web
counter
 

Fool Is No Fluke

By Jennifer McKeown | Posted Under Book Reviews | Comments (15)



dd-moore10_ph5_0495375108.jpg

I wasn’t expecting much from Fool, the newest novel from Christopher Moore. My previous encounter with Moore (the mind-numbingly awful Fluke) made me want to pound my head into the nearest hard surface — anything to remove the memory of that wretched story from my brain. Later, I was informed that Fluke was not the best introduction to Moore; instead, I should have read Lamb or You Suck. Whatever. I was already pissed.

Still, it’s difficult to ignore the legion of Moore fans who constantly sing his praises, claiming he’s just so funny, so entertaining. I found nothing even remotely amusing about Fluke. But when I heard his newest novel was a take on Shakespeare’s King Lear, I knew I had to give him another go. Perhaps Fluke was a fluke. (See what I did there? It’s funny, right? No? Not even a little? Now you know what Fluke is like.)

For the most part, I was pleasantly surprised. I didn’t hate it. I didn’t want to do myself bodily harm. In fact, I even found numerous scenes quite funny, even if I didn’t actually laugh out loud. Fool elicited the occasional inner snicker, we’ll say.

If you aren’t familiar with King Lear, here’s a brief recap: Lear is old. In order to die unburdened, he proposes to divide his kingdom among his three daughters. But first, a test. Tell me how much you love me, he commands. Goneril and Regan, his first two daughters — sneaky bitches, we can tell immediately — kiss his ass and tell him what he wants to hear. However, Cordelia, his youngest daughter, will have none of it and refuses to play along. Lear, blind as he is, gives the first two daughters everything and banishes the youngest. Unfortunately, greed begets greed, and it isn’t long before Goneril and Regan begin to want the other’s share. Fighting ensues. And death, obviously, since it’s a tragedy.

The Fool himself, although lacking a major role in the play’s action, is nevertheless an integral character. The Fool’s role was an important one at court, a place where one could hardly speak the truth for fear of punishment. While most lackeys blindly agreed with the person who boasted the most power, the Fool could speak his mind without fear of punishment, since whatever he said was considered a joke and unworthy of serious consideration. Lear’s Fool is no different, and often calls the old king a fool for the way he has treated Cordelia and other worthy characters.

In Moore’s version, the Fool (named Pocket) takes center stage and narrates the action of the play from his own unique perspective. Instead of being a powerless pawn, Moore’s Fool actually masterminds much of the play’s action. Pocket and his dim-witted sidekick, Drool, shag many maidens, plot devious escapades, and generally commit heinous fuckery most foul. Along the way, Pocket discovers some important truths about himself. While Moore’s take on King Lear was humorous and fun, I far preferred the depth and background he added to characters who aren’t fully developed in the play.

Which, of course, brings us to an important question: Is it necessary to be familiar with the source material before reading Fool? It’s not absolutely necessary, of course, but I doubt I’d have found much humor (or depth, what there was of it) in Fool without being familiar with the original. If you’re not familiar with the play, take heart: Moore deviates significantly from it anyway (at least, I don’t remember a lusty ghost, or a lusty laundress, or a lusty princess, but I have been known to skim).

In all, I enjoyed Fool, even if I don’t plan to read Moore again any time soon. Fool is a bawdy, rowdy novel that doesn’t treat Shakespeare (or anything, for that matter) too seriously. While not every joke works (some fall painfully flat), it’s a fun read so long as you aren’t expecting too much from it.

Jennifer McKeown reads way too much and blogs about her experiences over at Bibliolatry.









Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close Book Review | Star Trek Trailer 2













Comments

Actually, I'd start even earlier... my favorite Christopher Moore books are probably Coyote Blue and Bloodsucking Fiends. Lamb is good too, as is A Dirty Job.

I've yet to read Fool, mainly because I've felt like Moore is sort of going through the motions recently.

Posted by: TK at March 11, 2009 9:52 AM

Sounds like a ripoff of the Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead idea. Except Moore is not Stoppard.

Posted by: Stoppard anyone? at March 11, 2009 10:05 AM

Oh god, I hated You Suck. So much. And I love Moore. It was as if he was trying too hard to be funny, when his best work feels effortlessly humorous. That's why Lamb and The Stupidest Angel are my two favorites.

I'm reading Fool right now, but I'm only about 6 pages in so I have no comment on it so far. The map in the beginning with a coutnry labeled as "Fucking France" made me giggle.

Posted by: Julie at March 11, 2009 10:05 AM

"Heinous fuckery most foul" is officially my phrase of the day.

Posted by: Sean at March 11, 2009 10:07 AM

at least, I don’t remember a lusty ghost, or a lusty laundress, or a lusty princess, but I have been known to skim.

Hmmm, when you put it like that, Moore sounds kinda like he's just writing out all his pornish fantasies. I can't wait to read his next book, which will include more lusty occupations.

But in all seriousness, I did kinda like Fool. My favourite will forever be A Dirty Job, but I have to admit, Moore's take was worth the $25.

Posted by: Jeremy Feist at March 11, 2009 10:29 AM

Interesting that you ask about the need for background. A friend of mine who is Jewish read "Lamb" and kept interrupting me on a flight to NY to ask who was so-and-so in the New Testament. He still thought the book was funny but I suspect it might be funnier if one were familiar with the source material (I haven't read it so I can't reliably comment).

Posted by: PaddyDog at March 11, 2009 10:37 AM

I've read a bunch of Moore's books because I fell in love with Lamb and yeah, some of them are not so worthy of praise but I think Fool is a good one. I think Moore's strongest writing comes when he is satirizing material that is known or loved/revered, as in Lamb, and Lear is chock full of fodder in that respect. I also really liked Dirty Job (far more than some of his serialized books.) But, again, I think he had a lot of known legend, lore and information to work with when making fun of our perceptions of death that I think loaned itself to some good writing. Way better than Fluke, for sure.

Posted by: JenVegas at March 11, 2009 11:16 AM

Start with You Suck, Lamb, or A Dirty Job and you won't regret it. I was laughing while reading Lamb in a hospital with a friend and her terminally ill mother and I felt guilty from laughing so much out loud. I do not laugh very easily. Fluke is not one is his strongest, I agree but his overall works are clever and funny. I look forward to reading Fool. It is a brilliant idea to use the Fool as the main character who gets to interact in so many different worlds. You can read the first chapter online on Amazon.com for those who want to get a jist of the new book. There is always room for lusty ghosts, laundresses, or princesses in my book.

Posted by: TVConnoisseur at March 11, 2009 11:20 AM

I read A Dirty Job and really liked it (and I've read that a movie version is in pre-production. could be good). Then I read Fluke and was sorely disappointed and have never looked back.

Posted by: UnlessTheMoonFalls at March 11, 2009 11:36 AM

But...but...I love Fluke! It's one of my favourites! Really? You hated it? *sigh* Granted, a lot of it is biology geek humour, and I could swear that I've worked with some of those characters in my grad student days (some of my best friends were whale researchers!), so maybe there's a reason I hold it so dear.

Julie, I too have just started Fool. So far so good, although I do think TK has a point in that Moore is kind of going through the motions lately. Mind you, the formula works for me, and it's bound to be good for a few laughs. I expect no more or no less.

Posted by: meaux at March 11, 2009 11:47 AM

Lamb Lamb Lamb! It's the only book that has come close to making me laugh as hard as Confederacy of Dunces. I've read it twice and will certainly read it again in the future.

Posted by: krolowonder at March 11, 2009 12:48 PM

If you dig Carl Hiaasen for his bio-geek cred, you'll like Fluke.

You Suck was fun but certainly would have been better had I read Bloodsucking Fiends first. Lamb is so far his best work. I browsed through a Dirty Job and Fool last weekend but gave them a pass for now because I haven't the time to sit and enjoy them.

Posted by: idiosynchronic at March 11, 2009 10:20 PM

Seriously? Sure, Fluke petered out at a certain point and became lost, but saying it wasn't at all funny is ridiculous. That said, I forgive you not liking it. It's not the best.

Now, if you read Lamb and don't like it, I will never respect your sense of humor. EVER. Seriously, that book is great.

Posted by: ChristianH at March 12, 2009 12:24 AM

Lamb is solid, A Dirty Job is solid, and I plan to continue through the entire Moore collection. The guy is brilliant!

Posted by: RichieRich at March 13, 2009 1:39 AM

Moore has never written a great book. Mildly diverting, yes. But maybe I'm spoiled by Richard Grant's Tex and Molly in the Afterlife.

Posted by: NotaFAn at March 13, 2009 3:39 PM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time