I'LL TAKE YOU THERE was my first exposure to Joyce Carol Oates so I had no idea what to expect when I initially opened the front cover. At first glance the unnamed protagonist struck a nerve with me. She seemed so...strange and bizarre. But as the plot unfolded I became more entranced by her and began to comprehend her motives and actions. She was no longer strange but indeed a real and complex human being. Lacking any type of supporting family network she ventures through life trying to make emotional connections with others that she never experienced before. Set in upstate New York in the early 1960's the protagonist tries her best to integrate into Syracuse University social life. Unfortunately the harder she tries the more isolated she becomes. Her sorority sisters and classmates view her as a loser and social outcast. Her self-esteem suffers. Taking refuge in her studies she becomes enthralled by philosophical inquires. While in class one day she becomes acquainted with an advanced graduate student who shares her passion for philosophy. Social mores dictate that they should not become friends, let alone lovers, since she is white and he is black. Determined that she has enough love for both of them she begins to follow him around campus and stand outside of his apartment building. In the midst of the Civil Rights movement both characters face the harsh realities of race relations that are determined to split them apart. I'LL TAKE YOU THERE is a captivating novel that seeps into one's subconscious even while not reading. Oates' unnamed protagonist is unique and captivating. I enjoyed reading this book and I found myself often looking forward to the next time I can pick it up again.

This is a book about love: The narrator tells us about her attempts to belong. She wants to belong to the sorority, be one of those smooth, lovable girls - but all too soon she realizes that this cannot be: she's different. Maybe this feeling of being different from the "normal" people around her attracts her to the graduate student Vernor, although she falls in love with his clever voice before she sees his African American face. Vernor hates himself; he is drawn to philosophy because it seems to be a spiritual realm untainted with self; so it is no wonder that he cannot accept the narrator's love. The narrator's family seems to be devoid of love. Her mother died shortly after the narrator was born, who finds herself accused of being the one to blame for her mother's death. Her father, brothers, grandparents are taciturn, elusive strangers; and yet... This powerful novel shows how you create yourself, trying to be who you want to be; at the same time it proves that there are basics - roots? - from which you cannot escape.

Oates is a master at evoking physical and spiritual reality. The reader can smell the nightmare of the sorority house; the physical encounters with Vernor are so shocking because they are so real.
Maybe some readers' judgments are clouded by their expectations which come from reading other novels by Joyce Carol Oates. This is the first novel by her I have read, and I am deeply impressed by her mastery of the English language, by the beautiful rhythms and vivd descriptions which reminded me of Woolf and Mansfield.

I'll Take You There is a story divided into three sections concerning crucial stages of a girl's development and narrated in the first person by the girl, Anellia, herself. This is the same structure Joyce Carol Oates uses in her 1986 novel Marya: A Life though the stories of the two novels differ in some crucial elements. The first section, The Penitent, is primarily concerned with Anellia's torturous time spent in a sorority called Kappa Gamma Pi and her relationship with the foreboding and ultimately tragic English headmistress Mrs. Agnes Thayer. Her entrance into the sorority sparked by a timid desire to gain acceptance from her peers, gradually reveals the shallow nature of the sisters and the vacuous symbols of their elite collective. The second section, The Negro Lover, explores Anellia's complex relationship with brilliant and troubled Vernor Matheius. Her obsession with the philosophy student blooms into a tumultuous relationship based on passion that is stirred by feelings of alienation. Each of them are fiercely intelligent and trapped by a societal definition based on the exterior that they cannot escape. But unlike Vernor, Anellia embraces this identity distinction, her Jewish heritage, in order to exile herself from the repugnant normality she has discovered. The third and slightest section, The Way Out, finds Anellia extracted from the developmental struggle of university and unexpectedly driven to a reunion with her estranged father. As he is slowly dying, she develops a relationship with his caregiver and fiancee Hildie. The feelings of opportunities lost and emotions wasted are gradually excavated over their time together as they come to terms with losing a man who will always remain an aloof mystery.

This novel is brewing with complex ideas all delicately arranged around an intricate plot. The sections of the novel could stand quite independently from each other. But together they draw an intriguing picture of Anellia's development and her discovery of the woman she wants to become. The frame she has set around her life is designed to mollify her qualms with existence but it is also a trap that limits the freedom of her individuality. The language she composes to liberate herself is also an unbearable burden. This is revealed in the telling line: "In fear I seemed to be plucking at, with childish fingers, a consolation of philosophy." Anellia's relationship with Vernor is akin to an artist gazing upon her muse, drawing inspiration and guidance to create an artwork, an identity for herself. Unhesitating in her confrontation of the troubles of racial relations as Oates always is, the denial of the language which defines Vernor's color provokes the collapse of any true connection between them. This, paired with Vernor's own inability to divert from the path he has limited himself to, makes their coupling wildly antagonistic and dangerous.

It is significant that Oates has dedicated this novel to Gloria Vanderbilt, the visual artist, on who's work Oates has written: "It may be that Dream Boxes represent an elliptical, subversive reclaiming of identity by one who has, unlike most of us, been over-defined - 'over-determined' in psychoanalytical terms-by the exterior world." Anellia is also unique and this confession to an unknown companion is her psychological triptych. Engagingly emotional and philosophical, I'll Take You There is a deep study of a difficult climb to adulthood. Its artful composition produces a compelling novel. It is a skillful accomplishment that can be enjoyed by both the passionate thinking and the romantic reader.

I find myself always swept along in the exquiste flow of Oates prose; reading this book was no exception. The problem, ultimately, is that this river really doesn't go anywhere. I kept reading and reading, in the (vain)hope that the legion of Bellefleur ancestors brought to life by Ms. Oates would somehow bring the crises of the most current generation into focus and illuminate some kind of significant narrative trajectory. It never materialized for me. It's very possible that I missed essential clues and themes in the individual chapters. However, if they were there as part of some cohesive plan on Ms. Oates part, I didn't discern them. I thought about spending more time trying to tease out of the text some kind of larger meaning, but decided in the end that it just wasn't worth my time.
I would have given this book four stars except that Ms. Oates has set the bar much higher herself with several of her earlier works, which most certainly are worth the time.

It's taken me 21 years to finally get around to reading "Bellefleur" and it's classic Joyce Carol Oates... I must say that it wasn't one of the fastest reads chiefly because I was flummoxed from page one by the chronology. Because the characters in the family tree didn't have birthdates or death dates should've been my first clue. I find it unsettling when I don't have a frame of reference for the TIME involved in a story. At first I thought Leah and Gideon were living in the early 'teens of the last century. Then it would appear that no wait --- it must be the 30's, whoops, now it's the 50's, now back to the 20's and so on. That was extremely frustrating for me, and when I finally finished the book I almost had to conclude that the entire story took place in Bromwell Bellefleur's parallel universe.

All this left me with a real uneasy sense of a colossal "HUH???" Although the prose was beautiful and the imagery was striking, I felt a bit of a sense of let-down when I couldn't figure out the basic theory of time in this novel.

So -- what did I miss?

Bellefleur by Joyce Carol Oates is ranked as one of my most favorite novels of all time; I savored this gothic tale cover to cover and didn't want it to end. It possesses a life of it's own, the characters became ghosts that would haunt me after setting it aside after a short reading and I would look forward to picking it up again. After I finished it, I felt homesick in a peculiar way that no book has ever done to me before; it is very likely that I will revisit the pages of Bellefleur again. Each chapter is an opulent sliver of time that peers into the lives and thoughts of the residents of Bellefleur Manor, an American family of notorious distinction. Their history is rife with joys and sorrows deftly exposed by the astounding craft that is signature in JCO's prolific literary career. The mesmerizing shifts of time, like historical memories, travel from the heights of the imposing Mount Blanc, wind through the decadent rooms of Bellefleur Manor, and plunge into the depths of mysterious Lake Noir where disconcerting spirits dwell. The fanciful characters endear themselves because of their human vitality and cause despair because of their human flaws; they are very tangible and seductive in spite of the brief glimpses into their lives. This is not a book for the faint of heart for it isn't a serene walk in the walled garden of Bellefleur Manor. JCO reveals the grotesque that exists within the soul of the American dream, and with abrupt grace she divulges the unforeseen twists of fate that arise with incredible violence that will leave you reeling with astonishment. It is a unique and contemplative tale, not to be consumed in a few sittings; however, the temptation of the eloquent prose begs to be gorged until the reader is sated. Open this book and open your mind, and give your imagination a workout. If you read this book with a rigid, black and white mind-set you will come away frustrated by it. I highly recommend this novel to anyone who is looking for something out of the ordinary to read.

"Frankenstein" is a typical novel from the romantic period. The story is based on the conflict of a scientist with the results of his work. But Frankenstein is far more than that: It is the story of two individuals (Frankenstein and his "monster") and their acceptance and behavior in society, and of course, the novel contains a lot of latent psychological information (what would Freud have said about that?). However, it is typical for the age of romanticism that the feelings and thoughts of the individuum are at the center of the plot (see e.g. the works by Byron or by the German authors Eichendorff and Novalis). This holds as well for the music composed during that time (Schubert, Schumann, Chopin, ...). Mary Shelley describes in great detail the innermost feelings of Frankenstein and his "wretch" and how they changed from one minute to the other, and what made them change their moods, and why and how, and who was around etc. This actually - because presented through the entire book - makes the reading of the highly interesting story rather tedious. Story: 5 stars, Fun: 1 star

If you are expecting the novel Frankenstein to be like horror scenes depicted in the movies, you better think again. Instead, Mary Shelly allows the reader to create more images in his or her own mind. Today, we are so brainwashed to violence and gory images on television, that we sometimes forget what "real" horror used to be like. When you read Frankenstein don't forget that Mary Shelly wrote the book in the 1880's in a time of social unrest. The writing style is different, and the pace of the novel is not as up to date as modern books. Her descriptive words allow the reader to create the monster in his or her own mind, without actually seeing it. When Shelly writes, her words give such detailed images of what is going to happen next. For example, when something "bad" is going to happen, Shelly generates a spooky and mysterious setting.
One of the major themes throughout the book is science technology. When Victor creates the monster, he is challenging science, and therefore challenging God. When the creature awakes, Victor realizes that he has just done a "horrible" thing. He is disgusted with the thing he created, which led him to feel extreme guilt and compete rejection of the monster. Is it science that led him to self destruction? Shelly wonders how far will technological advances go before a man becomes too dependent on technology? Science destroys his life because the monster dominates him, and Victor winds up being a slave to his own creation.
What was also interesting about the novel was how Shelly made the reader feel sympathetic for the monster. After all aren't we supposed to hate this thing? She portrayed the creature as a "normal human", showing love and affection. The creature's ugliness deterred anyone from coming close to him, and made him feel like an outsider. This rejection from society made the monster sad and helpless. His only revenge was to engage in destruction. This is when the "real" monster is created. After reading parts of the novel I felt bad for the monster, in a way I never thought I would.
Although slow paced, Mary Shelly's style of writing will allow you to take on different dimensions and force you to develop your own profound ideas about the topics discussed in the novel. I think Frankenstein is a great Romantic classic for anyone who has a imagination.

The Frankenstein monster is truly one of the most tragic characters in classic literature. He is obviously quite brilliant, having learned to speak (rather eloquently, I might add), and to read simply by secretly watching others. He's sensitive, kind, and appreciative of nature's beauty-all of the most admirable characteristics of a wonderful soul. And yet, he is vilified by all who come in contact with him because of his physical repulsiveness.

His longing for love, especially from Victor, was so painful that it became difficult for me to read. I kept hoping he'd find someone to show him the littlest bit of kindness. His turn to violence is entirely understandable, and Victor's irresponsibility toward his creation is despicable. Victor, who is outwardly handsome but cowardly and cruel, is the story's true monster.

In addition to writing a captivating story, Shelley raises many social issues that are still relevant today, nearly 200 years later, and the book provides a superb argument against *ever* cloning a human being.

(Note: I have the edition with the marvelous woodcut illustrations by Barry Moser and the Joyce Carol Oates afterword - superb!)

I believe JCO is arguably the best writer to emerge in America in the second half of the 20th century. That said, I read this biography with much interest and found in it plenty of information about the elusive, invisible persona of JCO. However, as much as I appreciatted Mr.Johnson's obvious labour-of-love research and detailed account of the life and times of JCO, I found the whole thing somehow biased as a overly soft and timid portrait of a mysterious, enigmatic woman. I found many of the elements mentioned in the book suggested tremendously interesing points of entry into JCO's personal and psychological universe. None of them were explored. It seems like Mr.Johnson always stops at the threshold of the dark cave and then points his typewriter at some nice, peculiar social event. As I was reading, I felt Mr.Johnson limited his approach to recount little know facts with admirable accuracy and attention to detail, but reading any novel of JCO tells us more about her mind and soul that recounts of many dinner parties at Princeton. If you're interested in this wonderful writer, this book is surely helpful in reconstructing the outside of her life, and most interesting in its depiction of the inner workings of the literary world mafia, but I'd say very far from being the truly meaningful journey into JCO's mind that I'd like to read. I wouldn't like to discourage anyone interested in JCO to reads this, because it is a worthy and valuable read and Mr.Johnson deserves credit for taking on a difficult subject and rendering a never faltering narrative, but I believe JCO, and her readers, deserve even better (and specially braver) and will feel wanting for it. A good first look at this fascinating writer, sure, but she remains as invisible as she was before we opened this biography. Since JCO is after all still very much alive and kicking (her last BLONDE proves she as good as ever or even better), maybe it is a matter of time and perspective. Maybe Mr.Johnson himself, given time and distance, will offer us a deeper reading of JCO. He is surely an able writer and a keen researcher. I'll surely be there to check all the fascinating stuff about one of my favorite authors that this time, somehow, proved invisible, but smellable.

Invisible Writer is throughly researched and well written. I found it very readable, even though I was not a fan of JCO's. I'm still not a fan of hers. Greg Johnson manages to create a fair portrait of JCO as a human who is sometimes prickly and vain. I understand other reviewers' comments that he's too soft on her, but I see it as him being careful to be fair in writing about someone who is still producing some of her best work. Oddly I didn't find that his treatment made her more likeable, only that it made JCO someone with whom I can empathize.

After reading this book, the greatest question remaining about JCO is the violence, especially sexual, in her work. A childhood sexual incident is mentioned, but it seems rather mundane. Johnson refers to some of the hardships suffered by JCO's family, but those hardships doesn't seem to explain well enough how this quiet, intellectual woman lives in such another world in her writer's imagination. Perhaps that's the intrigue of JCO.

This biography exhaustively plumbs the life and career of Joyce Carol Oates. Although not a biography I would normally seek out, since I've read only a few of her books, "Invisible Writer" was named a "Best Academic Book of the Year" by the American Library Association and received glowing reviews, so I was curious about its content. I was immediately taken in by this sweeping, thoughtful, and superbly written account of a consummate writer's writer. Although Johnson does not shrink from criticizing his subject--her controlling behavior, her tendency to depict "friends" in her fiction in unflattering ways, even an occasional veiled threat of revenge to an unfriendly reviewer--he presents on the whole a fair, balanced portrait of a writer for whom art is almost her entire life. This should be read by anyone interested in writing or writers.

Let me first echo the sentiments expressed by others and comment on what a beautiful edition the Univ of Nebraska Press has produced. The margins are indeed wide and the type very readable. This edition is easily held, the illustrations nicely complement the text and the binding is quite durable. The introduction by Joyce Carol Oates is helpful albeit pedantic. Also, those who've read the Univ of Calif Press edition of Frankenstein will notice some overlap between this introduction and the one that Ms. Oates wrote for that particular edition. Nonetheless, the introduction is valuable.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is one of those stories, like Frankenstein and Dracula, that seemingly everyone has heard of and believes they understand("mythopoetic " in the language of Joyce Carol Oates). Much like the aforementioned works, the actual details of the story may come as a surprise to those who assume they know the story based solely on the popular understanding. For that reason alone I think the book is worth reading.

Dr. Jekyll is a respected if somewhat reclusive London doctor who has, through the course of years of experimentation, managed to create a solution which brings to the fore his evil alter-ego. Unlike many gothic literary villains, Hyde is not imbued with superhuman strength or exceptional gifts of any kind. In fact he is of a smaller and less imposing stature than most men. What he does possess however is a complete lack of compunction with regards to others. Hyde for example ruthlessly runs down a small child who gets in his way. As is the case with Frankenstein, Dr. Jekyll creates something that he can't control and which eventually destroys its creator.

The inhumanity that the fictional Hyde displays can be seen in the non-fictious world on a daily basis. As such, there is a realism to the story which is missing from many horror stories past and present. The fact that such a short and captivating work exists in an attractively packaged edition makes this one classic that will be a joy to read for all.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a clasic so, naturaly, I had high expectations. I certainly was not let down. It has a totally unique style with much detail and extensive writing. Yet, this novel is a very quickly read novel, unlike other excessively detailed books like Dracula. This book is not boring. This book is fun. It doesn't ruin the plot with too much detail like other books. Other fantasy books are usually not even close to realistic. Whereas Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is close to being conceived realistic. This book has a general morbid feeling to it where other fantasies are sometimes cheerful and happy. Robert Louis Stevenson is a realy good writer in my opinion.
He uses a very wide range of vocabulary. Stevenson uses many 19th Century terms that seem weird and different to me.
One thing bad about his writing is his punctuation. He uses way too many semicolons and comas. He makes one sentence out of six or seven sentences.
This book was not the best book I ever read, but was not the worst either. it was mediocre. however It was miles ahead of Dracula. Dracula is boring, whereas Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is fast paced, quick, and fun to read. its pritty morbid which is kind of a down side, but Since it is very short it is a good book on my list.

The University of Nebraska Press edition of The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is beautiful! The illustrations by Barry Moser, woodcuts that progress chronologically through Dr. Jekyll's life as it is described in hints throughout Robert Louis Stevenson's story, are atmospheric and evocative; a picture of a boy being guided by his father, for example, echoes Dr. Jekyll's comments that he has a "fatherly" interest in his alter-ego, Hyde, while Hyde has a son's "indifference" to the father; the cover illustration is a portrait of Dr. Jekyll's father destroyed by Mr. Hyde on a rampage.

Joyce Carol Oates's introduction is worthwhile, especially for those readers who know the story, as most English-speaking people do, in its basic framework, but who have not yet actually traveled the dark road with Dr. Jekyll and his friends.

It is a pleasure to read a classic book in such a carefully crafted edition. Too often books such as this are printed in cheap editions with narrow margins and lousy type; this one fits comfortably in the hand and is easy on the eye as the reader is drawn into this allegorical nightmare.

This review refers to the University of Nebraska Press edition only.

I found myself, overall, agreeing with one of the reviewers when he stated specifically that "Walden" is not a book to be read purely for enjoyment, it is not a thrilling read or even a very deep one in general but then one must remember in which time we live and the style used by Thoreau is one of the mid 19th Century which was prone to the type of writing he uses. Anyone who has read other novels of the time or rather written in that period will find similar styles eg James Fenimoore Cooper, Charles Dickens etc. In addition this is not a novel but rather a retelling of experiences of one man in his own adventure as he would put it.

That is not to say that Thoreau does not illuminate or at times give remarkable insights especially when it came to some of the people he met who had fascinating ways of life eg the woodcutter. The book varies from downright mundane and tedious to being very insightful and beautiful. Its amazing how someone can do this as he writes, verging from one extreme to the other. But then it was written from journal notes as he lived his life in the woods over two years experience and during that time a person changes as he adapts to his new way of life. At first its very exciting and new, any new experience is always full of a kind of life shock whether it be painful or joyful, the thinking mind, the mind absorbed in everyday "safe" tasks which define the "normal" life are absent in this new environment which requires new creative energies to survive, after a while this way of life becomes the accepted one and starts to be drained of the vitality it possessed at the beginning as one is fully acclimatised to it and it becomes the norm, after this stage comes the usual safety associated with the walls created to keep life ordinary rather than really being alive. This is hard to do when living in the woods by yourself where you need constant awareness to survive unless its a little too close to civilisation which provides the safety net which Thoreau always had available to him. But still during the period where he was very much alive and aware, life is lived without need for too much unnecessary thought, and this is the place from where insights and great creativity burst forth.

If one wants to know what it is like to be really truly alive in the moment and you are afraid to try it yourself and would rather read about it then try the books "Abstract Wild" by Jack Turner or "Grizzly Years" by Peacock. Am I wrong to criticise Thoreau so much ? Yes and no, eg Yes:see the comments by John Ralston Saul on exactly this aspect of Thoreau's writing, No: look at your own life or mine for example, in each case we do not escape this ordinary life we ourselves create. For the purely lived life expressed in poetry look at the poems by Basho, no clearer or more beautiful expression of life has yet been written. I say written not lived, lived can't be written down in full only a brief glimpse or shadow of it is possible even with Basho.

As regards what is said it often betrays Thoreau's astonishingly well read mind, quotes from the Baghvad Gita or other Hindu texts surprise because in Throeau's day very few people would ever have bothered to read the Indian works, the average American thought his own life and European works to be far superior. Thoreau often quotes Latin, often without reference, and the notes at the end of the book are very helpful. Thoreau's experience becomes the one Americans want to live at least without being in too much danger as he would have been in the true wild still available at that time in the lives of say the trappers or mountain men of the Rockies or any native American. As such it is an in between way of living wild.

So Thoreau's work is definitely worth reading even for only the historical value or the literature it represents. It stands by itself.

After I crashed and burned in a college intro to philosophy course, I wanted to see if I could find a work by someone who was both a thinker and a writer.

Thoreau, in his book Walden, proves himself to be it.

Walden is the narrative of the author's two year stay at the aforementioned pond. He has decided to live life simply, and in a collection of loosely connected essays, he describes the people, animals, and the pond that make up his new home. If you haven't spent real time out in nature, you might think this book is ridiculous. But go into the woods, and stay there until boredom and longing for the city stops. Just then you'll realize the awe he felt when examining the ice bubbles and listening to vagabond squirells. Thoreau has rediscovered the patches of Eden that still exist in the world. And if we are open-minded enough to listen to his instructions, we can find our way back to them.

Even if his insights into the idyllic perfection in nature fail to sway you to live more lightly in the world, Thoreau will open your eyes to the benefits of philosophy. He understands the man who marches to the beat of a different drummer, and shows through his clear, crisp text the results that thought and contemplation can hold for anyone.

This book screams simplicity!

In this book, Henry David Thoreau takes an extended look beyond human nature and human habit. He brings forth a new and exciting view point on life and teaches how to live in happiness without the confusion of mechanical materials. I had to read this book for a 9th grade Language Arts assignment, and I had never heard of Walden or Thoreau before this project was assigned. When I completed this book, I felt very refreshed. It encouraged me to take a second look at my own life, and simply discard of the things which were causing complications or confusion. This book stretched past the limits and capacity of my mind as a 9th grade student. It forced me to think. Judging by the majority of my peers, I am convinced that anything that would force them to THINK harder, deserves 5 shining stars.

"Corky" Corcoran is not the best of men--a womanizer, not the most honest of politicians or businessmen, and a somewhat failing father and nephew--but as Oates develops Corky you begin to actually like him. You definitely will never love his character but you breathe with him, live with him, and feel his pain and his ecstacy over a non-stop Memorial Day weekend. Corky is always moving and sweet-talking in his expensive Caddy, in his expensive clothing, with a glass of Red Label whiskey in his hand. To tell of Corky's plight that drives him all over town during this Memorial Day weekend would be to ruin the reader's enjoyment of the book. Be warned though that Oates' prose is raw and uninhibited and speaks through Corky's male perspective. Her prose can be disconcerting at times with graphic expletives galore but get past that and you will find an excellent and engrossing novel that delves into Corky's psyche

I'm a big fan of Joyce Carol Oates, but this book was much better than I thought it would be, and has remained in my thoughts though I read it more than a year ago. Corky Corcoran is a fascinating, tragic character and his story is alternately repulsive and compelling. I loved this book.

This is an excellent novel. Joyce Carol Oates takes everyday people and shows them in their glory and their faults, which makes you feel like you know them. WHAT I LIVED FOR covers a period in the life of Corky Corcoran, local bigwig, city councilman, and man-about-town. The book has a wonderfully vivid prologue which sets the mood for Corky's adult life. Fitted into the story, but not as a main pont, is the questionable death of a former, quasi-girlfriend and the ensuing police investigation. Corky deals with his married lover, his mentally-imbalanced stepdaughter, and his dearest childhood friend, all in an affable manner. The ending is emotional, but the epilogue is excellent, setting everything straight. Ms. Oates is talented, very versatile and a joy to read.

Though it did not start out as good as it ended, the short chapters (an average of two pages... the smallest chapter being two lines long) with large print on small pages makes it a quick and easy read. By the end of the book, the characterization has come full circle, and you really feel for the wantings of the protagonist (a psychopathic serial killer in want of free love). His last stated kill is his most powerful on the readers emotions because it is such a major and built up eliment in the plot. I like the rambling style in which Oates wrote the book. This book manages to do something that so few other books can do to me, and that is to disturb me.

The only thing I disliked about the book is that the serial killer was gay, and that many readers may be likely to stereotype all gay people as having the mindset or perversion of this killer (with no small credit to various Chrisian leaders and organizations, and the far right). My only hope is that Oates is not of that mindset herself and her character just happened to be gay for variety. I'm also hopeful Oates didn't use the characters sexuality to exploit society's general views for disturbingness factor of the book.

Fascinating look into a serial killer's mind. A Vulcan mind-meld softened by words. (Would you want to *feel* the insanity ?) You experience his meltdown.

He separates his father into two entities: 'dad' and 'Professor P__.' Later, he separates *himself* into two entities. One knows nothing of what the other does. In one sentence, he refers to himself both as 'I' and as 'Q__ P__.' Very convenient, as this allows him to completely detach from his actions. For example, he doesn't hit his victim with a crowbar; rather, the crowbar comes down and hits the victim. He does not act; the crowbar does.

His stories come out in jagged pieces: A few disembodied sentences here, more later; sometimes we never get the whole story. How can he be expected to think linearly, especially considering his odd relationship - or lack of one - with time. You see, his clock has no hands.

ZOMBIE is a book that can be read again and again. Read it superfically or delve into it to your heart's content. It's one of the most intriguing books I've ever read.

In this short and startling 1995 novel, Joyce Carol Oates again proves her expertise and versatility as a writer by getting inside the mind of a serial killer. The book is written as a diary, with bizarre capitalizations and crude drawings. She uses simple prose as the serial killer's dark obsession and demented scheming becomes clear and the reader is drawn into the workings of his mind. It is horrifying. The tension never lets up as one victim after another falls victim to his needs. The worst part is that we have all read the papers and know that there are really sickos like this out there in the world.

I was startled when I finished reading Joyce Carol Oates Black Water. What I found so astonishing was that I remained completely captivated, my eyes literally glued to a book that focused on one brief scene for almost its entirety. The book never became mundane or repetitious even though the reader is continually thrust into the front seat of a car being devoured by the water of a lake. Every scene that brought me back to the doomed wrecked Honda became more and more thrilling, all through Oates' talented writing. My suspense continued even after I learned the fate of the characters, because I wanted there to be more. The story of Black Water is a fictionalized rendition of the Chappaquiddick story, following Kelly Keheller, an American, politically active, sexually attractive young woman who becomes enthralled with the political actions of a Senator whom she has the honor of meeting at a friend's party. Keheller takes the opportunity and becomes acquainted with the man who could possibly offer her political leverage; however, her strife for political success leads her into the passenger side of a Honda that will soon be on a collision course. I think this novel is one of the best examples of how any story can become captivating and beautiful simply through a writer's talent. Though this story is in itself intriguing, Oates' talent with language exemplifies it. Kelly Keheller comes to life through simply snatches of conversation between herself and the Senator, or her friends, and brief memories of past lovers or family get-togethers. Also, in this small but extremely dense novel, are the readers presented with the struggles of a woman who chooses to be active in political parties in America. Her continual determination and idealism made me want to fight for her while I read. I also felt a continual frustration with the earnestness behind Kelly's struggles and her continual feelings of failure. The strength of this novel is its compactness. Oates says in so few words what could take other authors 400 pages to explain. Every description and scene is crucial to the understanding of Kelly as a character. Even as scenes tend to repeat themselves, Oates finds a way to make each scene new and continually awe-inspiring. I can honestly say I've never read an entire novel before with so many reoccurring scenes that continued to interest me. I highly recommend this novel. Not only is it a fairly short read, but the writing is genuinely wonderful. The plot is engaging and Oates finds a way to make even an "American Myth" new and interesting. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants a short yet enthralling read, as well as any avid writers, who want to learn how to make something new. Even within the first few chapters, all of which are short yet fascinating, can you see Oates' beautiful talent in taking one scene and recreating it for her readers over and over again until they understand every aspect, emotional and dramatically, yet without letting it lose its intensity.

She was an American girl. This is how Joyce Carol Oates characterizes Kelly Kelleher. Kelly is the supposed embodiement of a "normal" American girl. She is concerned with her appearance, rebels against yet loves her parents,has unfulfilling affairs, and the highest of ideals. Drawn rather obviously form an true story, this work of fiction digs deeper than a news story or a non-fiction novel. The story of Kelly is a short and sad one. She seems to have led a pretty average life, not to say that she isn't supposed to be a special person. In a short period of time the reader comes to know her on an intimate level. We learn her political views, her sexual history, even about the disease she was born with. These details are Oates's most careful dramatic and plot choices as far expressing the themes. Oates seeks to explore the character of Kelly, and to an extent, that of The Senator, who drives Kelly in to the water. Oates prooves what we already know- the people in the news or public eye are more than the flat characters flitting across the screen. Kelly Kelleher was a real person. The Senator was and is, a real person. While at times I think Oates unintentionally made Kelly in to a bit of a stereotype, this was effective as far as this story went because it was important that Kelly be something the reader could easily recognize. This narrative opens the past and present of a woman who has no future. The book is a literal representation of Kelly's life flashing before her eyes. It displays her terror at being left behind in the flooded car, along with what led her to that moment. This is the most effective plot tool used by Oates. By letting us in to the past and present of Kelly's life, while the actual time span of the novel is actually only a short time, the effect of experiencing Kelly's whole life is captured perfectly. The character of The Senator was perhaps a bit more difficult to write because the person he is based on is still alive and for the most part,went unpunished for what became of the young lady who was driven in to the water on a night of drinking. I think Oates managed to paint him as realistically and sympathetically as possible considering what she is telling us he did. Oates uses unmistakably powerful language to draw the reader in to the whirlwind ride that ends as we know it will. As always her plot, her characters, her language make a story come to life.

The novel "Black Water" by Joyce Carol Oates is about a young idealistic woman, who is attracted to "The Senator", an older successful politician, in whom she sees a chance to fulfil her yearning for adventures. She accepts his invitation for a night in his motel-room and joins him in his car which ends in a terrible accident where her entire personality is put to a new challenge- she questions the sense of her being, of her life she has lived so far, and doubts if her longing has been fulfilled in the way she had in mind.
Through the literary means of a brilliantly woven narrative, which is the typical feature of the novel, Oates produces a certain picture of Kelly's thoughts and feelings which is determined for the effect the book has on the reader: The whole story is written in a very captivating and sensitive way.
In our opinion the book is very worth to read.Kelly, in her special nature shows other women that no matter what happens one should never loose his/her belief in something and gives them the strength to keep their faith and their hope.
As it is based on a real incident, Joyce Carol Oates gives through her narration the forgotten and silent become mistress of Edward Moore Kennedy a voice and with it a human soul.

Joyce Carol Oates's newest book, "Beasts," offers the reader a suspenseful, flashback-type-of story, told from the main character, Gillian Brauer. The book is no more than 138 pages, a format where I believe Oates shines. With last year's massive novel, "Blonde" and her other latest, "Middle Age: a romance," the overly-detailed prose can make any good reader tired after a few chapters. Not to say those books are not good, because they are.

In "Beasts," Oates keeps you hooked, giving you a deep perspective on Gillian Brauer, a college student in the mid-70s, sexual attractive to her college professor, Andre Harrow. She is then drawn into Harrow and his wife's poetic, strange artistic world centered around wooden totems and a strange parrot named Xipe Totec. In the meantime, fires are being set by an arsonist around Catamount College.

After reading the book, I felt Oates could have established more of a relationship with Gillian's college friends, maybe have included a separate, brief chapter on them, but overall, the book reminded me of Philip Roth's book, "The Dying Animal."

I highly recommend "Beasts" because of Oates's unique and often horrifying look into her characters' lives. She doesn't disappoint the reader with "Beasts."

My first Joyce Carol Oates book was "We Were The Mulvaneys" last year, on Oprah's recommendation. Despite spectacular story telling and creative writing, I was disappointed - it went on far too long than it should have. This being my second JCO find, I was apprehensive about reading it. I'm glad I did.
Compelling, and wonderfully written, "Beasts" shows where Oates hits her stride - in tighter, more comprehensive writing. It's the type of book that is short (most will call it a novella), but filled with more than a full length novel such as "Mulvaneys". Her smaller chorus of characters, with their own individuality, are drawn together by a common link that carries the reader. Despite it's common characteristics of despair and dysfunction, etc., it is the type of book that leaves you wanting more, drawing your own conclusions, and begging you to read it once again.
'Go for the jugular' as one character says often enough. It is a book you won't regret reading...what Oprah should have put on her (now defunct) book club list.

This book is haunting my thoughts days after i read it.

In 138 pages, there's not much room for action to occur - but the characters are developed just enough so you feel like you know them - but just too little that they remain mysterious and can surprise you.

It takes place on a college campus - in a woman's dorm - and in a poetry class. All of the students fall madly in love with the teacher - but the narrator also becomes fascinated and intrigued by his wife. The couple takes an interest in several of the girls - which excites them at first but ends up disastrous.

This book shows true human nature, which many people like to ignore. Joyce Carol Oates portrays people as beasts, no different than the ones that the scupltress-wife creates - which disgust and repulse the town as well as the narrator.

Most of this book is slow with little action and then the ending is explosive and left me thinking for days.

This little novella is incredible once it has time to sink in!