Breakfast of Champions

De: Kurt Vonnegut

Narrado por: John Malkovich

Audie Award Finalist, Best Male Narrator, 2016

Breakfast of Champions (1973) provides frantic, scattershot satire and a collage of Vonnegut's obsessions. His recurring cast of characters and American landscape was perhaps the most controversial of his canon; it was felt by many at the time to be a disappointing successor to Slaughterhouse-Five, which had made Vonnegut's literary reputation.

The core of the novel is Kilgore Trout, a familiar character very deliberately modeled on the science fiction writer Theodore Sturgeon (1918-1985), a fact that Vonnegut conceded frequently in interviews and that was based upon his own occasional relationship with Sturgeon. Here Kilgore Trout is an itinerant wandering from one science fiction convention to another; he intersects with the protagonist, Dwayne Hoover (one of Vonnegut's typically boosterish, lost, and stupid mid-American characters), and their intersection is the excuse for the evocation of many others, familiar and unfamiliar, dredged from Vonnegut's gallery. The central issue is concerned with intersecting and apposite views of reality, and much of the narrative is filtered through Trout, who is neither certifiably insane nor a visionary writer but can pass for either depending upon Dwayne Hoover's (and Vonnegut's) view of the situation.

America, when this novel was published, was in the throes of Nixon, Watergate, and the unraveling of our intervention in Vietnam; the nation was beginning to fragment ideologically and geographically, and Vonnegut sought to cram all of this dysfunction (and a goofy, desperate kind of hope, the irrational comfort given through the genre of science fiction) into a sprawling narrative whose sense, if any, is situational, not conceptual. Reviews were polarized; the novel was celebrated for its bizarre aspects and became the basis of a Bruce Willis movie adaptation whose reviews were not nearly so polarized. (Most critics hated it.)

Download the accompanying reference guide.©1973 Kurt Vonnegut (P)2015 Audible, Inc.

Well read

It's was a little slow and fry for Vonnegut in my opinion but none the less a good novel with excellent reading. John Malkovich was an interesting choice but absolutely nailed the overall tone of the story. I probably would listen again but we'll worth it at least once. Anyone struggling with it: finish it. trust me the ending is worth it.

Vonnegut Masterpiece. Malkovich a bit lacking.

Kurt Vonnegut's masterpiece is delivered adequately by Mr Malkovich, a bit monotone and lacking in enunciation at times, but makes up for it with his extraordinary voice character.

My favorite book to date.

This is my favorite book to date, and John Malkovich fits the bill perfectly, etc.

John Malkovich is the perfect match

Breakfast of Champions as narrated by John Malkovich is the best book/performer pairing I’ve encountered yet. If I could give more than 5 stars to his work here, I would.

This book/performance is my favorite of the year (96 titles so far). Highly recommend for all lovers of Kurt Vonnegut or those who want a strange and wonderful break from classic literature.

Kurt Vonnegut had a remarkable way of exploding word colors.

I'm never surprised with my own affinity with Vonnegut. My infinite cynicism and skeptical nature find refuge in his outrageous process.

Malkovich obviously means every word It is delightful.

classic made better by Malcovich narration

a review requires at least twenty words. no doubt vonnegut would disapprove. imagine Malcovich reading this review.

The 70's will never get sane.

This is only a memory jogger for me.
Kurt Vonnegut is one of the reasons why, he captures the insanity very well , I just wish he recognized it as insanity. I don't want to revisit

the perfect performance

Not just a profound text, but one that lended itself to bring tag with surprising vigor. The performance made out better than I'd hoped for!

maybe my expectations were the problem

I love Kurt Vonnegut so with John malkovich reading, what could go wrong?
The reader was incredibly monotone, significantly more than I've seen him perform other things.

This is my first time not completely enjoying a work of Kurt Vonnegut and I'm assuming it's because of the reader because I highly doubt it's because of the material. buck maybe I'm mistaken.

Not a coherent story

I understand the beauty in disorganized thought. But this sort of writing style often feels rambling to me and is not something I enjoy reading. I liked some parts of the book, as it made you think, and become reflective of humanity, nature and society, but in my opinion those moments where over thrown by ramblings. Some of the deepest reflections upon life come from madmen. But you have to filter though the madness to obtain the nuggets of brilliance.