[1.5]
I'd heard the bad reviews, I saw it on everyone's worst books of lists. But I'm telling you I went in with an open mind! I had this recommended by someone who actually liked it and that was my final straw for finally picking it up. I thought "hey it might be good, I like a lot of unpopular books".

To sum up my thoughts and feelings, I present to you a list of ways one might interpret this book from most to least generous:

1. The author is actually a great writer and I just don't get it/the writing style isn't for me

2. The author intended this as a satire, but I don't get it

3. The author intended this as a satire, but it's a very poorly done one

4. The author is a terrible writer who doesn't know the meaning of words or how to use appropriate metaphors and similes but wrote this as a genuine effort

5. The author wrote this in like one night with minimal effort to meet a deadline

6. The author wrote this in like one night with minimal effort as a quick-ish cash grab

7. The author is a troll who is laughing at any of us who try to genuinely critique this book

Personally I think I'm gonna pick door number four, but I kind of hope it's seven.

I will say that this book was an entertaining way to spend a few hours. I made a game of highlighting in my ebook all the instances of shitty metaphors and similes (occasionally misused words, ascetic and lavish can't be used to describe the same thing; brackish water is a mix of salt and freshwater NOT pond water) and found that per page there was about an average of about 3-4, times that by 128 pages and you see the major problem with this book (and I didn't highlight the ones that were cliches or that I thought worked quite well). Some of the metaphors were so bad I had to laugh out loud. That Khaw chose to use "the colour of expensive chalk" to describe white cloth not once, but twice! Describing spiderwebs as looking like umbilical cords was a... creative choice. Several things were described using more than one simile that were incongruous or just a waste of words ("the colour of expensive chalk, or bone left out in the sun" girl, just pick one!).

The was a real mix of themes as well in the descriptions, leaving it at best tonally confused. The main themes I noticed were:
- Christian/Catholic metaphors (particularly egregious as this is set in a Heian period mansion in Japan and non of the characters are described as Christian)
- parts of the brain
- art techniques
- modern cultural references (forbes magazine, quarterbacks)
- probably more that I'm forgetting, and then just a whole lotta random nonsense

I will warn that the gore in the last part of the book made even my usually strong stomach turn a bit. So I guess one small part of the horror was done well. Other than that, it was a bunch of people being really bratty and petty who hate each other but will visit a haunted mansion together and then constantly bicker and act like general horror movie idiots despite the corny references to "if this were a horror movie..." ugh. Which is why it ALMOST works as a satire and could have been a great one, but alas we are left with this instead.