateman ever actually commits the murders so graphically rendered in the text's pages, in a manner that is exploratory and revelatory without ever being proscriptive. Thus we see an argument develop from the tentative suggestion that 'everything could well be contained to the level of fantasy,' to the final assertion that the violence within 'American Psycho' is 'an act of language' and never really happens at all. He ties this argument in very neatly with an understanding of the text in its political context, seeing Bateman as a 'pin-up boy for the establishment Right' during the Reagan era, and reading the real 'murder' within the novel, not as that projected by Bateman, but rather as the 'murder of the real' the erasure of all social difference and threat - what he terms 'the gentrification of the city.'

Murphet rounds this off with a great critique of the film version of the novel, his genuine academic appreciation of cinema in general, making this more than just a fan's opinion.

No reader of 'American Psycho' will ever wholly agree with any one theory, and indeed it is the paradoxical beauty of the novel that is never really gives you a definitive answer either way. Murphet's argument is one reading, but it is a very convincing one, and this text is a must for anyone who remains challenged by, and curious about, this work.

Having read American Psycho several times since it's release, I'm surprised that it's taken somebody (anybody) this long to put together something (anything) that delves deeper into this book. This reader's guide is broken down into 5 sections (the novelist; the novel; the novel's reception; the novel's adaptation; and further reading and discussion questions) and is followed by brief notes and bibliography pages. Like Anthony Magistrale's The Shining Reader and David Sexton's The Strange World Of Thomas Harris, I can further explore my favorite books. A little extra credit for the fans and a little insight for those who are not.

Brett Easton Ellis shows a very dark character in the book American Psycho. The movie did not even begin to scratch the surface of Patrick Bateman's "odd" personality. After reading this book, the movie adaptation is unbelieveable. You understand the pain that Bateman is going through when asking for reservations. He is so deeply disturbed that he onoly lives for outward apperances. If you only read one book this summer, and you really want to be shocked, pick up American Psycho

After reading every other book in Bret Easton Ellis' backcatalog, I picked up "The Rules of Attraction" expecting more of his overused trademarks: cocaine, sex, vacuous characters. I was really surprised when, in the first few pages, this shaped up to be an incredibly involving novel with some semblance of humanity incorporated into the vacant lives of beautiful college kids searching for love. The story is told through POV segments of various characters, including Sean Bateman (good-looking, hard-drinking, narcissistic), Paul Denton (openly bisexual, provides the novel with genuine morality), and Lauren Hynde (fretting over her boyfriend, who's off in Europe). Their weekly activities of going to parties, getting drunk/high, and getting laid are chronicled in a hell-as-repetition way, with Ellis incorporating bits of stark, unexpected humor that catches the reader off guard. "The Rules of Attraction" flows with a fluid consistency, so that even events that seem to repeat aren't marred by their redundancy and instead seem fresh. What Ellis does--which doesn't happen in many of his novels--is make us sympathetic toward these characters, even though they can be relentlessly egotistical and plain down stupid, we are curious about what their futures hold. It's only in the last 30 or so pages that the novel begins to wear out, with inexplicable motivations and emotions that drift with the consistency of mood swings coming to surface. Despite this, "The Rules of Attraction" is still a damn good novel--one of the best I've read in a while--and it's doubtful Ellis will ever be able to top it.

This is one of the books that will be "refound" later as one of the best works of fiction in the 1980s. I suggest you read the book aloud while driving cross-country with some friends. There's a certain gossipy nature Ellis captures throughout the novel that is stylistically refreshing and intense. Furthermore, for all those who claim this book is one big cliche ... they're right. And I think that's the point. That despite the myriad of different perspectives, sexual preferences, drugs, and majors, these kids are all pretty much the same. I think that's a fairly accurate depiction of college life. A chilling anti-utopian look at our future as a society. Faults: Lauren's character is particularly weak, but then again, Ellis seems to have no particular ability to write interesting females. I also thought the characters are a bit too negative. I thought their lack of love could have dealt with more sympathetically a la Sun also Rises. But nevertheless, a fun, enjoyable, and all to insightfull look at life.

After seeing the film version of "American Psycho" I was compelled to read the book. I became almost obsessed with AP--a funny, frightening, daring book. Since then I've been meaning to get my hands on more of Ellis's work. I was trying to decide between this and anotehr Ellis book, and since I'm in college myself decided to go with Rules of Attraction. A great, fun, interesting, thought provoking book. Now, I believe AP was probably Ellis's masterpiece, but Rules was very much the college, early 20's version of the world Patrick Bateman lived in.
The character I felt most for was Paul, who seemed the most genuine of the three main characters. Sean was frustrating and entertaining. Lauren was an interesting character, but her obsession with Victor became somewhat tedious at times.
However, the book was great, and oddly enough I hadnt' realized that Sean was the infamous Patrick's brother till the end. Sean was so different from Patrick (well, for one he wasn't psychotic) it never occured to me until he mentioned Patrick. And I did get a quick smile out of the brief appearance by Patrick--acting sane, oddly enough. I may have to go back and read Sean's appearance in AP.
A good book I read in 2 days! Not as "funny" as AP, but very good nonetheless!

Patrick Bateman is 26, handsome, sophisticated, charming and intelligent. He works on Wall Street by day earning a fortune. At night he spends it in ways we cannot begin to understand. Patrick Bateman is also a psychopath.

Bret Easton Ellis's bitter and aversive second novel takes us on a head-on collision with America's greatest dream - and its worst nightmares.American Psycho contains some of the most horrifying, repugnant, indeed misogynist scenes of torture and murder ever written (the monologue, however, remains aloof, cold and impartial throughout, whether describing drainpipes rammed into vaginas to allow rats access to feast inside, or the cut of a colleague's Armani suit, or the career of Whitney Houston), but they must be read in satirical context of the book as a whole: after all, the horror does not lie in the novel itself, but in the society it reflects.

The book is neither pleasure reading nor pornography. Ellis is writing from the deepest, purest of motives. Not only is American Psycho a bleak, pitch-black comedy and disturbing portrait of a madman but also a serious work that exposes the blatant excesses of American vanity 'culture', 80's consumerism and Reaganism.

Followed by a superior movie adaptation (2000) that raised the humour stakes and steered (due to director Mary Harron) towards feminist tract.

(Note: If you enjoyed American Psycho try The Wasp Factory by Iain Banks.)

I greatly fear that many people will dismiss Bret Easton Ellis' American Psycho off hand because of the notoriously sadistic tendencies of its main charachter Patrick Bateman. Although filled with gruesome depictions of murder, torture, and rape, American Psycho is not a tale about a crazed mass murder tormenting the Upper West Side as the Hollywood movie may depict. Rather, the book takes us within the mind of an extremely disturbed individual, a man brought up in a seemingly stable household (Ellis insinuates throughout the book that Bateman comes from old money) yet grows into a homicidal maniac devoid of emotion and feeling. Left calloused by the harsh, competitive environment that emerged with Ronald Reagan in the eighties and the stark inequality of wealth that followed, Bateman is alienated by his surroundings. He is devoid of all emotion and feeling. The world in which he lives is a cold, heartless one. Although cliched, its citizens are encompassed by an endless, mindless marathon to accumulate more "things" than their neighbor, their thinking is egocentric, driven by greed and appearances. Although Bateman is the extreme, all of us, especially those who have grown up in the last twenty years have been desensitized by the numerous images of hate, violence, beatings, and western-like shootouts that grace our television screens each night. Hollywood has glorified infidelity, made pill-popping sexy, and instilled in us a defense mechanism to numb our senses and emotions to the extent that we will not allow ourselves to be affected by any iamge, any event, or anyone in fear of disappointment or heartbreak. We no longer find refuge in a loved one or a quiet Sunday by oneself. Everything is fast-paced, short-lived, and vivid. The result is a world in which Patrick Bateman lives, a world in which we all live. We are on a quest to accumulate material possessions, finding relief from our stress through mindless shopping and violence. Our environment has calloused us to our surroundings. In order to cope with reality we must avoid it at all costs.

Ellis has created the ultimate indictment of '80s yuppie culture. Admittedly, Patrick Bateman is an evil presense and there's gore galore, be wary. But the importance of this book is its contribution to a literary history of our changing culture, its mores and cliches, a microscpic slide allowing us to examine from clinical distance a sad and soulless time in the American Dream slash Nightmare. The scene, New York - late '80s, the cast - the young, upwardly mobile, the venues - the clubs, restuarants, bars and 'in' joints at the height of their popularity, oh and the clothes, can't forget the clothes, don't worry, Patrick never does. In the chronical of the life of a pathological, psychopathic killer Ellis has attempted neither to explain nor excuse Bateman's devastating and deranged behaviour but rather, avoiding playing the popular blame game brought to the fore during the time described, he has instead merely laid out the conditions in which this behaviour became possible, conditions which in fact exacerbated the madness of one Patrick Bateman. American Psycho is a read highly recommended as a warning to the future on how to avoid... wait, no one ever learns from the past, do they?

I learned about Bret Easton Ellis from an interview in "High Times" magazine. His age at Less Than Zeros publishing (21 yrs.) is what interested me the most. I read the rave reviews on the books cover and decided to give it a go. From the first few lines you're thrown into a world that, although on a much more extreme level than the everyday life I'm used to, is an obvious example of art imitating life in its most Kafka-ish depths. Ellis pulls no punches, hides from no subject and tells everyone to open your eyes and open them wide. He also manages to slip in many of the literary techniques and characteristics used by the writers which I have been studying and trying to understand for my own personal benefit. Ellis's style, a modern-day Henry Miller type of journal entry that is fast paced and quick chaptered, was a pleasant surprise. He should stand on the literary mountain for quite some time, and will probably be standing on top before everything is said and done. Try this book. It's the real Beverly Hills 90210, without a single Tori Spelling smile.

I have been a huge Bret Easton Ellis fan ever since I read American Psycho. Less Thank Zero was the second Ellis book I read. I thought it was excellent. I really think that he took the time to develop the main character and make the reader understand what was going on inside his head. The book really delved into real LA life in the 80's. I am the same age as the kids portrayed in the novel and I found it so hard to believe that they could act that way because I know that I could never act that way myself. That is why it was especially shocking to me, because these kids lead such fast lives. I am not trying to make it seem like an admirable thing or anything, however, one needs to realize that it was reality. There really were kids like that back then and there are kids like that today. Rather than saying that the book is just about a bunch of disaffected kids, look at it for its biting realism. I also thought that the plot was developed perfectly. I really couldn't put the book down because I was so drawn to it and I couldn't wait to see what was going to happen next.

This is the book that got me started into the Bret Easton Ellis books about sex, drugs and rock-and-roll. This book, told by a experienced 18-year-old named Clay, was an opposition of the college life that The Rules of Atttraction was. This book was about the Californian lifestyle of coming back home for Christmas vacation, kind of the story after The Rules ends.

Anyway, Clay is back from a semester at Camden College in New Hampshire and he's getting back into the games of drugs, fast cars, rock clubs, cheap sex, unlimited money, yet limited excitement. He goes through many things that kind of has him showing how is dissatisfied with his life. Clay really doesn't try to patch things up with his ex-girlfriend, the reluncant Blair but tries to talk with her more often and tries most of the book to talk to his best friend, Julian, who's turned into a junkie/dealer--and is too damaged to escape. Clay and Blair and their other friends (including Kim, Alana, Rip, Griffen, and etc.) are all busy, throughout his visit, partying at night clubs with fake IDs, snorting cocaine up the wahzoo and listening to lots of typical music of the time. Through out the novel, Clay goes to the desert to think things over, and his flashbacks about significant moments in his life.

This book is the start of the youth quake of real teenager life. Kids do smoke, do snort, do sex, do party the way it's shown in Less Than Zero. This book shows how controversial today's, or yesterday's society, still is. Kids have their own lives and parent's don't know.

This was one of those fascinating books that is hard to put down but unfortunately leaves you frustrated. Arse-kicking ultraviolent terrorist supermodels is an interesting premise but this is really a book about chaos, reality perception, and fiding out who you are. The ending was disapointing and underwhelming and many complain about the violence and pornographic sex but this book is tame compared to Elllis' American Psycho.

Ellis took six years to write this and you can tell that from the tone and direction the book takes through its progress that Ellis himself changed during this period. I commend him for trying something (somewhat) new with this book becuase by the time I finished American Psycho, I was getting a little tired of his plotless formula. Victor Ward as a character is a little base to front a self discovery novel but it Ellis' wit and prose carries the book well enough.

Bottom Line: fans of Ellis should of course pick this up but again I think that Ellis books should be read in order. Those who have read all of his books will be inexplicably drawn to this one as I myself was. Wether Ellis sticks with his typical ambience piece or goes for another linear plot book is fine by me because I am just curious to see what he will do next.

People not familiar with Ellis' works should start with Less Than Zero.

Glamorama is pretty much a follow to Victor's life from Camden College in "Rules of Attraction". If you saw the movie, he's the guy that goes to Europe through that quick edit footage. The book's written pretty much the same way, except he's in NY. The run-on sentences make for a quick read, but becomes boring. I couldn't even finish the last few pages.

Before pickign up "Glamorama" I had read "American Psycho" and "The Rules of Attraction." Two very different books, in my mind, were AP and Rules, and so is Glamorama.

The idea that Ellis's characters live in one world, where characters from other books crossover and make cameos is a fascinating technique. It provides the reader with a background knowledge of some characters without alienating new readers.

When I first encounted Victor Ward in Rules he was vapid, dull, and clearly destined for his supermodel success. When we pick up on his story, sometime in the 90's, he quickly grew on me.

Sure, he's shallow and not very smart and not exactly cultured. But there is an innocence to Victor that stuck with me throughout the book, even as the story left NYC and traveled to Europe. For some reason fans of AP identified with Patrick Bateman. Similarly I found myself empathizing with poor Victor. He is so simple and even, on some level, innocent that he has great trouble sussing out that something is terribly, terribly wrong until it is too late.

I admit to being confused by some of the plot in the second half of the story. However, it does what a good book should do--make you think. Ellis's style keeps you reading even when the content is blurry.

The first book I read by Mr. Ellis was "The Rules of Attraction" and I couldn't believe how unlikable his characters were and how casual they were about sex and drugs and failing school. Well, you can imagine how surprised I was to read this one, which is a collection of vig nettes about horrible, morally-devoid rich and beautiful people in L.A. For some reason, though, it was a relatively easy read, and I kept going back to it, fascinated with how natural the characters spoke about things that would absolutely blow my mind to experience in my own boring life. These characters don't really have worries, and if they do, they're nothing compared to the average person's worries. Somehow, this book ends up making you feel both bummed and enlightened. Probably, for me any way, because you're sorry that there are walking corpses in L.A. who don't care about anything and are affected by nothing, but the enlightenment exists because I can al! so take solace in the fact that I'm not one of them. Mr. Ellis is my favorite author, and I liked the book, but it is definitely not your average reader's cup of tea.

In The Informers, Bret Easton Ellis continues with his stream of dark consciousness style, plunging deeper into our American wasteland. There is not a plot to speak of. This book is an expose, a strung out journal. No linear story exists. Not a single pleasant thing happens to any of the characters, with the exception of Anne, who does manage to meet a boy, but of course he winds up getting slaughtered by vampires. Even the vampires suffer, vomiting into toilets after discovering their victims blood was rich with heroin. Ellis ended American Psycho with the alarming, "This is not an exit," but The Informers offers perhaps even less redemption for its sorted cast. Loveless and stark, with no epitaph to speak of. Ellis does manage to evolve and branch into, for him at least, new literary territory. In The Rules of Attraction and American Psycho we are introduced to Sean and Patrick Bateman. The young spoiled, exceeding wealthy, ubiquitously jaded brothers who form the crux of Ellis's dusky landscapes. Sean even has a cameo of sorts in The Informers. But Patrick and Sean are young like Ellis is. They are men like Ellis. In The Informers Ellis introduces us to something different, their families. The mothers and the fathers, the sisters and brothers. The portrait is now complete. Here is the why behind the hedonism, the violence, and the senseless moral ambiguity of it all. This is where the monsters come from. Here we find roots, jaundiced and sickly, but roots never the less. Ellis has managed to mature and enlarge his shadowy world, without sacrificing any of the unholy brimfire that continues to be so fresh a voice.

3 and 1/2 stars leaning towards 4.

Bret Easton Ellis applies his cold Californian brushstroke to another slice of L.A. life. He is still using the same kind of clipped, cold and quick-to-read writing, but the difference here is that is is applied to more marginal members of society (as opposed to highschoolers, uni students and yuppies) such as rock stars, modern-day vampires, murderous dealers as well as possibly more familiar family settings.

Some of these stories are pretty good (The Secrets of Summer, Letters from L.A. & Discovering Japan), others are more average (Water From The Sun), but really if you know Bret Easton Ellis, then you know what you're are getting (bored, cold and uncaring charcters in interesting surroundings), the main difference here is due to the lack of an overall story there is a wider range of terrain and a little less cohesion. If you dig the man, you'll probably dig this book, it's a pretty decent page turner, but not in the same league as "Less Than Zero" or "American Psycho".