An Arsonist's Guide to Writers' Homes in New England

Rating: 5/5 stars

Brock Clarke's "An Arsonist's Guide to Writers' Homes in New England" is a masterfully crafted novel that seamlessly blends humor and tragedy. The story follows Sam Pulsifer, a complex and endearing protagonist, as he navigates a life forever changed by a fateful and devastating event.

*A Unique and Engaging Plot*

The novel's premise is both intriguing and unsettling. Sam, the protagonist, accidentally burns down Emily Dickinson's house, killing two people in the process. As he rebuilds his life after serving a ten-year prison sentence, a mysterious arsonist begins targeting the homes of famous New England writers. Sam's quest to uncover the truth behind these crimes leads him down a dangerous and unexpected path.

*Well-Developed Characters*

Sam's character is expertly crafted, eliciting both sympathy and frustration. His struggles to redeem himself and find a sense of purpose are deeply relatable. The supporting cast is equally well-written, adding depth and nuance to the narrative.

*Humor and Heartbreak*

Clarke's writing is both humorous and poignant, often simultaneously. The novel tackles themes of guilt, redemption, and the power of literature, all while maintaining a witty and engaging tone.

*A Must-Read*

"An Arsonist's Guide to Writers' Homes in New England" is a standout novel that will appeal to fans of literary fiction, mystery, and humor. Clarke's unique voice and style make this book a true gem. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a compelling and unforgettable read.

*Recommendation*

If you enjoy books with complex characters, intriguing plots, and a dash of humor, then "An Arsonist's Guide to Writers' Homes in New England" is a must-read. Fans of authors like John Irving and Michael Chabon will appreciate Clarke's writing style and the novel's blend of literary fiction and mystery. ( )

Fabulous title and an interesting premise, writing is easy to read and follow, but ultimately unsatisfying. Sam Pulsifer (nice name choice, btw) is the unfortunate narrator, with an even more unfortunate history of killing two people accidentally in a house fire.

Thie is supposed to be funny in the way that "all of life is trying to kill me" sort of way, but I got only a few smirks out of this book, and no belly laughs. The guy is too pathetic. Laughing at him is, for me, like crushing a slug.

For those who like a pathetic anti-hero who has life continue to fall on him, this would be a fun read. It is well-written and makes internal sense. It simply isn't to my taste.

I did enjoy the series of people who really wanted to line up to burn down writer's homes. I would have liked more on why they felt so strongly about their destruction. Lots of funny stories in there.... ( )

Well, I completely agree with everyone who was annoyed by this novel, BUT I also completely agree with those who liked it. It was not a bad book by any means, though the plot seemed overly contrived and there are plenty, plenty of moments where you think, "Why doesn't he just tell the truth?" "Why didn't he just DO that?" and other moments that are similar to those in movie theaters showing horror movies. You want to yell (well, maybe I wasn't so passionate about the book to yell) at the screen and tell them what to do. Ugh. But! I thought the book held some great stuff, and, had the writing not been so ... heavy-handed, so treated-me-like-I'm-not-smart-enough-to-catch-on-without-having-things-over-explained-to-me-esque, perhaps I really would've felt strong emotions toward the especially beautiful writing in the last couple of pages.

However, I was affected by this book. In a good way. I DID enjoy it. Clarke has some good insights, there are some quotable lines, there is a lovable character or two in there (Sam's mother, for example), but I wish I could've gotten to know Sam better. I wish the MAIN character could've been more personalized, more attractive as a human being, more sympathetic. Regardless of all the negative criticism, though, I am glad I read this book. I was engaged in it (some times more than others ... another point I won't delve into is the consistency of the book on a few different levels), it really had some good stuff in it, and Clarke clearly is a talented writer.

Lastly, I'll say this: I think Clarke hits the reader over the head with/re-re-re-states things that are, to most, abundantly clear and obvious parts of the plot, but remains vague and slightly ambiguous on the emotional specificity and background of his main characters and their motives. And I always prefer character-richness to plot-richness (especially in cases such as these, where the plot is so ... plotty).

So, that's my mixed and all-over-the-place review of a novel that was, well, likewise, much the same. ( )

Overwritten for my taste--too purposefully eccentric, too self-conscious, too full of quirky 'wisdom'. ( )

Plus the every illusive half star. I got the humor; I just got bored. ( )