Customer Reviews
Dressed Up Postmodern Metafiction - By: A. Ross, 12 Dec 2005 
The first book of Auster's New York trilogy was originally publishedin 1985, &in 1994 was adapted into this graphic novel. I've never read the original (or any of the other parts of the trilogy), so I can't comment on Karasik & Mazzicchelli's adaptation. However, I can say that since I'm not particularly fond of existentialist or postmodernist literature (those two terms being the most common critical shorthand for Auster's story), this really didn't do anything for me at all. The story is basically an exercisein metafiction, & if you like that stuff, great -- I do not. It is dressed up (at least initially)in the mystery genre, but that's just window dressing. (There's a long legacy, especiallyin France, of cloaking novels & films of ideasin genre trappings (for example Alain Robbe-Grillet's two books The Erasers & The Voyeur, or the films of Jean-Pierre Melville.)
The story begins fairly straightforwardly: a reclusive writer of potboiler mysteries named Daniel Quinn livesin New York on his own since the death of his wife & son. A complete stranger calls him & thinks Quinn is a private detective named Paul Auster & begs him to to take his case. (The writer Paul Auster, & his family, shows up for one scene -- it's that kind of book.) Quinn meets with the strange man, who was raisedin rather harrowing circumstances by his professor father, who was seeking to discover the true language of God. The father has been released from jail & Quinn is supposed to keep an eye on him & report. Everything starts to derail when he loses track of both the old man he's been following, & his clients. He spends several months watching the building & going crazy. Once he realizes they've disappeared, he finds his own life has disappeared as well. Obviously this is all somewhat about identity, but it's more about fun stuff like language, representation, & other tiresome postmodern subjects (as are the other two parts of the trilogy, which involve a man spying on someone, & yet another disappearance).
It has to be said that the artwork does an admirable job of treating the bizarro world Auster has thrust his characters into. The simple, heavy black & white inking is a perfect match to the material, especially when the representations become less literal & more symbolic. However, if your taste runs more toward things like plots & characters, this is probably not for you. Fans of Auster may enjoy this, but fans of the graphic novel form are probably going to be much less keen.
Fantastic! - By: , 01 Feb 2005 
This is a brilliant adaption of the original book. A really pleasant surprise as often adaptians can kill the original article, but notin this case. Strongly recommend that you have a look at this book.
Auster is Magic - By: , 01 Jul 1999 City of Glass is an incredible novel. Auster's prose is graceful, & elastic enough to express virtually any idea. It will carry you through the story even if you would rather not go. Auster employs as much subtltety as anyone could stand to impart the profound (and confusing) message of this novel. By the last page, I felt invigorated, perplexed, & grateful. Don't be put off by the ending, the message will be there if you only look for it. City of Glass is a rare book , worth absorbing, & one that will certainly be read & appreciated for many years to come.
A tale of Two Stories - By: , 01 Jun 1999 
I am by far what you would call an acomplished reader. A good book to me is one I can finish, but I am taking a Contemporary Literature class over the summer & was forced to read "City of Glass" by Paul Auster. I must say, Auster has a unique way of not letting the reader understand what the heck is going on. For the first half of the book, I was under the assumption that this was a mystery/detective novel. By the 203 page, it had turned into a book of morals. Auster was addressing how screwed up the world is & how we all play a partin it. It turned into a book about a man that was so out of the norm, the character should not even be allowed to comment on what he thinks is right or wrong. The Daniel Quinn from the beginning of the book is a different person by the end, which can only make the reader wonder, what was Auster trying to convey to the reader? Or was this just something I, as a young student of literature, have missed...
Three Stars BUT What a UNIQUE read - By: , 30 May 1999 Before you get too excited from reading the other reviews, I will offer some words of caution.
The ending is weak. It is that simple. (Ending defined as the last chapter or two.)
Auster offers beautiful prose & the book reads quickly. It is intriguing, but when I finished it was as though Auster had written himself into a corner. All his brilliant questions could not be solved.
A novel does not need to answer everything. Leaving the reader to think is good, but Auster at second glance seems to lead the reader on knowing he cannot fulfil the experience with a proper ending. Yet,in some ways that is his point.
The book is worth reading if you have never encountered Auster before or read any existentialistic novels because then the book will be unique. Yes, unlike anything you have ever read before.
I have read of all of Auster's novels - except Timuktu which is just out - & they all seem to have this problem except for Mr. Vertigo.
Go to Auster for fancy prose. He is great at it, but do not expect a fulfilling ending.
