Series
Collection
Publication
Penguin Books (1987), 208 pages
Description
"It was a wrong number that started it." When reclusive crime writer Daniel Quinn receives a mysterious phone call from a man seeking a private detective in the middle of the night, he quickly and unwittingly becomes the protagonist in a real-life thriller of his own. He falls under the spell of a strange and seductive woman, who engages him to protect her young husband from his sociopathic father. As the familiar territory of the noir detective genre gives way to something altogether more disturbing and unpredictable, Quinn becomesconsumed by his mission, and begins to lose his grip on reality. Will he be drawn deeper into the abyss, or could the quest provide the purpose and meaning he needs to rebuild his shattered life?
User reviews
LibraryThing member Meredy
Six-word review: Does anyone here tell the truth?
Extended review:
I really don't know how to rate this. I think it was probably good, but I didn't like it: not because it was weird but because the plot, if it was a plot, changed direction so many times, and in the end I was left only with
In general I try hard to rate on what I consider goodness (well-done-ness) and not personal preference (how much I liked it), but in this case I don't feel qualified to separate them. The best I can do in the direction of objectivity is to say that the writing is very able and that I believe the author is in control of his material; it came out the way he meant it to.
This means that the puzzlement I feel is due to the author's strengths and not his weaknesses. He chose to be mystifying, chose to play with perception and delusion, chose to leave the reader wondering. It's not from any flaw in construction or delivery. I just don't like being strung along like that, feeling as if I'd invested my attention and didn't get the payoff I was expecting. Clearly I was not the intended audience.
I think I'll leave it at that.
Extended review:
I really don't know how to rate this. I think it was probably good, but I didn't like it: not because it was weird but because the plot, if it was a plot, changed direction so many times, and in the end I was left only with
Show More
questions.In general I try hard to rate on what I consider goodness (well-done-ness) and not personal preference (how much I liked it), but in this case I don't feel qualified to separate them. The best I can do in the direction of objectivity is to say that the writing is very able and that I believe the author is in control of his material; it came out the way he meant it to.
This means that the puzzlement I feel is due to the author's strengths and not his weaknesses. He chose to be mystifying, chose to play with perception and delusion, chose to leave the reader wondering. It's not from any flaw in construction or delivery. I just don't like being strung along like that, feeling as if I'd invested my attention and didn't get the payoff I was expecting. Clearly I was not the intended audience.
I think I'll leave it at that.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ardvisoor
City of Glass as the name suggest is more about a city, characters are belonged to city, to its streets,layers of big city's spirits.Timing,pursuing and being alone.
Daniel Quinn is a mystery writer who lost his wife and son and now spends an almost meaningless and boring life. Everything changes
Maybe to run from his empty life Quinn pretend to be Paul Auster and starts to follow the man's father that he believe is going to kill him. The father had been once a Professor in university and Quinn starts to read his books of strong religious beliefs.
in the now madman book English immigrants to the us are described as humans following command of God to be "fertile and ... fill the earth" as is said in the book .
"What more western land in all Christendom,Dark asked, than America?"
So the US is become the salvation place of humanity but it's now in its down and the madman wants to create a Babel again, which words have true meaning and not only because they are only words.
Quinn in playing along with the madman loses himself more and more and sink in the streets of New York.
In this books words are important they do have meaning and at the same time they simply present something else as the characters. Quinn is him for a second then he is Paul Auster or even some fictional character in a book.
"Consider a word that refers to a thing - 'Umbrella' when I say it you see the object in your mind. You see a kind of stick,with collapsible metal spokes on top that form an armature for a waterproof material which,when opened , will protect you from rain...... what happens when a thing no longer performs its functions? is it still the thing or it become something else?When you rip the cloth off the umbrella, is the umbrella still an umbrella?...in General people do.At the very limit, they will say the umbrella is broken. to me this is a serious error, the source of our all troubles."
Daniel Quinn is a mystery writer who lost his wife and son and now spends an almost meaningless and boring life. Everything changes
Show More
when he get a call from a scared man asking for a private detective named Paul Auster.Maybe to run from his empty life Quinn pretend to be Paul Auster and starts to follow the man's father that he believe is going to kill him. The father had been once a Professor in university and Quinn starts to read his books of strong religious beliefs.
in the now madman book English immigrants to the us are described as humans following command of God to be "fertile and ... fill the earth" as is said in the book .
"What more western land in all Christendom,Dark asked, than America?"
So the US is become the salvation place of humanity but it's now in its down and the madman wants to create a Babel again, which words have true meaning and not only because they are only words.
Quinn in playing along with the madman loses himself more and more and sink in the streets of New York.
In this books words are important they do have meaning and at the same time they simply present something else as the characters. Quinn is him for a second then he is Paul Auster or even some fictional character in a book.
"Consider a word that refers to a thing - 'Umbrella' when I say it you see the object in your mind. You see a kind of stick,with collapsible metal spokes on top that form an armature for a waterproof material which,when opened , will protect you from rain...... what happens when a thing no longer performs its functions? is it still the thing or it become something else?When you rip the cloth off the umbrella, is the umbrella still an umbrella?...in General people do.At the very limit, they will say the umbrella is broken. to me this is a serious error, the source of our all troubles."
Show Less
LibraryThing member EikaiwaCafe
I have to admit, I find "City of Glass" to be a very difficult book to review. From the very beginning it deviates from the expectations of a detective novel by the fact that the protagonist, Daniel Quinn, is not an actual detective, but rather an author of pulp detective fiction... though even
If that seems complex, wait until you read the book. However, be warned, if you are expecting an actual detective story, as I was when I looked at the cover and picked it up, you should look elsewhere.
After claiming to be Detective Paul Auster and agreeing to help the troubled man on the phone, he heads to the man's apartment the following morning. There he meets Peter Stillman, a sort of a puppet of a man. You see, as a child, Peter Stillman had been imprisoned for 9 years in a dark room by his father (also named Peter Stillman), convinced that if raised in isolation the child would eventually begin speaking in God's language, the true language of creation, which was spoken througout the world before the fall of the Tower of Babel. Since being freed from that captivity Peter has managed, somewhat to function as an actual human. However, his father is to be released from the assylum the following day and he asks Auster (Quinn) to protect him. While the story begins in the guise of a standard detective story, after about the first hundred pages it veers off into existenialism as Quinn plummets into madness while following the case.
While I honestly was disappointed by the fact that I hadn't picked up an actual mystery and wasn't prepared for where the book took me, I have to say I was really fascinated by a number of the conversations that took place within the book. The conversations between Quinn and Peter Stillman (Jr. & Sr.) were truly amazing. The son talks as one who dances around words he is unable to find truth in. "I am Peter Stillman. That is not my real name. Thank you very much." The talks with his father delve into the power and indeterminate nature of language. Going back to "God's Language" from an earlier chapter, we learn that "Adam's one task in the Garden had been to invent language, to give each creature and thing its name. In that state of innocence, his tongue had gone straight to the quick of the world. His words had not been merely appended to things he saw, they had revealed their true essences, had literally brought them to life A thing and its name were interchangeable. After the fall this was no longer true." Later in the book, in one of his conversations with Quinn, he uses an umbrella to demonstrate this:
"When I say the world 'umbrella' you see the object in your mind. You see a kind of stick, with collapsible metal spokes on the top that form an armature for a waterproof material which, when opened will protect you from the rain. This last detail is important. Not only is an umbrella a thing, it is a thing that performs a function-in other words, expresses the will of man. When you stop to think of it, every object is similar the umbrella, in that it serves a function. A pencil is for writing, a shoe is for wearing, a car is for driving. Now, my question is this. What happens when a thing no longer performs its function? Is it still the thing, or has it become something else? When you rip the cloth off the umbrella, is the umbrella still an umbrella? You open the spokes, put them over your head, walk out into the rain, and get drenched. Is it possible to go on calling this object an umbrella? In general, people do. At the very limit, they say the umbrella is broken. To me this is a serious error, the source of all our troubles. Because it can no longer perform its function, the umbrella has ceased to be an umbrella."
This and other passages really engaged me as I was reading the story. At other points in the novel Quinn manages to track down the only Paul Auster in the city... and rather than being a detective, it turns out he is a writer. If that name hadn't caught your attention earlier, take a look at the author of "City of Glass". Hmm... it appears he inserted himself into the book and is now talking with his protagonist. At another point Quinn writes amazingly insightful observations on the ranks of homeless in the city... shortly before he becomes one of them himself. Elsewhere he ponders the true meaning behind the "It" in "It is raining" or "It is dark." What is this "It"?
These are the things that kept me reading the novel... I was personally disappointed in the actual story. That is partly because I was expecting a detective novel, but also because I'm also not a big fan of existentialist literature. I wanted however, to show that I did find a lot of stimulating material within the book... but I don't believe I will go on to read the other 2 books that make up "The New York Trilogy". Because of my false-expectation when I started reading the book, which lead to disappointment, I won't be giving a star rating.
Show More
that isn't cut and dry as he writes his detective novels under the pen name of William Wilson, an empty persona he created for himself after his original life as a serious writer came crashing down with the death of his wife and child (referenced, but never explained in the book). Quinn identifies more with the protagonist of the detective series, Max Work, than he does with William Wilson, so when he gets a series of phone calls, seemingly to a wrong number, for a Detective Paul Auster, he decides to create yet another persona, this time based on his fictional character Max Work, and take the case.If that seems complex, wait until you read the book. However, be warned, if you are expecting an actual detective story, as I was when I looked at the cover and picked it up, you should look elsewhere.
After claiming to be Detective Paul Auster and agreeing to help the troubled man on the phone, he heads to the man's apartment the following morning. There he meets Peter Stillman, a sort of a puppet of a man. You see, as a child, Peter Stillman had been imprisoned for 9 years in a dark room by his father (also named Peter Stillman), convinced that if raised in isolation the child would eventually begin speaking in God's language, the true language of creation, which was spoken througout the world before the fall of the Tower of Babel. Since being freed from that captivity Peter has managed, somewhat to function as an actual human. However, his father is to be released from the assylum the following day and he asks Auster (Quinn) to protect him. While the story begins in the guise of a standard detective story, after about the first hundred pages it veers off into existenialism as Quinn plummets into madness while following the case.
While I honestly was disappointed by the fact that I hadn't picked up an actual mystery and wasn't prepared for where the book took me, I have to say I was really fascinated by a number of the conversations that took place within the book. The conversations between Quinn and Peter Stillman (Jr. & Sr.) were truly amazing. The son talks as one who dances around words he is unable to find truth in. "I am Peter Stillman. That is not my real name. Thank you very much." The talks with his father delve into the power and indeterminate nature of language. Going back to "God's Language" from an earlier chapter, we learn that "Adam's one task in the Garden had been to invent language, to give each creature and thing its name. In that state of innocence, his tongue had gone straight to the quick of the world. His words had not been merely appended to things he saw, they had revealed their true essences, had literally brought them to life A thing and its name were interchangeable. After the fall this was no longer true." Later in the book, in one of his conversations with Quinn, he uses an umbrella to demonstrate this:
"When I say the world 'umbrella' you see the object in your mind. You see a kind of stick, with collapsible metal spokes on the top that form an armature for a waterproof material which, when opened will protect you from the rain. This last detail is important. Not only is an umbrella a thing, it is a thing that performs a function-in other words, expresses the will of man. When you stop to think of it, every object is similar the umbrella, in that it serves a function. A pencil is for writing, a shoe is for wearing, a car is for driving. Now, my question is this. What happens when a thing no longer performs its function? Is it still the thing, or has it become something else? When you rip the cloth off the umbrella, is the umbrella still an umbrella? You open the spokes, put them over your head, walk out into the rain, and get drenched. Is it possible to go on calling this object an umbrella? In general, people do. At the very limit, they say the umbrella is broken. To me this is a serious error, the source of all our troubles. Because it can no longer perform its function, the umbrella has ceased to be an umbrella."
This and other passages really engaged me as I was reading the story. At other points in the novel Quinn manages to track down the only Paul Auster in the city... and rather than being a detective, it turns out he is a writer. If that name hadn't caught your attention earlier, take a look at the author of "City of Glass". Hmm... it appears he inserted himself into the book and is now talking with his protagonist. At another point Quinn writes amazingly insightful observations on the ranks of homeless in the city... shortly before he becomes one of them himself. Elsewhere he ponders the true meaning behind the "It" in "It is raining" or "It is dark." What is this "It"?
These are the things that kept me reading the novel... I was personally disappointed in the actual story. That is partly because I was expecting a detective novel, but also because I'm also not a big fan of existentialist literature. I wanted however, to show that I did find a lot of stimulating material within the book... but I don't believe I will go on to read the other 2 books that make up "The New York Trilogy". Because of my false-expectation when I started reading the book, which lead to disappointment, I won't be giving a star rating.
Show Less
LibraryThing member phredfrancis
This is one of my favorite books of Auster's, and one of my favorites in general. Billed as an "anti-detective story," it uses many of the trappings of the classic detective formula, but rather than unraveling a whodunnit, it retains an aura of mystery throughout. Auster explores many of his
Show More
favorite topics in this short book: loss, the nature of language, identity, obsession with intellectual concepts. While these might seem like heady or perhaps tedious subjects to some, the form he uses keeps up a narrative pace that makes it all flow naturally. Show Less
LibraryThing member alycias
I have mostly read this on planes.
Perhaps it was the sleepiness, the waking and nodding off and reading interwoven, but I'm kind of scared of this book.
Perhaps it was the sleepiness, the waking and nodding off and reading interwoven, but I'm kind of scared of this book.
LibraryThing member the_terrible_trivium
Starts out good but drags before its short duration is up.
LibraryThing member Mary_Overton
Post-modern, metafictional identity crisis. Who is this protagonist? Is he Daniel Quinn (who shares initials with Don Quixote), bereaved father and widower, or is he William Wilson, and which Wilson - Mets ballplayer or mystery writer? Does he channel the fictional detective, Max Work, or the real
"In the good mystery there is nothing wasted, no sentence, no word that is not significant. And even if it is not significant, it has the potential to be so - which amounts to the same thing. The world of the book comes to life, seething with possibilities, with secrets and contradictions. Since everything seen or said, even the slightest, most trivial thing, can bear a connection to the outcome of the story, nothing must be overlooked. Everything becomes essence; the center of the book shifts with each event that propels it forward. The center, then, is everywhere, and no circumference can be drawn until the book has come to its end." (15)
"Quinn was deeply disillusioned. He had always imagined that the key to good detective work was a close observation of details. The more accurate the scrutiny, the more successful the results. The implication was that human behavior could be understood, that beneath the infinite facade of gestures, tics, and silences, there was finally a coherence, an order, a source of motivation. But after struggling to take in all these surface effects, Quinn felt no closer to Stillman than when he first started following him." (105)
Show More
author, Paul Auster, who is mistaken for a detective in his own book? And all those father-son duos with mix-and-match names - the two Peter Stillmans, Sr and Jr, Daniel and Peter Quinn, Paul and Daniel Auster. Don't forget the 17th century pamphlet writer, Henry Dark (who shares initials with Humpty Dumpty.) "In the good mystery there is nothing wasted, no sentence, no word that is not significant. And even if it is not significant, it has the potential to be so - which amounts to the same thing. The world of the book comes to life, seething with possibilities, with secrets and contradictions. Since everything seen or said, even the slightest, most trivial thing, can bear a connection to the outcome of the story, nothing must be overlooked. Everything becomes essence; the center of the book shifts with each event that propels it forward. The center, then, is everywhere, and no circumference can be drawn until the book has come to its end." (15)
"Quinn was deeply disillusioned. He had always imagined that the key to good detective work was a close observation of details. The more accurate the scrutiny, the more successful the results. The implication was that human behavior could be understood, that beneath the infinite facade of gestures, tics, and silences, there was finally a coherence, an order, a source of motivation. But after struggling to take in all these surface effects, Quinn felt no closer to Stillman than when he first started following him." (105)
Show Less
LibraryThing member sfhaa
A fascinating, modern story about the nature of authors and how a story can seemingly be autobiographical whilst meddling with the realities of being the writer in the book AND the character in a fictional story at the same time. A modern Jorge Louis Borges. Looking forward to reading the next two
Show More
books in the series. Show Less
LibraryThing member amydross
What a strange and fascinating book. A near perfect example of how fiction can say things about language and identity that theory fumbles at... I'll be thinking about this one for a long time.
LibraryThing member BooksForDinner
Q: How many Paul Austers can there be in one novel?A: Lots
LibraryThing member BraulioTavares
An oddball mystery. It begins like a conventional P.I. investigation but then veers toward the Kafkaesque and the absurd. The second half reminded me of Hawthorne's "Wakefield" short story. There is to the whole thing a sort of phantom quality which also reminded me (I'm not so sure why) of Jim
Show More
Jarmusch's movie "Dead Man". Chapter 8 has a stunning explanation for the seemingly random walkabouts of a character. Show Less
LibraryThing member jburlinson
I place this item on a none-too-tiny list of literary Rorschach tests. Unconvinced? Please sample any ten of my fellow reviewer's estimates of the "meaning" of this book.
The best parts of this book are the hero's various meetings with the two Peter Stillmans, father & son. The dialogs between Quinn
The best parts of this book are the hero's various meetings with the two Peter Stillmans, father & son. The dialogs between Quinn
Show More
and these two grotesques are very amusing. Interesting use of the author as character in his own fiction -- though not as entertaining as other masters of this specialty: Roth (P.), Vidal, Mailer. Show Less
LibraryThing member Floratina
READ IN ENGLISH
I don't know what to say about this story. I liked the beginning and was intrigued by the story, but at times and especially near the end more often than not I was thinking, stop this post-modernistic nonsense and try and complete the story.
I felt I was left with more questions than
I don't know what to say about this story. I liked the beginning and was intrigued by the story, but at times and especially near the end more often than not I was thinking, stop this post-modernistic nonsense and try and complete the story.
I felt I was left with more questions than
Show More
usual... Show Less
LibraryThing member lucybrown
Wow. More later.
LibraryThing member lucybrown
Wow. More later.
LibraryThing member lucybrown
Wow. More later.
LibraryThing member skavlanj
A Trilogy
Because City of Glass is the first book in a trilogy, I'm going to write my review in sections, each an impression after completing one book of the three. I'm also going to delay rating the book, since the conclusion of each book is (hopefully) clarified by the contents of the successive
Part I
City of Glass is an odd book. A quirky book. If you like Stranger Than Fiction and/or The Eyre Affair, you should enjoy this book.
There is one main character in the book, Daniel Quinn. Or are there four? Quinn, the protagonist, is an author using the nom de plume William Wilson to write detective fiction about his private eye Max Work. Quinn receives several late night phone calls for Paul Auster (in true Shoeless Joe and The Razor's Edge fashion, the true author interjects himself into the story), who is some sort of detective. Quinn decides to masquerade as Auster and tail Peter Stillman père to prevent him from killing Peter Stillman fils.
Peter Stillman père is a lunatic. So is fils, although as a result of père's religiously-influenced actions rather than a defect of his own biology. Fils' wife, Virginia, is a lunatic. Quinn becomes a lunatic. In fact, you will probably feel like a lunatic at the conclusion of the novel, after you have successfully weaved your way through multiple intellectually interesting discussions of religion and literature you have to sift carefully to separate fact from fiction and a plethora of characters who share names and/or initials.
You are not prepared for City of Glass to end, except through your tactile awareness as you read that you are physically nearing the last page, and through the clever usage of Quinn's red notebook in the storyline. When you finish reading, you want to immediately begin Ghosts, because you are simply left hanging as far as what happened to Quinn, and to Peter Stillman and his wife, and find yourself suddenly wondering who the hell told this story because after 128 pages of third-person narrative we have an "I" explaining the events. Actually, "I" doesn't explain. He doesn't know, and imparts his lack of knowledge to us in an intriguing, enticing way.
Part II
What. The. Hell. Studs Lonigan managed to show up in all three books of his trilogy. Granted, he is the namesake of the series, so we should expect him. Why, then, is Dunstan Ramsay present in all three books of the Deptford Trilogy? With the namesake being a town which, if memory serves, it seems incongruous that Deptford fails to play a central part after the first book. Along the same line, why would Nick Jenkins et al be present for all TWEVLE books in A Dance to the Music of Time?
Disconcertingly, only New York makes a repeat appearance in this trilogy. Neither Quinn nor Wilson nor Work - not even Auster - have a cameo in Ghosts, the second of the three books. So this review will be short, and I fear that my uneasiness with the ending of City of Glass will only increase, that the mystery of what happened to Quinn & Co. and the Stillmans will not be answered. And I will have to downgrade the novel as unsatisfying, failing to conclude as it does.
Part III
Because City of Glass is the first book in a trilogy, I'm going to write my review in sections, each an impression after completing one book of the three. I'm also going to delay rating the book, since the conclusion of each book is (hopefully) clarified by the contents of the successive
Show More
books.Part I
City of Glass is an odd book. A quirky book. If you like Stranger Than Fiction and/or The Eyre Affair, you should enjoy this book.
There is one main character in the book, Daniel Quinn. Or are there four? Quinn, the protagonist, is an author using the nom de plume William Wilson to write detective fiction about his private eye Max Work. Quinn receives several late night phone calls for Paul Auster (in true Shoeless Joe and The Razor's Edge fashion, the true author interjects himself into the story), who is some sort of detective. Quinn decides to masquerade as Auster and tail Peter Stillman père to prevent him from killing Peter Stillman fils.
Peter Stillman père is a lunatic. So is fils, although as a result of père's religiously-influenced actions rather than a defect of his own biology. Fils' wife, Virginia, is a lunatic. Quinn becomes a lunatic. In fact, you will probably feel like a lunatic at the conclusion of the novel, after you have successfully weaved your way through multiple intellectually interesting discussions of religion and literature you have to sift carefully to separate fact from fiction and a plethora of characters who share names and/or initials.
You are not prepared for City of Glass to end, except through your tactile awareness as you read that you are physically nearing the last page, and through the clever usage of Quinn's red notebook in the storyline. When you finish reading, you want to immediately begin Ghosts, because you are simply left hanging as far as what happened to Quinn, and to Peter Stillman and his wife, and find yourself suddenly wondering who the hell told this story because after 128 pages of third-person narrative we have an "I" explaining the events. Actually, "I" doesn't explain. He doesn't know, and imparts his lack of knowledge to us in an intriguing, enticing way.
Part II
What. The. Hell. Studs Lonigan managed to show up in all three books of his trilogy. Granted, he is the namesake of the series, so we should expect him. Why, then, is Dunstan Ramsay present in all three books of the Deptford Trilogy? With the namesake being a town which, if memory serves, it seems incongruous that Deptford fails to play a central part after the first book. Along the same line, why would Nick Jenkins et al be present for all TWEVLE books in A Dance to the Music of Time?
Disconcertingly, only New York makes a repeat appearance in this trilogy. Neither Quinn nor Wilson nor Work - not even Auster - have a cameo in Ghosts, the second of the three books. So this review will be short, and I fear that my uneasiness with the ending of City of Glass will only increase, that the mystery of what happened to Quinn & Co. and the Stillmans will not be answered. And I will have to downgrade the novel as unsatisfying, failing to conclude as it does.
Part III
Show Less
LibraryThing member adastra
A mind-boggling metanovel which reminded me of Bored to Death sometimes, but which is WAY weirder.
ISBN
0140097317 / 9780140097313