Customer Reviews

House of Holes

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(11)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

Nicholson Baker has proven that he can make the familiar very strange. Consider his first novel, Mezzanine , where a man is on a lunch hour hunt for shoelaces. All the odds and ends, the digressions and pop-up thoughts that can enter a desultory mind, are playfully and artfully presented in a readable and engaging manner.

In Vox, a lonely man and woman hook up on the phone. They are able to talk about everyday matters and lure the reader into their idle chatter, so that the sexual banter is fluid instead of gratuitous.

In his last novel, The Anthologist, Baker uses stream-of-consciousness to wax poetic and edify the reader about verse. My personal favorite, Human Smoke, is an exquisite tome that shifts the kaleidoscope on history's sacred cows.

Baker chose a small concept idea for his latest, HOUSE OF HOLES, a cheeky plunge into lust and vulgarity so steep and rank, so exhaustive and consummate, that it is recommended to be read in small doses. That's easy, as each surreal chapter is its own short carnal experience. Although some characters appear in several chapters, they are not immersed into a tight, ongoing storyline, except for Shandee, who finds a male arm, which is detached from its owner (Dave), and seeks to find the rest of his body. The eponymous HOH is the main character, and everyone else is a fornicating subject. People come to the House of Holes to make their prurient dreams come true.

Somewhere or anywhere/everywhere are circles that are potential portals--the end of a straw, the putting tee of the seventh green, the fourth dryer from the left at the laundromat at the corner of 18th Street and Grover Avenue--that will suck up (or down) and send the willing concupiscent to the House of Holes. There are no limits to what you can do with your anatomy at HOH, and Baker will provide infinite LMAO and OMG moments as you read.

I don't think any author has come up with so many creative terms for the most intimate parts of our body: meatstick, truncheon, length of badness, bulldog, hamsteak, thundertube, beast, frilly, slobbering kitty, bungee hole, slippery salope, cold Snapple in my condo--well, you get the point.

Highbrow and lowbrow blend together, and it is evident that Baker is a scholar with a wanton repertoire of ideas. Some chapters are more "fulfilling" than others, also. For example, a woman nose-dives into a portal and ends up inside her friend's penis. Getting out was quite the liberating experience for both of them.

Crotchal transfers, temporary scrotal removal, sex with headless men, Penis Washes, Hall of the Armless Men--this is just a fraction of the dizzying booty in this book, just an ampule of the sex blasts of comic and twisted derangement provided between these sticky pages. Rather than read it solo, this would make a humorously lewd parlor game between trusted friends at a dinner party (make that AFTER dinner). You could truth or dare it--read a chapter on a dare--but I wouldn't advise trying any of these tricks yourself, or with each other!

Take a ride on the "Pornsucker" ship or gaze at the 12-screen Porndecahedron of licentious delights. This review comes with a warning, however, something that Erica Jong once said:

"My reaction to porno films is as follows; After the first ten minutes, I want to go home and screw, after the first twenty minutes, I never want to screw again as long as I live."

This book is not for everyone, I'll say that right up top. It is, however, for me. I absolutely loved it... a plunge into pit of happy promiscuity. It is true, as everyone says, that there isn't a traditional "plot" -- the book consists of a series of interlacing vignettes, but characters appear and reappear, moving in and out of each other's stories, summoned when other characters press the "sex now" button or showing up as recruiters (to the House of Holes) after their own initiations. The book is raunchy, yes, but also deliberately and deliciously silly, and Baker gives himself free reign to explore the absurdist outer limits of sexual fantasy in a way that many other writers, particularly prominent ones, would be embarrassed to do. There really isn't any other book like this.

First off, the only books I've read by Baker are the Mezzanine, Vox, and Room Temperature, with the last being my absolute favorite. I liked these books because they offered an inquisitive look at curious and seemingly mundane things, descriptions of the ordinary, and views into the simplest things which often reveal a gleam of joy or acknowledgement from the reader.

This book is absolutely nothing like those three books, even Vox which was very sexual.

Anyways, to the things I LIKED about this book: it was very funny in some parts, and it gave me a huge amount of "...wait what?" moments that required a short reread.

An example of that would be the part when

**spoiler**
-
-
-
-
The two girls talk about wanting to see a naked man, and the other lady tells them they should just eat this special acorn so they do, and then they poop out the acorn which hatches into little men, which they then rub and which turn into normal men.

-
-
-
**/spoiler**

However, I felt like the book as a whole was extremely disjointed, and all of the various 'places' and 'things' that occur in the house of holes were simply presented and not given a lot of description. I never felt like I knew any of these characters, from Dave's amputated arm to the Porn monster in the end, but simply saw glimpses into their lives. That is what this book seems like - a glimpse into the lives of extremely horny people who find themselves in a futuristic sci-fi sex-fueled utopia. If that sounds like your type of book, then it'll certainly be a fascinating, eye opening ride. If not, then either glance through this book or avoid it entirely.

Though I've always enjoyed Nicholson Baker's books, I think he falls short with this one. Sure, he has something to say in House of Holes, but he says it over and over again, without much variation. Yes, sex is fun. Fantasizing about sex is fun. Even the most bizarre fantasies are wholesome in their own way. No need to heap it on. If your looking for excellent literary porn, try to find a copy of William Kotwinkle's Night Book. Now there's an entertaining and imaginative book.

Baker is brilliant writer and a master of invention. In this joyful and irreverent novel, Baker offers a pleasure resort where guests can experience every manner of sexual titillation and fulfillment, including many that they (and we) never could have imagined.

If you've got a fantasy, describe it and it's yours. If you don't, or you stammer trying to communicate it, the House of Holes opens up to show you sex acts, partners (including a tree and a lake), and an overflow of erotic possibilities.

I loved this book, especially Baker's inventive language. Thank you, Mr. Baker, for such fine fun.

Joan Price

I will begin by saying that this review was twice refused because Amazon's software (or some moron who vets reviews?) believes it runs afoul of their guidelines. Each time I have censored it, because Amazon won't even let me use normal biological terms for a male [thingie] or what a female ["down there"]. Nor does Amazon permit mention of the reproductive act. Thus, here is my review, censored further. Misspellings and euphemisms are intentional.

--------

House of Holes is a humorous but not particularly erotic send-up of the standards of heterosexual pr*nogr4phy, which is to say that its characters (who exist as mere sketches on which to hang a series of anecdotes about the House of Holes and its, um, inner workings) celebrate and revel in a pr*ntopia where s3x is a purely physical phenomenon which has nothing to do with reproduction (or human biology), few emotional attachments and no real-life negative consequences whatsoever.

Here, as in standard heterosexual pr*n, everyone is straight, with some girl-on-girl just as in standard hetero pr*n. Almost all the men have good-looking faces, buff bodies and [big you-know-whats], and almost all the women have large (if not humongous) breasts. [Org4sms] are long and loud; bodily fluids are copious. Everyone wants s3x all the time and conversations quickly devolve into "dirty" talk, some of it rather funny. (Who else but Nicholson Baker would use "Malcolm Gladwell" as a euphemism for a [man's you-know-what]?)

Having availed himself of these conventions, however, Baker veers into science fiction. Characters enter and leave the House of Holes by portals to what are clearly different dimensions. S3x in the House of Holes is also bizarre. One character switches [parts] with a woman and lets himself be p3n3trated (in his new [Lady Jane]) by his own [John Thomas]. (He draws the line at going down on his own [Malcolm Gladwell].) Another man gives up his arm for a period of time so that he can temporarily switch his [John Thomas] for a bigger one. A woman shrinks to tiny size and gets stuck in a man's urethra until she is [ej4cul4ted] out. To all of these things, Baker's characters have a "why not try it?" attitude, but the comment of the woman who has s3x with a headless man (his head is being kept in a room by a headmistress) could well sum up the entire book: "This is pretty impressive but pretty nutty."

By the end, it made me want to read some good [pr*n].

i bought and read this entire book based on the fact that it was reviewed not once, but twice, in the new york times. expectation of a story line or plot was dashed to smithereens in the first chapter. for baker, introducing so many characters seemed to be simply an easy way to talk about sex in all its glorious and raunchiest forms. and that was okay by me.

once i realized that, i changed my expectations about the book - okay, i dropped them - and that's when the fun began. what i really enjoyed about moving through each chapter (though each one was just barely stitched together on the most fragile of threads - sex at the HOH) was the easy way baker had his characters immediately start talking to strangers about sex or sensuality in plain, straightforward language. not in a sleazy, creepy way, but in an almost vulnerable manner, which i found refreshing.

it made me ask myself, if someone said something similar to me, would i find it as compelling as i did while reading it? more to the point, could I just open up to someone - friend or stranger - about my sexuality/sensuality?

talk about an icebreaker!

because i bought it on a kindle, i was amused by the number of sentences that were underlined by other readers. actually laughed out loud at some of the lines others had highlighted! (i do love that feature in the kindle)

and finally, because my husband and i often read aloud to one another, one night i decided to read this to him without telling him in advance what it was about. he was intrigued at first, then lost interest after about two pages - which is not to say that reading it aloud had no impact on our, uh, communication later that evening.

interesting...

House of Holes is funny. Very funny.

And it's raunchy.

And it's beautifully written.

Not so much a story as a series of connected vignettes Baker creates some of the very nicest, most considerate, friendliest and accommodating characters imaginable doing the darndest things.

Sweet, generous people having sex in the wildest, most spectacular ways possible.

What's not to like?

But of course as sex is the subject the puritanical impulse engages over and again in the discussion about Baker and his book.

Sigh.

Reminds me of the old saw regarding movie ratings. Chop off a breast in a bloody epic and earn a PG. Show a nipple in a love scene and it's R.

With the NY Times having praised this book as if John Updike had come back from the dead, I was surprised and disappointed how boring I found it. It seems much more full of itself than clever or original. I did not find it offensive, but not worth the time spent on it, either. It is only modestly amusing, unless you find the use of dozens of synonyms for penis witty. It is best suited for those who think they will be regarded by their friends as daring for reading a book the Times finds daring and raunchy. Raunchy, yes, but as daring as Sex and the City--which was another Times favorite.

This book is pornography from cover to cover. But it's different from other porno I've sampled, in three important ways.

First, it's unusually sympathetic to the woman's point of view. More often than not, the character portrayed in a state of sexual ecstasy is a woman. As with his previous two porno books, Baker takes the view that female arousal is, or should be, very exciting to males. Personally, I have always agreed with this opinion completely. But the makers of most porno plainly *don't* agree; there, the women hardly ever reach climax and indeed they are often shown as humiliated or in pain.

Second, Baker has a deeply sympathetic attitude -- tender, really -- to all of his characters. They are all portrayed as really nice people and there isn't a sadist in the bunch. I found myself engaged with their fates (will Shandee finally find Dave?) as I read through the book.

Third, Baker's porno is meant to be funny. The humor is deliberately silly, with endless novel ways of describing sex and sex organs.

In sum, like many books, this one will appeal only to certain people. If you like sex portrayed from the viewpoint of the woman's pleasure, and you like stories in which the characters are really nice, and you enjoy silly verbal humor, than I think you will like House of Holes. Otherwise, you'd probably do better to stay away.