Attachments by Rainbow Rowell

Title: Attachments
Author: Rainbow Rowell
Original Publication Date: April 14, 2011
Pages: 336

A sweet and funny read with all the awkwardness of the situation beaming at the reader.

Rowell provides witty characters with just the right amount of quirkiness enough to make the reader identify, if not love them. The pop culture references, especially the sci-fi ones are delightful, and doesn't seem to be forced and out of context.

The setting and the character dilemmas of the story would provide a good rapport especially to late-bloomers.

Every Day by David Levithan

Author: Every Day
Title: David Levithan
Original Publicaiton Date: 2012
Pages: 322


It would seem that David Levithan has no love for the traditional linear narrative form of story writing. The Lover's Dictionary (1 Star) is in, as its namesake suggests, dictionary entries. Every Day too is not of the traditional linear form. It has no beginnings, and it knows no ends. It began where it ended, and it ends where it began. Searching for closure here would be an act in vain.

Every Day tells us the existence of an entity which inhabits a body for just one day. For one day it gets to live in that body. On the next day, it is randomly transferred to yet another body. The concept is terrifying and hauntingly beautiful. But David Levithan chose the dilemma of loving in that momentary living as the focal point of the story. In so doing he presents us various lives of what can be readily seen as stereotypical teenagers like metalheads, depressed individuals, jocks, cheerleaders, nerds, and teens struggling with their identities.

I like the two messages I picked up in this book. The form without end and beginning gives credence to the leitmotif that we should live in the present just as the entity does, living day by day in different bodies. The second that love is universal, that it is not solely anchored on our physical facet but on the person as a whole, that it is not just between man and woman. I think this book made a lot more sense because Levithan did not endeavor to elaborate on the mysterious aspects but instead played on the emotions involved, I like that he did not clear up the mysteries. You may feel cheated, ending up where he started, but Levithan played that real good.

The Fault in Our Stars by John Green

Title: The Fault in Our Stars
Author: John Green
Publisher: Dutton Books
Original Publication Date: January 10, 2012
Pages: 318

This is a story of boy meets girl. 

The boy, Augustus Waters of Indianapolis, walked with a hobbling gait, a crooked and triumphant gait. This gait perhaps was a metaphor for particular triumph over osteosarcoma a year and a half ago that will lead us to a belief fraught with existential crises. The boy loved metaphors. A passion that perhaps sets this story in motion, for the girl might have been very a well a metaphor for a ghost. The girl, Hazel Grace Lancaster, loved only two things. The first, the fact that she has stayed true to the precarious belief that once she leaves this world, she will not have caused a scar; the second, the novel An Imperial Affliction and how she unceasingly yearns for a plausible denouement to its story. She did not know she will love a third time. Augustus meets Hazel in the heart of Jesus, cradling a cancer-support group peppered with stories of lost balls, encumbered by wars pre-destined to be lost, and haunted by lists populated by those who must be remembered as commanded by the ratio, 14:1.  He knew immediately that she’s his forever.

This is a story of boy meets girl. But you should know up front, this is not a love story.*

It’s not 'just another' love story.

I have not read other fictional novels containing cancer, or ones whose characters are fighting cancer, except for those medical journals and publications I happen to randomly come across once in a while, which of course cannot be compared in its aspects. So I do not have any point of comparison whether John Green aspired and achieved differently what he sought to when he wrote The Fault in Our Stars. What I have read however is his three other books, and perhaps I have substantial grounding to compare it.

John Green's stories are formulaic. They follow an identical framework, one which John Green's fidelity in rendering his books under such distinguishable yet ubiquitous rubric is, arguably, second to none. Let me say now that The Fault in Our Stars has been shaped under the same rubric. It is, essentially, no different from his three other books, only now instead of depression, teen angst and dubious teenage know-it-all rebellion, we have cancer as the mechanism that sets this story in motion.

This was a tragedy fraught with an existential crisis. Why you ask? It's simple. I have believed that for tragedies to have those heart wrenching and tear jerkers, the characters have to slowly, or all at once, identify and connect with the reader. This is not saying that empathy is no less of a medium in such instances, but, as I have felt in Green's earlier works, it is hard to identify with his characters.

It is hard because they seemed to be unreal, and even raising the characters to a pedestal, accentuating them as heroic models seemed to have failed for me. I'm not saying they are unreal in the sense that the pain and suffering that Green wrote in his characters are unreal (that is the part that actually successfully came across to me). What seemed unreal to me is that, aside from the frivolous aspect of these teenagers randomly spouting words like existential, hamartia, and resonances in everyday conversation, for basketball free throws and fleeting shadows which just seemed a tad unrealistic, it was that they suffered from immanent character inconsistencies.

It is curious to me why a person bent on leaving the least mark and scars on this world would readily go out and commit on leaving another scar. Or that a person detesting leaving legacies would seem to act in way that is characterized by nothing but leaving one (but then again this was the actual point of the book, wasn't it?). Or even of the fact that a person who lost a leg to cancer, even if declared free from it for a year and a half, would not engage in regular check ups only to be struck down with a massive recurrence. I'm not knowledgeable on this, but it seems stupid considering the vicious stories of virility and incomparable propensity of cancer cells to relapse (the cancer in this instance was one of those instances that it was relegated as a mere plot device). Perhaps too much love of metaphors makes one forget of the real things that matter.

Reading this was unique. I somehow visualized it as having composed of two parts. The romantic YA part and the part of story tackling cancer. The foregoing discussion has pertained, not strictly but majorly to the YA parts, which I rated 2.5 Stars. The parts which 'really' talked about cancer, I gave another 2.5 stars. I made it this way because I too felt that Green managed to capture a fraction of the truth on cancer and its derivatives, on teens fighting it.

For example, this statement is no stranger to me:

“Any attempts to feign normal social interactions were just depressing because it was so glaringly obvious that everyone I spoke to for the rest of my life would feel awkward and self-conscious around me, except maybe kids like Jackie who just didn't know any better.”

In its actuality, this rating is a five out of 10 but I am not stingy enough not to give that real five-star rating as it has some considerable leg to stand on. If I were a teen and was rating this, I would have felt five would have been an understatement. This proposition stands on a two-fold premise.

Green's quotability is one. I may not have been ineffably impressed with his prose, but he sure wrote a book peppered with statements and phrases one could unceasingly quote. It occurs to me that there are many ways to romanticize this work, this is one. Perhaps this too is the reason I've been seeing an innumerable number of Facebook posts that previously I did not know originated from this book.

This for example fully delivers.

"I fell in love the way you fall asleep: slowly, and then all at once."

Or this hidden gem here.

"....it occurred to me that the voracious ambition of humans is never sated by dreams coming true, because there is always the thought that everything might be done better and again."

But the real strength of this book lies in its audacity to compel, or endear people to read it, which in turn has led to an immeasurable number of audience. From the individuals whom I've considered as intellectual forces to be reckoned within Goodreads and in personal circles, to those who are much like my sister where young teen giddy love is alive, not only have they found the time to read this book, they even took time to write reviews bearing their hearts out. Considering this in a global scale, I do not doubt that a lot of people came to appreciate reading, or perhaps had their first real reading experience with this book. That is something great. John Green made that happen. This book made it happen. Of course, this should, as it is, only be the footstep of what is to be a marvelous development in reading for individuals.

The general message is actually good. Let not sickness define you.

Withal, I further learned to never again underestimate the power of peer pressure, or one's sister's coercive and threatening gesture to force you to read something.

P.S.
I hated Augustus' cigarette metaphor and strongly stand that it was pointless and dangerously equivocal of his intentions. I recognize that this is a desperate act for any semblance of control in answer to the recalcitrant cancer, but still, it failed for me.


*opening italicized lines lifted from 500 Days of Summer :)

The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making (Fairyland, #1) by Catherynne Valente

Title: The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making (Fairyland, #1)
Author:  Catherynne Valente
Publisher: Feiwel & Friends
Original Publication Date: May 10, 2011
Pages: 247

“Make it a rule never to give a child a book you would not read yourself.” 

― George Bernard Shaw

I love reading, and I want my future children, and my future children’s children to love it too. I cannot however, just as any form or object of love, force them to love it too, what I can do however is guide them in learning to love it, by helping them sort through the millions of books out there, directing them to the good ones, to the really really good ones. The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland in a Ship of Her Own Making now occupies a special place in that future for my children. This goes to show that I too enjoyed this book. 

The book’s narration shifts back and forth from an omniscient narrator to the second person point of view. The usage of the technique is wonderful. It radiates the feeling that the book itself is telling you the story, an aspect that perhaps highlights the book’s age appropriateness as a children’s literature. The narration gives of a lively, vibrant and engaging narration. There are a lot of references to creatures of fantasy both familiar and unique to the book which is in keeping to its general plot. These creatures however are vividly portrayed in manner that will not give children the nightmares. I do not recall encountering big words, jargons, or technical definitions. The conversations were natural, crisp and direct. What sets this book apart from most children’s lit is the prose with which Valente wrote in. It is neither an exaggeration nor romanticism in play when I say that this is one of the most fluid and beautiful prose I’ve have read. The book cover and the drawings are adorable. The book’s entirety is simply riveting. 

As most children’s books go, this is no exception to its class in its distinctive features in respect of the substance and weight of its message, subtlety in delivery of that message and of course the conclusion, to which I am reminded again that it is us, adults who have suffered through a decadence of belief and imagination, who need dumbing downs in our daily serving of dreams, fantasy, and literature. Let me liberally quote statements from the book which adults know of as reality.

“And she definitely wanted to get somewhere, even if she didn’t know where somewhere was. (25)”

“But splendid things are often frightening. Sometimes, it’s the fright that makes them splendid at all. (39)”

And one of my personal favorites…

“When you are born,” the golem said softly, “your courage is new and clean. You are brave enough for anything: crawling off of staircases, saying your first words without fearing that someone will think you are foolish, putting strange things in your mouth. But as you get older, your courage attracts gunk and crusty things and dirt and fear and knowing how bad things can get and what pain feels like. By the time you’re half-grown, your courage barely moves at all, it’s so grunged up with living.(56)”

“Of course not. No one is chosen. Not ever. Not in the real world. You chose to climb out of your window and ride on a Leopard. You chose to get a witch’s Spoon back and to make friends with a Wyvern. You chose to trade your shadow for a child’s life. You chose not to let the Marquess hurt your friend—you chose to smash her cages! You chose to face your own death, not to balk at a great sea to cross and no ship to cross it in. And twice now, you have chosen not to go home when you might have, if only you abandoned your friends. You are not the chosen one, September. (162)”

These are some of the messages in this book to which pales however to the message its entirety seeks to impart, that of loving, losing and letting go. Truly it is a masterpiece to deliver this kind of real life lessons in a medium such as children’s book and still convey it without loss of substance. I will be looking forward to the other books in this series with delight, designate a special place in my future children’s book shelves and definitely recommend it to someone looking for a delightful read.  

Eleanor & Park by Rainbow Rowell

Title: Eleanor & Park
Author: Rainbow Rowell
Publisher: Orion
Original Publication Date: April 12, 2012
Pages: 325

Sad stories make for good books. The better statement would be that sad stories are treasure troves for writers to make books about.

At least this statement holds true for Eleanor and Park as it does for most YA Romance books, in the likes of John Green's, Daniel Handler's or the other various books in this genre. I read this book after reading a number of Saramago's books which are laden with sentences paragraphs long, Eleanor & Park, was, as one would say it, a welcome break. As it would turn out, the reading itself was not however a welcoming experience.

STORY
There was a sense of familiarity with this book, which is sadly, not of the good kind you experience reading coveted stories of childhood like that of Atticus Finch, or of even of the fictional world of Le Guin's where deliverance from nostalgia is an unwelcomed visitor. No. Unlike the desire to embrace and revel in this book's familiarity, one tends to get tired and exhausted. The first romance between two teens, both with familial problems and issues of their own is lifted straight out of cliche and hackneyed themes. I've read it a number of times and in every case, the essential struggle, if not the sole aim, is to find something new the book, the story, the characters, the author is offering. Sadly, the book was not able to discharge this burden.

HISTORICAL SETTING
I'm not a pundit but it doesn't need one to see that the story development and the social and factual setting of this story, in 1986, is in conflict and inconsistent. Discrimination and preferential treatment in those days were not as subtle as it is of this age. I simply felt that there was a lot of potential in Park as this half Korean kid whose mother was directly taken from Korea right after the American perversion, sorry, assertion of capitalistic designs disguised through its affirmation of its unilaterally defined democratic principles in the Vietnam War. The point is, I think Park would have been more interesting if he wasn't defined by the traditional sibling rivalry which to some extent Rowell did endeavor on, only she did not expound on it.

NARRATIVE FORMAT
As standard YA Romance novels go, the book falls under the stream of consciousness thought, albeit the narrative is directed by the alternating POVs of the male and female protagonist. The narrative is interlaced with conversations that are direct and crisp, which makes this book really an easy read and hastily contributes to that well neglected reading challenge. The problem with the alternating POVs is that sometimes it borders repetitiveness, though it may also stand for recognition of the emphasis and weight of the moment in the book.

The Maze Runner (Maze Runner Trilogy #1) by James Dashner

Title: The Maze Runner (Maze Runner Trilogy #1)
Author: James Dashner
Publisher: Delacorte Press
Original Publication Date: October 6, 2009
Pages: 374

The Maze Runner is like Pandora's box. As the mysteries haven't been revealed just as Pandora's box haven't been opened, it remains to have this unlimited, unknown potential. This statement comes after reading the main trilogy under Maze Runner, and is a subtle way of saying, that  I really liked how James Dashner conceived this world, but did not so much as appreciate how he ended it. Tragic and disappointing.

The Lover's Dictionary by David Levithan

Title: The Lover's Dictionary
Author: David Levithan
Publisher: Farrar, Straus and Giroux 
Original Publication Date: 2011
Pages: 211



Belated 
adjective 
1 : delayed beyond the usual time
2 : existing or appearing past the normal or proper time

Actually took me up until letter B to realize that I was bored reading it.

Drop/Dropped
transitive verb
1 : to let fall : cause to fall
2 a : give up 2, abandon

I am putting this into my DNF shelf. I cannot simply force myself to finish this! I think my upcoming finals schedule is taxing enough. Also I forcibly placed this so that 'did not finish' could be inserted, just like how the book felt, a lot of the entries were rather conventional, if not forced. No fluidity.

Continuance
noun
1 : continuation
2 : the extent of continuing : duration
3 : the quality of enduring : permanence

So I will be enduring this, because I know it takes a lot of trees to produce copies of this book. it will be a waste and shame to the trees to simply stop at letter B.

Tree
noun
1 a : a woody perennial plant having a single usually elongate main stem generally with few or no branches on its lower part
b : a shrub or herb of arborescent form

Wasted paper. Wasted trees. The format aimed to be novel and fresh and exciting. I'm telling you now it was nothing like that but large chunks of wasted spaces. In contrast to Nicole Krauss' History of Love and Jonathan Foer's Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close which masterfully employed this minimalist aspect in type-setting, I see nothing but fragmented struggling minimal entries in paper.

Hodgepodge
noun
: a heterogeneous mixture : jumble

The dictionary entry styles barely made any sense. Interjected themes, issues and ideas where they would randomly fit through the words. At the risk of being redundant, there was no fluidity.

Honesty
noun
1 obsolete : chastity
2 a : fairness and straightforwardness of conduct
b : adherence to the facts : sincerity

I confess I only read this because I failed to find a copy of Raymond Carvers' book What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.
I also confess, I never got past B. Sorry trees.

Looking for Alaska by John Green

Title: Looking For Alaska
Author: John Green
Publisher: Dutton Children's Books
Original Publication Date: 2005
Pages: 231

Here's the second book borne out of having been lost in a labyrinth that is Tolstoy (it is true that YA are easy reads, with respect to Looking for Alaska though, that is an understatement).

John Green's first book that I have first read, which interestingly, did not leave any hint of novelty. The reason is conspicuous enough. The plot is conventional and prevalent (predictable too). Who hasn't read, or heard of, of teenagers who know everything, of people who believe they stand at the top of the world only to be confronted by something beyond comprehension? Relegating the plot, perhaps the characters echo of redemption. I am again to be disheartened. The characters were the embodiment of stereotypes. Miles (stereotypical nerd) who leaves for boarding school only to search for his "Great Perhaps". What is surprising however is that Miles forgets this Great Perhaps of his only to reemerge in the last parts. One can hardly argue that his stay was his Great Perhaps, as the stereotypical nerd, he gets pushed and nicknamed Pudge, (where's any hint of a Great Perhaps?) with no attempt ror what so ever of shaking off occurred, in the contrary, Miles subdued himself to it, he pays for Colonel's cigarettes, and is of course forever chided by Alaska. Colonel (stereotype of a cool friend who strives because of a definitive family background). Alaska as the stereotype of the hot and smart girl who I guess Green envisioned to be near perfect in light of his feminism (who doesn't ever go beyond the pseudo-feminist bickering), a roomful of books and precal tutorials. So everybody likes her, but hell, you can't have her because once you thought so she'll start spouting that she's oh so loyal, right after making out with her.

Miles lost any redemption towards his Great Escape, something the author conventionally concludes through their predicament of "looking for Alaska". And if to add insult to injury, they never really did find Alaska, emphatically that is, did they?

The appeal is easy to see. The character's are in a school, no less of a boarding school, and yet they have access to booze, sex, and smoke. They can carry out any prank with little injury. So I guess Green cast his characters in a mold embossed with intelligence, love for learning and books not only to offset, but to some extent justify, what his characters do. Who would, from the young (who want to experience such), the YA (who are experiencing such), and the young once (who have experienced such), not get caught up in such a subjectively pleasing read?

So yeah, we give in to the occasional emotional torrent to which the work's success must have been anchored. We give in to the dreaded  effects of bullying, to the alienation, to the incomparable feeling of first love or lust, whether it be real or not, and to lost love, to chasing ghosts. We give in  to the pursuit of redemption, of Looking for Alaska through pulling the best imaginable prank ever in Culvert history. After all there is something somewhere to which we can relate to what Green has written, however minuscule or insubstantial that is.

I guess, if I were a teenager, I would have given it a 4 or even a 5. I admit I liked Mile's devotion to last words (got me curious to a great extent I'll be picking up a book on this), but somehow, the prank they pulled off was seemingly anti-climatic. I expected something more. Or then again, I am totally in the wrong for every word in this review, after all, it is American culture Green is writing into.

addendum
In an attempt dictated by convenience and compelled by the material, I have somehow visualized this review.

not viewable, here's the <a href="http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/856/40020854.jpg"> link </a>
**i dread repeating words, which in this case is not only fitting but inevitable  in lieu of the indistinctness of the plot.

Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger

Boy, that goddamn killed me!

Reading is never an easy thing. Surprisingly I still find that there are books that are laboriously... fatal. It killed me, it really did.

Now, where the hell do I goddamn start? I'm obviously done with the use of profanities.Some things are just not good enough, certainly not with the use of profanities in this case. The concluding paragraph on chapter seven for instance has this:

"When I was all set to go, when I had my bags and all, I stood for a while next to the stairs and took a last look down the goddam corridor. I was sort of crying. I don't know why. I put my red hunting hat on, and turned the peak around to the back, the way I liked it, and then I yelled at the top of my goddam voice, "Sleep tight, ya morons!" I'll bet I woke up every bastard on the whole floor. Then I got the hell out. Some stupid guy had thrown peanut shells all over the stairs, and I damn near broke my crazy neck."

How can Holden be so irritatingly inconsistent of a character and yet at the same time be so annoyingly repetitive. In hindsight it actually is of no surprise, it is rather a perfectly unfortunate complement.

If "Holden was born in the world not just strongly attracted to beauty but, almost, hopelessly impaled on it,"(as an antihero who decidely hated phonies, he hated this world) still if this is what he considers one of the things he labels a phony, it is contradictorily funny, at best and at worst, is an ironic manifestation of the hypocrite that he is, seeing that he has this decisive use for the word ugly. More than anything that merits of a hypocrite label is how well and how much he lies saying "he could go for hours" (as he showed on the train with his schoolmate's mother). A condescending and rather conceited reason he has for lying is that he hates explaining things to people, thinking that it's easier to lie than to explain the truth to people. Holden Caulfield is not really self-aware that is to say, he can't see that he himself is a phony.

Laden with inconsistencies, I got the feeling that I was reading a book with a child that was not depressed in any meaning of the word, but who is rather a child with a savant syndrome.

Page 38:

"My brother Allie had this left-handed fielder's mitt. He was left-handed."

Holden was repetitively stupid.

If the point of the anti-hero is to annoy, then it did succeed, too well, far to well that I absolutely hated Holden.

A lot of people loved, venerated and labelled this book a classic. Some say the reason they do so is that, God forbid, they identify with Holden and in that process, it changed their lives. This is not surprising for Holden is, without any discernible difficulty, the book itself. I however recommend that rather than fraternizing with Holden, one should seek a cathartic outburst, and if failure still lingers, nothing beats employing professional help.

Lest some incomparably emotionally attached reader lambast me and do educate me that all I've been talking about is Holden and not the book, and I do, to some extent acknowledge that, here then is my leverage.

The book actually had barely any plot at all. This is precisely what I meant when I said that I toiled and labored going through this book. I would gratify at the fact that I could be rectified concerning this point. Adding to such disposition, the stream-of-consciousness narration writing style in the book did not help at all (n.b. most YA novels proliferate under such school).

For all that is now between me and this book, I too have to acknowledge the fact that Salinger wrote this at the end of WWII, an anti-hero theme which gave light to the themes of teenage angst and alienation in a world that the youth are nothing but alienated, in a world that precisely needed it.

A clear undeniable precursor of things to come.

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card

Originally posted at Goodreads

So, here's the search for the Napoleon who will never lose, for the Alexander who will die of old age and for the Caesar who's fidelity to his ideals define him. Here's Ender's Game.

I have put off reading Ender's Game for innumerable times now, for a reason I cannot fully comprehend, which is strange since Ender's Game easily occupy the top spots of the myriad of sci-fi book lists that exists out there. The book's following is noticeable, the appeal conspicuous, the devotion emphatic. Of course, who doesn't want to be the genius? The commander? The leader? The prophetic revelation? The savior? It's fairly easy to fall in the routine (surprising as it is) of kids defeating the bully, both personal and imaginary, and saving the world through video games (who could have thought of a more convenient way?).

The bone I'll be picking however is as conspicuous as the appeal of this book.

I have strangely felt that I was not reading a sci-fi book at times, but a psychological epic, bluntly guilty under such theme of extended internal monologue. Admittedly, there is depth in the book even under the purview of sci-fi conventions. That is to say the psychological meanderings and military motif give it a worthwhile kick. But then again, Ender's Game seemingly exist in a pole, in the extremities, which is conspicuously embodied in 1) The repeating, intense desire to kill both in and outside a military training facility; 2) the love between siblings bordering future incest; 3) and (in perhaps the most fiddling negligible example) sleeping naked in a room of 40 people you have just met. Nuances exists as do occasional irksome parts like this:

"Since he hadn't fired a shot, he had a perfect record on shooting-- no misses at all. And since he had never been eliminated or disabled, his percentage there was excellent."

It is worth emphasizing that there is no statistic if the variable is null.

There was no difficulty relegating the rating to Ender's Game, which due to Goodread's lack of a more defined rating system, is three stars.

Mockingjay By Suzanne Collins

Originally posted at Goodreads

I'm thinking of the perfect way to open this review, and while doing so, I realize that I am genuinely saddened at how the series developed and ended. I liked Hunger Games, I liked it to the point that even after what Collins did with Catching Fire, I still finished Mockinjay, partly because Catching fire was evidently prefatory to Mockinjay and partly because I sincerely hoped till the last pages the book can recover. It did not.

I see that most if not all of my Goodreads friends have rated the book from 4 to 5 stars. I could have given the same rating to Hunger Games, but doing so to Catching Fire and Mockinjay would be taxing credulity.

Collins killed her own creation.

Collins killed the Katniss that has captivated readers from Hunger Games. She killed the independent, headstrong, resolute and determined Katniss. Instead she gave us a Katniss who is fatally fickle-minded, inconsistent, vacillating and hesitant. This points out Collins' failure in developing Katniss' character concomitant with that of the plot, both in the substantially abstract aspect and the literal one. Notice how Collins has perpetuated the use of questions and maybe's in Katniss' extended internal monologues. Katniss was left unsure and questioning all the time. It is worth repeating that one of the reasons I have read this book is the empowerment and divergence from gender norms presented through a female lead. However what remained of such positive assertions were obliterated with the 2nd and 3rd books. They contained nothing but mere vestiges of something that should been worth perpetuating in any literary work. It is truly heartbreaking.

Collins killed the plot too. Systematically done through an incoherent execution and severely erratic pacing. One moment we see a rescue getting organized for Peeta's liberation the next, he's just there. Collins could have cut back on Katniss's internal monologues, because by this point, it is tedious and borders boredom. I half-expected that she would do so, she had every capacity and opportunity to her disposal, considering that there were numerous moments she could have drawn out in the book, like writing out Peeta's rescue but instead we get a sudden surprise that it was successful,(view spoiler) I know Collins wanted those deaths to deliver a wallop of an emotional punch, but it did not. She failed to establish the reason and the need for the deaths. It was simply disjointed. Collins did not need to spend a hundred pages or so on building-up the rebellion through Katniss' long walks over District 12. And most especially revolting, since this book is half dystopian and half romance is how the romance was eventually played out. I was eagerly looking forward at how it will be resolve, at how Katniss will choose between the two, I could swear I could have thrown the book in the thrash when I notice EPILOGUE suddenly looms over the next page. I mean just fu*k it. Fu*k it. Aside from the indecisive use of the kisses and the subtle objectification there was actually no resolute conclusion on the romantic issue was there, or could one hardly call Peeta's reappearance shoveling the snow at Katniss' house the decisive moment? This was the point that Collins should have employed those excessive internal monologues of Katniss and explained why Gale is suddenly out of the picture. Well, if one fundamentally considers, Katniss did not actually choose anybody did she? Peeta chose her from the beginning till the end (bolsters the predicament that Katniss is indecisive). Haymitch was proverbial when he said to Katniss that she does not deserve him a thousand lifetimes over. For all its worth, Peeta's the real martyr here, that is why it was actually a relief that he was hijacked.

Believe it or not, Collins managed to kill the excitement too. The books were overly anticlimatic. The escape from quarter quell being told in hindsight, and so is the conclusion of the supposedly epic rebellion. I mean, Collins simply build it up and up and up and just cuts it. It would have been more riveting if she wrote it straight out.

I finished the series because I was in love with the possibilities presented by the plot I experienced with Hunger Games. I was captivated by that Katniss. And I am saddened of how things turned out. This was something that started out great, turned tepid in the middle and ended up badly. One of the stars in the rating is rationalized by my love for Hunger Games, the other comes from my sister. She's gonna hate me with leaving Mockingjay with only a star, so here's two.

Paper Towns, An abundance of Katherines by John Green

Originally posted at Goodreads

In an attempt dictated by convenience and compelled by the material, I have somehow visualized this review to be like this:


**i dread repeating words, which in this case is not only fitting but inevitable in lieu of the indistinctness of the plot.

Generalization:

Protagonist (stereotype of the nerdy-smarty-pants boy without/with a handful of friends who is enlightened(however this word is defined under the books that is) after the proverbial encounter with the female protagonist)

Female Protagonist ( seemingly physically perfect cool girl who deep inside is depressed, radical and rebel who either dies, disappears or leaves and in doing so does not only enlighten and leave the protagonist helplessly obsessed but also moves the plot, anchored as it is.

Sidekick Protagonist (is either cool, bordering coolness, or leading to coolness)

Paper Towns, Abundance of Katherines, and Looking for Alaska are the same. No statement rings as true as this statement concerning these three books could ever be. And no, neither is this straining credulity. And in hindsight, I somehow miraculously wonder at how I've come to finish these three books (which is to Green's credit?).

To Green's credit, he doesn't push the moment beyond acceptable verisimilitude. It wasn't drawn out, it wasn't pushed in urgency, contributing to the enjoyability of the prose and occasional attempt at humor.

So i guess if you want to read the classic transition of a nerdy/nobody to an enlightened albeit obsessive and depressed boys, buy the book. Sorry, let me rectify myself, buy all three books.

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins

Originally posted at Goodreads

At the outset, it is worth mentioning that the reason I read Hunger Games is that the lead is a woman. I have finished a number of YA books (not numerous, but substantial enough) to see a subtle inclination (at least to the ones I have read). Those books were epitomes of woman empowerment at the most, and at the least were divergents from a male-lead, paternalistic, socially constructed society. I find that Hunger Games is no different from those books and certainly no stranger to that, although to what degree I have yet to conclude.

The books is presented through Katniss' POV, I guess this should have said lot of what was forthcoming. I am hesitant to ascribe as form of a fault more than necessity the extended internal monologue and world-building through Katniss. I guess there is simply no other choice considering the manner the book is presented. The problem though is that the mental disposition of Katniss is more of a hodgepodge, that is to say clutter is involved. Sometimes it is questionable that someone who suddenly daydreams of the past and fantasizes of what could have been won the games. Although I am lead to believe that such fickle-mindedness is prevalent among the female sex. But beneath that, I can see how Katniss has been tempered, the verisimilitude of the persona within the setting is riveting.

There is almost none to little character development at all aside from Katniss' is there? This waterloo is intricately embossed with the manner of writing the story. How can one build another character through a single POV?

The book is also labeled as dystopian. To this aspect too much have yet to be developed, and after the first book, I have yet to conclude if I am in the middle of either a gory love story or a dystopian novel. I am picking that second book to answer all this. I have high hopes that this will not be one of those books that are using dystopian themes to perpetuate comical and laughable love stories that are better left unread, or better yet, unwritten. This book comes with a three star rating meaning I'd follow Katniss to death rather than live a thousand lives with a simpleton like Bella.

Conspicuously, and still strangely enough, the tragic love story of 1984 is what comes to mind with Peeta and Katniss' relationship and of course, Battle Royale. I am even inclined to say that the plot was lifted from this Japanese work.