This reading group pick is Richard Russo's fourth novel.

William Henry Devereaux, Jr., the chairman of the English department at a small Pennsylvania university, seems to handle campus politics, budget issues, and changing mores with ease, thanks to his witty, carefree, and rebellious manner. But is he really above it all?

He dreams of being a novelist but has only one slim book from his younger years to show for it. He also has unresolved daddy issues, a detachment from his grown daughters, and a somewhat philosophical attitude towards his wife of many years.

When his wife goes out of town for a week, Will's life starts to spiral downward. The novel unfolds over those seven days. In my household, we joke that my husband of almost 39 years needs supervision as things tend to go wrong when I'm away. So, I found this aspect of the novel quite hilarious.

Some, or rather many, of the incidents that Will experiences border on slapstick, and Russo managed to get plenty of laughs out of me. However, in the end, while I was entertained, I didn't really care much about what might happen to a man who was not quite in touch with himself or others. Mostly, he seemed to get by on luck.

Nevertheless, the reading group members liked the novel, and we had many laughs while discussing it.

It was an enjoyable read, despite its flaws, and it provided us with plenty of material for a lively discussion.

Overall, Richard Russo's fourth novel is a lighthearted and entertaining read that will appeal to those who enjoy humorous stories about flawed characters.

This was by far the most humorous book I have ever read! That is precisely why I awarded it a full 5 stars. Usually, I don't necessarily find books "funny," but the humor in this one is truly clever and intelligent, constantly having me in stitches. It has a dry and subtle quality that makes it all the more enjoyable.

The story revolves around a 49-year-old English professor who is somewhat out of touch with himself. He is bright and moral, yet also a bit of a wise-ass. Still, he is ultimately a good guy. The book follows his journey of coming to terms with aging and learning to deal with people. I'm not the type who demands "action action action" in a book or movie; I simply relish reading about real life. This book is extremely well-written, allowing me to truly get inside the professor's head.

The book is filled with numerous funny moments. For example, when Hank threatens to hit Teddy for liking his wife, and Teddy reminds him that he is a pacifist. Hank's response, "That doesn't mean I can't threaten you. It just means you're not required to take me seriously," is both hilarious and clever. Another great moment is when the waitress in the bowling alley keeps ignoring Hank, which I found absolutely hilarious. There are many such moments throughout the book that keep the reader entertained from start to finish.

In conclusion, I highly recommend this book to anyone looking for a good laugh and an engaging story. It is a truly enjoyable read that will leave you with a smile on your face.

The worst things that can occur for me on a book jacket are the words "New England Professor."

Consequently, Straight Man is the worst thing that can befall me in a book.

I simply cannot fathom what isn't blatantly evident about this type of infidelity-prone human or its mercifully disappearing lifestyle that I didn't already determine in Who's Afraid of Virgina Woolf, The World According to Garp, or in college for that matter.

It seems that these works have already explored the nuances and idiosyncrasies of such individuals and their lifestyles to a great extent.

Perhaps the author of Straight Man thought they could offer a new perspective, but to me, it just feels like a rehash of what has already been done.

I was hoping for something more original and thought-provoking, but unfortunately, this book didn't deliver.

Maybe others will find it engaging and entertaining, but for me, it was a disappointment.

Meh. 1.5.

I finally managed to finish this book, but it was a real struggle. That's about all I can really say about it. I bought it for a mere $4 from The Book Barn some time ago. After all, I thought I should really branch out and read something other than science fiction or fantasy occasionally, right? However, the problem is that whenever I venture outside my comfort zone of books, my success rate is usually quite low. Ironically, when I went back to The Book Barn today, hoping to get rid of this pesky thing, they refused to take it back! I brought back around 20 books and 25 DVDs, and some of them were really quite strange (I mean, I even brought the movie "The Faculty"). But this was the only item they didn't want. So now I'm stuck with it. Do you want a copy? Let me know. The narrator of the book, if he were real, would probably have a good laugh at that.

I guess this is one of those so-called "good" books that delves into the idiosyncrasies of human nature, the listlessness that accompanies middle age and a sense of being stuck in mediocrity, long-suppressed daddy issues, and so on. But, quite frankly, it just wasn't enjoyable to read, and I don't feel like I gained any deeper knowledge or understanding from it.

The first 50 pages or so, I actually found somewhat enjoyable. The narrator is the perpetual comic, making fun of all the "straight" men and women around him, those who can't see the humor in their own quirks. But as the book progresses, the narrator comes across as more and more of a jerk. For example, some of the people in his department come to him worried about their jobs, and all he can do is laugh. The entire book felt rather "fuzzy" to me. The readers' only perspective into the world is through the narrator, and he is so clueless that it feels like being trapped in a thick fog. And seriously - why on earth did they have to kill the dog? I understand that it creates a sort of symmetry in the book, but really. This occurs within the last few pages, and I was already debating between a one and two-star review before this happened.

I guess the comedy in this book just didn't really resonate with me as being all that funny. At best, it was a little too close to home. At worst, it was just plain annoying.

In conclusion: meh.

I have long shied away from academic satires for two primary reasons. Firstly, being an academic myself in a way, I am already well aware of how absurd I can be. Secondly, this genre has always struck me as too easy, like shooting fish (with PhDs) in a barrel.

However, this year I am entering the academic job market, so I have decided that some comic relief regarding my chosen profession might be beneficial. The main reason for this is that if I can convince myself on some level that it's all a huge mess of ego-driven, solipsistic lunacy, then I won't feel as bad when no one hires me.

I decided to begin with Russo because, quite simply, I like the style of his writing. It may no longer be fashionable to like Richard Russo (if it ever was). He is a bit too good-natured and, dare I say, optimistic for the average literary reader. And many of his books are made into movies that your parents enjoy. But still, I turn to Russo for his humanism. Not specifically for the inherent goodness in people, but for the way he seems to understand the small humiliations, irrational desires, and fleeting joys that make up so much of our lives, and the way he forgives us for our inability to make sense of it all. He discovers something noble and big-hearted even in the most discouraging aspects of contemporary American culture. For example, the way a college is managed.

The familiar tropes are present from the very first page. There is plenty of tweed. Departmental in-fighting. Feminists against the old department dinosaurs. Heavy drinking. Philandering. Student protests. And, of course, delusions of grandeur. However, guiding us through it all is Henry Devereaux, Jr., a reluctant department chair, former writer, and career ironist. Besides all of the very funny set pieces and academic gags, the pleasure in this book lies in watching the evolution of a character whose mask and true nature couldn't be more different. He deflects the silly and sorry state of his life and career with puns, sarcastic quips, and cutting remarks. He rarely says what he truly means. Yet, as the novel progresses, he is compelled to make decisions that bring him closer to figuring out what he really believes, something he hasn't seriously considered in twenty years.

My only significant complaint about the book is that Russo takes a kitchen sink approach to comedy. Besides Henry's issues with department cuts, he also has an estranged father moving back, a delusional mother, a crazy father-in-law, a secretary he might be in love with, a possible gallstone problem, a daughter having problems with her husband, a vendetta against an aggressive goose, a potentially unhinged writing student, and numerous other daily tribulations. All of this keeps the laughs coming, but at times it seems more like piling on rather than well-plotted.

In the end, however, I think "The Straight Man" had the effect I was seeking. I got to laugh at myself and the academic club that might have me as a member (at least for now). And I gained a worthy protagonist in the process. Now if only I could figure out what I truly believe...

I was in the process of ordering humorous academic satire books, and this particular one was recommended to me.

However, upon delving into it, I found that it was rather dated for my taste. It seemed to be set in a specific time during the early 1990s, a period when sexism and whiteness were still deeply ingrained in academic culture and, unfortunately, not being adequately addressed.

Despite this, I did appreciate certain aspects of the book. The tight time frame within which the narrative was structured added a sense of urgency and coherence. Additionally, the crafting of the various plot lines was quite skillful, keeping me engaged throughout.

Some of the family relationships depicted in the story were more compelling and fully developed than others. They added a layer of depth and authenticity to the overall narrative.

On the other hand, the academic side of things felt a bit too silly and toxic to be entirely believable. It bordered on the absurd at times. However, the pacing of the story was such that it allowed me to overlook these flaws and simply enjoy the ridiculous nature of the plot.

Overall, while the book had its shortcomings, it still managed to provide some entertainment and food for thought.

Now, I had already watched the TV version of this book, “Lucky Hank,” starring Bob Odenkirk, on AMC. I thought it was rather good. However, I kept coming across reviews of this book by people who had read it multiple times, as they found it extremely funny. So, I thought that perhaps it was still worth giving the book a try, even though I already knew the story.

Well, I am truly glad that I did. Those readers were right; it is really hilarious. Russo is such an engaging and entertaining writer. The TV version did actually enhance the plotline to some extent and eliminate some unnecessary characters, but the book version is undoubtedly funnier. And I have a great affection for Odenkirk.

This novel served as a reminder of how much I had relished Russo’s “Empire Falls” when I read it perhaps 20 years ago. Now, I am considering reading “Nobody’s Fool” next. I saw the movie and was not overly impressed. But then again, I recall being disappointed when I watched the movie version of “Empire Falls” as well.

I am eager to explore more of Russo’s works and see if they can bring the same level of enjoyment and laughter as “Lucky Hank” has.

Glory to God, I suffered! Some horribly outdated book - in fact, it was written in 1997, but it reads as if it were from the 70s, and in a bad sense. A week in the life of a white cisgender (yes, again)) 50-year-old professor of English literature, who is tormented by difficult urination and sexual fantasies about everything that moves and the female gender (yes, he somehow manages to combine the two), faculty intrigues and the need to interact with colleagues and students, who are all, of course, stupider than him. It is assumed that all this is supposed to be very funny and witty, but it turns out to be 600 pages from the perspective of a self-burdened pretentious character, whose jokes, philosophical musings and urinary system are of interest to no one but himself and, perhaps, the author.

The story seems to be an attempt to create a satire on academic life and the human condition, but it falls flat. The characters are one-dimensional and unlikable, and the humor is often forced and inappropriate. The descriptions of the professor's sexual fantasies are particularly off-putting and add nothing to the story. The author seems to be more interested in showing off his own knowledge and wit than in creating a engaging and meaningful narrative.

Overall, this book is a disappointment. It fails to live up to its potential and leaves the reader feeling bored and frustrated. I would not recommend it to anyone looking for a good read.

I have read a significant number of Richard Russo's novels, which has made me extremely familiar with his writing and storytelling style.

He creates diverse types of characters, places them in vivid settings, builds them skillfully, and crafts engaging conflicts in his stories.

Although a certain degree of predictability accompanies this familiarity, I still relish Russo's work.

For one thing, his writing has the power to make me laugh out loud.

I also have a soft spot for his characters. Despite their tendency to repeat past mistakes with foreseeable consequences, I can't help but root for them.

Who among us hasn't made similar mistakes?

"Straight Man" is a prime example of Russo's excellent work.

I thoroughly enjoyed my time spent with Hank. Just like Hank, I often found myself wondering why he was making the choices he did.

He seemed to lack a clear plan and was seemingly finding his way as he went along.

As a reader, I felt as if I was uncovering the mysteries right alongside Hank.

However, compared to some of Russo's other novels, I felt that I didn't get to know the secondary characters as well as I would have liked.

Overall, it's a highly enjoyable read that I would highly recommend to anyone who is a fan of Richard Russo.

This was my very first encounter with the works of Richard Russo. Oh, what a splendid introduction it turned out to be!

The protagonist here is William Henry "Hank" Deveraux, Jr., an English professor and the department chair in a small, not-so-prestigious university.

And it seems that he is深陷于中年危机之中, as he grapples with a plethora of work and family issues throughout the course of just one week.

I think what I relished the most about reading this book at that time (several years ago - this is a reread), was how effortlessly I could identify with the ambiance. Since I myself have taught at a small college, it was almost as if I could spot William right away. I have encountered countless Williams during my teaching career. It's not that every middle-aged man is a William, nor that this couldn't happen to a middle-aged woman.

But this is undeniably William's story.

And it was most definitely familiar to me.

What's truly amusing about William is that no matter what he attempts, he manages to make it worse, as most of the chaotic situations he finds himself in are of his own making.

Now, some critics regarded William as tiresome and uninteresting. However, I saw him as familiar, comical, and perhaps a touch sympathetic.

Sometimes, people in department chair positions can be a bit too self-important. (I sincerely hope that anyone I know doesn't think I'm referring to them!)

But really, let's move beyond this egotistical mindset in academia. The truth is, William is in a crisis of his own creation, and each reader will either journey through it with him...

Or not.

Hailing from academia myself, I was able to perceive the humor in it all.

The story also offers astute observations about friendship, family, and the often-intriguing world of academic politics.

I would highly recommend giving this book a chance.

  Straight Man

tells the story of Hank Devereaux, who is the temporary chair of the English Department at a small state university in central Pennsylvania. He often refers to Occam’s Razor in the book. This is a philosophical principle stating that the simplest explanation of a problem is usually the best approach. He attempts to follow this advice as he navigates the numerous complex relationships in his life. However, he fails miserably.

Hank tries to make light of situations with jokes, but ends up making a fool of himself instead. There are some sharp dialogues and very funny scenes in the book, which has been described as a hilarious read. I got scolded by my wife one late night when my laughter woke her up.

Richard Russo is the author of several books and won the Pulitzer Prize for his work

  Empire Falls

. I have read many of his books and he is an outstanding writer. His books generally don't have a traditional plot. Instead, they are about people and their relationships with other interesting and well-developed characters. In this book, he captures the humor and the inner thoughts of the main character.

The academic satire that lies at the core of the novel is for the most part quite clever. It is often humorous and, when it doesn't go overboard, it is rather accurate.

However, I believe that Russo attempts to cover too much in this overly stuffed novel. There are themes of parents and children, especially fathers and sons, husbands and wives, love, marriage, and divorce, and the list goes on and on.

I think that if I had read this 30 years ago when it was first published, I would have found it funnier. Its attitudes and perspectives now seem extremely dated.

I will definitely read more of Russo's works, but I will look for something more recent to see how he has evolved since this earlier effort.