What an excruciating ride.

This book is obviously iconic in terms of the cultural impact it had- and continues to have 25 years later- on the horror genre. The influence of House of Leaves is felt, at least by me, throughout internet horror; whether it be stories on /r/nosleep, analog horror series on YouTube, or even fan-made Doom mods. Does all that influence alone make this a good book, however? I don't think so.

After sitting with my feelings for a day or so, I think that this book, though well researched and executed, doesn't wow me as much as I thought it would. I find a lot of aspects of it annoying and tedious (and before you say anything about it being meant to elicit those exact emotions, shut up, I don't care, it makes it a slog to get through huge portions of this book.) I also think the story, considering the length of the book, is lackluster; we really don't get a complete picture of any of the storylines. This could be my fault for not diving in deep enough or something (I got tired after a while, sue me). 

Back to the point about the book being difficult to read and pretentious on purpose. I think it accomplished what it meant to say, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. I do appreciate the subject matter, but I think sometimes it is hamfisted and takes away from the storytelling.

I did like it, tho.

JT's sections didn't bother me nearly as much as all the other detractors. His writing style and story remind me so much of the over the top, over dramatic nosleep stories I used to read as a teen (think "i dared my best friend to ruin my life") and made me a bit nostalgic. I also really enjoyed the Navidson story - well, what it is at its core, at least.

Again, it's a very important book, and I'm glad to have read it. But I'm not going to be obsessing over it like some others do (so shade to those people at all, much respect, in fact) because I don't feel it impacted me that much.