Comments on: EW Slams Andrew Davidson and The Gargoyle

By: Hartlee

Hartlee — Sun, 30 May 2010 12:30:06 +0000

Novels like “The Gargoyle” are always going to be subjective to each reader. Clearly, the reviewer from EW didn’t seem to adjust to the tone or the narrative prose within the book. Now for me, I absolutely was drawn in because of the narrative prose.

This is one of the rare cases for me to be compelled by a story not only for its plot but the sheer tone of its primary character. There’s something abrasive, and harsh in the character’s recollection of his trauma that is akin to slowing down your car along the highway to observe a car wreak. Davidson’s voice for his character kind of ambushes you into the story and doesn’t hold back. This is, of course, a compliment to the author.

I will say that I really didn’t like how the EW review singles out a very “colorful” passage outside of its context.

My favorite passage is the very first line, “Accidents ambush the unsuspecting, often violently, just like love.”

All in all, “The Gargoyle” is the sort of novel readers will either love or hate because Davidson has done a great job of creating a very unique voice. It almost seems as if the EW Reviewer would have rather enjoyed something run of the mill or lacking in depth like “Twilight” – the magazine’s current obsession.

By: Laura O

Laura O — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:59:58 +0000

Funny, I’m not an avid reader. I rarely ever finish books when I read them. If they do not hold my interest, I stop. I went to the library the other day in search of my annual find. They didn’t have anything on the shelves I had any interest in reading, so I looked on. Over on the display there was The Gargoyle. I looked at it, thought a minute… picked it up and read the inside of the sleeve. I found the discription good enough to check the book out. I started reading right away, I was excited to about it. Now you see, I’m a busy wife and mother, plus I work full time. There is not a whole lot of time for me, so I usually nap, or find something to do on the computer when given the chance. The first few pages were the ones that got me. I had to stop briefly, as I had to put the kids to bed. When I picked it up again, I read for the next 6 hours! I had to work last night, and I was disappointed that I only had time to read 4 pages.

By: Linda

Linda — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:30:11 +0000

oh please, as fiction, this is one great book to loose yourself in over a winter snowstorm!
The rest of you who feel you must dissect every reference, etc, etc need to just breathe and enjoy
Thank you Andrew for a great story to get lost in!

Linda …mew years day 2009
Well said, Linda! Thank you.

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 20:50:23 +0000

This book was indeed poorly written and howlingly bad. The prose was hilarious, although that wasn’t Andreew Davidson’s intention. Anyone who liked this book should expose him or herself to some good, quality literature that is actually well written. (Might I suggest you start with Gabriel Garcia Marquez or Geraldine Brooks?)

Also, there were passages in this book that were completely blasphemous. I won’t repeat the filth here, but Andrew Davidson needs to seek God’s forgiveness for some of the things he wrote about Jesus Christ in this book. Anyone who is a Christian (or who merely has good morals) would be offended by this novel.

I’m sure most of you will disagree with me or label me as a religious fanatic, and that’s your right should you choose to do so. For those of you who do, I’ll pray for you.

By: Græme

Græme — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:54:56 +0000

well…I actually did cringe at those lines. And there were some other ones that were pretty terrible. But style aside, the story is great and I couldn’t put it down. I finished it in 3 days!

I did think it was overly-planned, though. I mean, 33 chapters like the 33 cantos in the Inferno. Sometimes it felt just a bit to forced.

But I would recommend it to anyone.

By: Tamara K

Tamara K — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:45:48 +0000

Wow…how about a big kick in the rear end to the EW reviewer. I’m only half-way through the book, but I can’t put it down…love it, and will be hard-pressed to find another book this year that will leave me this impressed!

By: linda

linda — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:41:26 +0000

I loved The Gargoyle. I am a simple, non snobbish every day reader of books. I do not belong to a book club. I read a few chapters, or more, before I turn out the lights at night. I plan to tell all my girlfriens about this book because I loved the message………..which perhaps was lost in how the prose were written and all you you snobs seemed to miss……..as usual.
This is what will make a very successful writer……….the selling of books.

By: Brian Huycke

Brian Huycke — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 18:52:31 +0000

When I sat down with Andrew Davidson yesterday to do yet another review for the Winnipeg Free Press I asked him about his critics. He cheerfully pointed out to me who they were so before I wrote the first sentence I read the reviews in Time and EW.
But here is the rub. I had the choice of doing an interview and review. I read The Gargoyle in two sittings in two days. It was very entertaining and enjoyable and I did not feel compelled to pick it apart any more than I would scratch at a painter’s canvas.
You can enjoy something or someone as a sum of the parts. Antrew did very well.
Brian Huycke
Pinawa MB. Canada

By: Eli Hessberg

Eli Hessberg — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:12:00 +0000

Reading over my post, I realize that it’s too pointed by half. So thank you for seeing the nascent argument that’s half-hidden by overreaction. The EW review was a capsule joke. It’s the kind of thing you’d hear coming out of Glenn Beck’s mouth. There’s really an opportunity here to produce a rigorous appraisal of Davidson’s work, but you can’t rely on a ‘paper or a magazine to get this one right. Reading the first hundred pages, I saw the influence of countless novels, sit-coms, movies, old radio shows, and famous stand-up routines. Someone could point out the difference between literature and fiction; someone could make the point that this is more of a novelization than a novel. I’d like to read an analysis of Davidson’s use of mysticism, and the possibility that this novel is such a commercial success because of its genre bending. Look at Stealing Dawn. I wouldn’t read that on a coconut husk raft in the middle of the South Pacific. But it sells more than Great Gatsby reprints. So go figure.

But, for some reason, the adulation just bothered me. And it still does. Davidson’s unwittingly done something kinda interesting: he’s written a commercial novel that combines easily digestible insights with a sci-fi love story. It’s like Tuesdays with Morrie and an Anne Rice novel all in one. A good way to make money, but a Marian Engel (CanLit reference; Engel was a mid-tier author of serious, and I mean serious, fiction. See The Glassy Sea, Bear, etc.) he’s not.

By: Literate Housewife

Literate Housewife — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:17:50 +0000

Sarah and Eli, I really appreciate what you have both said about this book. Eli, had you written the review for EW, I wouldn’t have been upset at all. You bring up valid points and are honest with your assessment. Now I wish that I have read Absalom, Absalom! I have read Light in August twice, but although I loved it, I haven’t read any other Faulkner. Thanks so much for your comments.