This book is fascinating and surprisingly moving. Basically rats live where people live and eat what people eat, crossing almost all socioeconomic barriers (except for, strangely, Montana). I found the stories about post 9/11 New York rats particularly moving. Even after so much chaos and violence at the site of ground zero a lot of rats managed to survive. I'm not sure exactly how to eloquently express the rats/people metaphor, maybe I need to read the book again, but it was moving. Also moving were the stories of the exterminators that volunteered to go to ground zero to combat the exploding rat population. Is it weird that I'm rooting for and against the rats?

This book details the journey of the Norway rat in America as well as the fight against it. I highly recommend this book.

Loved the content of this book, did not love the writing.

Thank you Kevin for the book! Super interesting lens into New York history, culture, and society through the lens of Rattus norvegicus.

Absolutely insufferable.

If you're a New Yorker you're going to love this fascinating look at Rats. We see them everywhere and yet know so little about them. This book was well written and provided a really great look at these mysterious creatures.

I adored this book. It's rare that a nonfiction book grabs me the way a novel does, but I couldn't put this down. Don't be grossed out by the topic -- it's actually a really fascinating study of New York.

For what is a very promising title and cover, this books stupendously fails to deliver. For a book about rats, I learned a lot more about Sullivan, and precious little about the subject I wished to read about. How is it possible that a book on RATS is so dull?

i didn’t absolutelyyy hate it. it was just a bit disappointing! but i love rats and i learned some facts

I have a soft spot in my heart for animals that make most people cringe. When I see a rat "in the wild" scurrying by, my eyes light up, I squeal, and clap my hands. I used to have a pet rat in high school (his name was Tynan) and he was such an incredible little companion. I know, I know, city rats are *not* the same as pet rats. But still...they are smart, cute (yes, they are!), cunning, resourceful, and tenacious. So imagine my excitement when I came across this title, and my surprise at noting that it was a NY times bestseller. Some writer, and obviously his audience, had at least enough curiosity and some amount of respect for the rat to make a best-selling book!

I dug into the book with high expectations. I have to say some of those expectations were met, but in the end the book came up short for me. The reader is taken into the personal world of the author who decides to study the rats in a particular alley in New York city. He learns about rat behavior from reading some natural history documentation, by observation, through exterminators, and also through some interesting connections he makes through historical rat populations in New York tenements.
I thought the descriptions of rat behavior and rat biology was very interesting and well presented. I am a little sad that upon learning more about city rats I will no longer be quite as thrilled when I come across one.

The part that didn't work so well for me was when Sullivan tried to extend the history and population of rats into the civil and territorial history of New York. I think he was going for the approach that Mark Kurlansky (Cod, Salt) is so successful with. He just didn't do it as well. Some parts were interesting. For instance, the history of rat fighting, and the use of rat infestation to protest for tenant rights. But he spends too much time on making these connections and it becomes less and less about the rats, and the connection is stretched thin and loses the thread and momentum. There is also a long part towards the end of the book that tries to tie the rat population he's studying with the historical geography and city layout of the area that is just so boring that I can't even remember what connection was ultimately made.
I think if the editor could have culled out some of the last quarter of the book it would have made for a more cohesive picture. I think a reader could get just what they need from reading the book about 3/4 of the way through and then letting it go.

As someone who is fascinated by the unlooked for causalities that affect human history and development, I liked reading about the parallel histories of humans and rats in NYC. The way the city’s geography, alcohol steeped underbelly and tenement past all had distinct rat relationships and were in turn shaped by the existence of the rat populations is awesome. While the overall tone was truly more of an ode to the rat, I was able to glean more about my new home and new epidemiologically relevant books to add to my to reading list not to mention a bunch of neat random facts to add to my trove.

Едно доказателство, че да се пише нехудожествена литература, също не е толкова лесно. Заглавието подвежда изключително много, въпреки амбицията на г-н Съливън да изкара цяла година, наблюдавайки плъховете в глуха улица, само на няколко преки от Уолстрийт, действителността се оказва съвсем друга и той прекарва повече време в библиотеката, издирвайки и засипвайки ни с ирелевантни факти и истории. Това не е книга за плъхове, оскъдната информация за вредителите вътре само дразни, а десетките исторически препратки и интервюта, макар и свързани с проблема, размиват и обезсмислят цялата книга. Ако трябва да я категоризирам като нещо – това е книга за Ню Йорк, точно това се е получило след авторовото безсилие. И то раздърпана и хаотична книга за Ню Йорк.
От четирите сезона, които решава да прекара в алеята, Съливън пропуска почти цялата пролет, лятото обикаля из други градове, есента падат кулите близнаци, само на три пресечки и алеята му е затворена, а зимата минава унищожител на вредители и избива плъховете му, толкова за наблюденията, които, там където ги имаше, бяха на ниво домашно на третокласник.
Другото адски дразнещо нещо беше любовта на автора към няколко американски „класици“ и постоянните му бездарни опити да копира стила им на писане. Щялото нещо засилваше абсурда почти до хумореска.
Все пак намерих няколко доста интересни неща вътре, за съжаление не за плъховете. И най-вече още повече започнах да уважавам „Крадецът на орхидеи“. Ако съпоставим двете една до друга виждаме един и същи модел на работа и огромната разлика в резултатите – разликата между шедьовър и посредственост.
Дигам звездичка, защото книгата става за нещо, ако някой се интересува от историята на Ню Йорк през годините, тук може да намери парченца доста ценна информация.

Not the intelligent, playful, loyal, fancy rats that I and my siblings kept as pets; and if I remember correctly once showed competitively, when we were young.

This book just doesn’t match-up to the real life experience of owning a pet as wonderful and as intelligent as a rat. Go to a fancy rat show & you’ll see what I mean (in England see http://www.nfrs.org/ ).

There’s a rational explanation for all of this. The book investigates the life cycle of the urban ‘wild’ rat; every bit as intelligent as it’s more highly bred cousin; but overall possessing problems of image.

This ought to be an interesting book. But to me, with my practical experience of well-bred rodents, this book read painfully like a manufactured publication; a ‘what can I write in a book about rats, that it will grab attention and sell well, so turning a useful profit?’ I gave up about half-way through.

All I can say is thank goodness for urban rats, black and brown. They do an awful lot of cleaning up after Man. Rats would be considerably worse off if Man lived less wastefully, and cleared up better after himself.

All in all, not a book I’d recommend to owners of fancy rats.