Papegøyens hevn, issued on Cappelen, was reviewed in Norway's major newspapers. It was a meta-novel about a manuscript also called Papegøyens hevn (English: Revenge of the Parrot), about a married couple and a parrot, written anonymously and issued by Cappelen. After the book won a Brage Prize, "Aksel Fugelli" fraudulently came forward as its author. Part of the novel's purpose was to satirize the Norwegian book publishing business and literary critics.[5]
The initial criticisms stemmed from Bergen, where Bergens Tidende called the book "grotesque" and with an "anal fixation". Bergensavisen called it "nauseating" and issued the mediocre "die throw" 3 out of 6. Adresseavisen rounded off the initial wave of reviews, calling the novel a "Bloviated provocation": "The novel asks for trouble, but in such a bloviated and nonchalant, easy-going way that there is little to arouse trouble for". On the other hand, all three critics found good formulations here and there.[5][6][7]
Next, Nordlys published a positive criticism: "His [Fugelli's] language is devil-may-care, raw, deliciously nutty, with a rare degree of power and drive".[8] Much of the same was to be found in the review of another regional newspaper Fædrelandsvennen.[9] The novel fared worse in the Oslo newspapers Dagbladet and VG, with the former calling it "empty", "strange", "half-hearted" and "dumb" and the latter calling it "mean" (and issuing a "die throw" of 2).[10][11] Both Aftenposten and the smaller Sandefjords Blad regarded novel as a "weak" effort from an otherwise skilled writer.[12][13] Unlike previous reviews, these newspapers disclosed that some of the grotesque and provoking scenes were descriptions of animal cruelty.[13][14]
The phrase Tøffe tider for gentlemen (English: Tough Times for Gentlemen) was used in 2001 in conjunction with the music project Rangle.[3][15] It too had several autobiographic elements, describing Bergen youth of the 1990s, as well as an infamous instance when a live penguin was stolen from the Bergen Aquarium.[16] The book got a mediocre review in Bergens Tidende, issuing 3 out of 6 points, adding that sex scenes in the book were on par with those receiving a Bad Sex in Fiction Award.[17][18] Stavanger Aftenblad however gave a favorable "die throw" of 5, regarding the characters and the "sketch-like" plot as easy-going and fun.[19]
