Status
Call number
Genres
Publication
Description
Fiction. Literature. Humor (Fiction.) HTML: An "outrageously hilarious" novel about a young man who has trouble with the truth (The Boston Globe). Adrian Healey loves to lie. He does it all the time. Every minute, every moment. And worse, he does it wonderfully, imaginatively, brilliantly. He lies to buck the system, to express his contempt for convention, but mostly because he just plain likes to. It's fun. He invents a lost pornographic novel by Charles Dickens, and, for himself, a career as a Piccadilly rent boy, hireable by the hour. But Adrian's lies eventually bring true danger, as he finds himself caught up in the machinations of a shadowy network that puts his own life at risk, in this "clever and entertaining novel that will appeal to Anglophiles with a twisted sense of humor" (Library Journal)..… (more)
User reviews
We can clearly hear Wilde's language and ideas combined with the events Evelyn Waugh might have conjured. At the same time Stephen Fry takes the piss out of the entire genre as well. He clearly shows the self absorbed narrow world of English private academia. However, this isn't just a pastiche novel, it isn't a copy or weak derivative. Through the familiar Victorian and Edwardian language we can clearly here Fry's own voice and one as clever as you might expect. In some parts and phrases we can even hear Chuck Palahniuk's voice.
It is rather strange however to see the means by which Fry evangelizes the gay persuasion. I don't mean that he tries to persuade anyone in converting but there is a definite sense of trying to normalize queerness (his word not mine). The way in which this is done in my view anyway is rather counterproductive. Instead of showing the elegance, the refined nature of most gay men, Fry shows and describes all those things we think they're up to in great detail. After having read Portnoy's Complaint it did not bother me too much but then again I can see how the novel can turn people away.
There is another interesting link to Portnoy's Complaint. Philip Roth who wrote Portnoy has always denied his book was autobiographical. Unlike Fry who I believe clearly admitted in various interviews that the materials for The Liar were snatched from his own experiences in the English public school system and other parts of his early life. Comparing Portnoy to the Liar becomes even more interesting when we look at how the protagonists in either novel address us, the reader. Whereas in Portnoy the author essentially screams at the reader about his problems, Fry hides behind his protagonist. A protagonist who we are told from the very first sentence will lie to us. The protagonist is arrested for possession of cocaine, but as we find out later that was all a lie. In reality Fry was arrested for possession of cocaine and sent to prison. Bits of knowledge like these add a completely new layer to the novel and a rather interesting one because we now have a novel in which we can ask: what exactly is an unreliable narrator when the narrator speaks of both the protagonist and the author?
Traces the life of a compulsive liar through public school to Cambridge University, where he finally meets his match.
enjoyment i felt upon completing "The Stars Tennis Balls" is mirrored only in the colossal dissapointment i felt in this work.
The story jumped about, was confusing, appeared to make no logical
Although a huge fan of the man himself, i would reccomend his other books over this one.
I feel pretty mixed about this book, then. It was well written stylistically, certainly. The book flowed nicely, there were some very good scenes, and the references were quite nice, as well. Still, the plot overall was forced in places, hard to follow, and didn't gel well, and the characterization beyond the main character wasn't great. It made me laugh a couple of times, which is actually not that bad, but the rest of it wasn't great.
I can't say that I really recommend this, but if you're inclined to comedies, you could certainly do worse. I'll probably not be leaping on to reading the rest of his books, though.
I gave it 3 then switched it 2 because
1. Fry is showing off too much - the multiple languages, the obscure academic references, and so on were more than a bit too much. I mean this is QI on steroids
2. If you
3. The unbelievable personal life story is more believable than the spy bits - only because I read Fry's autobiography first. But even so, it's like he took his own life story and jacked it up to 11 on the scale of 10.
3a. The spy bits were just hilariously awful
4. None of the characters are all that interesting
5. No real emotion or insight
When it comes down to it, of all his many talents, writing is not Fry's best. His autobiographies suffer some of the same failings as this novel. Still love him though.