|
| Blood Canticle | 
 enlarge | Author: Anne Rice
Publisher: Knopf Canada
Category: Book
Buy New: $1.50
New (6) Used (25) Collectible (2) from $0.01
Avg. Customer Rating:  374 reviews
Sales Rank: 626360
Media: Hardcover
Pages: 320
ISBN: 0676975976
EAN: 9780676975970
ASIN: 0676975976
Publication Date: 2003
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 369 more reviews...
 from Anne Rice herself!!! thought I'd bump this October 4, 2004
102 out of 161 found this review helpful
THIS POSTED ON 9/6---BRAVO
Reviewer: Anne Obrien Rice (New Orleans, LA United States) - See all my reviews
Seldom do I really answer those who criticize my work. In fact, the entire development of my career has been fueled by my ability to ignore denigrating and trivializing criticism as I realize my dreams and my goals. However there is something compelling about Amazon's willingness to publish just about anything, and the sheer outrageous stupidity of many things you've said here that actually touches my proletarian and Democratic soul. Also I use and enjoy Amazon and I do read the reviews of other people's books in many fields. In sum, I believe in what happens here. And so, I speak. First off, let me say that this is addressed only to some of you, who have posted outrageously negative comments here, and not to all. You are interrogating this text from the wrong perspective. Indeed, you aren't even reading it. You are projecting your own limitations on it. And you are giving a whole new meaning to the words "wide readership." And you have strained my Dickensean principles to the max. I'm justifiably proud of being read by intellectual giants and waitresses in trailer parks,in fact, I love it, but who in the world are you? Now to the book. Allow me to point out: nowhere in this text are you told that this is the last of the chronicles, nowhere are you promised curtain calls or a finale, nowhere are you told there will be a wrap-up of all the earlier material. The text tells you exactly what to expect. And it warns you specifically that if you did not enjoy Memnoch the Devil, you may not enjoy this book. This book is by and about a hero whom many of you have already rejected. And he tells you that you are likely to reject him again. And this book is most certainly written -- every word of it -- by me. If and when I can't write a book on my own, you'll know about it. And no, I have no intention of allowing any editor ever to distort, cut, or otherwise mutilate sentences that I have edited and re-edited, and organized and polished myself. I fought a great battle to achieve a status where I did not have to put up with editors making demands on me, and I will never relinquish that status. For me, novel writing is a virtuoso performance. It is not a collaborative art. Back to the novel itself: the character who tells the tale is my Lestat. I was with him more closely than I have ever been in this novel; his voice was as powerful for me as I've ever heard it. I experienced break through after break through as I walked with him, moved with him, saw through his eyes. What I ask of Lestat, Lestat unfailingly gives. For me, three hunting scenes, two which take place in hotels -- the lone woman waiting for the hit man, the slaughter at the pimp's party -- and the late night foray into the slums --stand with any similar scenes in all of the chronicles. They can be read aloud without a single hitch. Every word is in perfect place. The short chapter in which Lestat describes his love for Rowan Mayfair was for me a totally realized poem. There are other such scenes in this book. You don't get all this? Fine. But I experienced an intimacy with the character in those scenes that shattered all prior restraints, and when one is writing one does have to continuously and courageously fight a destructive tendency to inhibition and restraint. Getting really close to the subject matter is the achievement of only great art. Now, if it doesn't appeal to you, fine. You don't enjoy it? Read somebody else. But your stupid arrogant assumptions about me and what I am doing are slander. And you have used this site as if it were a public urinal to publish falsehood and lies. I'll never challenge your democratic freedom to do so, and yes, I'm answering you, but for what it's worth, be assured of the utter contempt I feel for you, especially those of you who post anonymously (and perhaps repeatedly?) and how glad I am that this book is the last one in a series that has invited your hateful and ugly responses. Now, to return to the narrative in question: Lestat's wanting to be a saint is a vision larded through and through with his characteristic vanity. It connects perfectly with his earlier ambitions to be an actor in Paris, a rock star in the modern age. If you can't see that, you aren't reading my work. In his conversation with the Pope he makes observations on the times which are in continuity with his observations on the late twentieth century in The Vampire Lestat, and in continuity with Marius' observations in that book and later in Queen of the Damned. The state of the world has always been an important theme in the chronicles. Lestat's comments matter. Every word he speaks is part of the achievement of this book. That Lestat renounced this saintly ambition within a matter of pages is plain enough for you to see. That he reverts to his old self is obvious, and that he intends to complete the tale of Blackwood Farm is also quite clear. There are many other themes and patterns in this work that I might mention -- the interplay between St.Juan Diago and Lestat, the invisible creature who doesn't "exist" in the eyes of the world is a case in point. There is also the theme of the snare of Blackwood Farm, the place where a human existence becomes so beguiling that Lestat relinquishes his power as if to a spell. The entire relationship between Lestat and Uncle Julien is carefully worked out. But I leave it to readers to discover how this complex and intricate novel establishes itself within a unique, if not unrivalled series of book. There are things to be said. And there is pleasure to be had. And readers will say wonderful things about Blood Canticle and they already are. There are readers out there and plenty of them who cherish the individuality of each of the chronicles which you so flippantly condemn. They can and do talk circles around you. And I am warmed by their response. Their letters, the papers they write in school, our face to face exchanges on the road -- these things sustain me when I read the utter trash that you post. But I feel I have said enough. If this reaches one reader who is curious about my work and shocked by the ugly reviews here, I've served my goals. And Yo, you dude, the slang police! Lestat talks like I do. He always has and he always will. You really wouldn't much like being around either one of us. And you don't have to be. If any of you want to say anything about all this by all means Email me at Anneobrienrice@mac.com. And if you want your money back for the book, send it to 1239 First Street, New Orleans, La, 70130. I'm not a coward about my real name or where I live. And yes, the Chronicles are no more! Thank God!
 Egotistical and Self-Indulgent Drivel!! September 30, 2004
91 out of 120 found this review helpful
I agree that reviews should not be mean spirited or slanderous. I wouldn't dream of saying that it was not Anne Rice who wrote "Blood Canticle". It is clear that she wrote this book. One can look at the huge downward slope of her novels, to see that "Blood Canticle" is the absolute bottom of the barrel. Yes, taste is subjective, and you have the right to like anything that tickles your fancy, but I have the right to dislike it.
Mrs. Rice doesn't seem to think that it's possible to not like this "book" because it's just simply really, really, really bad. Instead, she says that basically she is a great, great talent and that "we just don't get it". Well, maybe if she put aside her enormous ego, she might realize that some of us really do get it. I got it from the first sentence. It's an awful "book". You can make lame excuses all you want, but nothing excuses bad writing. "Blood Canticle" reeks of nothing more than a case of fulfilling a contractual obligation. I won't go through the trouble of dissecting the "book", because it's clear that the author was troubled with plot development (I mean drug overlords and Taltos?) or character development (massacre). But, there is justice as it is apparent to me that more and more people are getting it: her novels fall off of the bestseller list like a rock and her print runs have been dwindling steadily since "Servant of the Bones". Maybe Anne, you don't get it. Perhaps, Ms. Rice should look towards a successful peer like Stephen King. Mr. King manages to be quite prolific and not descend into blithering drivel.
Anne says that she is above being edited. I cannot remember when I have heard a more egotistical comment in my life. If her words were "polished", there wouldn't be plot and character inconsistencies that a Hummer could drive through. Thankfully, I didn't pay for this tripe. I will NEVER purchase another Anne Rice book, and I will make sure that I tell every single person that will listen to do the same.
A Lighter Turn December 5, 2003
71 out of 92 found this review helpful
'Blood Canticle' is by far the fastest-reading one of the Vampire Chronicles. I found myself surprised by the pace, as I've been reading Anne Rice for years and am accustomed to their taking a bit longer to get through. This one was a three-nighter. I'd call this one 'Anne Rice for people who don't really read Anne Rice.' It's a bit lighter fare than some of the others and it's quite playful in places. I for one enjoyed Lestat's opening diatribe chastising readers for not liking 'Memnoch' and found his recent discovery of 'lingo' amusing. I can't understand why so many readers were so violently upset over Lestat's linguistic change - I mean sure, maybe 'yo' and 'dude' and 'shove it' are a little behind the times, but that aside, do some of us have a problem with Lestat entering the 21st century? He is getting on to 300 years old, is he not? He's an immortal, is he not? Hadn't he better get used to the world changing? Hadn't the readers better get used to it too? It would NOT work for a character like Louis or Armand to be talking that way, but it works for Lestat - he is an always has been completely full of himself and I think that's a fine and funny way to keep things fresh. It was kind of strange to have Maharet communicating by email! That threw me for a loop but again, it is the 21st century. Missing from this book are some of the lengthy narrative descriptions - Anne Rice is a master of description and in many of her books this can go on for pages. While it can sometimes be a bit bogged down, I almost found myself missing it in 'Blood Canticle.' It was as if something had been abbreviated. The characters seemed somewhat abbreviated too - especially the Mayfairs. 'The Witching Hour' is my favorite Anne Rice and one of my favorites, period, and I was delighted with the idea of incorporating Mayfair with Vampire Chronicles. But after the lushness of 'The Witching Hour,' these characters return in 'Blood Canticle' somewhat diminished. I forgot Michael Curry was even in the room on several occasions - wouldn't even know he was there until he spoke some line of dialogue. The same went for Quinn, who also disappeared almost completely in this book. I liked him in 'Blackwood Farm' (and yes, I liked 'Blackwood Farm'!) but in 'Blood Canticle' he's rather reduced to a vehicle for shushing and comforting distraught females. Oncle Julien didn't seem quite himself either, although putting him in the book was throwing a great bone to the readers. I never really understood why it was Stella who appeared with him, of all the Mayfair witches to choose from, and it occurred to me that if you hadn't read 'The Witching Hour,' you'd have no idea who Stella was. The Rowan/Lestat thing made sense to me. They've both done some unspeakable things in their lives and they're both seeking redemption in some way. They each see the goodness in the other and they're drawn to one who sees their goodness. However, I found their teenager-like encounter at the base of the oak tree unnecessary. This thing existed in the book on a much loftier, almost metaphysical plane until that happened and I was a bit grossed out. The whole Taltos thing was rushed and needed more explanation for readers who haven't read the Mayfair books. I totally understood what was going on because I have, but I imagine that someone who hadn't wouldn't cotton at all to the Taltos business, and some of the reviews I've read here are obviously by readers who haven't read 'Taltos,' 'Lasher,' or 'Witching Hour.' Those three books are the perfect example of suspension of disbelief and they are great. I did feel sad at the end knowing that this is the last of the Vampire Chronicles because for all these years I've been reading them, but I suppose we can all just use our imaginations from here on out and hope that Anne Rice will continue writing, even if it's something completely different. Subject matter aside, she is an excellent writer and while I don't necessarily love each and every one of her books, I'll always continue to read them. I'm shocked by some of the mean-spirited reviews I've read here. Everyone's entitled to their opinion and that's why this is a great website, but to be so destructive in attacking Anne Rice only deters people who have never read any of her books, and now never might. No, it's not 'The Witching Hour' or 'Interview with the Vampire' or 'The Vampire Lestat', but 'Blood Canticle' is fun. It's a good time reading it. It's entertaining and it's good escapism. What else are you looking for if you just want to enjoy yourself with a book? Sure, I would have loved to see Louis but it looks like Louis has moved on with his life so more power to him and let the rest of us take his example.
Death is sooooooooooo cool, isn't it? October 1, 2004
69 out of 101 found this review helpful
Alright, so we've had devoted Anne Rice fans defend the book merely because Queen Anne of the Damned wrote it, and former fans trash the book because it's not what they thought it should be. I'm not a fan of hers; I read some of Interview a few years back, and put it down because I thought it was extremely poor. Myself, I think she's an awful writer. However, maybe my objective position will be one of reason.
Look, Rice has the right to defend her work. It's her own book, and what she wrote was what satisfied her and what she thought was the proper ending to her Chronicles. However, she should not treat her fans, even the ones who have left her, so poorly, and actions like her diatribe here and the fact that she actually complained about those who did not like "Memnoch the Devil" within this work are inexcusable. It smacks of egotism, haughtiness, and poorly disguised desperation.
Fans of Rice, I can understand when a beloved series takes a unexpected and seemingly ill-advised turn. I'm a Star Wars fan; enough said. You have the right to feel disappointed by it, and to voice your opinion, but there's no reason to be so venomous.
Because when you really get down to it, Anne Rice is really just a bestseller writer who found a particularly passionate niche audience, and then realized it was profitable to exploit it. Call it stereotyping all you want, but goths, at least the more fanboyish of the subculture, tend to be losers, quite frankly. Kids with no social life gather in whatever dark, tragic subculture they can, because it's like, so deep, and will totally disturb your parents, those conformists. But here's the truth: Lestat is not a real person, he's just a character in a series of books, and not a particularly interesting character either. Jay Gatsby, Stephen Dedalus - those are characters that transcend from the written word to life. Going so far as to profess love for a Eurotrash vampire is rather lame. There is nothing particularly glorious or deep about death and tragedy, unless there happens to be a particularly unique insight behind it. You will grow up and fall in love and see sunlight, and by that point, you'll forget all about Anne.
Here's the most important thing about the debate, and what makes it seem so ridiculous to me: There are so many authors out there that are worth reading, analyzing, and discussing passionately. James Joyce, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Cormac McCarthy, Ernest Hemingway, Fyodor Dostoevsky, William Faulkner, John Steinbeck, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, and many, many others. And that's just in prose fiction! Please, give some real authors with real insight a chance. No, you don't have to read a classic to get merit out of reading, but at least realize that great authors truly do exist. You're just being played by Anne's hype machine and cult if you treat her as the alpha and omega of literature.
This book is insulting!!! February 8, 2004
64 out of 89 found this review helpful
Okay? Where do I begin? This book is very condescending toward those who did not like Memnoch The Devil, insulting toward them in the very first or second chapter saying how it out-sold her other vampire chronicles and that those of us who don't like it only don't like it because we don't understand it. There are those who did not like it BECAUSE they understood it! This might come off as controversial of me to state but she has Lestat, the one who questioned everything and who says "Wouldn't it be great if no one had to die in the name of God again"' in the novel The vampire Lestat. But here in Blood Canticle she has him say "Church and state should not be separated." This segregates all of Anne's non-Christian readers, and believe me, she HAD a few. And then he says The Pope is infallible. To call this maturing for the character is a sin. Now let's move on to her little blurb against us "Yankees" in the North. Deep into the book Lestat makes a comment about a man, and Lestat's saying the man was from the deep south and that's a place where people know how to treat blacks, not like intolerant Yankees. She was calling Northerners racist!
And in the statement itself it gives way to the fact that in her mind African Americans are not people in saying the people there know how to treat 'blacks' as if white people are the only people and everyone else is '___ people' like they're an alien species and not Yankees or Southerners in themselves. This ain't 1865, Anne. The war is over, okay!
I think she was deliberately trying to offend every one of her fans with this book. She has Lestat, LESTAT- the one who questions everything saying Church and state should not be separated. You know what this says? 'Freedom and justice but only if you're Christian.' Can you really imagine Lestat saying or believing that?
Now we talk about redemption. Lestat became a rock star to have some reverence and therefor do some good, he wanted the world to see the evil that walked among them, to know the truth, and for the mythic evil that was never necessary to be wiped out. That was in The vampire Lestat novel.
Not quite the same as saying Yankees are racist, that the pope can never be wrong, that church and state should not be separated and chastising a female vampire for being slutty and killing those that worship him even if they beg for their lives... All of which happen in Blood Canticle... Being good and being a religious fanatic are not the same thing, Anne.
Yes, he wanted to be a teaching brother when he was twelve, and to quote her own book, he never believed in the religion. He believed in the cleanliness of the place, and he believed in the goodness of the men, but he didn't believe that God inhabited those halls. He saw their order, cleanliness, and teaching to be good- it wasn't about the religious aspect of it. He says this flat out.
He never believed in the religious part, he had a secular belief, even then at age twelve, good and evil were all that mattered, it wasn't about the saints and martyrs. You can believe in goodness without believing in being rewarded for good or condemned for evil. There are atheists who believe in right and wrong. He held value to innocents because there may be nothing later. And he did not want innocents to suffer on Earth in case there was nothing after ward to justify their suffering. Doesn't she remember The Vampire Lestat at all? That wasn't about God. It was about good and evil, those were the themes, he wasn't even sure there was an after-life. In this book she has Lestat chastise a female vampire for dressing too slutty. And later the vampire girl apologizes saying Lestat's right. First off, Lestat LIKED modern fashion. His own mother dresses in drag for God's sake and he did NOT disapprove. There are no words to describe how offensive and bad Blood Canticle is. Racist, religiously bias, and sexist. If I didn't know better I'd say this book was deliberately bad and trying to ruin Lestat's reputation.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
