With at least four narrators, (Will Navidson, who shot and edited a documentary about a house where the interior dimensions appear larger than its exterior entitled The Navidson Record ; Zampano, the author of the original manuscript; Johnny Truant, young tattoo assistant and compiler of Zampano's notes; and of course the final editors), House of Leaves is, among other things, a study in narrative.
Zampano's manuscript boils down to a highly detailed and researched critical analysis of Navidson's documentary, complete with non-existent quotes, missing evidence, questionable footnotes, and secondary sources which, like the principle film, are predominately phantasmic. Sounds contradictory? It is, and that is where Mark Danielewski comes in to construct the narratives in such away as to make the impossible possible and the rational questionable - at least while one's nose dangles precariously between the gaping covers.
They say truth stands the test of time. I can think of no greater comfort than knowing this document failed such a test. -Zampano, January 5, 1997
The text itself slowly descends into a copy editor's nightmare: different fonts, strikethroughs, sideways, upside down- it's all there. Some will argue the textual twists are nothing more than carnival tricks. They very well may be, however there is a function to all of them and more importantly, the narratives easily stand on their own. These 'tricks' are comparable to the futile awareness of dreaming while sweating through a nightmare.
Sections of the book are admittedly mired in self-reference, footnotes and commentary in an almost Pale Fire kind of way, but there is something intangible that pulls you along. What is real? At what point does perception interfere with reality? The questions linger and the unknown, perhaps the essence of all horror, will be enough to keep most readers turning pages. It is the unknowing that will suck you in even while Danielewski repeatedly reminds you that it is only a book. Yes, House of Leaves is unquestionably a post-modern work, but we really shouldn't hold that against it.
Does it succeed as a horror story? Yes, it scared me. There, I've said it. Telling myself that I was being absurd offered little consolation. I tried to blame the nightmares on the stress of starting a new job, or my excessive drinking at the time. Neither of these excuses held up entirely. The ravenous blackness outside my window, shadows just beyond the edge of vision - and the sounds or voices, unintelligible, but certainly felt nonetheless. Resonating, pulsing, pushing the breath back down my throat like a winter wind. Myopically seeing DEATH spelled out on my digital clock. Yes, there are five letters there - don't you think I know that? Do you really think the knowledge of the extra character mattered in the middle of the night when my head lay stuck in the cement of my pillow, shrouded in the smell of recycled scotch?
Article comments
1 - Zaldor
Interesting fact: Mark Danielewski is the brother of singer Poe - and there is a version of her song, "Hey Pretty" in which Mark reads some of this book over her song. I haven't checked out the book yet, but I plan to!
2 - Brady
Although there are flaws in this book, I can't help but praise it almost roundly; It sucks you into its labyrinth and you go willingly. Here in this novel it is always night- even during the daytime: the nightime of our undiscovered primal souls. There is nothing more awesome and disturbing than the unknown within each one of us and insomuch as this recondite aggregate of all our fears takes completely subjective form these fears are ours alone - and that is scary as hell. Great read, deep and entertaining too. The only quibbles I have are with the Truant character (he is an awkward combination of street smart and literate which comes off a bit forced (especially in the former)) and the sometimes superfluous (and annoying) literary tangents which seem placed in the novel to prop up the narrative and give it more gravitas. The endless journalistic and periodical footnotes are fun but also begin to wear one down with their obvious self-aggrandizement. It begins to discredit the novel (especially the Navidson Record) insomuch as the detail afforded each moment and exchange between characters seems a bit too belaboured and overwrought (especially the copious psychological examinations - "who cares"? - I think reads one and the audience feels that way too. Perhaps Danielewski could have left even more up to the imagination regarding these analyses vis a vis the reader's interpretation? Anyway, notwithstanding this reader's critique, House of Leaves is an original and significant work which should be read by anyone into truly creative and poignant fiction i.e. anyone into Borges, Pynchon, Delillo, Kafka, Auster, Joyce et al..
3 - Justin
Pins you to the candel light your reading by.
noir to it's rubix cube core