Customer Reviews

Rant (Limited Edition): An Oral Biography of Buster Casey

5 star:		(78)
4 star:		(49)
3 star:		(30)
2 star:		(22)
1 star:		(19)

 

 

I've heard it said that there are no new ideas left in the world. The proliferation of movie remakes, regurgitated pop music, and Danielle Steele novels certainly add to this argument. Even in "Rant," Palahniuk's latest novel, you won't see anything that hasn't already been covered by Sartre, Camus, or The Terminator. The thing about Palahniuk (and other brilliant writers like David Mitchell, Craig Clevenger, and Jonathan Lethem) is that while the message may not be all that new, the manner in which it is told is nothing short of stunning.

If you're paying close enough attention, Palahniuk gives away almost the entire story in the first four pages, and he drops plenty of hints along the way for those who still haven't caught on. "Rant" is about, alternately, an underground cult of car crashers, a rabies epidemic, the true essence of religion, and a guy named Buster Casey who is addicted to spider bites. Like his other novels, Palahniuk employs an encyclopedic knowledge of the macabre. His spare, punching prose ties together a medley of ideas and facts until what you're left with is a dizzying collage that is so kaleidoscopic, it'll probably take you three reads just to get half of what he's saying.

And he says a lot, in spite of the low page count. Some of "Rant," in fact, might feel rewarmed to the hardcore Palahniuk fan. A character named Echo Lawrence makes her money by exploiting the same weaknesses manipulated by Choke's Victor Mancini. Buster's physical immolations recall Shannon McFarland's reality-enhancing disfigurement from Invisible Monsters. And the whole idea of Party Crashing (an underground cult of Nighttimers who get their kicks by intentionally hunting down and wrecking into each other) is an obvious off-shoot of Fight Club's nihilistic pugilism (an observation that is actually made by Palahniuk himself, three-quarters through the book).

While those past books were great in their own ways (although "Choke" was a bit more mainstream than usual), they were also all pretty single-minded of purpose. In "Rant," Palahniuk's blistering pen stabs into several themes -- population control, theistic iconography, segregation, and (of course) life as a diversion from reality, the theft of existence by a society that is happier with blunted and denuded entertainments than with the raw, sometimes poisonous, bite of true, fully aware experience. Most Eastern philosophies are all about achieving true consciousness through an elevation of the mind; Palahniuk wants the same thing, but his methods of transcendence involve far more noise, chaos, and pain.

If it sounds confusing, it is, but the real brilliance (and -- believe it or not -- beauty) of "Rant" is how all of these themes dissolve into one another. There is no clutter here, in spite of the density of the words. The fact that the book is arranged in the form of an oral biography -- told exclusively through snippets of interviews and recorded information -- only adds to the story's web-like framework, highlights each dark, glistening strand.

"Rant" is a lot of things. It is part Strange Days, part Perfume, and part Cronenberg's Crash. It is half a condemnation of a spirit-deadening world, and half a celebration of it. It's morbid, grotesque, unsettling, evocative, and sometimes just plain hilarious.

It's Palahniuk. What more can I say?

Chuck is back! I can happily and unreservedly recommend "Rant" -- to fans of Palahniuk, that is.

After "Haunted", which had many interesting moments, but which otherwise failed to really come together for me, "Rant" is a satisfying, interesting, challenging read. The narrative structure is definitely different, taking the form of transcripts from oral interviews about a character who's no longer on the stage to represent himself. As a result, what you get is a tangled projection, at times incomplete and often contradictory, of that central character, as seen through the eyes of the people who knew him. And by the way, this narrative technique subtly echoes the neural transcripts described *within* the story.

As the story progresses (NO SPOILERS), it gradually undertakes a systematic deconstruction and reconstruction of the character of Buster Casey, which continues to evolve in unexpected ways throughout. The nice thing about this process is that it makes you keep returning (in your mind) to previous points in the narrative, realizing they didn't mean quite what you thought at the time.

There's also the unique metaphor of "boosting peaks", and once you've read the book, you'll see how that metaphor applies to the perceptual process of reading Rant's story through the senses of people *other* than Rant himself. There's also the metaphor of the car salesman -- in which Wallace Boyer is essentially a representative of the author, Chuck Palahniuk, himself. Like Boyer, Palahniuk carefully, and skillfully, directs readers through a series of "control questions", "embedded commands", and "pacing", taking them exactly and only where he wants them to go.

The novel explores some big, mind-bending ideas, too, all with a vintage Palahniuk backdrop. Surreal touches like the "Sex Tornado", "Animal Fishing", and "Party Crashing" will remind you of other Palahniuk novels, while the voices of the characters in "Rant" are rather different. They remind me of the characters in Mark Richard's "The Ice at the Bottom of the World", which I've also reviewed (and this is meant as a very favorable comparison). Other aspects remind me of the postmodern elements of a Don DeLillo. Also, because of the narrative structure, the novel is *all dialogue*, and no description (except for what you get in dialogue). It's a little bit more like a play than a novel in that way. Very interesting, and usually successful.

An added bonus: Palahniuk manages to put a reference to his own "Fight Club" into the novel, evoking it as a cultural artifact in the world Rant Casey inhabits.

I thought it was excellent. Ye sit took awhile to get rolling and it was a touch confusing trying to see where it would lead. But the last 1/4 of the book was impossible to put down. Palanhiuk's standard twists and turns are all there.
Well worth the read.

Combining snake bite-induced erections with car crash-induced time travel and a whole host of other bizarre and almost realistic events, Chuck Palahniuk has created another character in his universe of strangeness with Rant Casey.

The story unfolds as a biography of Rant after his death, strung together through snippets of interviews with dozens of his close friends and neighbors. It starts off simply enough: an odd little boy in middle America causes quite a stir as he grows up by getting into mischief like collecting other people's teeth; purposely getting bit by snakes, spiders, and rodents; and using real animal blood and entrails as part of a community haunted house. Palahniuk's simple language and townie slang kept me engaged and enjoying the yarn.

Soon enough, Rant moves to the city, and we find out we're actually in a futuristic world where people "port in" to experience entertainment, reminiscent of the video games from David Cronenberg's eXistenZ or the "feelies" from Brave New World. There's also "Party Crashing," a game people play where they crash their cars into each other. When Palahniuk drops this unusual character of Rant into this even more out of the ordinary world, it's inevitable the story is going to get much more complex and interesting.

What I have always enjoyed about Palahniuk's work is that his characters are incredibly bizarre but he always finds a way to speak through them about very real but seldom-expressed human perspectives. A lot of times it seems he can figure out some of my thoughts and perceptions and explain them to me, with more clarity and sensibility than I would've thought possible. This book is no different: Rant is pretty far from anyone or anything I've ever known, but because of Palahniuk's descriptions, Rant is still somehow familiar.

So, even though the story gets pretty twisted and out of control confusing near the end, it's still a very interesting read with a lot of unpleasant but likable characters.

So, I've taken the time to read many of the criticisms leveled at this book. "Chuck is losing his touch." "Chuck is repeating himself." "The third act sucks." "The book is about Rabies!" Blah Blah Blah. I quite liked "Rant" and I appreciate its unique style and presentation, even though the themes have "been done before." Show me something that hasn't been repeated and I'll give you a rabies-coated gold star. Yes, Chuck is revisiting themes that have been addressed in his other works... that's what he does... and he does it well.

I do think that this book is a challenge and a mind-bender. It's a gutsy novel that, in the end, is making fun of the format in which it's presented... a sort of muddled oral history where no one opinion can necessarily be trusted. Anarchism is abound, and the book itself does pose many intriguing moral questions involving lineage, segregation by class, and disease... be it physical or mental. Anyway, I'm not going to give away the plot... but I will boost the amazon star count and recommend this book to anyone who has taken a novel with "Oprah's Book Club" embossed on the front, and burned it just to watch it die ;)

If this was the first Palahniuk book I ever read, 5 stars.
If it were the 9th or 10th (which it is), 4 stars.

The raw shock often associated with his books is undeniable in this one, however as a conditioned Chuck fan, I know what this man is capable of.. and this book was just a bit sub par for him.

This book lived up to my expectations of the author, but only by the skin of its teeth. True, it was entertaining & engrossing enough to keep me coming back to its pages every chance I got, and yes it had the essential never-saw-it-coming twist that Chuck is noted for.. however, the narration dragged at parts & it left questions not answered as well as in his other books; lots of loose ends were tied, but not very tightly.

The book is written in the style of an oral biography; meaning there is no one single narrator, but several different narrators who "contributed" to the "biography" -- a childhood friend, a neighbor, his parents, scholars commenting on certain theories and/or Rant's life. Every story or thought is preceded by a character's name and a colon, almost in the form of a play. I found this to be a refreshing tactic; it helped to keep the story consistently interesting & rolling. Especially so because the reader may see the same story or memory from totally different perspectives, or perhaps a different spin on the same rumor.

All around a good read for the beach, in between classes, before bedtime, or wherever.. I don't regret buying it & I still don't hesitate recommend it to all my friends interested in his writing style.. just don't expect Rant to be the end-all be-all, career-defining masterpiece of Chuck's work.

Whatever your favorite title by this author may be, I doubt any of you will champion this new submission by Mr. Palahniuk as your favorite.

In it there's a reiteration of a few thoughts touched upon in his books `Stranger Than Fiction' and `Haunted,' intermingled with what appears to be a strong influence by J.G. Ballard's apocalyptic fetishes ( The Best Short Stories of J. G. Ballard ) written in the style of Capote.

This may be a personal problem, but I find that his writing technique doesn't much lend itself to long-term memory. Be it his interspersing of the narrative in small bits in every chapter, it's difficult for me, even a few days after finishing one of his novels to recall the plot flow.
Which is a shame, because I can RECall laughing out loud at points, but stumble for words when trying to relay it to someone else.

What's worrisome to me in this book is its consistent references to `Fight Club.' I can't put my finger quite on it, but referencing a pop culture phenomenon that you yourself created while simultaneously trying to create another seems a bit `hack-ish' - for lack of a better word.
He goes so far as to spend nearly 3 chapters outlining the rules of this new car-rendition of `fight club,' in which obvious care and consideration was put towards the safety of his readers whom I expect he hopes will mimic said game, as we have his others.

But something sad happens when you obediently follow an author through the course of their career (I have all of his first editions signed.) It dawns on you; that perhaps to begin with they had wonderful things to say and you were glad to hear them, but you see a very strong equation to their story telling.
With Palahniuk it's simply this:

1. Anti-hero is at odds with environment.
2. Anti-hero then participates in seemingly masochistic acts (sometimes nudged along by a guru that is somehow blood related) to achieve an enlightenment fitting to environment.

He does try something slightly different in this book, towards the end, which I won't mention details - I don't like getting into plot - he deals with some scientific theories through these characters telling the story. It seems a little last minute, usually he leaves the gurus wisdom up for interpretation, but here he attempts to explain, and really does a poor job. I really don't know if philosophical and scientific explanations will ever be his strong point.

Of course its entertaining, and well written, and funny, but there's not much to walk away with here.

This is a spectacular, wonderful book; truly a thinking-persons' delight. The presentation of the story, much like participating in a group discussion after the fact, mirrors the key aspect of the story itself: we and the characters in the story are all in the same boat, trying to unravel and understand the complexities of Rant, everyone else in our discussion group, what has transpired, and life in general. Most importantly, as we progress, each of our perceptions of the story - what really happened - is continually changing, and changing the way the details of the story will come out along with what exactly the details really mean. And yes, I do mean participating: more than just listening in, we feel like we are part of the conversation, right along with the other characters.

Definitely a fun read, with an appropriate amount of satisfying gross-out and extreme episodes, but this book is also loaded with great insights into modern life and the perils facing society at large. There's a lot here, but it's up to the reader to make the connections and do the thinking. A second read is just as satisfying too - and maybe even moreso.

Four stars instead of five as the end fades just a bit; definitely could have used a bit more discussion about linear time in the same vein as the Easter Bunny without hitting the reader over the head with a sledge hammer.

But again, a fantastic book that rewards thinking beyond just reading!

Buster "Rant" Casey just may be the most efficient serial killer of our time. A high school rebel, Rant Casey escapes from his small town home for the big city where he becomes the leader of an urban demolition derby called Party Crashing. Rant Casey will die a spectacular highway death, after which his friends gather the testimony needed to build an oral history of his short, violent life. With hilarity, horror, and blazing insight, Rant is a mind-bending vision of the future, as only Chuck Palahniuk could ever imagine.

With this book, Palahniuk tweaks, and nearly perfects, his own style. I had a love-hate relationship with Haunted. I thought that it would have worked much better as a simple collection of short stories than as a complete narrative. Rant shows Palahniuk's evolution of style from the ooze that was Haunted to this new, fully-formed, completely different organism.

I will admit: the first 150 pages of Rant were a struggle for me. I waded through Casey's rural back-story, almost dropping the book altogether a handful of times, but was eventually brought back around by the time Shot Dunyan started describing boosted peaks. It was fascinating to watch how Palahniuk slowly and methodically pieced together his vision of the future (or the now?) in such a way that it came into focus like one begins to see the picture in a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle.

I see that a lot of the bad reviews here are mainly in reference to the "oral biography" approach to the story. Just because the approach is scattered and non-linear, doesn't mean that the book has no plot. Palahniuk could have just as easily approached this same story in a more traditional format, however, I don't think that it would have had the same impact. For me, the format didn't really pay off until the end, and then it began to make perfect sense why he approached it this way.

Also brilliant is the fact that, as another reviewer pointed out, we are given the entire story in the first four pages. At that point, we just simply don't have enough information to understand what we're being told.

I have always been a fan of Palahniuk's, and while I have, at times, found his plot twists to be manipulative, or anti-climactical (such as in Diary), I have always found them entertaining. That was, for me, the only reason I kept on plowing through Rant. The liner notes promised a "mind-bending" novel, and I kept waiting for my mind to be bent. It was.