The Visible Man

A Novel

By: Chuck Klosterman

Narrated by: Annabella Sciorra, Scott Shepherd

Length: 8 hrs

Publisher's summary

Austin, Texas. Therapist Victoria Vick is contacted by a cryptic, unlikable man who insists his situation is unique and unfathomable. As he slowly reveals himself, Vick becomes convinced that he suffers from a complex set of delusions: Y__, as she refers to him, claims to be a scientist who has stolen cloaking technology from an aborted government project in order to render himself nearly invisible. He says he uses this ability to observe random individuals within their daily lives, usually when they are alone and vulnerable. Unsure of his motives or honesty, Vick becomes obsessed with her patient and the disclosure of his increasingly bizarre and disturbing tales. Over time, it threatens her career, her marriage, and her own identity.

Interspersed with notes, correspondence, and transcriptions that catalog a relationship based on curiosity and fear, The Visible Man touches on all of Chuck Klosterman’s favorite themes: the consequence of culture, the influence of media, the complexity of voyeurism, and the existential contradiction of normalcy. Is this comedy, criticism, or horror? Not even Y__ seems to know for sure.

©2011 Chuck Klosterman (P)2011 Simon & Schuster, Inc.

A decent read.

The author succeeded in creating unique and detailed characters. Although the story began with intriguing, thought-provoking circumstances, it ultimately became diluted by generic and predictable antics. The conclusion was underwhelming.

Fantastic.

What did you love best about The Visible Man?

The story, the performance of the readers, and the ability of Klosterman to reach out to a new medium for him, but still retain his sensibility.

Thought-provoking Work

What made the experience of listening to The Visible Man the most enjoyable?

The narrators were great and really brought the characters to life. I know some of the other reviewers commented on the fact that the narrator who played Y seemed more sane and personable than their perception of Y as a sociopath but I thought that was precisely the purpose of such a selection. Since the voice of Y was sane and alluring it enticed me to interpret Y as an alluring character the way theoretically Victoria viewed him.The pop culture philosophy was also interesting and thought-provoking. I had the distinct desire to talk to someone else about the thoughts expressed in this book and my views on them which is always a good thing in a book. Some of his social commentaries were a bit short but I believe that if they had been extended they would likely fall into repetition (the discussion about money and happiness is an example of this)

Who was your favorite character and why?

Unlike I believe some other readers, I was particularly drawn to the character of Y. I could understand and sympathize with Victoria's unfortunate lack of boundaries with Y. This might however be because I tend to like portrayals of brilliant characters and their thought process (despite or perhaps because of the often arrogant and dysfunctional way they are portrayed in most forms of media). I thought that Y had both charisma and definite issues and had the distinct feeling that many people would consider him psychopathic although I would not.

Any additional comments?

Y described really odd and likely clinically disturbed people for the majority of his descriptions of his home observations. I thought Chuck's choice to do this was both interesting and unfortunate. Examining disturbed people gave me as a reader an opportunity to analyze what I would think about these people and gave me the feeling that it was entirely possible that most single adults were secretly disturbed in their most private moments. However, it also nagged me because from my own experience it didn't feel true (note that my only experience with being with someone when they are alone is with myself). As such, I was taken out of the story several times and had to remind myself that it was possible the characters picked these stories out of thousands because they were the most interesting and that Chuck simply could not write about at length about the truly boring aspects of the private lives of sane non-disturbed people (which might constitute almost exclusively consumption of media). It was just unfortunate because one of the charms of the book was the realization that theoretically it was possible thought incredibly unlikely that any of us could be watched when we believe we are alone and the use of unrelatable subjects for Y's observations served to distance ourselves from the possibility of being observed.

interesting. Disturbing. Compelling. Decent Story.

The narration from both readers is excellent.

The story only gets 4 out of 5 stars because I just "wanted more" as a reader. Also, the lead female character makes some dumb and extremely unprofessional decisions and her self-awareness of her blunders could be read as a very problematic element of the story. Another reviewer on this app blasts the book for that element of the story primarily and while I'm not as deeply offended by that element of the narration, I do agree that it's a valid criticism. Just like bad TV or crappy horror movies, audiences might find themselves yelling at the protagonist something like, "no! Don't be so stupid! How can you not see how deranged this is!?"

I enjoyed the suspenseful aspects of this story and found myself wanting more back-story and more narrative about unseen elements of the story, which are impossible to convey through the narrative structure.

The whole book is presented as a compiled collection of notes and drafts of a manuscript for a book about a therapist and her patient who can make himself almost impossible to see. Because the book is presented in this first person style and through the retelling of transcripts of counseling sessions, it's impossible to tell what's happening between the counseling sessions unless the therapist tells us through random exposition. It's an interesting narrative choice that builds tension through omission. Is the character of the patient as sinister as implied? Yes! I really think this is a portrait of a deeply disturbed individual, but did he really do all of the things that he claimed to do while he was "invisible?"

The sense of danger implied by an unseen person who may lack empathy for others choosing to stalk people or enter their homes without their knowledge is super creepy. The character of Y chooses to inaccurately paint himself as "an impartial observer" of people when they're totally alone for the sake of trying to better understand the human condition. Y can't understand the emotions of other people and sees all social interactions as pretense or overly constructed performance... and therefore fake or disingenuous. He believes that no one is truly themselves unless they're totally alone. There were some interesting anecdotal passages about the topic of when people are alone and about social norms and the antagonist presents some conflicting views about those topics.

Y is deeply disturbed person who can use his advantages of stealth over others to "impartially observe" but he's not impartial and he does some pretty terrible things to some people if his stories are believed to be true. Not only does he lack empathy or understanding toward the rest of mankind, but he believes in the rightness of his own will for the sake of itself.

I enjoyed the suspenseful, creepy, and thriller-esque elements of this story and wanted more of that but also see how that would be impossible to deliver via the narrative structure.

I enjoyed this somewhat flawed novel for many reasons and would encourage others (even if you're not familiar with Chuck and his other non-fiction writing) to check this out. It's probably not his best writing, but it was a decent (but somewhat frustrating) story with a protagonist that you want to do better, and an antagonist that you love to hate. Lastly, the random riffing on society that this writer is best known for is shown as something deeply despicable, which is such a fascinating thing for this author to have done with this narrative. In a very "meta" kind of way, he paints his own writing style as the villain and that may be the most interesting thing about the whole book.

Fun paychothriller

Human perception, distortion and intellectual arrogance are soo fascinating. I suppose we all have a blind side.

Maybe it would have been an intriguing short story?

This book has an intriguing premise, which creates an interesting mechanism by which to explore human nature and action, and I think could have made an interesting short story, or essay. Ultimately though, I got to the end, and wondered “what was the point?” In spite of a few clever moments, the book was surprisingly devoid of the sharp observational pop-culture humor I would have expected from the author. Nor was there much insight into the characters or the people around them. It was ultimately, in my mind, an unusual book about a sociopath patient (psychopath?) and an idiot therapist. Wish it were better.

Don't listen to this while driving!

This was the only book we have purchased that we both didn't enjoy. We like a great plot when driving & this was just a boring diary!

My god what a boring, pompous waste of time.

Any additional comments?

I listened through to the very end. This book goes nowhere with a very interesting premise.Don't waste you time on this one.