Here's a writer who seems to elicit either fulsome praise or wholehearted denigration. For my part, I thought and still do that American Psycho was one of the best things I have ever read, maybe because it chimed so well with the themes I like to explore. I found Glamorama and The Rules of Attraction less compelling, but enjoyed Lunar Park, even though he seemed to be trying to cram too much into a single story.

I've ordered Less Than Zero through Amazon, as it's the only one I haven't yet read.

To those who don't get on with him, I'd be interested in hearing your criticisms.

Guy

Well, I thought Less Than Zero was ok, and Rules of Attraction was all right, if not a bit boring. I couldn't get into American Psycho at all, though I enjoyed the film.

My view is that Ellis is one of these writers that is supposedly 'hip' and therefore brilliant by default. I found that >ahem< less than true.

JB

He has certainly been lionised, especially in the States. I've learnt the hard way not to set too much store in a writers reputation. If I'd learnt that lesson sooner, I could have saved myself the effort of bludgeoning my way through Ulysses.

I found the style of American Psycho very effective. Very matter of fact and clinical. The endless lists of clothes, grooming products, musical preferences brought the character of Patrick Bateman alive for me, although I realise these are the very same things that turned a lot of people off. I guess I'm just attracted to deviant characters in novels and felt this guy had been particularly well drawn by Ellis.

To be fair, I didn't give it much of a chance, as I was distracted by something else I was reading. I read Less Than Zero and Rules of Attraction in college, and remember finding them exciting at the time - just not by my standards now.

JB

and remember finding them exciting at the time - just not by my standards now.

I got this feeling when I tried to re-read The Wasp Factory by Iain Banks. First time round, superb. Second time, tedious and annoying. Maybe it's because I could see where it was leading.

I confess I got The Wasp Factory out of the library at a point when I wasn't really concentrating on reading much, read a few pages and just gave it up. It just seemed turgid - now I've got more time, maybe I should give it another bash.

I've just read my first BEE, actually: Lunar Park. I was completely gripped by it, even though it did frighten the bejaysus out of me at times. (It's very scary if you are a wimp about horror, like me).
I know what JB means about the hipness hype, because it kind of put me off all his others. I always preferred Jay McInerney, who he is often compared to.
This one really intrigued me though, after I heard him being interviewed about it. For anyone who doesn't know: it's a novel about a writer called Bret Easton Ellis, who is haunted by his own creations (mainly Patrick Bateman from American Psycho). The back of the book says something like: 'Everything in this book is true, however awful it seems.' The whole thing is quite a quirky risk but for me, it really worked. Guy, which one do you think might be good to read next?

To my mind, and this seems to be echoed by most people, American Psycho is his best novel. I haven't yet read Less Than Zero, which is his first and the one which catapulted him to fame, but I hear tell that it's pretty good as well. It should be coming in the post soon.

I should warn you that you'll probably find it quite different to Lunar Park.

I remember reading American Psycho at school - it was the book we all felt naughty reading. I also remember not being able to read it all - even though I'd reared myself on a diet of fairly gross horror (as most teenage boys do). I began Lunar Park in a bookshop, and was intrigued by how much was true, and how much fiction. In this respect it reminded me a bit of Philip Roth's The Plot Against America - having the writer as the main character, but much of what happens as fiction. All rather postmodern, if that term is still in existence.