Isolation at its finest.

     Hi guys! Today I will be discussing Shatter Me, this specific book was written in 2011 by Tahereh Mafi. There will be minimal spoilers in this post, but there will be warnings if a small one comes up! In the past I’ve stayed away from dystopian novels for no reason but Shatter Me was recommended to me by some friends who were hoping I’d read it. To be honest, I’m very glad I did because it also got me out of a reading slump that I was stuck in for a while. 

         

The novel begins with Juliette (the MC) stating that she has been in an asylum for 264 days. No human contact, no speaking for any reason. Just her with her thoughts in a cell. It was kind of crazy putting that into perspective. Relatively quickly we got an idea of what her time in the asylum was like; usually a daily routine with burning bowls of food. She gets a cell mate which developed into a slow friendship building off of trust. Like I said Juliette hasn’t experienced any actual human interaction for a long time so gaining another person living with her is an extreme adaptation on her part. As time goes on, we learn her cellmate's name is Adam and he will play an important role later on in the story. I know this small description sounds boring, but it gets so much better the more you read, the plot twists and detailed descriptions help the reader depict the setting and other characters through Juliette’s perspective.  

    

It should also be noted that there are smaller books referred to as novellas which have I guess filler information in them, they aren’t necessary to read before reading the next book, but they are helpful. As of right now Shatter Me has 6 books in its series (Shatter Me happens to be the 1st book and name of the series), and a 7th book will be available in a couple of months. I’ve read the entire series, and I will say the plot twists that come with each book, and the new characters/backstories being revealed draws the attention of the reader. It was really hard to put these books down to be honest. Reading one after another until the series was finished. Overall Mafi put a lot of work and thought into the series, and I would most definitely recommend more people to read the 1st book if they are interested in the genres dystopian fiction or romance. Overall, I think that might be enough yapping from me, but thank you for reading my blog post!! 

 

-Chloe B. 🦆 

"we accept the love we think we deserve": The Perk of Being a Wallflower - Max B-M.

    The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky is one of my favorite movies and probably my favorite book. The story focuses on Charlie, a high school freshman lacking any friends. He befriends a group of seniors and they show him what it feels like to be truly loved, along with meeting a teacher who helps him both academically and socially, providing advice for both. Charlie navigates through a lot of mental health struggles including PTSD from childhood trauma and there’s quite a bit of high school drama (he dates two of the seniors which is a bit creepy but we’re just not going to think about that). 

    The film is very well made and shows a lot of mental health experiences in the way they feel (there’s a panic attack scene that just encapsulates what it feels like). 

    The book is written in the form of letters, sent from Charlie to an anonymous person. This method was apparently suggested to Charlie by his therapist to cope with some of his loneliness after losing his best friend to suicide in the year prior. These letters are always addressed “Dear Friend” with no further information. Charlie says in the first paragraph of the book that he will use other names for the people, or “characters,” in his life to keep whoever is reading his letters from finding him. This shows that whoever he’s writing to is a real person, but he wishes to never know them, and for them to do the same for him. It is unclear if this person writes back or not, and if they do, the contents are not included in the novel, nor are they ever discussed from Charlie’s perspective. 

    I think that this method of writing a book is extremely beautiful. It’s unreliable, but that’s part of what makes it so enjoyable. It shows the character’s experience in the rawest form, where they are telling someone else what happened. Charlie’s ability to communicate directly to the reader makes a lot of what he says and what happens more impactful. 

    If this story was simply told from a third-person perspective, it would lack the utter feeling behind every word communicated. It is truly a beautiful story that encapsulates a multitude of emotions, allowing many to relate to certain parts, whether it be Charlie himself or one of the other complex characters he writes about. 

The novel begins with:

“Dear Friend, 

    I am writing to you because she said you listen and understand and didn’t try to sleep with that person at that party even though you could have. Please don’t try to figure out who she is because then you might figure out who I am, and I really don’t want you to do that. I will call people by different names or generic names because I don’t want you to find me. I didn’t enclose a return address for the same reason. I mean nothing bad by this. Honest.” This shows the layer of reliance put on “friend,” along with Charlie’s deep insecurity and almost embarrassment with the intense wish to remain unknown. 

The novel ends with: 

    “So, if this does end up being my last letter, please believe that things are good with me, and even when they’re not, they will be soon enough. 

    And I will believe the same about you.” This shows the trust built up and the knowledge that Charlie has gained on how to help himself when things are “bad again,” allowing himself to need “friend” less and less as he grows. 

        Anyway, this book is really good and a relatively short read (213 pages but it's not super dense writing or anything). The movie is also great and does a pretty great job of illustrating the original story (it was also written and directed by Stephen Chbosky). Overall, fantastic story and I’ve been obsessing over it for far too long. 

Thanks! 

Cringe Culture, Queer Culture, and Kit Kats

I don’t know how many of you are theater nerds, but if you are, I‘m sure you’ve heard at least one cabaret song. I’m also sure, if you watched the Tony's however long ago, that you’ve seen the backlash Eddie Redmayne has gotten for being too over the top or making viewers of the Tony Award cringe at how weird so many parts of the song were. I agree, this new adaptation is a very cringy, and very difficult to watch musical at some points. I know this is older news, but it's been nagging at my mind since I saw it. This is my take on it:

 Cabaret is a culturally significant piece, depicting the stark reality of the Kit Kat club and life in 1940‘s Germany. It’s meant to make you uncomfortable; the way they make jokes about a gorilla being unfit to be a partner, making you laugh at the notion that a human could love a creature such as that, only for the quiet, hissed “punchline“ to be that it is actually a Jewish woman. The way they depict an orchestra playing happily at the beginning, only for each and every one to be killed by the Nazi regime in the end, shining a light on their limp bodies as (in some adaptations) there is silence where you expected to hear them playing as jovially as they did in the opening number. It isn’t supposed to make you feel good, you’re supposed to be deeply unsettled by every minute of this show. 

In the time Cabaret was written, queer culture was being formed. To the outside world, this was a deeply unsettling notion, and quite often freaked out the people who followed "normal" culture. Classics like Rocky Horror Picture Show, though seen as a humorous play on culture quickly becoming mainstream now, was unsettling to many at the time, even being put out in midnight theaters after receiving such bad reviews from their normal audience. This movie was produced in 1975, and Cabaret was produced 1966, so before Rocky Horror even made a slight change to the view of queer culture. This musical made people uncomfortable, it made them squirm in their seats and check the time. This was intentional. 

Fast forward to today, the old style of Cabaret is celebrated. A wonderful, beautiful achievement, that this notion of queer culture is no longer cast to the side, but bad for Cabaret itself. It had become a fun, eccentric show to go see with your friends. The music they played being what pop music now mostly sounds like, or having stage direction seen as funny more than gross. This is exactly what the artists at the Tony's didn’t want, and so they changed the stage direction. They changed the actors, and they changed the faces — they made sure at every moment, the audience was cringing. They made sure at every second the audience was watching Eddie Redmayne pull a strange face and sound weird they were fighting to shrink back in their seats. You were meant to be uncomfortable. You were meant to feel an underlying, ever present feeling of discomfort as you watch these characters hide from the Nazi regime.