Wednesday, March 11, 2009

I Am Legend - Richard Matheson

A while back when I watched the Will Smith movie version of I AM LEGEND and posted about it, several people recommended that I read Richard Matheson’s source novel, something that I’d been meaning to do. Well, now I have, and everybody was right: other than the fact that it’s also relentlessly depressing, it’s really different from the movie, and really good, too.

No need to go into the plot. Most of you already know it. Two things impressed me about the book. One is how well it works as both horror and well-thought-out science fiction. I’m sure there have been other novels that achieved such a mixture, but right off-hand, I can’t think of any that accomplished it as well. The other thing that stands out for me is the sheer readability of Matheson’s prose. I was sitting there reading along, and I suddenly realized that I’d read seventy or eighty pages in what seemed like no time at all. In these days when I have to slog through too many books where the writing just doesn’t compel me to go on, an experience like that is rare. I’m not enough of a technician to pinpoint exactly how a writer does that, either. A lot of hard work and a little magic, I suspect.

That's the original edition pictured above. I read the edition of the novel that was issued as a tie-in with the recent movie, and it’s a good deal because you get not only the novel but also ten of Matheson’s excellent short stories, ranging from the Fifties to the Eighties. Several of these I remember reading when they first came out, but I enjoyed reading them again. Among them is “Prey”, originally published in PLAYBOY, which was adapted into a TV-movie featuring Karen Black and a vicious little African doll with a knife. Like a lot of people who were around in the Seventies, I remember that movie very vividly, but I had forgotten that it was based on a Matheson story.

I suspect that most of you reading this have already read I AM LEGEND. If you haven’t, I highly recommend it. A grim but excellent book.

13 comments:

Patrick Shawn Bagley said...

I have a nice trade paperback that collects I AM LEGEND and HELL HOUSE along with several of Matheson's short stories.

pattinase (abbott) said...

I read it for the first time last year and I was absolutely blown away by it. I think the movie really went in the wrong direction midway through, making it a much more generic story.

Randy Johnson said...

It's long been a favorite of mine. I was severely disappointed in all three movie versions of the story.

OlmanFeelyus said...

That's a gorgeous cover on that original edition. The most memorable and moving scene for me was the stuff with the dog. Oh, that hurt!

Yes, they completely blew the ending in the movie.

Juri said...

It must be one of the best novels ever, in any genre or non-genre.

One thing bothers me though: why is it I AM A LEGEND? My sense of English grammar would seem to requite "a" in there.

madshadows said...

Well after reading this blog entry it has inspired me to order the book off play.com, I'm looking forward to reading it.

Todd Mason said...

Well, Damon Knignt (much to Ed Gorman's disgust) and Spider Robinson to a less stringent degree have criticized Matheson's use of the language (and Knight Matheson's fumble with the biology in this novel), but I AM LEGEND in this case, Juri, implies that in the world of vampires, the human is a looming, super-legend, not just A legend...though, of course, not in the way that the protag thinks he is.

Charles Gramlich said...

I have the "I am Legend/Hell House" collection. Definitely well worth a read.

Gary Dobbs/Jack Martin said...

I've heard so much about this one over the years. I believe Stephen King is a big fan. Never read it myself - shall have to.

Juri said...

Oops, Todd got my meaning even though I should've of course written: "why isn't it I AM A LEGEND"? But okay, I accept your explanation. Even though I find that "I am legendary" might be better, but then again that's not as catchy.

Anonymous said...

"Damon Knignt (much to Ed Gorman's disgust) and Spider Robinson to a less stringent degree have criticized Matheson's use of the language"

The more I read about Knight and Robinson, the more I get the impression that they were a couple of jackasses, at least in regards to their criticism.

Todd Mason said...

Well, Andy, I wouldn't say so, but as even Knight's admirers would admit, when he was offended by something, he didn't stay his hand. Robinson can be kind of blindly forgiving of anything Robert Heinlein did, but usually he's been pretty sharp, well-informed, and while not crocthet-free even beyond RAH idolatry, even-handed. The examples they cited of the flaws in Matheson's work were genuine, but as Robinson noted, there are virtues to Matheson's work that are all but inarguable.

You might not agree with their critiques in various details, but they are definitely worth reading. Knight's fiction was brilliant, as well, at least his short fiction (he didn't learn how to write a novel till the last decade of his life...his first successful one was CV). Robinson doesn't seem to challenge himself nearly as often, but particularly in his first decade, he offered some interesting, ambitious work.

Rabid Fox said...

I am in full agreement. I saw the film, liked it. Read the novel, loved it. It's easily included as one of my all-time favorites now, and I'm on the lookout for "Hell House."