The Sword and Laser discussion

Hi guys,

I'm about one-third of the book (chapter 15), and I'm still struggling with the humor from David Wong. It seems to oscilate between the witty sarcasm of John Scalzi's Old Man's War and the outright bizarre seen in Douglas Adams The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and Terry Pratchett Wyrd Sisters .

Problem is, I seldom find it funny. Ok, I do giggle sometimes, but more often I feel like witnessing a friend trying to tell a bad joke in public -and failing.

I was wondering about your thoughts on the humor on FVAFS. Are you having fun? Or are you tired of the "don't forget to grab the smelly cat" style?

Several weeks ago, Stephen posted one line from this novel as an introduction: "This city is a butt that farts horror."

I keep thinking back to it, and I feel like how favourably you reacted to this line would determine your enjoyment of this book. Did you find it clever and weird, or was it cringey and sophomoric? For my part, I can't imagine Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett ever writing that line.

For my part, I can't imagine Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett ever writing that line. .."
I can easily imagine either of them approaching that general concept . . . but in much more sophisticated language!

Even on their worst days, Adams and Pratchett wrote funnier stuff than this that ended up in their rubbish bins ;-)

The humour (or lack thereof) was what I found most disappointing about this book. The humour just didn't work for me. I could see what Wong was going for, but it just fell flat.

I agree. I don't think I laughed at all while reading the book, though I did start to see what humor was intended. Not my style.

I wasn't really into all of the jokes of the book, things like a butt that facts fell really flat for me but it was the jokes like the hologram that screamed scrooge that kept me chuckling along. I think the overall tone of the book is quite fast paced and so when a joke fell flat for me it didn't matter too much because the book itself had already moved onto something else.

This was a silly book. There I said it!

I did wonder if the humour was particularly "American", and that as a Brit it didn't translate well for me...

I can see why Brian Brushwood would recommend it though. Definitely his kind of humour! :-D

This was a comedy??!! I enjoyed the strength of Zoey's character and some of the sarcastic wit, but it came across to me as clever, rather than funny. I certainly would not call this book a comedy!

Horses for courses I guess. I thought this was quite funny, whilst I think Pratchett is tedious in the extreme (I think him and his stream of single universe books the most overrated of modern times - thought I quite like his first book "The Carpet People" which he wrote when he was very very young - has anyone read it?).

Of course neither is patch on Adams.

Pfew! Thanks guys, I was starting to think I was in bad mood or something, not being able to see the fun in the puns. Seems several people are having the same feeling.

And of course, thanks fezfox for providing the opposite viewpoint. I was worrying that noone (other than Brian Brushwood) was laughing at the jokes. The book has received good reviews on Goodreads, so at least some people must have found it funny.

I'm not going to say I'm disliking the book as a whole, but the not-so-funny-jokes keep getting in the way, breaking the pace of the adventure part.

Alan wrote: "For my part, I can't imagine Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett ever writing that line. .."
I can easily imagine either of them approaching that general concept . . . but in much more sophisticated l..."

I was doing a Discworld runthrough ... I always thought Pratchett's suggestiveness was kind of fun, then I got to, I'm pretty sure it was Lords and Ladies where the dick jokes became less than suggestive. I ended up taking a break after one or two more books.

Now I'm not easily offended; the bit with the statues I thought was pretty fun. But, and I can't think of anything specific right this moment so maybe it was just the frequency, but I feel like the humor kept going to a place a little too juvenile for my tastes.

And I just realized that as I'm typing this, I'm listening to a Kevin Smith podcast which is far more the juvenile and explicit, and consistently so, than this book, so I must be holding my books to a different standard.

I really enjoyed the humor. Catered to my inner teenager I guess. Weird but fun and I wasn't sure what to expect even up to the ending. I enjoyed it enough to read Wong's other 2 books, John Dies at the End and its sequel This Book Is Full of Spiders: Seriously, Dude, Don't Touch It. I actually enjoyed them even more than FVAFS.

Yes it was farcical but I expected that going in. I think expectations make a huge difference to our reactions to the material.

I consider it somewhat in the vein of Redshirts, though maybe a tad more sophomoric? I dunno; I loved it.

Buzz wrote: "I really enjoyed the humor. Catered to my inner teenager I guess. Weird but fun and I wasn't sure what to expect even up to the ending..."

Could be so. Maybe my inner teenager never got interested in Zoey Ashe. But I think Tom might have hit the spot on the last podcast, when he mentioned that the story mixes some very cartoonish characters and over-the-top action with some really serious subjects, like the almost constant threat of sexual assault on Zoey. This resulted in an unbalance where there was a feeling that these subjects are depicted in a too serious manner, only to be joked about on the next page.

Anyways... Didn't work for me. Trying to finish it quickly to move to December's pick at this point.

Paulo wrote: " But I think Tom might have hit the spot on the last podcast, when he mentioned that the story mixes some very cartoonish characters and over-the-top action with some really serious subjects..."

Yeah, I agreed with Tom as well. Very cartoonish, but it worked for me.

I also thought Veronica nailed it when she mentioned that there was this constant threat of rape of Zoey throughout the book and that would rub some people the wrong way.