I didn't find Allie Fox likable, charming, charismatic, or engaging. I hated him. He was a tyrant, completely insane, and dangerous. His favorite past time seemed to be mental mind ****ing others, especially his own children. I even disliked the mother for allowing such a dangerous man with such a loose grip on reality to remain at the helm of their family for so long. Even towards the end when Allie became psychotically dangerous the mother seemed completely incompetent to step up to the plate and take control.
He was an ego maniac, a terrorist, a torturer, a liar, a control freak, an abuser, obsessive compulsive, paranoid, and self centered.
This was not some genius with charming eccentricities. The guy was bat**** insane and behaved in alarming and menacing ways. While the mother sat by doing nothing the kids were held hostage by an insane person.
By the end of the book the only character I felt close to was Jerry. He was the only one who clearly saw the dad for the monster that he was.
I was just completely unsympathetic towards Allie Fox. Reading the book was like spending time with some crazy bipolar paranoid asshole.
I think the book would have been a better story for me if Jerry was the narrator. Had it been narrated by the mother I imagine it would be unreadable. I would like to know more about a character like Jerry. A kid who sees the emperors got no clothes. Jerry knew his father was a douchebag while Charlie was still making excuses for dad's indefensible behavior. The mother was useless. I'd have loved to have heard the story from beginning to end from Jerry's perspective. Charlie wasn't spineless like his mother. But Jerry had balls and seemed far less willing to forgive or tolerate some mad professors b.s.
I thought the story was Charlie's journey from Idolization of his father to realization of the selfish prick his father really was.
The mother was terrible as a character. I hated her. She never showed any spine, and just when I thought she might get to be a full character, she reverted back to the useless, spineless POS she was through the rest of the book.
Allie was a great antagonist IMO. I went on a similar journey as Charlie while reading (accentuated by the first-person narrative).
But towards the end of the book I wanted to bash his brains out with a hammer.
Overall, I thought it was an excellent book, wonderfully written and a very well-crafted story. I would have enjoyed more character development overall for the non-Allie, non-Charlie characters, who were all pretty much one-dimensional and undeveloped.
I didn't find Allie Fox likable, charming, charismatic, or engaging. I hated him. He was a tyrant, completely insane, and dangerous. His favorite past time seemed to be mental mind ****ing others, especially his own children. I even disliked the mother for allowing such a dangerous man with such a loose grip on reality to remain at the helm of their family for so long. Even towards the end when Allie became psychotically dangerous the mother seemed completely incompetent to step up to the plate and take control.
He was an ego maniac, a terrorist, a torturer, a liar, a control freak, an abuser, obsessive compulsive, paranoid, and self centered.
This was not some genius with charming eccentricities. The guy was bat**** insane and behaved in alarming and menacing ways. While the mother sat by doing nothing the kids were held hostage by an insane person.
By the end of the book the only character I felt close to was Jerry. He was the only one who clearly saw the dad for the monster that he was.
I disagree somewhat on Jerry, however. Jerry's view of his father was just the way he manifested his own panic and despair. He happened to be correct in that expression, but I don't think it came about from an insight more powerful than the others'; rather just the same chaotic desperation that inspired every character's thoughts in that last stretch.
Now for the part I didn't like.
I didn't like that Allie was shot and paralyzed. I thought it was predictable and unimaginative. Here's the man who never sleeps. The man who can do 50 push-ups. The man who doesn't require food or water.
Paralyzed.
That's the one part of the book I thought could have been done better. It was kind of expected if you know what I mean. Kind of here's the yin for your yang. I like my yin and yang scrambled.
The man who could do anything. The man who can do nothing. It was trite.
I'm usually hopeless at this sort of thing anything unless it was obvious but I thought it was simply a good tale rather than containing too many underlying political and social themes. I don't know if it was supposed to but that was my take. Obviously it was about the potentially damaging effects of personal rebellion but beyond that it was just an enjoyable story.
I personally wondered if Allie was bipolar but then again I don't know much about bipolar and I had just been watching Steven Fry's show about Manic depression.
Interesting. Strange I missed that on the technology. I'm quite into decentralised, alternative technology myself which is sort of related.
The political aspect and lessons learned by the book would be that by trying to change teh world to suit our purposes instead of adapting ourselves to the world in which we live will always lead to hardship.
I don't know about that. One of the repetitive statements made was that Allie never did anything that didn't benefit himself first. His inventions came out of his own needs to have something vs any need to solve a problem for the greater good of all. He did seem excited at different points throughout the book to show and share his inventions with others. However it appeared his main goal was to impress others and feel superior. He had no interest in sharing anything with folks who weren't going to fall all over themselves in gratitude and amazement.
Anyway I didn't read the book and think trying to change the world vs adapting was a bad decision. Being a maniac like Allie would be bad. But invention in and of itself isn't a negative. The children altered their little acre area. They created forts, a church area, etc. The children were happy in their space because they were free from the insanity of their crazy dad.
What I got from the book is that extremism is almost always bad. You can have a cause, a religion, etc but any belief taken to the extreme will eventually cross the sanity line. Allie was insane. Allie didn't dislike religion, he despised it. He didn't dislike what was happening in America, he despised it. His personality, beliefs, ideas, actions were only toxic because they were all taken to the absolute extreme. There was nothing in moderation for Allie. Either total commitment or complete banning. Either love or hate. Success or failure. Such an extreme individual could never be in a state of relaxation. They'd always either be jubilant or raging.
I don't believe the book ever meant to say anything negative about trying to change the world, inventions, technology, etc. It was trying to show you what happens when activism is allowed to run wild. It leads to insanity. Insane people are dangerous.
Ever met a person who was an activist for a cause? A cause that on its face has some value, some merit. Yet the activist is so completely crazy and insane about it you just want them to get the **** out of your face even though in many ways you agree with the gist of what they're saying? People get carried away, obsessed, and ultimately they become toxic and insane like Allie.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?