Two Non-posthumous Novellas by H. P. Lovecraft

 

INTRODUCTION

Hello, I’m back. I understand I went through the trouble of informing of the biweekly shift, but I am still holding onto that. This is simply a bonus edition meant to coincide with last week’s sort-of-mini-review. But I mean, when you live in The Attic all day, you have to hope some can pick up the sheets I slide through the cracks.

Ehem, an important announcement on this regard, H. P. Lovecraft was a horrific slanderer. The Beings, well they aren’t really being as they don’t be-, anyways, that I represent want to wholeheartedly, well they don’t have- wholeheartedly state that this is fiction and not representative of their goals. Though, if this moves you down the path of contacting them then by all means, read along.

Now that the important things are out of the way, let’s talk about the two novellas published during Lovecraft’s life.

THE SHADOW OVER INNSMOUTH

This was actually the only book published by Lovecraft containing an individual story in his lifetime. Originally, Lovecraft refused to publish it, and it took the efforts of correspondent August Derleth to get it published (Lovecraft was not happy about it) as a cheaply produced book.

This story begins as the narrator starts telling of how his experiences in the coastal slum town of Innsmouth led to a massive federal investigation, arrests, and an attempt to destroy a local reef. What could have led to this? Why, the revelation that the town had a dark secret, involving sacrifices to eldritch abominations and said beings slowly intermingling with humanity (yeah, that is the issue with Lovecraft. His stories seem so cliché nowadays.), is what did the trick.

This book does feature Lovecraft’s standard themes, including fears of degeneracy (particularly mixed with racism, and possibly metal illness.) It actually has a moving plot, and where it does have your standard infodumps, it actually has a legitimate action scene.

Honestly it’s pretty good. And I feel is one of his more approachable stories. The story tells of a town that is wedged between several real town that became desperate in troubling economic times and what was done in order to save the town, even if it might appear reprehensible to outsiders. While that may be moving, I feel that Lovecraft's classism means the story is supposed to move us to disgust rather than pity for the inhabitants of Innsmouth, but I pity them regardless.

AT THE MOUNTAINS OF MADNESS 

This is probably one of Lovecraft’s best stories. I won’t say it is his best, as there is another story that I feel deserves that title, but this is definitely top ten worthy. It is also the only one that Lovecraft knowingly (at least I think) approved publication of.

This story tells of a professor and geologist named William Dyer at the Miskatonic University at Arkham, Massachusetts (the asylum was named in tribute to this), who after hearing of a exhibition to a bizarre territory at the center of Antarctica that an expedition Dyer co-headed discovered has decided to explain his horror of the place and tragic and terrifying reasons that he abandoned hope of learning more of the Antarctic interior.

The story is quite good, though it is more of the fact that it has well developed plot details, and on action it is not often. It tells of a expedition to the unknown and how after losing contact with a sup-expedition after they made the discover of a lifetime, a horrifying truth is uncovered about the history of our world. The horror is more of a subtle suspense, an existential consideration of the facts before you. Ultimately, I find myself feeling that Fantasy fans may enjoy the elaborate history generated from the finding, and it definitely is one of the largest info dumps he wrote.

Well, I am afraid you won’t hear from me for another two weeks as I get back to my promised schedule. I would like to know your thoughts so far so I can feed them to- I mean I would like to know what you think and if you have any recommendations so far on what you would like me to read. I’ll have a print-out slid under through a crack in my door.

Two Post-humorous Novellas by H.P. Lovecraft

 

INTRODUCTION

I decided that, due to the different nature of this review, I would alter this week’s format. I decided to cover my most hated of my favorite authors, Howard Phillips Lovecraft. While famous in the weird fiction community, he could be called a socially awkward xenophobe with too much bigotry to count, but he still wrote moderately good existential horror that inspired many works. This week we will cover his four novellas/short novels.

Because of this decision, I will have to divide the parts up based on the works themselves as I am not really buying jumping across them, and of course, you would struggle to keep track of which one I am talking about. I always care about my readers' sensibilities.

Lovecraft was mostly a writer of short fiction, but he did write four stories long enough to be considered novellas. I will break this into two halves in order to digest it better and make it easier for me. Lovecraft had two of these works set aside due to his dissatisfaction with them, and personally, I find that he may of had a good reason to. While I cover these two this week, I will cover the two published during his lifetime next week. Now, let us go and see what these works have in store for us.

THE DREAMQUEST OF UNKNOWN KADATH

“The Dreamquest of Unknown Kadath” is the first novella Lovecraft wrote, believed to have been written around 1927, but Lovecraft declined any attempt to publish it, and it was not until around five years after his death, in 1943 did it get published.

The story details Randolph Carter, a quiet, introspective, and bookish man who had previously appeared in several other stories as he sets out across the “dreamworld,” a bizarre cross between the shared dreams of reality and an alternate dimension, in search of Unknown Kadath, a mountain palace where the “gods of earth” dwell. Carter is an experienced dreamer, someone who can move into the deeper levels of the dreamworld, yet he is stumped after he dreams of a beautiful sunset city. After praying to the gods, the vision disappears, so Carter decides to travel to Unknown Kadath to get answers, even though nobody in the dreamlands knows where it is.

Frankly, this book is a bit of a rollercoaster ride. The imagery, like classic Lovecraft, is lush and bizarre, yet opaque and undescriptive. It is a fantasy story with often surreal beings appearing and interacting with Carter, with very few of them getting a proper introduction and a few require you to be familiar with his work.

Unfortunately, the plot seems to go all over the place and it is really more out of luck and allies that gets Carter where he needs to be, and the meandering story with no chapter breaks makes it feel like it goes on forever. I feel this is probably a mediocre story, and it constantly features call-backs to other works. Essentially, it was badly paced, with no real drive and a lack of objectives beyond the overarching quest.

I like Carter, who is intelligent and knowledgeable, but I feel he suffers from being a mostly inactive protagonist. He has the know-how and the connections to go places, but when faced with threats such as the men of Leng, the moon-beasts, or the High Priest Not to Be Described, he really doesn’t have any way to fight back against threats.

Honestly, this book is really only for dedicated fans of Lovecraft, and this is more for the world building and descriptions rather than any entertainment value. Most of all, I feel it would be a mistake for this to be your first Lovecraft story.

THE CASE OF CHARLES DEXTER WARD

The next work is Lovecraft’s second novella, and like the prior one, Lovecraft abandoned it and it was not published in his lifetime. This work, Lovecraft’s longest, addresses the recurring themes of ancestral taint and the dark past of New England found throughout his fiction.

The narrative first describes the mysterious disappearance of Charles Dexter Ward, a bookish young man with an interest in the occult and antiquity after being confined upon the advice of several alienists (an old term for psychologists who specialized in deviant behavior,) due to his aberrant behavior. The narration follows a family friend named Dr. Willet as he investigates Ward’s bizarre behavior which began with his fascination with Joseph Curwen, an ancestor of Ward who dealt in the supernatural and was hated as one who dealt with the devil, and Willet’s ultimate confrontation with the evil that surrounds Ward.

Honestly, this book is better than "Dreamquest," and is a good story, yet it tends to drag on far too long. Multiple plot reveals become obvious, yet Willet takes forever to discover. (The plot is a bit obvious and cliché to modern readers, I think.) Ultimately, I have to admit though that is due to us knowing he is in a supernatural horror story, so I can’t get too annoyed (yes I can.)

This book is relatively good if one is interested in Lovecraft, though it does drag on a bit, so I can only say that you should expect a slow burner with mostly a mystery style structure, with little action. This book is paced much better than “Dreamquest,” but that isn’t saying much. The book is interesting for those who like Lovecraft’s style, but can be off-putting to casual readers who expect a more tense or event-focused.

Thank you for reading, and I promise that the special review next week will be better, where we will be moving onto the much more famous (and better) “The Shadow Over Innsmouth” and “At the Mountains of Madness.”

"The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien

 

SYNOPSIS

This is a brilliant work of metafiction, telling the stories of a platoon of American soldiers in the Vietnam War and based on first-hand experience. Meditating upon topics such as innocence, love, comradeship, bravery, and the power of stories and the truths they tell, O’Brien, through a fictional version of himself, talks of life, the people he saw, and the things they carried with them.

OPENING THOUGHTS

First of all, I would like to make some announcements. First, I would like to apologize to my readers for not releasing a post last week, but prior commitments to the old- I mean adult arrangements prevented me from doing so. I will be forced into a biweekly (once every two weeks,) schedule from now on, so I apologize to my readers for forcing them to wait twice as long. I feel very sorry, especially since it gives me great joy to see that people actually read these things. To segue off of the announcement, I thank you for reading and here is this week’s review.

My thoughts on this book was honestly how moving it was. The book constantly moves around through interconnected stories displaying a theme on what exactly is the nature of truth in a story, and whether there are problems with fictional accounts or maneuvered truth if it displays how things felt. 

This book blends reality and fiction, both within the story-world itself and in its worlds relation to reality. It weaves together narratives of camaraderie and life with dark humor and death. It mixes love with fear. Remembrance and loss.

Ultimately, it is a tale spoken through metaphors and morals, stories that paint a portrait of the young boys sent across the Pacific Ocean and into a war zone. It may not be a political story, or really about the war and the enemy, but rather one of personal reflection and compassion.

LOVING CRITICISM

Often times, people might be confused by the broken up nature of the novel, with each story jumping back and forth through time, and the narrative is a very contradictory on the nature of truth, with O’Brien consistently admitting scenes prior brought up as entirely fabricated and ultimately people may find this very confusing, especially those who desire actual answers.

The lack of character development may also put some off, and is part of the reason this review lacks a section for it.

SHOULD YOU READ THIS BOOK?

Yes, it is a funny, yet deeply moving work that uses its metafictional elements that explores the deeper meaning in life, and what truth is, not as fact, but as true expression of emotion.

REVIEW: "Jurassic Park" by Michael Crichton

 

SYNOPSIS

An astonishing technique for recovering and cloning dinosaur DNA has been discovered. Now humankind’s most thrilling fantasies have come true. Creatures extinct for eons roam Jurassic Park with their awesome presence and profound mystery, and all the world can visit them—for a price.

Until something goes wrong. . . .

WHAT I LOVED MOST

Now we move onto Jurassic Park, a novel many only know because of the movie adaptation. Which makes explaining the premise of this book quite easy. A team of experts assembled by a wealthy genetic engineering corporation are brought to a zoo/theme park where dinosaurs are reconstructed by skilled technicians when accidents put the feasibility of the park opening at risk. Several accidents, caused by glitches and people alike, throw the park out of control, and now the team must fight for their survival.

Before we move deeper, I must comment that the book and the movie are not very similar. They both feature the basic premise, and most of the characters have the same names, but the plot doesn’t always match up and many characterizations are extremely different. Just because you watched the movie, doesn’t mean you will know the plot of the book, and concurrently, you may be a fan of one and not the other.

On a personal note, I found this book to be a thrilling novel. It had an interesting premise that was expanded into an interesting plot. You have a large cast, some of which will be likable and some not, that the narrative moves around. The shifting narrators allow us to follow both the personal feelings of the cast and the action, while also creating an atmosphere of suspense as the reader becomes increasingly aware of events and dangers that the current narrator may fall victim to without realizing it. It was a fun novel, not really taking that much effort to finish. I really enjoyed the plot, though that may be my bias speaking, due to my interest in dinosaurs.

LOVING CRITICISM

The book may seem dull due to the in-depth descriptions afforded to the scientific processes, a fact that the novel even admits though the young narrator Tim to be boring, and the characters feel stale and overused, particularly if you are familiar with Crichton’s work. You certainly see it in Dr. Ellie Sattler, who frankly reads like most of the women created by Crichton.

The archaisms may be a little amusing, such as the top-of-the-line computers used to automate the islands are actually inferior to most modern smartphones, and there are several inaccuracies with the dinosaurs.

The final criticism is that the theme of  the dangers of abusing technology can get boring, as it’s basically the same theme that every other Crichton book. As I once heard someone describing the differences between book and film (though I can’t recall who,) for every speech about it that Malcom gives in the movie, he gives nearly five in the book, and I feel this can get preachy after awhile.

MY FAVORITE CHARACTER

My favorite character would have to be Dr. Alan Grant. I feel he is the most likeable and is actually very different from the movie. Instead of being a young professional man who dislikes children, he is a middle aged, friendly, casual and bearded widower and has a healthy love of children, particularly those fascinated by dinosaurs.

He has a similar role in the movie, where he is a paleontologist who briefly met years ago and is funded by John Hammond, and is invited to the island. During the chaos he is forced to watch after Tim and Lex, and later becomes one of the leaders of the group attempting to survive the dinosaurs.

SHOULD YOU READ THIS BOOK?

While I feel this book to be a bit slow in the beginning, it quickly makes up for it once at the titular park, and I feel it to be a fun, if long, and exciting thriller that I would recommend to many.

REVIEW: "The Little Prince" by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

 

SYNOPSIS

A pilot stranded in the desert awakes one morning to see, standing before him, the most extraordinary little fellow. “Please,” asks the stranger, “draw me a sheep.” And the pilot realizes that when life’s events are too difficult to understand, there is no choice but to succumb to their mysteries. He pulls out pencil and paper and thus begins this wise and enchanting fable that in teaching the secret of what is really important in life, has changed forever the world for its readers.

WHAT I LOVE MOST

Honestly the theme of this book really moved me. This book I originally read as a young teen, and it is one of the few to make me cry. This book was originally written in French, and while I intend to read it as such someday, I have only read the translation by Richard Howard. 

This book is a children’s book, yet it is quite introspective at times, questioning what exactly people find valuable in life and detailing the little prince’s interactions as he stumbles through an adult world that he finds bewildering. This bewilderment is the source of the book’s message as the little prince questions the established actions of people as they chase what the little prince sees as meaningless things, yet we ourselves can see ourselves and people we know in these adults, forcing us to wonder whether we chase things of little value.

I feel this book is for all ages, as its simple plot and illustrations make it a story digestible for children, who might find a sense of connection to the little prince’s wonder at the frivolous pursuits and rules of adults, yet it really can be a story of rediscovering the passions of youth that one leaves behind to fit in with a mature world. I personally find the book a fantastic view on children and adults alike.

LOVING CRITICISM

Honestly, this book is very satisfactory for children, though the tragedy may be harsh to them. Adults may find the book simplistic and the symbolism obvious, and they may find it ridiculous to read a book written for children’s comprehension level.

MY FAVORITE CHARACTER

My favorite character would have to be the pilot. The pilot’s role in the story is at first glance minimal. He acts as the storyteller for the little prince, nothing but a vehicle for us to have a glimpse into the story of the little prince and his rose.

On the second look, you realize what he is. The principle crux of his character is his fascination with the little prince. The pilot presents himself as a responsible adult who simply desires to fix his broken plane and escape the desert. He is the grounded realist, contrasting with the imaginative dreamer that is the little prince. Yet he becomes fascinated with the prince because he sees himself in the prince. 

The prince asks him to draw a sheep, a task a young pilot would have enjoyed. But after the pilot’s dreams of artistry were crushed in childhood when his pictures failed to garner interest and were dismissed. The pilot, ready to get rid of him, hands a drawing he made as a child, but he is shocked when the prince correctly identifies the picture. This leads to the pilot seriously attempting to draw a sheep, and after that he begins their acquaintance.

The pilot sees in the little prince the imaginative wonder he once had, but was crushed when the grown-ups around him thought it wasn’t respectable. This is the first person that the pilot sees as truly understanding of him, and their friendship grows until the pilot repairs the plane and their sorrowful farewell.

SHOULD YOU READ THIS BOOK?

This question’s answer, to me, is yes. This book is an emotional journey for both adults and children as we look at what exactly is meaningful in life, and it shows the joys of youthful imagination.

REVIEW: "Catch-22" by Joseph Heller

 

SYNOPSIS

    Set in Italy during World War II, this is the story of the incomparable, malingering bombardier, Yossarian, a hero who is furious because thousands of people he has never met are trying to kill him. But his real problem is not the enemy—it is his own army, which keeps increasing the number of missions the men must fly to complete their service. Yet if Yossarian makes any attempt to excuse himself from the perilous missions he’s assigned, he’ll be in violation of Catch-22, a hilariously sinister bureaucratic rule: a man is considered insane if he willingly continues to fly dangerous combat missions, but if he makes a formal request to be removed from duty, he is proven sane and therefore ineligible to be relieved.

WHAT I LOVE MOST

    Catch-22 is a book that I consider, along with War and Peace, one of my top three favorite books. I can’t think of the third one, but I’ll get there when I remember what it is. Anyway, now that’s out of the way, let’s talk about what I liked about the book.

    This book’s central and recurrent theme is insanity. From the titular rule to the daily interactions, Yossarian finds insanity everywhere. In fact, most of the people he encounters claim the same about him. Insanity is the only attribute one can find in almost every chapter.

    Really, for me, what made this theme special was how the repetition of the comedy reflects this. Everyone has their unique quirk, a comedic insanity, that, as the book progresses, it becomes a sobering horror. This horror is in my opinion omnipresent throughout the novel, yet it is hidden. As the novel progresses these actions slowly build upon each other until they head to their ultimate and logical conclusion.

    The true heart of the novel is the titular catch. Yossarian spends his time after learning of it trying to understand it. Where does it come from? What power does it have? Who is in charge of its implementation? How can he escape? The climax of the novel ultimately exposes to Yossarian the truth to these answers.

    A unique attribute about the book is that it is told nonlinearly. The novel starts in the middle of his quest to escape catch-22, but it proceeds to jump around as it describes characters and events. Yet I feel that the progression of events follow the book thematically, and it can be quite funny seeing the origin of jokes chapters after their introduction.

LOVING CRITICISM

    So, what are the problems with the book? There are a few problems such as repetitive humor, confusing narrative, and a large number of characters.

    The humor in this book, while we move through various scenes, and many of the jokes are quite funny, is very formulaic. I don’t quite think this to be a bad thing necessarily, I simply feel people may get bored, frustrated, or irritated by this.

    The narrative, if one wants to try and sort everything out, is complex, with chapters running before, ahead, or even parallel to others. I feel people may want to organize all these events, but I feel it is easier if one tries to treat each one as separate stories, sharing a continuous theme and setting. It takes a chart to truly get each part down, but really there are enough call backs and set pieces to generally get a feeling when each chapter appears in relation to other events.

    There is a massive amount of characters, some minor, major, and a few that change from one to the other. Most characters though tend to have simplistic characterization, often a prominent trait or quirk, that helps you remember enough about them. Characters often have segments that introduce them though and give you a general understanding of who they are.

MY FAVORITE CHARACTER

    I feel that my favorite character would have to be the protagonist, Yossarian. He originally comes off as a one-note character like everyone else, a lazy and womanizing bombardier who wants out of a war he sees himself as nonfactor, yet he comes out more fully fleshed as we discern the effects of the death of the radio-gunner Snowden on him. Due to nonlinear narrative Snowden is introduced as dead and his death becomes one of the major set pieces of the story, but his death is the climax of the story.

    Yossarian ultimately becomes a man desperately trying to keep his life in the face of insane cohorts, selfish or impotent commanders, and a deadly enemy trying to kill him on every mission he goes on. Ultimately, his character arc is the main meat of the novel.

SHOULD YOU READ THIS BOOK?

    I feel this book is one of my favorites, so I feel I am a bit biased when I say that you should read it. This book is very comedic and silly, yet at times open and horrifying. The book is pretty long, with most editions running over six-hundred pages. There is also the criticism that I brought up before, so try to see if you would like it.

REVIEW: "War and Peace" by Leo Tolstoy

 

SYNOPSIS

Tolstoy’s epic masterpiece intertwines the lives of private and public individuals during the time of the Napoleonic wars and the French invasion of Russia. The fortunes of the Rostovs and the Bolkonskys, of Pierre, Natasha, and Andrei, are intimately connected with the national history that is played out in parallel with their lives.

The prodigious cast of characters, both great and small, seem to act and move as if connected by threads of destiny as the novel relentlessly questions ideas of free will, fate, and providence. Yet Tolstoy’s portrayal of marital relations and scenes of domesticities is as truthful and poignant as the grand theme that underlies them.

WHAT I LOVE ABOUT IT

Honestly, War and Peace truly is a fantastic book. It is a deeply engaging book as we look into the fortunes of its main characters, several noblemen and noblewomen in Napoleonic Russia, as they quest for ideals such as happiness, personal fulfillment, or understanding of one’s meaning in life.

I first read War and Peace, in Mandelker’s edit of the Maude translation, about five years ago, and it was one of the most engaging books I had ever read. No stranger to classics of literature, I decided to tackle this immense novel and found a book that I could not put down.

Its characters were fascinating as I watched them engage in their domestic struggles. From Andrei’s feelings of unfulfillment with his married life driving him to the army, to Pierre’s complete bewilderment with his own life leaving him unmoored and frustrated, to Nikolai’s and Natasha’s youthful naivety leading them into dangerous pitfalls at violent war and precarious peace.

The moments we see in the narrative from the mundane to the chaotic, in my opinion, show meaningful description. We see this from scenes of war, where noble and impressive commanders give orders that are ignored, worthless, or past enforcement, and description of convoluted and tricky scenes as characters try to navigate the social circles of high society.

I truly felt this was an amazing novel.

LOVING CRITISIM

Frankly, the book is long. Many people would automatically see that as a nonstarter, and I admit that people who don’t read fast or find it tiring will struggle with this. The mass of text can seem overwhelming, and side characters are not the easiest to keep track of either.

The principal issue lies in the dozens of chapters without narrative. See, this book was written with a theme in mind, and back when this book was written, authors (like Victor Hugo) did not always shy away from giving the most precise reflection and description of various plots and themes. These chapters are increasingly prevalent in the second half, and if one decides to read them, they can kill your interest.

MY FAVORITE CHARACTER

Personally, my favorite character is Andrei Nikolayevich Bolkonsky. I feel he has a fascinating storyline, being driven to find a purposeful, fulfilling, and happy life.

At the beginning, we find an intelligent, driven, and witty young man. He finds his wife, while friendly and sociable, to be enamored with trivialities and thinks of himself as chained to this unfulfilling life.

In his attempts to escape this, he becomes an officer in the army, after which, he pursues a source of happiness through glory, domestic life, and romance. He attempts and struggles with all of these, and ultimately finds truth in his epiphanies on the nature and importance of man.

SHOULD YOU READ THIS BOOK?

Yes, absolutely. This is a masterpiece of literature, though I feel it should not be one’s first foray into high literature as it is long and didactic at times. If one likes historical fiction, one should definitely give it a try. I recommend this to adults as there are scenes of violence and the prose is opaque and hard to understand. Any sexual content is merely implied or happens off-page for those who are uncomfortable with that.

REVIEW: "Good Omens" by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman

SYNOPSIS

According to The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch (the world's only completely accurate book of prophecies, written in 1655, before she exploded), the world will end on a Saturday. Next Saturday, in fact. Just before dinner.

So the armies of Good and Evil are amassing, Atlantis is rising, frogs are falling, tempers are flaring. Everything appears to be going according to Divine Plan. Except a somewhat fussy angel and a fast-living demon—both of whom have lived amongst Earth's mortals since The Beginning and have grown rather fond of the lifestyle—are not actually looking forward to the coming Rapture.

And someone seems to have misplaced the Antichrist . . .

MY INITIAL TAKE

I first read this book eight years ago, and it was one of the first Neil Gaiman books I ever read, with the exception of Coraline. Since then, Gaiman and Pratchet have become two of my favorite authors. Pratchett always makes me laugh with his charming characters and witty dialogue, and Gaiman has a talent for crafting beautiful fairytale stories that remind me of playing in the woods behind the baseball fields, hunting for fairies. As a thirteen-year-old, I loved Crowley for his dramatic flair and his grudging love for humanity, and the comedy of it all made me laugh. Today, I still love those parts, but I can appreciate the philosophical discussions and debates of the book more than I could back then. 

WHAT I LOVED MOST

Crowley's reluctant goodness is still one of my favorite parts of the book. A demon cast down from Heaven for his curious and questioning nature, Crowley works as Hell's agent on Earth, and he finds he rather likes his job. At the beginning of the book, he meets with two other demons who share their evil deeds for the day: temptations for holy men, luring them down the path of sin. When asked about his own deeds, Crowley admits, with pride, that he cut the telephone wires in London that morning for a brief period. The other demons are completely flabbergasted, and Crowley explains the evilness of his actions: that minor inconvenience means that thousands of people were inconvenienced and their frustration would fuel more evil actions. These people would take out that frustration on friends, family, coworkers, and even strangers, who would take it out on others still--corruption on a mass scale. Crowley doesn't have to do real evil deeds--the humans will do them for him. This ties into my absolute favorite part of the book: Crowley's internal monologue on the nature and origin of evil. 

See, he argues that Hell and its demons are not the creators of evil, though they do push people in that direction. Rather, humans themselves create evil through their own choices to be selfish or cruel. I love this point, because cruelty, whether through action or violence, is a choice. Evil doesn't exist as an external force, but in an internal philosophy that one's own needs and desires are inherently and objectively more important than those of others. This is something often addressed in fiction, but what I like about Gaiman and Pratchett's approach is that this is never said to be all there is. Crowley also says that humans, while capable of "skin-crawling" acts of evil that drive demons to drink, are also capable of grace and kindness beyond Heaven's wildest dream. All that really matters is the choice. 

This message, that humans are not predisposed towards good or evil, is important to me. I believe that the power of the choices we make, even if it is a choice to do nothing, determines who we are as people. There is always a choice, even when the answer seems obvious or like the only one, and "Good Omens" shows us a cast of characters making choices, from Anathema Device following a book of prophecies to the letter, to Crowley and Aziraphale working against the Great Plan, even though it seems hopeless. 

MY FAVORITE CHARACTER

If I'm being honest, my favorite character has always been Crowley. He's funny and over-the-top, and I loved David Tennant's portrayal of him in the 2019 miniseries adaption. Tennant captured the fun and the humanity of Crowley. One of my favorite moments between him and Aziraphale is when he transforms a team of office workers' paint guns into real ones. Aziraphale admonishes him for it, insisting that he undoes it, and reminding him that someone could seriously get hurt. After some prodding, Crowley reluctantly admits that he never planned for anyone to get hurt, and he used his infernal influence to ensure everyone had miraculous escapes because it "wouldn't be any fun otherwise."Crowley does not want to be evil or to do evil things. He is a character who enjoys mischief and a hedonist, but real, widescale suffering is abhorrent to him, and the idea of wiping out all life on Earth is unthinkable. While his motivations are mostly selfish--he enjoys the life he has--there is good in him. He doesn't just run from the disaster, and he hesitates to truly or permanently hurt anyone. 

Beyond being fun and relatable, Crowley, along with his angelic counterpart Aziraphale, provide much of the driving philosophical discussions, beginning with their theorizing on whether the Antichrist is destined to follow in his father's footsteps, that is to fall. They discuss nature versus nurture, the absolutes that the Bible presents, and if fate exists. One of the reoccurring discussions they have is about demons and angels, and whether angels are capable of evil while demons are capable of good.

It is Crowley that questions the Great Plan, as he is wont to do. This is something I admire about his character. Even when everything seems hopeless, he just can't give up. Even though he professes to be a hard-hearted demon, he can't help but love the world around him, and he can't help but look for a solution. 

SHOULD YOU READ THIS BOOK?

If you're a fan of either Gaiman or Pratchett (or both), then the answer is a resounding yes. I believe this is their best work, and as much as I love their other titles, none of them can top this in my mind. This one just speaks to both a loving exasperation with humans and hope for the future. If you haven't read either author before, then I recommend it to anyone who likes books that can both make them laugh and make them think. There is so much to love about this story, and if you don't like one character, you're bound to love another. 

You can buy "Good Omens" on Amazon or your favorite bookstore.