Customer Reviews for

Naked: The Life and Pornography of Michael Lucas

Average Rating 2.5
( 3 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously
Sort by: Showing all of 3 Customer Reviews
Page 1 of 1
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 13, 2014

    I'm not sure that this is written by the Corey Taylor that they

    I'm not sure that this is written by the Corey Taylor that they say it is.......

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted February 27, 2013



    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted July 29, 2007

    Porn Made Boring

    The under-qualified author writes in fawning adulation of his subject 'Michael Lewis', and has produced a stream-of-consciousness work of sycophantry. The viewpoints are odd, not curious, but odd, even galling at times. For example, by virtue of the subject's husband's alumni status, the subject is given the opportunity to speak to students at a Yale Master's Tea. Afterward, the author writes that the subject 'had joined company with other greats. . . like John McCain, Oliver Stone, Meryl Streep, [&] Kurt Vonnegut. . . .' Nowhere is the subject's greatness explained or demonstrated, rather it is assumed from the outset, and extolled as a means of proving its factuality. The delusion continues as the subject declares that because he has used New York's Fire Island as a location in several films, the local residents 'should put a monument to me on Fire Island, but they are way too arrogant for that.' The author fails to cite this as an example of the subject's own arrogance, but rather appears to quote the subject in steadfast agreement. All in all, this is a poorly-edited, exhaustingly-quoted, and failed attempt at a clinical analysis of its subject, lacking objectivity or excitement. Only upon reaching the epilogue does the reader discover that the subject terminated contact with the author during the course of the project. One can only wonder if the subject saw an early draft, and pulled out as a means of damage control.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
Sort by: Showing all of 3 Customer Reviews
Page 1 of 1