BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Neil Gaiman's American Gods.

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Poke it with a stick
17:57 / 16.10.05
So, Shadow - black or white? While the character's name perhaps suggests he's black, I always read the book with the image of a caucasian lead in my head. Any thoughts and, honestly, should I actually care about it? I mean, it's still a damn good book and it doesn't affect the story one way or another.
 
 
matthew.
21:11 / 16.10.05
it doesn't affect the story in the slightest, i don't think. the book has a very strong vein of multiculturalism; everybody should just hold hands and sing...

he's probably mulatto....

who cares what colour he is. he's exactly what he is: a shadow... not a full character. he's merely a tool to bounce characters off. he's like a Dickens character in that sense.

By the way. I have to confess (don't laugh) I was really shocked to find out that
SPOILERS











the character Low Key was actually Loki. What am i? a fucking idiot that's why.











End SPOILERS!

Anyway. My opinion... he's probably mulatto.
 
 
P. Horus Rhacoid
21:52 / 16.10.05
Erm. Spoilers.

Actually I think he's pretty explicitely white. His father's a Norse god, after all, and doesn't Wednesday prefer light-complexioned women, blondes and redheads and the like? I might be misremembering that last part since I read the book like 4 years ago. I've always imagined him- Shadow I mean- with pale skin and black hair.

I also totally missed the Low Key/Loki thing. Because I, too, am an idiot.
 
 
lekvar
22:51 / 16.10.05
I was under the impression that Shadow's mother was dark-skinned. I pictured him as mixed-race, too...
 
 
P. Horus Rhacoid
08:17 / 17.10.05
You're probably right. Like I say, I read it a long time ago.
 
 
Cat Chant
13:55 / 17.10.05
Off-topic, but in future would people please say 'mixed-race' (or 'biracial', if you prefer) rather than mulatto, which is offensive to many mixed-race people (it comes from the Spanish word for a 'mule' and means a 'sterile hybrid of two different species', so it harks back to some pretty nasty ways of conceptualizing 'race').

Thanks.
 
 
matthew.
14:07 / 17.10.05
RE: the term I used.

My profound apologies. I did not know it offended people. But I can relate... I am Metis; I am half-Scottish and half-Native.

Sorry if I offended anybody.
 
 
Poke it with a stick
21:17 / 17.10.05
Thanks all - I was pretty sure he was white (primarily because of who his father was), but it's nice to feel like I'm not entirely out on a limb with the assumption.

And, honestly? It took me a second reading to get that Low Key was white, even once it clicked that he was Loki...
 
 
Quantum
11:15 / 18.10.05
I assumed Shadow was a black guy. Maybe because of DJ Shadow...
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:24 / 18.10.05


"A dark children's fable for adults, I highly recommend it!" - DJ Shadow on Neil Gaiman.
 
 
_Boboss
11:47 / 18.10.05
the gaiman mystery, all of it, was answered superbly for me in last tuesday's brighton evening argus. an interview with

wait for it

david gaiman

who?

Who?! only, mate, the famed vitamin entrepreneur david gaiman, father of the very stylish neil (and a couple of others, neither of whom pops was so keen to bang on about according to the interviewer who, amusingly, had never heard of the swish leather-jacketed genius)

so the interview is all blah blah blah and he's got these leather-jacket wearing eyes in the photo which neil himself probably hides behind those extremely hip 'shades' he favours, until you come to this line here:

'David and his wife converted to Scientology in the nineteen sixties'!!!

imagine the joy - the local rag answered all of my neil gaiman questions in one swoop, and the guy from the paper didn't even know who he was. brilliant. henceforth to be called Neil 'neil' Gaiman: Son of Scientology. a great veil of purpley prose is lifted.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:13 / 18.10.05
To be honest, I think the fact his new novel is called Anansi Boys is probably all you need to know. As Haus pointed out, he clearly started with the title - "A-NANCY boys, haha! God I'm good!" - and worked backwards, although only as far as ripping off the entire concept of China "like Gaiman but much less shit at prose" Mieville's King Rat and making it about spiders instead of rats.
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
13:22 / 18.10.05
i was wondering when the Anti-Gaiman Brigade was going to notice this thread.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:31 / 18.10.05
Are people who do not like (author whose work you do not like) part of the ""Anti-(author whose work you do not like) brigade"? Or are they just people who do not like (author whose work you do not like). It's an interesting choice of words...
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
16:51 / 18.10.05
I just continually find it curious that any time a topic related to Gaiman is posted on Barbelith, sooner or later there appear comments that don't in any way contribute to the actual discussion in that topic.

Instead, they are purely to criticise some other aspect of Gaiman that is arguably irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

It seems as if the thought is "Oh! A topic about Gaiman. I don't like him, I don't care what this topic is about or if my dislike of him is relevant, I just feel a burning desire to tell others my opinion and bash him."

It's like clockwork.

Am I totally wrong about this? I don't think that people should stay out of threads if they don't have something constructive to say (I would have been kicked out long ago), but it seems the intention in these particular Gaiman-centric instances is to insult someone else's taste.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
17:19 / 18.10.05
I think the intention is to insult Neil Gaiman... and he is quite an open goal, really (though I rather liked Coraline). I'm sure those who like Neil Gaiman are capable of defending him against e.g. Flyboy's accusations of sub-standard writing and filching ideas from other writers (something which Gaiman himself has copped to wrt American Gods).
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
17:21 / 18.10.05
And I don't think this thread had a particularly strong premise to begin with, so I am not bothered if it gets a bit derailed - there's more chance of interesting discussion that way in this case.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
17:51 / 18.10.05
Yeah, I think seeing as this thread was admittedly based around a "quick, inconsequential question" we aren't losing much. I can see that this sort of thing might possibly occur in a more substantial thread, and if it did I think it'd be a cause for concern- but the best way to deal is to just talk over it as though it's not there.
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
17:54 / 18.10.05
Hmm...it still seems an overly malicious thing to do, to be perfectly blunt.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
18:10 / 18.10.05
I don't think there is any malice directed at other Barbelith posters in anything anyone has said on this thread, Keith. I don't even think there's much malice directed at Gaiman - just piss-taking. It wasn't a serious thread to begin with, no one here has expressed their undying devotion to Gaiman, I don't see a problem.
 
 
Poke it with a stick
19:18 / 18.10.05
Kit-Kat, you're right, it wasn't a particularly serious thread to begin with, but is there any chance people who are going to post in this thread could actually attempt to answer my question or else go to another thread handily entitled "Neil Gaiman sucks: discuss" and leave the rest of us to continue the initial (again, admittedly inconsequential) topic in peace?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
01:11 / 19.10.05
Well, given that the title of this thread is "Neil Gaiman's American Gods", and the question seems to have been settled, a broader discussion of the book might not be at all inappropriate...
 
 
All Acting Regiment
01:31 / 19.10.05
Does "The Internet" appear as a character?
 
 
P. Horus Rhacoid
09:18 / 19.10.05
SPOILERS!














Yes.












END SPOILERS.

On a more serious note, can anyone link to an article where Gaiman admitted lifting the premise of AG? It seemed like the basic idea was the same as 'The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul,' but it was such a different take on the idea that I figured it was more of an homage than a ripoff, especially given that Gaiman biographied Douglas Adams. Did he admit to snagging ideas from anywhere else?
 
 
Cat Chant
09:42 / 19.10.05
He nicked the idea from Diana Wynne Jones's Eight Days of Luke. He asked her permission first, though. There's a reference to it in an interview with her, where she draws a sharp distinction between Gaiman's appropriation of Eight Days of Luke and Rowling's malappropriation of Witch Week. I'll try and dig the link out later.
 
 
Cat Chant
09:51 / 19.10.05
It's here - last paragraph of the April 2002 bulletin. She writes:

It IS customary, since someone asked this, for one writer to ask another if he or she minds an idea being borrowed. For instance, when Neil Gaiman was writing AMERICAN GODS (which is a terrific book), he knew he had got the original idea from me, from EIGHT DAYS OF LUKE, and he told me so. But of course his book turned out very different. Besides which, we have been friends for a long time. But I have never met JK Rowling, so this doesn't seem to apply.

(I love her.)
 
 
P. Horus Rhacoid
10:15 / 19.10.05
Thanks, Deva, that's a great article.

Erm. More spoilers.

I still stand by similarities between AG and Tea-Time, though they may be mostly superficial. They both involve Norse gods, and Odin is a bastard who is frustrated that nobody believes in him anymore, and the Odin of each book takes drastic action to remedy that (though that action takes very, very different forms). Hmm. It's been too long since I read either for me to make an accurate comparison, I think.

It's also possible that DNA read Jones, too.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:14 / 19.10.05
He's also ripping off himself - specifically, Sandman's urbanised deities and the idea that gods need worshippers.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
14:38 / 19.10.05
After watching a large chunk of internet heathenry wetting its collective knickers over this book, I was actually pretty disappointed. The lore is all solid, of course, in a textbooky way, but somehow it feels a bit dead on the page. The book definately tastes of warmed-up Sandman leftovers.



S

P

O

I

I

I

I

L

Y

!



I'm getting increasingly bored of the now-hackneyed "Gods need to eat their malted worship-flakes or they get all scrawny" trope. And even if we accept that as the underlying mechanic, the knowledge that the One-Eyed Bastard and his drinking buddies aren't exactly short of mead-swilling devotees Stateside doesn't help one buy into the book. The melancholy notion of fading, unworshipped Gods ekeing out a living on crumbs from the pop-culture table is somewhat undermined by several gajillion AOLers calling themselves "Odhinnsson" or "Freyrsdottir" bitching because Thor's not in it and Odin wouldn't do that, ect. ect.

Do try to keep up, Neil.

Still sucked less than Written in Venom, though.
 
 
Dead Megatron
21:43 / 19.10.05
I kinda picture Shadow being played in a movie version by Ving xXx Diesel, so a bit undefined etnicity fits Shadow very well. Remember (BIG SPOILER AHEAD) he's the son of a nordic god, so 100% black is out of the question.

And about Low Key's real identity, it skipped me as well. I mean, when I saw the old gyu's name was Wednesday, I got who he really was right away (Wednesday - Wotan's day - Odin's day.. you know, you read Sandman), but Low Key, I missed completely. I guess it is a classic con artist trick - things that are too obvious sometimes go unnoticed...
 
 
wandering aengus
15:46 / 23.10.05
YES!! Shadow IS Vin (XXX)Diesel!!! [excuse the multiple exclamation marks, but I've been waiting for that equation to be solved for years]
Loki was also a mystery for me until I read it the second time.
My question is: why the use of Herodotus? After reading AG I took Histories out from the library and couldn't make head nor tails of it in relation to the novel and to Low Key's character.
 
 
matthew.
00:06 / 24.10.05
Pardon my forgetfulness, but what use of Herodotus? I don't remember any Herodotus in the novel....
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
22:05 / 24.10.05
Dude! The whole "Father of lies" thing. Beginning of the book, for a start. Low Key turns Shadow onto Herodotus (partly coz they share a by-name*).




*Yes, I know--disputed translation ect. Context of the novel and all.
 
 
Baz Auckland
22:50 / 24.10.05
I just pictured Shadow looking like the Neil Gaiman picture in the 'about the author' bit on the back cover... Not out of laziness or anything... it just seemed to work.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
23:09 / 24.10.05
Sad but true...
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply