Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Oh yeah! Out of the Dust!
I can't believe I forgot about Out of the Dust! Now that you mention it, I totally remember being struck by it! Perhaps I didn't think of it because its written in verse, and in my mind I've always categorized it as a verse novel, not thinking about it being historical. I'll definitely look into Chains. Perhaps I'll read it over break. Thanks Dr. Cole!
Monday, December 13, 2010
Fever 1793 Finished
This being only the second piece of historical fiction that I remember reading (the other being Thomas Pynchon's Mason & Dixon), I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it. I've never been particularly interested in the genre, but I think its fair to say that with this novel, Anderson has sparked in me an new-found appreciation. She does well to create the world of 1793 Philadelphia, and in doing so, proved to me that historical fiction, despite being based in the past, can have a positive affect on reader's in the present. Before I comment on what I particularly appreciated in the novel, I'd just like to say why I read it. My Step Mother works as a librarian at a school for troubled youth. At her school, the entire senior class read this novel, and according to my her, it had a lasting positive effect on the students. Many of them became interested in reading to a degree that they had never been. I found it interesting that a novel set in the late 18th century could have affect students in such a way, so on my Step Mother's advice, I decided to read it.
So, here's a few things that I found interesting in the novel, and one comment on the novel's dialogue (I'll start with that):
1. This is by no means a complaint; I really enjoyed the dialogue in the novel. I'm just second guessing my previous assumptions about the way people spoke in Revolution-era America. It seems to me that most of what I've learned regarding English in the 18th century puts it in a position farther removed from modern-day English. Anderson's dialogue, however, doesn't seem that far removed. Whether or not her dialogue reflects the way people actually spoke at the time, I don't know. Regardless, I'm second-guessing my notions of what it was like. If nothing else, it makes me want to look up information on the topic to educate myself further.
2. Loss of innocence is a prevalent theme in the novel, which is theme I've always found intriguing. It was reminiscent of To Kill a Mockingbird in that way. We have a young female narrator, and we see her change a great deal over the course of the novel. Of course, the ways Mattie and Scout lose their innocence is different, but the outcome is pretty similar. I suppose that losing innocence is something that every adolescent has to go through, and hence, it has become a popular theme of YA lit. In terms of Mattie's specific situation, her loss of innocence is absolutely devastating to the reader. This young woman goes through so much tragedy that one can't help but appreciate the courage she possesses. Having read other works by Anderson, I find that creating powerful characters adept in overcoming adversity is one of her strong points as a writer (Twisted, Wintergirls, and Speak all have strong narrators).
2. The idea of the coffeehouse as type of "social commons" was interesting to me, and I think that it is analogous to several institutions that we utilize for informal conversation today. Technology has done a great deal to increase worldwide communication, and the venue for discussion that was once the coffee shop around the corner has turned into internet chat rooms. It just goes to show that though technology might change, society's values might evolve, people's necessity for communication will never diminish. Whether the year is 45 B.C., 1000 A.D., 1793 A.D., or 2010 A.D., human beings have an inherent need to connect and share their opinions/thoughts with others, if for nothing more than to make sense of the world around them. If I were to ever teach this novel, highlighting this fact would be definitely be one of my unit goals.
3. The appendix at the end of the novel is a useful tool, especially for readers who may have trouble discerning the fact from the fiction. It would certainly be beneficial in a classroom setting, as it would explain the history behind the novel while opening and aiding in discussion of cultural/technological/medical differences between 1793 and today. I've never seen such an appendix in a work of fiction, and I think including it was an excellent move on Anderson's part.
In terms of content, readability, and ability to engage me as a reader, this is one of the better novels that I've read over the course of this semester. The only one that I can say I liked more was To Kill A Mockingbird. I suppose we'll have to wait and see if Fever 1793 joins TKaM as a classic high-school text. I wouldn't be surprised if it did.
So, here's a few things that I found interesting in the novel, and one comment on the novel's dialogue (I'll start with that):
1. This is by no means a complaint; I really enjoyed the dialogue in the novel. I'm just second guessing my previous assumptions about the way people spoke in Revolution-era America. It seems to me that most of what I've learned regarding English in the 18th century puts it in a position farther removed from modern-day English. Anderson's dialogue, however, doesn't seem that far removed. Whether or not her dialogue reflects the way people actually spoke at the time, I don't know. Regardless, I'm second-guessing my notions of what it was like. If nothing else, it makes me want to look up information on the topic to educate myself further.
2. Loss of innocence is a prevalent theme in the novel, which is theme I've always found intriguing. It was reminiscent of To Kill a Mockingbird in that way. We have a young female narrator, and we see her change a great deal over the course of the novel. Of course, the ways Mattie and Scout lose their innocence is different, but the outcome is pretty similar. I suppose that losing innocence is something that every adolescent has to go through, and hence, it has become a popular theme of YA lit. In terms of Mattie's specific situation, her loss of innocence is absolutely devastating to the reader. This young woman goes through so much tragedy that one can't help but appreciate the courage she possesses. Having read other works by Anderson, I find that creating powerful characters adept in overcoming adversity is one of her strong points as a writer (Twisted, Wintergirls, and Speak all have strong narrators).
2. The idea of the coffeehouse as type of "social commons" was interesting to me, and I think that it is analogous to several institutions that we utilize for informal conversation today. Technology has done a great deal to increase worldwide communication, and the venue for discussion that was once the coffee shop around the corner has turned into internet chat rooms. It just goes to show that though technology might change, society's values might evolve, people's necessity for communication will never diminish. Whether the year is 45 B.C., 1000 A.D., 1793 A.D., or 2010 A.D., human beings have an inherent need to connect and share their opinions/thoughts with others, if for nothing more than to make sense of the world around them. If I were to ever teach this novel, highlighting this fact would be definitely be one of my unit goals.
3. The appendix at the end of the novel is a useful tool, especially for readers who may have trouble discerning the fact from the fiction. It would certainly be beneficial in a classroom setting, as it would explain the history behind the novel while opening and aiding in discussion of cultural/technological/medical differences between 1793 and today. I've never seen such an appendix in a work of fiction, and I think including it was an excellent move on Anderson's part.
In terms of content, readability, and ability to engage me as a reader, this is one of the better novels that I've read over the course of this semester. The only one that I can say I liked more was To Kill A Mockingbird. I suppose we'll have to wait and see if Fever 1793 joins TKaM as a classic high-school text. I wouldn't be surprised if it did.
Monday, December 6, 2010
Post #14 - Go Ask Alice - finished
So, over break I read Go Ask Alice, by "Anonymous"
As a little background... the book is "based" on the diary of a teenage girl who is into drugs. It deals with her problems, her triumphs, and ultimately, it ends in tragedy.... she dies due to some drug related mishap, though the reader never finds out what exactly happened to her. There has been a lot of controversy regarding this book, as it seems unclear how closely or loosely it is based on an actual girls diary.
I read the story in 6th grade, and I really liked it a lot. As I read it again, 13 years later, I tried to keep two things in mind: 1. Why did I like this when I was 12 (and all the questions that stem from that)? and 2. How loosely is this based on some girl's diary... does it seem legit?
I didn't really enjoy the book this time around. I think that says a lot about the changes that take place between adolescence and adulthood. When I was 12, I was trying to figure the world out and be rebellious and all that good stuff, so I can see why the book was appealing to me then (also, a girl I liked then recommended it, so I started reading it for that reason, and I ended up enjoying it). It deals with some serious issues that many adolescents face, some of which I faced myself, and some that I found so outrageous I had to read on. I think the main reason I didn't like it this time around stems from (2) above.
When reading it, it felt like an adult was trying to write in the voice of an adolescent. It seemed false. Whether this was because its dated (the diary upon which it is based was written in the mid 70s) or because the woman who published the book took too many liberties, I can't tell, but either way, it didn't feel like the writing of an adolescent. It seemed like the style changed a lot between passages, too. Some were deep and very well written, while others were weaker. As with any writer, the author has her ups and downs, but it almost felt like you could find the places where an adults editorial hand came into play. Lastly, in the beginning, where all of the publication info is listed, it has the "This is a work of fiction, any references to real people and places are completely coincidental..." warning, making it seem even less like a diary.
The final thing I'd like to mention is that at a few points, I think the novel promotes discrimination against homosexuals. Here's why.... the main character... the writer of the diary... finds out that her boyfriend is engaged in a homosexual relationship. She then, in her diary, refers to him like, "that homo" and "that queer," and never touches on the topic again. She also turns him into the police for selling drugs, her decision partially influenced by his homosexuality. I was kind of alarmed that a book intended for adolescents that is so highly published and read would say such things an never clarify or mention anything else on the topic. Perhaps it is due to changes in mainstream culture and acceptance since the publication of the book, but still... it seems pretty odd, and utterly unfortunate.
As a little background... the book is "based" on the diary of a teenage girl who is into drugs. It deals with her problems, her triumphs, and ultimately, it ends in tragedy.... she dies due to some drug related mishap, though the reader never finds out what exactly happened to her. There has been a lot of controversy regarding this book, as it seems unclear how closely or loosely it is based on an actual girls diary.
I read the story in 6th grade, and I really liked it a lot. As I read it again, 13 years later, I tried to keep two things in mind: 1. Why did I like this when I was 12 (and all the questions that stem from that)? and 2. How loosely is this based on some girl's diary... does it seem legit?
I didn't really enjoy the book this time around. I think that says a lot about the changes that take place between adolescence and adulthood. When I was 12, I was trying to figure the world out and be rebellious and all that good stuff, so I can see why the book was appealing to me then (also, a girl I liked then recommended it, so I started reading it for that reason, and I ended up enjoying it). It deals with some serious issues that many adolescents face, some of which I faced myself, and some that I found so outrageous I had to read on. I think the main reason I didn't like it this time around stems from (2) above.
When reading it, it felt like an adult was trying to write in the voice of an adolescent. It seemed false. Whether this was because its dated (the diary upon which it is based was written in the mid 70s) or because the woman who published the book took too many liberties, I can't tell, but either way, it didn't feel like the writing of an adolescent. It seemed like the style changed a lot between passages, too. Some were deep and very well written, while others were weaker. As with any writer, the author has her ups and downs, but it almost felt like you could find the places where an adults editorial hand came into play. Lastly, in the beginning, where all of the publication info is listed, it has the "This is a work of fiction, any references to real people and places are completely coincidental..." warning, making it seem even less like a diary.
The final thing I'd like to mention is that at a few points, I think the novel promotes discrimination against homosexuals. Here's why.... the main character... the writer of the diary... finds out that her boyfriend is engaged in a homosexual relationship. She then, in her diary, refers to him like, "that homo" and "that queer," and never touches on the topic again. She also turns him into the police for selling drugs, her decision partially influenced by his homosexuality. I was kind of alarmed that a book intended for adolescents that is so highly published and read would say such things an never clarify or mention anything else on the topic. Perhaps it is due to changes in mainstream culture and acceptance since the publication of the book, but still... it seems pretty odd, and utterly unfortunate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)