::READERS REVIEWS::

meh - groundbreaking story and literary archetype? yes. that's why i give three stars. decently constructed narrative? sure. the writing, though? not good. it's worth reading because it's a classic of literary and pop culture, but to say bloch is a master writer of the genre is not only stretching it, it kinda makes me, oh, i dunno, want to go put on a dress and wig, get a straight razor and . . . make one hell of a ham sandwich.

EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF NOVEL WRITING - PSYCHO is maybe the best example there is of how to construct and write a novel.

Norman Bates is as fragile as a soap bubble, and Bloch milks Bates' pathology and circumstances for every drop of mayhem possible.

But its the architecture of this book that is impressive. Schools should use it to illustrate how you write a masterpiece with chewing gum and duct tape.

Brilliant! - Having loved the film for years, I thought it was time to read the book that inspired it. What a delight. The writing is suspenseful and clear. The characters are well drawn and three dimensional. The intersection of chapters that allows the reader to see what different characters are doing simultaneously is dynamic and keeps the reader intrigued.

As for the story itself, well it is simply brilliant. The action starts quickly and never lets up. Norman Bates is far more developed and sinister than in the film. Mary Crane is dark and depressing. Even Sam Loomis is complicated! Poor old Norman Bates just cannot seem to catch a break, well, until he has a break down.

The only complaint I have is that my very old used copy (that is aging and looks like was once for sale at the checkout of a supermarket) has quite a few spelling mistakes and weird errors: Lila becomes Lisa for 3 pages and punction is sporadic for a page! (I thought is was funny more so than anything else.)

The book is just superb. The last lines linger in your mind. I highly recommend it!

Powerful, harrowing novel - I have been reading this book and have only a little more than 23 pages to the end. However, so far, I have been bowled over by the strong use of language and the way themes and concepts are introduced! This is one book that I think could (and possibly should) be assigned to read in junior high or high school. That's how moved I am by it. The human condition is one of the central threads of the tlae and you and I being human can certainly relate to that if I'm not mistaken.

A Pulp Masterpiece - First off, I was a fan of the movie before I read the book. There's no doubt that the movie is a classic, a must-see for any fan of the horror genre and one of the scariest films of all time, but the book is a classic in itself. Essentially, the plot in the book is the same as the movie, but there are big changes in dialogue and in several other details (Ex. The character Mary Crane is named Marian in the movie, Norman in the book offers Mary coffee to go with her food while Norman in the movie offers Marian milk.)

The biggest difference is that Norman Bates in the book isn't the clean-cut kid that we see in the movie. Anthony Perkins was great as Norman, but the Norman in the book is someone that a lot of people can level with: Anthony Perkins plays as the twenty-something mama's boy, Norman in the book is a 40 year-old pervert with a lot of personal problems that are pretty much out in the open for the reader to see (he's an alcholic for one thing.) With the movie, it is difficult to see how Norman deals with his struggles with Mother, and we see him as someone that we can easily sympathize with because aside from his anger towards his mother, and his willingness to protect her after the murders began, he still seems to be a pretty nice kid until we discover the truth that he is his mother. The original Norman that we see is a chilling portrayal of a sexually-repressed psychopath(with more than one personality, of course.) When it comes down to it, the Norman we see in the book is grittier and more true to life than in the movie, which is not to insult Hitchcock or Perkins.

The book itself is fast-paced and an easy read, not all good books need esoteric prose or footnotes at the end of every sentence, and although the movie has definitely outlived the book, the book is where the idea came from in the first place; if not for Psycho the book, Psycho the movie would never exist. We also shouldn't forget that this novel was written by Robert Bloch, a master of the horror genre, respected and loved by the best writers in the field (if you don't believe me, check out Appreciations of the Master by Robert Bloch, edited by Richard Matheson and Ricia Meinhardt) For me, Psycho is good read that is worth re-reading at no great cost (it only took me a day to read the darn thing for goodness sake!)

Excellent page-turner, bested by the film - I read this book through in a few short sessions, and I could certainly see reading it in full in one longer sitting. It's an American classic in horror as we all know, but having seen the film I could not help but make continuous comparisons to the film.

Often I prefer the book to the film, "The Shining" comes to mind, but here it's the opposite, I think anything left out of the film that was in the book was almost always the right thing to do. Some of the slower parts in the book helped to add proper atmosphere I suppose, but I still feel they could have been left out. Furthermore, the character of Norman Bates is more interesting as the tall, thin, shifty Anthony Perkins than the fat, be-speckled fellow we meet in the book.

Let me just brag a bit and say that when I first saw the film, the ending was unknown to me, I'm probably one of the few people still around who can say that, and it did make the film a lot more frightening at the time. That being said, if you're like I was, I'd recommend the movie first, read the book later, it will be a much more memorable experience. I did enjoy how Bloch subtly handled Normans interactions with mother, and that's all I will say.