The New Canon is a regular feature, contributed by Ted Gioia, focusing on great works of fiction published since 1985. These books represent the finest literature of the current era, and are gaining recognition as the new classics of our time. In this installment of The New Canon, Gioia looks at House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski.
Some novels experiment with language or plot or chronology. But how about a work of fiction that takes typography to the next level?
I can tell that you’re hesitant. Okay, could I interest you in an exciting novel featuring heroes who combat the ultimate evil... a house with lots of extra space? And I mean lots of space.
Hmmm, still not taking the bait. But wait, there’s more (as the infomercial announcer says). This book also features a hidden code in the footnotes, and it spells out secret messages for those who figure out the rules. It includes a pioneering index -- yes, full of mistakes; I’ll admit the page numbers were hastily compiled — but which lavishes readers with entries for and, in, so, dark and all, among others. Starting on page 64, the author provides the longest list of photographers outside of the master files at Getty Images. The inside covers can double as a random number generator. Hell, this book even has words in different colors. And I save the best for last: there are several pages that you can’t read without a mirror.
Wait! Don’t run away!
Okay, I’ll admit it. It’s not easy to pitch House of Leaves, Mark Z. Danielewski’s strange magnum opus, to the skeptical. And this book can be so frustrating, that there were times I wanted to toss it out the window, and let the gardener rake it up. House of Leaves, please meet pile of leaves.
Any yet...And yet... this is also a feverishly creative book unlike any other you have encountered. If I hadn’t persevered with this volume from beginning to end, I would never have believed that a novel in the new millennium could hold so many surprises. Don’t let the gimmicks — and, yes, there are lots of gimmicks here — fool you: House of Leaves is an exhilarating, spooky, mind-bending experience.
But this book is not for the faint of heart. I’m not just talking about the macabre Stephen King-ish atmosphere in this iconoclastic novel — which is downright creepy at times. Even more striking is the way this book forces readers out of their comfort zone. Danielewski gives you no quarter, no place to hide. There are a handful of books I have encountered over the years — such as Heidegger’s Being and Time or Joyce’s Ulysses or Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow — that possess a “will to power,” an ambition to dominate the reader. You must address books of this sort on their own terms, or not at all. House of Leaves is one of those works. It sets its own rules, and you can play or walk away, but not much in-between.
Article comments
1 - Kennardism
I bought this book several years ago and its pretty interesting. I think you'll be seeing more non traditional fiction coming from the next generation of writers. I would welcome a change like that from these same ol same ol types of books.
2 - Friend Mouse
Well, now I'm intrigued. Thanks for the review.
3 - James A. Gardner
I read House of Leaves when it first came out, with no foreknowledge other than its boat-anchor substance. And despite the daunting length and the sometimes off-putting typographical gimmicks, I found it genuinely creepy and enjoyable. It's been a major frustration to me that I haven't been able to convince many of my friends to read and discuss it with me.
It's one the best "unreliable narrator" works I've read; it's masterfully atmospheric; and its layers of narrative and innovative narrative approach remind me of Italo Calvino's If on a winter's night a traveler...
All the meta-textual aspects of House of Leaves are probably enough to give it stature as an important postmodernist work, but I think its greatest achievement is in conveying the questionable sanity of the principal narrator effectively and chillingly. It's an accomplished psychological horror story.
I'm glad to see you writing about it here. It will be interesting to see how canonical the book becomes in years to come.