free counter with statistics Rant by Chuck Palahniuk | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

rant.jpg

I Don’t Shut Up, I Grow Up and When I Look at You I Throw Up. Then your Grandfather Time Travels around the Corner and He Licks it Up

Rant by Chuck Palahniuk / Constance Howes

Book Reviews | July 12, 2007 | Comments (55)


Last weekend I attended a 4th of July bash in rural Pennsylvania. I ate delicious food, witnessed illegal fireworks, talked my head off and drank copious amounts of beer. However, in the midst of all the down-home goodness, I couldn’t help but think about rabies, car crashes, statutory rape, time travel, the Grandfather Paradox and whether it’s possible to determine what a man does for a living by the taste and/or smell of his semen. I blame Chuck Palahniuk for this icky mental mile and I blame him hard.

Chuck Palahniuk’s Rant is the fictional biography of serial killin’ Buster “Rant” Casey. I usually like reading about serial killers. Did you know, for instance, that Ted Bundy used to work at a suicide hot line? Or that Gary Leon Ridgeway (“The Green River Killer”) forgot the total number of women he’d murdered? Did you know that Eileen Wuornos skipped her last meal? Or that she requested Natalie Merchant’s “Carnival” to be played at her funeral? Totally true.

While the commercial teaser for Rant suggests a serial killer story, this is no bag-it-tag-it-the-guy’s-a-nut job kind of book. Nor is it a how-to with Colonel Mustard in the study. Instead, Palahniuk’s newest novel chronicles a relatively charming rabies epidemic spread by a backwoods time-traveler who murdered an awful lot of people. The book is also about how much gross the author could cram into 318 pages.

Like a kid repeating overheard expletives because his dumbass Daddy finds it funny, Palahniuk irresponsibly gluts us with gore — in-depth descriptions of sticky biological processes are repeatedly shoehorned into 50-cent metaphors that fall flat. Reading Rant, we are meant to believe that the main character is something of a hillbilly deity. His handicapped paramour Echo Lawrence explains:

He’d come up on his elbows, smacking his lips, his chin dripping, and say, “You ate something with cinnamon for breakfast.” Most guys are keeping score with every lap of their tongue. Every time they come up for air, they’re clocking your pleasure. And, lick for lick, you know it had better balance out with the pleasure you give them back … That’s every guy — except Rant Casey. He’d stick his tongue into you and years could pass. Mountains erode.

Way to sell antihero, Palahniuk.

Don’t get me wrong, I’ve already admitted my love for serial killer lore, so I’m all right with (heck, even partial to) overly visceral descriptions. Gross can be good. However, the author’s balls-out attempt to craft a character whose transcendence is charted by superior oral sex skills and rabies immunity somehow escapes my interest. While blow job competency is a worthwhile skill, good — even psychic head — does not a time-traveling antihero make. I don’t care how many orgasms Marla Singer Echo had.

Rant’s story is told posthumously through the twanged-and-slanged voices of anyone who knew, heard of or slept with him. Much like his other protagonists, Palahniuk paints Tyler Durden Rant Casey as something special from day one. Young Buster Casey was christened “Rant” when he replaced harmless grape eyeballs and pasta guts with actual cow parts during a Halloween fright night. Costumed kids got covered in blood, rot and stench and in true Lardass Hogan form, the entire town lost its lunch. The word “rant” supposedly describes the sound of all that … wait for it … upchucking. We also learn that Buster Casey actively sought attacks from poisonous or rabies-carrying creatures. Apparently a rabies high gives you one hell of a boner … before the drooling and the dying, that is.

Palahniuk revels so much in anecdotal antipathy that the plot, which is really quite interesting, becomes a mere footnote to the blinking, neon shit. Seriously, Chuck’s writing style could be passed around freshman lit classes like a not-so-secret recipe: Add one charming sociopath, two cans of creamed societal strife, a heaping tablespoon of Wikipedia and a dollop of LSD. Place ingredients in blender. Hit puree. Drink. Regurgitate: Voila.

So, redneck Rant reckons that time is structured “like a chain link fence.” By literally crashing his car (sans flux capacitor) into humanity’s ticking clock paradigm, he maneuvers himself into a position in which the Grandfather Paradox and Yorick’s skull suddenly have a whole lot in common. And what does our psychopathic pal decide to do with this epic discovery, you ask? Well, Rant decides to go back in time to rape his adolescent grandmother and create a double-stuffed genetic version of his future self. He also hides money and jots down lottery numbers. But mostly he rapes his adolescent grandmother.

Since Rant is written as oral history we are obliged to read repetitive diatribes that can’t do much but awkwardly propel the plot or praise the protagonist. It’s not inappropriate of Palahniuk to do this; after all, the book is about Mr. Casey. Snippets of Rant’s parroted homespun wisdom include, “It’s always rush hour somewheres” and “every family is a regular little cult” or “the first rule of fight club is you…” I mean, “the future you have tomorrow won’t be the same future you have yesterday.” Deep, right? Who needs rabies when you got boner-inducing prose like that? (*violent sarcastic head shake*)

This book is less fictional biography and more masturbatory ode to Palahniuk’s own imagination. But that’s nothing new for him. If you’re already a fan, I’m sure the book will poke and prod all the right pressure points. And if you’re not a fan, those pressure points are probably somewhere near your gag reflex.

Constance Howes is a book critic for Pajiba and a graphic designer living in Philadelphia. Her hobbies include making out and messing shit up. In short, she’s a firecracker. She blogs over at I Love You in the Face.


La Vie en Rose | Jacob's Pajiba



Comments

I dunno, they sell fireworks at the shop 'n save now. I think they legalized them in PA. Unless you witnessed some nice giant ones.

Posted by: kate at July 12, 2007 2:00 PM

thank you SO much. I love all cp's other novels, but this one fell short.

Posted by: katelyn at July 12, 2007 2:01 PM

My heart is warmed by the Stand By Me references. Good stuff. The book sounds... interesting.

Posted by: Eileen at July 12, 2007 2:17 PM

Will I be reading this book?

"Rant decides to go back in time to rape his adolescent grandmother"

No.

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at July 12, 2007 2:19 PM

But thanks for the review, Constance!

Posted by: Bianca Reagan at July 12, 2007 2:22 PM

This sounds...umm...intersting. I'll be in the corner scrubbing that image out of my brain with hydrochloric acid, thanks.

Posted by: Manny at July 12, 2007 2:32 PM

i can never decide on Chuck Palahniuk. sometimes there's a certain original poeticism to his anti-societal tangents, sometimes you know he's just writing creepy stuff to gross you out. it seems like he thinks there's more to it than it is, like he should get some sort of props for being this really brave and original author pushing the limits..

Posted by: hk at July 12, 2007 2:35 PM

When I first started reading this I thought it was a review of a short story I've read called Rant by Nancy Collins. It's in a collection called Splatterpunks II that I have. The story is written in the first person by a completely deranged homicidal paranoid schizophrenic. I highly recommend it.

Posted by: wandereraz at July 12, 2007 2:36 PM

True story:

Chuck Palajfreowsijfs (whatever) gave the boyfriend a package of seeds when the bf went to get a copy of a book signed. The bf has not planted aforementioned seeds as he is nervous what will grow. It would probably be a plant that rapes you and beats the crap out of you in an effort to educate.

Posted by: David at July 12, 2007 2:48 PM

I've never worshiped Palahniuk as so many of my friends have. This sounds like one I'll skip as well.

Posted by: Kevin Longrie at July 12, 2007 3:03 PM

I actually didn't even register the graphic descriptions in this book because the format of it was too jarring. Each chapter is made up of snippets of interviews, which works great for explaining a man's life (I'll go to hell for this, but imagine the four gospels reedited so the authors talk about one topic at a time, instead of Jesus' whole life, 4 times) but when his friends try to explain the theory behind, and the process of time travel, it pretty much falls apart. It was an OK, interesting, read for 200 pages about how an oppressed class is created, and a bad mind fuck for 100 pages.


While I don't worship him, I've been a huge fan of Palahniuk's for years, and I appreciate the experiment in form, it just doesn't work that well.


And the grandma rape isn't gross, it's just out of nowhere and even though the reason is explained, it doesn't make sense.


Go read "Choke" (which is apparently about to be a movie starring Sam Rockwell) for great Palahniuk that also, kind of deals with time travel (sans grandma rape).

Posted by: zac at July 12, 2007 3:19 PM

I was going to skip this (already having a meaty reading list thanks to Pajiba), but the phrase "relatively charming rabies epidemic" has me intruiged. I must find ways to work this phrase into my cocktail party conversation whenever possible.

Posted by: PaddyDog at July 12, 2007 3:51 PM

While blow job competency is a worthwhile skill, good -- even psychic head -- does not a time-traveling antihero make.

HEE! Awesome. I am going to post that in my cubicle.

I loved Fight Club (the movie) but Palahniuk's books have never done it for me.

Posted by: alanna at July 12, 2007 4:09 PM

My friend gave me an advanced copy of this from the bookstore where she works and I read it pretty quickly. I like Chuck Palahniuk a lot but I feel like his books are starting to be a bit...lazy. This book and Haunted, while both decent, felt like they were a bit by the numbers as opposed to some of his older books which I love.

Posted by: chriso at July 12, 2007 4:10 PM

i'm reading "rant" right now, and just a small request - could you alert us to the spoilers in your review next time? the time travel is certainly evident early on, but i could have done without the "grandma rape" information. it's disappointing to see that in a pajiba review without adequate warning.

Posted by: kate at July 12, 2007 4:36 PM

Wait-what's the story with the rabies here? I don't plan to read the book, but I find anything about infectious diseases fascinating. Yeah, I know, it's weird.

Posted by: Jenna at July 12, 2007 5:07 PM

I've wondered for a while if Palahniuk pushes the envelope on gore further and further with each book as a kind of joke on the sort of fans he gained after Fight Club (the movie) came out. Haunted got me wondering, this kind only solidifies my suspicions. Pointing a finger back around and going "hey, if you're really getting off on this then you're the sick one". I'll have to read more of his earlier works to figure it out. I've read Diary and Haunted all the way through and part of Choke, and Choke was definitely bleak and disturbing in it's way but Diary and Haunted can make you loose your appetite in places.

He does follow a certain kind of literary tradition from Bukowski to Bret Easton Ellis to Palahniuk. I find it interesting to read the books, and my last boyfriend was a fan of all three authors (after I introduced him to Bukowski) but I find them all to have a pretty low estimation of humanity. Some days, like the day I read about Captivity, I agree with them. Most days I don't.

Posted by: Genny at July 12, 2007 5:14 PM

Tyler Durden slam? Haha ... I think you now own my heart.

Posted by: Karina at July 12, 2007 5:53 PM

As a young girl growing up catholic, I basically worshipped Palahniuk for the out it gave me and complete balls-out gruesome EVERYTHING he'd put into his books. It was love at first page.

It took me a few months to finish "Haunted" his collection of short stories. It was just so fucked up and... eugh. I dunno.

I think he's just riding high on what made him famous, and multiplying it by a gazillion, the "shocking gross-out factor."

Please, Chuck. Don't go down that road. ;(

Posted by: Alexa at July 12, 2007 5:54 PM

"If you're already a fan, I'm sure the book will poke and prod all the right pressure points. And if you're not a fan, those pressure points are probably somewhere near your gag reflex."

I think I disagree. I'm already a fan but this was too much for me. I love Palahniuk's earlier work. But I enjoyed it for its originality and despite its grossness. Lately it seems like he's just being gross because he's lost the originality -- this is a big problem for me. I tried reading Rant but honestly I couldn't make it through -- all that grossness just blends together into one big boring blob after awhile and I lost interest.

(And am I the only one who noticed that his more recent books all have deus ex machina endings? The early ones had explanations that were weird but totally plausible. The later ones (time travel, ghosts, weird voodoo cults, etc.) feel like a cop-out.)

Posted by: scullypdx at July 12, 2007 6:50 PM

i bought palanuik's 'haunted' to read on a flight from LA to NY to Zurich. the first chapter involved a very detailed description of various sadistic and disgusting ways a young boy can masturbate (carrots, candle wax...it's insanity) and ended with another detailed description of a boy getting his intestines sucked out by a pool drain (which, sadly enough, happened to a young girl a week ago). i put the book down and couldn't get my stomach to stop churning for the next hour. i haven't picked it back up. i see enough crazy shit on the news.

Posted by: vleigh928 at July 12, 2007 7:35 PM

No scullypdx, you're not the only one. He went more horror-esque after 2001 and the books have for the most part suffered.

And I couldn't get through "Haunted." Not because it was gross, it was just uninteresting.

Posted by: zac at July 12, 2007 7:35 PM

Funny you should say that Genny, because B.E.E. swears up and down that he doesn't think that way, and isn't a nihilist. I don't know... some of that stuff in RULES... is pretty out there. Same for LESS THAN ZERO, especially for a nineteen-year-old to have written.

I remember having to read COMPLICITY for a class, and getting very upset about that one. It's probably child's play to everyone else though, huh?

Posted by: M at July 12, 2007 8:21 PM

Alexa commented on Chuck's use of a "shocking gross-out factor." That thought certainly came to mind as I neared the end of Lullaby, where what was a decently compelling story, though jarred by my disgust at most of the characters, was completely derailed by an utterly unnecessary gross-out. I haven't read a Palahniuk book since, though one of my friends has been after me to read Choke.

Posted by: Just Joe at July 12, 2007 9:40 PM

(sigh, spoiler alert)


He didn't rape his grandmother, his dad raped his grandmother. Rant tried to go back in time to save her. He even said so in the first chapter.

Read, don't skim the damn book. Diary was the worst CP book. There will never be another Fight Club. Deal.

Posted by: Joe at July 12, 2007 10:01 PM

Thanks, you just saved me some time and effort. See, I checked this book out from the library about a week ago and it's been sitting on my nightstand ever since. I've tried and tried and tried and I CANNOT fucking get past page 12. It just doesn't hold me at all. And whoever said the format is jarring is right. It's not just jarring, it's, well, it makes my eyes glaze over.

Instead, I've been reading Christopher Moore's A Dirty Job and McCarthy's The Road.

So I think tomorrow I'll give it up and just drop this one back off at the library. Thanks again!

Posted by: Kathy at July 12, 2007 10:57 PM

i was thoroughly disappointed with rant, but not as much as haunted. it seems like palahniuk's last three books have just been gimmicks- a diary, short stories and poems, and now an oral biography...and he relies far too much on disgust, where he used to actually be clever. i want the old chuck back.

Posted by: jordan at July 13, 2007 12:22 AM

Chuck Palahniuk's books have always been a bit too fucked up for my tastes, but I happened to meet him last year and the funny thing is, he's one of the most genuinely nice guys I've ever met.
He said that no matter where he goes, people always come up to him and say, "I've never told anyone else about this..." So a lot of the really sick shit in his stories are based on true anecdotes.

Posted by: Chad at July 13, 2007 2:44 AM

i was a fan of 'fight club' and didn't really mind 'invisible monsters' or whatever it was called but after so much, you get tired of the repetition. 'haunted' was just like an attempt to gross you out as much as he could in the first story. this one just sounds stupid.

i can't tell if he's trying to just ride out his 'fight club' shit, become the new bret easton ellis (with time travel!), or just is a bad writer who doesn't evolve past his old gimmicks.

Posted by: j at July 13, 2007 4:45 AM

Sorry Alexa, Not only has CP "gone down that road," he has already circled the Beltway a couple of times. I think he has slumbered/stumbled into exposing himself as a bad AND lazy writer who cannot get past his gimmicks. **Nods to prior Pajiba commenters.**
And please, Pajibans, can we not use "loose" (the opposite of tight) when we mean "lose" (to fail to keep, sustain, or maintain)? Please, PLEASE. O.k., grammatical rant over, but that one really does cause me to lose it.

Posted by: rudy at July 13, 2007 7:09 AM

Sound like Chuckie P. has gone the way of Stephen King. Write one or two good books and then just change the names and re-write the same story for years to come.

Posted by: MadameUgly at July 13, 2007 9:21 AM

Is that a James Jean cover right there?

Posted by: Jaap at July 13, 2007 10:55 AM

Is that a James Jean cover?

Posted by: Jaap at July 13, 2007 10:56 AM

Is that a James Jean cover?

Posted by: Jaap at July 13, 2007 10:57 AM

I love Palahniuk, but Rant did nothing for me. I had a hard time with the dialogue and just wasn't interested in the story, it took me a really long time to get through it. Oh well, better luck next time Chuck!

Posted by: BethS at July 13, 2007 11:10 AM

Jaap: Actually, I think it's a Rodrigo Corral cover. I looked up James Jean though and wow...just, wow. Thanks for mentioning him.

Posted by: Constance at July 13, 2007 11:23 AM

Can't stand him. I like his style, but the climaxes have always, always disappointed me.

But, will I be reading this book?

"Rant decides to go back in time to rape his adolescent grandmother"

Yes.

Posted by: sia at July 13, 2007 4:14 PM

*spoiler*


As Joe pointed out, Rant doesn't rape his grandmother! Rant goes back in time to try to stop his mom from being raped. Yes, technically the man who rapes Irene is the same genetically as Rant, but he's treated as an entirely different character in the context of the book, so it's completely wrong to say it's Rant.


Did the reviewer even bother reading the book?!? "Rant" wasn't a great book, but it was better than this review would indicate. Maybe stick to movie reviews, Pajiba, if your book reviews are going to be as uninformed as this one.

Posted by: k at July 13, 2007 4:51 PM

Sounds like someone who had his review already written in his head before reading the book.

Posted by: bleh at July 14, 2007 4:00 AM

Actually [I]read[/I] the book next time, Constance, before writing the review.

Anyway, I was entertained while reading Rant, so I'm happy.

Posted by: AnonymousSkull at July 14, 2007 10:39 AM

I am a Palahniuk fan, but now only reluctantly. For some reason, I keep buying his books, even though I know they will be the same characters in different stomach-souring situations. The crossouts in the review were extremely clever - I've read all of Palahniuk's fiction, and the Tyler Durden type recurs in every single novel. And yet, I keep going back. At least he seems to have abandoned the "I am Jack's raging bile duct"-esque word gimmicks that began to show up in every book; but, still, his edgy social commentary has devolved into gross-out sci-fi shock-value-driven pulp. He should have stopped at Fight Club, and I hope to the god of filmmaking that studios have the sense to spare us visuals of a "sex tornado." But, I guess my loyalty to Fight Club has become part of the problem.

Posted by: KTuls1 at July 14, 2007 5:17 PM

I could do with out the "female" input on this site....they just don't have a grasp of good and bad.

Posted by: mothy at July 15, 2007 4:18 PM

I could do with out the "female" input on this site.

Perhaps if I were to "input" my "foot" up your "ass" it might help clear your head. Sweeping generalizations and poorly worded criticisms = bad. Giving a much deserved ass kicking to a smarmy misogynistic blowhard = good. See? We totally know the difference.

Posted by: litelysalted at July 16, 2007 1:25 PM

I love you, litelysalted.

Posted by: justanotheruselessfemale at July 17, 2007 8:59 PM

Misogyny loves company!

Posted by: New Millennium Craka at July 18, 2007 2:48 PM

Misogyny loves company!

Posted by: New Millennium Craka at July 18, 2007 2:49 PM

I'll skip this, didnt even know it was coming out.

I was a BIG fan up until I tried to read "Diary" 4 times and couldnt get through it because it bored me to tears. And then "Haunted"........

Posted by: Ebethneu at July 18, 2007 6:03 PM

There are few things that anger me more than a smug, ill-informed and entirely negative review such as this one. Ms Howes dismisses Rant as a "masturbatory ode to Palahniuk's own imagination." Uh, talk about the pot and the kettle. Why would someone read a book by an author they clearly dislike and then trash it in such elaborate detail? If you don't dig Palahniuk's "freshman lit" style or can't handle his particular brand of 'grossness', you should steer well clear, but those able to see beyond the former and control their gag reflex over the latter will find Rant to be hilarious, thought-provoking and actually quite insightful. As for the 'facts' about the effects of rabies... it's a work of fiction. Oh, and the misogynist label? Nice try; it's been done before and it ain't gonna stick.

Posted by: Matt Pucci at July 25, 2007 2:56 PM

Sorry Matt, I wasn't aware that only fans of Chuck Palahniuk are allowed to buy and read his books.

Posted by: Constance at July 27, 2007 11:12 AM

I don't believe I said Rant was only for fans, but - for better or worse - Chuck has long been known for his particular style of writing, the themes and subject matter he chooses to write about, and any reviewer worth their salt should be aware of the author's previous work and reputation. You clearly are (see: the references to Fight Club). I just can't understand why you would then go to the trouble of reading the entire goddamn book and writing such a lengthy diatribe - parts of which have been proved to be factually inaccurate - on how much you hate it. Chuck Palahniuk clearly LOVES being a writer, and Rant is simply another labour of love. Did you ask yourself, what is he ultimately trying to achieve here, with this book? Sure, a big part of his raison d'etre is to gross people out and get under their skin (in which case, mission accomplished) but there is something far more transcendent about his work than you give him credit for.

Posted by: Matt Pucci at July 28, 2007 9:33 AM

Well, because I had to read the whole thing to decide how I felt about it. I don't like Rant but I appreciate that you do. Thanks for commenting and setting your version of the record straight.

Posted by: Constance at July 30, 2007 11:44 AM

The review gives a great image of the book. I've read it twice now and it truly is a work of art.

Posted by: Zakk at August 17, 2007 4:50 PM

I love all of Chuck's Palahniuk's works, but I struggled with Rant. I loved it, nonetheless, but when coming to a close, I didn't understand the ending. Can someone help me out, please?

Posted by: Gutze at December 7, 2007 2:56 PM

I love all of Chuck's Palahniuk's works, but I struggled with Rant. I loved it, nonetheless, but when coming to a close, I didn't understand the ending. Can someone help me out, please?

Posted by: Gutze at December 7, 2007 2:56 PM

I love all of Chuck's Palahniuk's works, but I struggled with Rant. I loved it, nonetheless, but when coming to a close, I didn't understand the ending. Can someone help me out, please?

Posted by: Gutze at December 7, 2007 2:56 PM