Essa adaptação é um laboratório onde Mazzucchelli pode esticar as pernas e experimentar à vontade com a narrativa pós-moderna de Paul Auster. Ainda assim, parece estranhamente contida em seus fragmentos, como um prenúncio do que o autor alcançaria mais tarde com Asterios Polyp. É fácil perceber porque é um quadrinho tão influente.

I really enjoyed this adaptation but felt that it fell short of the hype. Each panel felt more like graphic punctuation rather then rich storytelling, which was interesting but not entirely satisfying.

5 stars for the technical accomplishments in the comic book medium
4 stars overall

This graphic novel is a fun read, playing with the notion of identity and language being intertwined; the main character takes on other imagined personas simply by changing his name. Common to the original author, Paul Auster, City of Glass uses the premise of a classic detective story; the noir aesthetic is intriguing but could be expanded upon in its graphic novel format, practically begging for more illustrious artwork to enhance the meaning of the text. Readers will see quick, rapid use of symbolism in the panels, referring to the confusion of meaning and identity, and the importance of words. Auster's original influence is allowed to shine, as characters take his namesake and speak about his original theories regarding personal meaning. The characters struggle with language, feeling its limitations, but also being trapped by the fact that it is the only means of understanding, so their understanding is never complete. Moments of meta-writing are playfully executed, as the narrator of the story confronts his own story and purpose, and layers of writing about writing emerge. The characters become interestingly intertwined as the confusion escalates. However, the beginnings of the detective story plot line become lost among the existential pondering, and the story takes on the role of a larger commentary on meaning. It is, understandably - given its original author - an enjoyable story that relies more on its explorations than on its artwork and narrative arc.

I am aware that’s its an adaptation from the original 1972 novel of the same name. Holy hell, did I enjoy this. It was very intriguing to read. On top of that there is so much meta textuality, as Paul Auster (the author) is placed within the text as a secondary character, who also is a writer.

There were so many beautiful panels, my favourite being the finger print and the language ones. I really enjoyed this so much.

I am at a loss for words.
This is probably just not my cup of tea, but honestly...
what story is there?
what sense is there?
what point is there?

For me this is a stringing of ultra complex weird things that make no sense, that do not entertain or raise a thrill of whatever kind.
I am quite possibly not intelligent enough to understand why this is so hyped.
The only good thing I can say... the graphic novel version is quick to read and not too much of a waste of time.

what on earth was this? the art was great. the story was intriguing. a little too intriguing in fact because i don't think i understood it in the first read. I'm lost.

I've not read the prose edition of this novel, so I can't fairly compare them to each other.

The story itself is a puzzle.. Who is Paul Auster? Why does Peter Stillman (Jr) phone him repeatedly? Where did Peter get Daniel's number? When Peter Sr turns up in the City, Peter sees a younger version peel off of him... why does Peter follow the older version and where did the younger one go? Why does Peter Jr's wife truly act as she does? These are all mysteries, to be sure.

Daniel sees his losses in just about every one he meets, when he finally leaves his flat. He's very attracted to the Homeless of the City.

"Don Quixote" by Cervantes is referred to throughout. I think this story is patterned on that book. Since it's one of the novels I have never read, I believe that my understanding of this story is incomplete.

That, of course, makes my review rather flawed.

Vreemd & bevreemdend. Dat is het verhaal. Het verhaal van Paul Auster, maar ook deze ambitieuze graphic novel versie.

Dit boek is ambitieus, omdat niet rust op letterlijke illustraties van het verhaal. De tekenaar ondersteunt de tekst met visuele verhalen die op zichzelf kunnen staan.

Dat merk je. Zo blijken passages met zeer statische 'vertellers', plots scènes vol visuele choreografie te ontlokken, met - wss - dezelfde ondertoon.

Ik kreeg meermaals het gevoel twee parallelle kunstwerken tegelijkertijd op te mogen/moeten nemen. Dat ik dat apprecieer, dat weet ik.

Wat ik niet weet? Eens het verhaal uit is, en je je afvraagt wat het 'centrale idee' van het verhaal nu was... Dan geraak ik er niet uit.

Opties? Verloren gegaan in de tekst-selectie?Verdronken in de extra tekeningen? Bewust desoriënterend & gewoon opzet?

Vreemd en bevreemdend is deze graphic novel van Mazzuchelli, maar dat was het origineel ook. Zo zit het verhaal vol 'dubbele' identiteiten: elke naam heeft minimum twee dragers en de hoofdrol draagt drie identiteiten. Zeer ambitieus.

Het vakmanschap staat buiten twijfel. Het verhaal? Is vreemd, maar is dit een ander soort vreemd? Waren twee ambities teveel voor één balans? Ik vraag me des te meer af. Misschien moet ik het origineel lezen.

Wat het ook mag wezen:Ik laat het wat bezinken terwijl ik nageniet.

Commentaar is welkom & lezen is aanbevolen.

In mijn ogen een van de beste strips ooit gemaakt.

A detective that lost his identity.

City of Glass or The New Babel is a pain in the ass for anyone who wants to find some meanings in life.

The story is about a crime fiction writer accidentally receives a random phone call from a woman, having mistaken himself as another person named Paul Auster (a.k.a. the writer of this novel!?), to do the mysterious case with strange people involved. I can't say anything about the sub-sequential events after that. For me, it could be read like a post-modern detective novel. Beneath the surface, it's an existential graphic novel, with heavy symbols, meta-narratives full of absurdity defying the meaning of life we often end up thinking it was.

My favorite quote: "what Quinn liked about mysteries was their economy. There is no sentence, no words, that is not significant. Even if it not, it has the potential to be so. Everything becomes essence: the center of the book shifts, is everywhere..and no circumstances can be drawn until the end."

This is the critical mark on top of the frequent quotes I found on the book which tends to draw me in the exact opposite direction. The whole story, later on, turns out to be the most pointless quest of the most pathetic man. The crucial scratches he is gathering on the way are up to no use, only the tool to tell another story he no longer lives or witnesses to tell. In the labyrinth, crime based location like New Work, the city of broken pieces, both glasses, which underlines the mental delusions, and people, we only seek for the better shell to become someone for some purposes.

"there are those were forever on the move, as if it mattered where they are. It seems to me that I will always be happy in the place where I am not, or more bluntly, wherever I am not is the place where I am myself."

The intertexuality also helps to create this masterpiece. The parable between Hamilton's Paradise Lost, a made-up sequel written after by Henry Dark, and this graphic novel is cleverly intertwined. For example, the paradox in the meaning of self-delusion as concluded as the theme is, in the worst possible way, that makes us to survive.

I don't give it a full five star because I haven't quite understood the whole essence of this book yet. It takes me to another new level in reading something very difficult to understand in one sitting. Give me the text only, I'll try my best to understand. But with the visual arts and content, it becomes more painfully staggering long work to make peace with. I promise to pick it up to be fascinated more often.

I add some helpful, but not friendly deep analysis for my future-self to read one day:
An essay by Nicholas Dawson and this one