Friday, February 24, 2012
YA Book Club: The Fault in Our Stars
Last fall Tracey Neithercott created the super-fun Fall Book Club. We read a trio of great YA books and discussed them in blog posts. Go here for my post on our first read, Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children, or here for the second pick, Daughter of Smoke and Bone, and here for the third, The Scorpio Races. It's no longer fall but happily the book club is back in slightly new form: the YA Book Club. In February we read the club's first contemporary YA selection, The Fault in Our Stars. (Actually, I read it in January and posted here, but of course I have more to say.)
I'd describe the books by John Green (that I've read: Looking for Alaska; Will Grayson, Will Grayson; and now The Fault in Our Stars) as contemporary YA, but at the same time I don't know if I'd describe them as completely realistic contemporary YA. This is not a criticism--it's actually a distinction I consider a huge compliment. I'm envious of Green's writing (aren't we all, really) and particularly the way he writes characters/situations/settings/dialogue/etc. that are both authentic and elevated. They are verisimilar: true without being realistic to a fault.
Let's step back with a concrete example. Dialogue is one of the best parts of a John Green book. Example from p.87 (Augustus describing what he likes about a sculpture):
"Two things I love about this sculpture," Augustus said. He was holding the unlit cigarette between his fingers, flicking it as if to get rid of the ash. He placed it back in his mouth. "First, the bones are just far enough apart that if you're a kid, you cannot resist the urge to jump between them. Like, you just have to jump from rib cage to skull. Which means that, second, the sculpture essentially forces children to play on bones.The symbolic resonances are endless, Hazel Grace."
His characters tend to be whipsmart, hyper-eloquent, effusive, expressive, and really funny. They work in references to Schrodinger's cats and obscure writers and philosophers and really deep intellectual and spiritual theories at the same as dropping likes and awesomes. Do real teens speak that way? Yes, and no. I definitely talked about Big Ideas with my friends as a teen--ruminating on infinity and Marx and existentialism and religion in the way that certain nerdy kids do. Were our thoughts as well-expressed as those of John Green's characters? No. Did we stumble over our words and ideas more? Yes. Would recreating those sorts of authentic conversations make for good fiction? No, probably not. John Green, like the superstar he is, takes the essence of young people's conversations and elevates them to beautifully crafted writing. His dialogue sparkles in a way that might not be entirely realistic, but the heart of the content is. It's not realistic; it's hyper-real (and thrilling to read for that).
Nowhere was this elevation of reality more clear than in The Fault In Our Stars, and not just in dialogue. This is a book about something very real and very sad: cancer and mortality. Yet the world Green has built in TFIOS feels almost like a magical place (if not an always-joyful one), particularly when Hazel and Augustus get to travel to Amsterdam, oxygen nubbins and prosthetics all. We are both shown the gritty truth of being sick--the physical limitations, the sadness, the pain and guilt and fear--but despite that a sense of wonder and expansion runs through the story. It's a contemporary fantasyland, but it's a verisimilar one in which real life happens, the good and the bad. Amazingly, love supersedes the bad stuff, in terms of both the theme and storytelling. Many books are either/or: gritty and true, or ideal and shiny. This one is remarkably both.
What did you think about TFIOS?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)


11 comments:
Ok, hopefully I won't end up leaving five comments (I'm having Blogger issues :))
Just wanted to say YES, completely agree with what you say about the dialogue. It might not be realistic in some ways, but the essense always is.
Yes, I totally agree. I was willing to overlook the fact that most adults, never mind teens, don't talk like this because the effect it created was so wonderful. So teens aren't that witty or philosophical 24/7. The dialog was brilliant (along with the rest of the book) and I think it's part of what made me so love these characters. I think in good fiction readers are willing to suspend belief for a moment if you give them a good reason to....and if you make the unbelievable believable for that situation.
What an awesome review. You are so right about TFIOS being "hyper-real." Elements like the genies make the trip to Amsterdam just plausible enough to maintain the suspension of disbelief. And even Hazel seems to question how Gus is "on" all the time, which allows the reader to accept it.
I'm glad you decided to talk about this side of the book, because I thought the same thing as I read it (and it's true that his other books are the same way). These kids aren't your typical teens and the discussions and dialogue are smarter than you might expect. But I loved it! I really enjoyed the deeper themes these kids discussed, and appreciated that there were also moments when they sounded like normal teens. John Green is brilliant. :)
It was gritty and shiny. Perfect description. And "hyper-real" is such a good word for the dialogue.
I didn't think the dialogue was entirely unrealistic, because I knew people like this in high school too. I WAS people like this. But you're right--we weren't nearly as eloquent. It can be argued that no one is as eloquent as fictional characters, though. Part of writing great dialogue is chopping out the boring bits. When you write a phone conversation, you don't usually start with "Hello?" "Hi!" "Oh, hey! It's you. How are you?" "I'm OK. Ready for the weekend. How about you?" (etc.) because that stuff is yawn-inducing, even in the best possible stories.
I absolutely LOVE this, Rebecca. I've seen John Green's writing criticized several times as not being "realistically teen," and I think you've expounded on his style perfectly. Why not write about teens who are crazy-smart and well-spoken? Why can't eighteen-year-olds think deeply about death and love and making an impact on the world? Just because a YA book has a contemporary setting does not mean it should be written for the lowest common denominator.
Anyway, you said it way better than me, so bravo! :)
I agree with you wholeheartedly!
Teens do talk about BIG IDEAS...I remember the long discussions at my high school about the meaning of life or about philosophers whose work we just read for class. These talks challenged me, stimulated me and I loved them! Just like you, we were not as articulated (at least not all the time ;-)) as Hazel and Gus but for me those two are real, and very close to my heart!
"I'd describe the books... as contemporary YA, but at the same time I don't know if I'd describe them as completely realistic contemporary YA. This is not a criticism--it's actually a distinction I consider a huge compliment. I'm envious of Green's writing (aren't we all, really) and particularly the way he writes characters/situations/settings/dialogue/etc. that are both authentic and elevated."
You hit the nail on the head, here. I love reading Green's mature characters and don't fault him for it. I think that's what makes his books so wonderful to read and his writing HIS. I tried to articulate this on my post about the book but, like Katy said, you've just said this all in a much more eloquent way than I could. :-)
I know what you mean, but I love John Green's smart characters. I can suspend my disbelief to read fantasy and sci-fi, so why not for teens that are more intelligent and eloquent than average?
And in this case, I think it makes sense for them to be mature and have specific thoughts on the deep subject of death. Teens who have had to face their own mortality and have spent hours in hospitals where reading is one of the few options left to them would logically have opinions on the subject. So you definitely won't hear me criticising the intelligent banter.
So glad the YA Book Club reviewed this book and convinced me to read it, albeit a day late.
Interesting point about the suspension of disbelief in contemporary! It is so true that in this genre, I am much pickier about what I'll accept as plausible/believable.
I definitely adore John Green's philosophical and eloquent teen characters, and I see them as realistic-but-polished.
I think John Green said he writes dialogue the way teen *think* they talk, and I liked that a lot. It's how they think they sound in their head vs how it actually comes out.
Post a Comment