subverting the text

Internet! You know what is better than a nutella cheesecake? Not much! EXCEPT CO-REVIEWING WITH ANA. Ana blogs at things mean a lot and if you don't know her you are missing out. TODAY we are sharing the conversation we've had over a book, by some dudes you may have heard of. We sat and took apart Will Grayson, Will Grayson by John Green and David Levithan, and it was so freaking awesome, Ana blew my mind into 2012. TRUE STORY: it is not the Mayan calendar ending that kick starts the apocalypse, but my brain arriving in 2012 and EXPLODING FROM GLEE that Ana gave up her precious free time to tl;dr with me. I know, everyone wants to touch me now, but instead all I can offer you is our co-review. While this is in no way as awesome as you getting to co-review with her oh yes you're jealous aren't you, it is still pretty awesome. But I have to warn you, you may not want to enter this co-review without a breadcrumb trail and a spoiler net, because it is long and full of plot details and twists.

Also, I'm sorry about the apocalypse.

Renay: Will Grayson, Will Grayson! Two of them, two authors, two of us. This is clearly a recipe for success! I am totally STOKED to be discussing this book with you because it means I get to pick your brain. I promise I will not make this Renay Asks Ana Nosy Questions About A Book And Doesn't Share Any Opinions At All, because that would be unfair to make you do all the heavy lifting (it will be hard, but I will endure). I feel it is safe to start at the beginning, which for both of us I think was "JOHN GREEN HAS ANOTHER BOOK COMING OUT!!!111 CUE FANGIRLING." Time for the necessary evaluation of all that excitement, those nights, waiting for the book to arrive, the thrill when we held it in our hands, when we read the first page! The question is, did it deliver?

Ana: You had to start with a difficult question, didn't you? ;) I didn't quite know how I felt about the book for days after I finished it. I mean, I know it was awesome in many ways, but I didn't know how I felt about it as a new John Green book. And I did wonder if all those months of fangirling and taking screenshots of John Green holding the book during his live show to e-mail you didn't contribute to my developing slightly unreasonable expectations (for which I solely blame myself, of course). Expectations are killers! I wish I knew how to get rid of them. To actually answer your question, this book didn't hit me like a punch in the gut like John Green's other books did, but I do think it's a book capable of having that same powerful effect on other people. And one of the reasons why I've been looking forward to discussing it with you is because I know that as we move from how much we enjoyed it to how it works, what it does, and how it does the things it does, I'll develop an appreciation of it that simply reading it and putting it back on the shelf wouldn't allow me to have. Can you tell I miss lit classes?

Renay: Of course! I ask the tough questions. You can come to the lit class IN MY HEART. :D

I did manage to keep my expectations in a low gear, because I knew David Levithan was the co-author. I am very hit-or-miss with Levithan's work. Sometimes it's wonderful (for instance, I loved his work in Naomi and Ely's No Kiss List) and sometimes I go, "....what...? (Wide Awake). Expectations fully tempered, despite efforts to the contrary. ;) I was actually prepared to go into this book loving John Green's half and being emotionally disconnected from Levithan's. Neither of these things happened. I liked the book, of course! I gobbled it up in one day and wanted more more more, but no, it wasn't a John Green Book for me (that phrase comes with sparkles, but no unicorns). There's not the same helpless love I felt for Looking for Alaska or An Abundance of Katherines, but I don't think that's a bad thing. Not every work an author puts out is going to be fireworks and cotton candy and a ride on the Scrambler. I liked their characters and the complicated nature of friendship and love being analyzed, but I did wonder at the end: who this story is truly about? Did you run into that issue, as well?

Ana: I did a bit, yes. I hesitate to call the book unfocused, and I have absolutely nothing against stories in which several different characters deal with their own separate issues, but by the end I kind of wanted it to have gone....further? I've seen reviews that said that the ending felt rushed, and while I don't think it left the characters in a bad place necessarily, I kind of felt that way about the whole book. Things happened fast, and I had several moments of, "Wait, can we go over that again, only more slowly?" Then again, I read this book insanely fast — all because, as I said above, I was ridiculously excited to be reading it — so it could have been that too.

Renay: I actually discussed the end of the book with KJ because I was curious if I was the only one going "WTF?". We had an interesting discussion about resolution, which might tie in to how the work felt unfocused. I don't think the ending was rushed, I think the ending was kidnapped! Obviously, what happened at the end was pretty neat, but KJ said that the book ended about one chapter too soon — and I agree with her. That abruptness, the lack of direction plagued me the entire story, too, even though I enjoyed it. I can't decide if the speed at which I read it contributed to this feeling, or if I read it so fast because I was waiting for something and kept rushing through to find what it might be. Ensemble casts are awesome, but when the book starts and seems to be about these two boys but ends on another character who has come to define the text, I get a little confused. Was the story about how each Will navigated their own life, or navigated their own life around Tiny? I think it matters! I have seen other reviews claim this is a "love it or hate it" ending, but I think that oversimplifies the issue. I didn't love it, of course, or I wouldn't be whining! But I didn't hate it, either. I was...bemused!

Ana: Yeah, I'm not sure if it's about it being a "love it or hate it" kind of ending. And that question does matter! Tiny Cooper stole the show, and not in an entirely positive way. I mean, on the one hand, I liked him. He was interesting to read about! The things he went through were relevant! And while I can see other writers making a mess of not presenting him as a stereotype, I did think Green and Levithan did a fine job of making him fully human.

But — the book is called Will Grayson, Will Grayson. Obviously that doesn't mean there isn't room for other characters, especially characters that are so important for the two Wills. But the way the story played out, and especially the ending, did make them seem a bit like they were satellites revolving around a person who was just louder and more noteworthy than they were. I'm not sure if that was intended, but at any rate, it wasn't quite what I wanted from the story. I don't think Tiny's presence in the story is a bad thing — he helps Green's Will break through his façade of not really caring, and Levithan's Will feel more comfortable with his sexuality than he ever did before. But the emphasis on the person who brought these changes about rather than on the changes themselves kind of cheats both Wills out of their agency. I'm not saying the story presents Tiny as a Big Fairy Godfather of Feel Good, but because his presence is so inescapable, especially towards the end, it comes a bit close.

Renay: I agree that Tiny was extremely important to both protagonists, for the reasons you outlined but also for the way he brought them together with someone else who was what they needed at the time, even if they didn't quite know it. Will and Jane and Will and Gideon — Tiny helped both of them form these relationships both directly and indirectly, even if they were hesitant to reach out before. So even though at the end they feel resolved, in a way, I think you're right on about the agency. Tiny basically steals the show, which is always a problem when writing a character like this. So many reviews gush over Tiny but Will and Will are barely a blip — and I think many parts of their story, divorced from Tiny, like their connection, is lost because of this, which makes me a little sad.

Ana: It really is too bad. I find the processes they both go through so interesting, and I find stories in which people tentatively reach out even though they're terrified endlessly fascinating. (Um, not that I have unresolved issues in that area or anything.) The book would have satisfied me more if it had dealt with that in more detail, and if it hadn't been for Tiny's Magic Wand effect.

You mentioned earlier that you were worried you'd feel emotionally disconnected from Levinthan's Will Grayson, but in the end that didn't happen. Was your level of investment in both stories the same, then? How do you think that they compare?

Renay: If only they had given us ONE MORE CHAPTER. Just one, guys!

I expected to like John's Will Grayson more — for him to be more accessible to me. I have whined about my problems with Levithan's characters and plots before, so I don't have a super great track record. What happened surprised me, because after finishing the book, my feelings are all tangled up with Levithan's Will Grayson. I know I rushed through every other chapter to find out how he handled things, how he survived. ( spoilers )

That did it for me. It even surpassed the all-lowercase typing, which I could have lived without. Green's Will — his problems were definitely Straight Cisgender White Dude problems and I have to admit I am way less interested in that, which is not fault of John Green's at all. I knew how that story was going to end! If John Green's books have a weakness (besides how he uses female characters), it's that I expect certain things because the character type spits out the plot at my feet. Honestly, even if Levithan is hit-or-miss for me, there are surprises on the journey. This, in all likelihood, is just me? Maybe? Perhaps? ( Read more tl;dr and also lots of spoilers! )

My feelings about this book are complicated, to say the least. "My feelings are complicated" is the shortest way for me to write how I feel. Once I start to unpack it, the words do not stop. They keep flowing, like a rampaging river, covering small towns and washing away tons of SUVs and flooding all your Farmville plots. Yet I will soldier through!

This review is about my feelings, friends. Beware.

You may have surmised from my less than gleeful first paragraph that this review isn't going to very many positive places, which is a fair warning to back out while there's still time! I have a problem with this book. It almost upsets me to write it. I wanted to love this book, I wanted to love this book and cherish it and hold it to my chest and write lots of girlslash for it! Yeah! Retelling of Cinderella where girls make out! I was in love with the premise the first time I heard about it. A friend bought this book for me so it's EXTRA GUILT that I didn't set it on fire with the power of my undying devotion to it.

Of course, this book had to face my pulsing love for Ever After in a grudge death match. Ever After was the Cinderella story of my teenage years and the older I get the more I imagine it's going to be the measuring stick forever. Snark! Subversion! Sass! If I had been a contender, Henry would have been out of the picture. But they were pretty awesome together: I GUESS!



Confession time: girls making out and romance between girls and girls having sex and being totally hot and romantic and loving and whatever else they are does not ping me most of the time (unless we want to get TMI about Renay's Sexual Preferences and maybe we can save that for another entry). I feel very guilty writing this and I will be unpacking this more later. I will probably always feel guilty, especially when I weigh my free time and go read about the dudes making out instead of possibly being disappointed (again) by girl-love stories. Fiction about girls kissing doesn't do it for me very often. I can live with that. It is disappointing, but what can you do other than lie to yourself about your preferences (and everyone knows that is not cool)?

BUT WAIT!

Something like Whip It slams into your world and you sit up and go, "wow" when Bliss and Maven are on the screen together. I pinged hard and there's barely any fanwork for it. It's a live-media fandom and my brain balks at even trying to write for it, but seriously? It's asking for it:



Slight derail, sorry, but it's worth it. MAKE OUT ALREADY. Oh my gosh.

When I examined my reaction to Ash and my preferences, I came to a conclusion. The culture I grew up in has conditioned me in ways I am not aware of to skip the tickets to the girls kissing train and maybe that's why my reaction to this book is less "throw it at all my friends and demand they read it" and more "....what?" However, allow me to discuss why the book initially failed for me until I started examining why.

We can talk about the okay things: I liked Ash! I did. I enjoyed her ability to be a snark, which she grew into over the course of the book. There's a section at the end where "oh snap" doesn't even begin to cover it. I loved Ash when she found her voice. Loved her.

The world building was...interesting. WHAT FAINT PRAISE! I am trying really hard here, please don't judge me. Is "interesting" a compliment anymore or what someone says when they're like, "I have to think of something kind to offset all this vitriol I am going to unleash!"? It's all I have, Ash herself and the world building, the weaving of the fairy and Ash's reality: well done! OKAY, okay, I should stop trying to force it. Instead, I will quote Nymeth, who is better at these things than I am:

But let me tell you a little about what makes the world appealing: it has its own customs and traditions; it seems to exist beyond the story. Ash grows up in a remote part of the country, in a forested area where old traditions still live. We're told about the conflicts between older and modern ideas; about rites, festivals and celebrations; about the land's lore and about the truth behind that lore.

Inevitably we come to my biggest issue with this book, which later contradicts something I realized about myself. There is too much cock. HILARITY! I know at least five people keeled over from shock that I wrote that, but stay with me: there's a man in this story and he bores me. He bores me to tears. I was bored by him and his emoface and wah wah wah and oh gosh, can't we just have the girls being awesome together? Every time Ash went back to Sidhean I said, "Please get this het out of my delicious lady time!" It was being used for contrast? I GUESS? Why not have the fairy godmother be the fairy-boyfriend instead, right? Maybe that's where we are with GLBTQ love stories; we have to keep some heterosexual shenanigans in there and not go full-on SAME SEX MAKEOUTS and prove...what? That a romance between two women can't stand on its own, it requires some magical cock?

The longer I struggled with this book, the more I realized what I had expected and wanted was a true girl-meets-girl-cue-the-hearts fairy tale retelling. What I got was half a book about Ash spending lots of time with a dude, or thinking about a dude and a retelling that feels rather pasted on around this inexplicable relationship with a dude who is ME ME ME and oh yeah, ME! It was predictable and not in a good way. Sidhean, I don't like you, at all, and I'm not sorry! On top of the snore-fest of a male love interest (and my confusion on WHY HE EXISTS as a love interest), my dreams were foiled by another love triangle! I could write a book, YA Literature, on your trespasses concerning love triangles. My decision is that most of them suck, they are great big piles of fail and every author in the world thinks they're awesome at them. Meanwhile, back in Reality, most are ill-handled and boring and make whatever romance ends up occurring emotionally unavailable because a lot time was spent doing romantic geometry. I HATED GEOMETRY. That's where I was at the end of this book: picturing myself back in Mr. Norwood's math classroom as he berated me for NOT GETTING IT. Everyone ELSE gets it, Renay. Why are you so dense? You are the only one in the class who does not worship these triangles and formulas! Get with the program. YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE AN F IN YA ROMANCE.

I was happy that the book ended with Ash finding her way, but the journey was heteronormative. A queer character that's not turned into a Gay Plot Point. Awesome. However, when people are going, "GROUNDBREAKING!" and praising a book for taking a different path, I do not open that book expecting Heterosexual Couple Land and for half the book to be defined by straight marriage (regardless of the social commentary) and a dude and that dude's feelings. It's yet another instance of same-sex couples as the special case and girls getting the shaft because of Man Pain, which disappointed me. Blow after blow to my hopes and dreams!

I was disappointed in the romance. There was no spark or life or UST! I am very bitter about the lack of UST. I pined in this book, but it was all wrong. I pined for Sidhean to die in a terrible magical horse riding accident and I pined for more sexual tension between Ash and Kaisa and at some point the pining simply becomes a forest of disappointment, deep and dark and moist with all of my tears.

sob sob sob

I thought about my reaction to this book a long time, because I worried: did I not connect with the romances because my brain doesn't like F/F romance? Am I being overcritical of the ladies...again? A classic case of It's Not You, It's Me? I wonder if I am letting my preferences cloud my judgment on these issues of whether a F/F pairing has enough oopmh and thus is a good pairing, or whether I am simply an unrepentant boyslasher, or if I have internalized a slimy and sexist habit to make me more critical of F/F pairings and stories in general and thus uninterested. Except for some F/F pairings I'm not uninterested and I am left bemused, on my Island of WTF. This book and my failure to love it as I wanted made me consider it. Bring on the guilt!

As I did so, I came to a conlusion that was difficult for me to put into words. The culture I was raised in values heterosexual relationships, and recognizes relationships between two men (whether or not they were accepted although most of the time they were). The one difference I had growing up, while otherwise raised open-minded, was that lesbian relationships weren't generally spoken of. Gay and male? Well, if you have to. Gay and female? Not in polite company! In fact, never reference them at all unless it's a matter of life or death. I have wondered a long time why this was, and what it says about me as a person, and the more I thought about it the last few days, the more I think it's about passion.

One of my issues with Ash is the passion between her and Kaisa I think is sorely lacking. But is it? Or does it only feel that way because it is not a sexual relationship that is defined by penetration? I suppose this is the point where everyone who can't talk about sex without flipping out can turn away, because the more I turned this idea over in my head the more I think this is where my problem with lesbian relationships comes from. A distinct lack of cock to define it!

Relationships between women don't always play into these same power dynamics as M/M or F/M do because often, no one ends up with a cock...anywhere. It is most definitely Not About The Men, in a culture where About the Men is the default gaze for everything and you really have to work to break out of it. This takes it way outside our comfort zones. How do we deal with that? It almost reminds me of how we gender babies with pink and blue — if we can't figure out the gender we tend to get highly uncomfortable double fast and possibly offensive (at least the people around me do). The accepted "normal" of F/M has cock and the "other" of M/M has cock and because of my culture, I have soaked up this "The Almighty Cock!" attitude. Things outside that which do not involve one throw me off, unless those romantic relationships between women follow a specific heterosexual dynamic with a dominant/submissive type (see my Whip It example from above), even if that dynamic changes later. People who write romances between women have to compete not only with heterosexism, but also possibly with the idea that lack of cock equals lack of passion. They have to work extra hard to prove there's some hope for some sexy times later and deal with critics like me being, well, critical over the lack of passion because no one is going to end up with a cock in them somehow! I discussed how relationship dynamics sometimes work with owlmoose a little:

renay: because we are so in the habit of reading pairings in the "TAKEN" (aka penetrating) romance between women doesn't register
owlmoose: i think you are onto something, maybe, because we have this concept of women having deep friendships that are not romantic. whereas if men and women have feeling for each other it's read as romance
renay: so people writing F/F have to overcome that
owlmoose: yeah. when if you compare it to M/M we have less of a concept of emotional male friendship. because men aren't supposed to be emotional about people who aren't either their lovers or their family

Welcome to Horrifying Revelation Time With Renay: Critical of The Girlslash. Next time I see someone who says YA doesn't teach adults anything, I am going to mock them relentlessly on twitter. In one fell swoop, by not loving a book, I have uncovered SEKRITS about myself and my preferences. I am sure I could unpack them even further, but you know, one startling self-revealation at a time. I am exhausted. The patriarchy makes me tired!

eta: I have considered how to approach this from a transgender perspective but I am completely confused on how intersectionality comes into play here. I realize my argument is flawed and I am waving my cisgender privilege everywhere. I welcome being schooled, because it's not that I don't want to learn, it's that I am very confused and how no idea where to go or how to get there.

I think it is important for me to say I enjoyed Ash and Kaisa. I wanted more of everything for them: more time and more feelings and more falling in love and more adventure. Perhaps saying that I wanted more UST/passion is tied up in my skewed view of the world (despite how not-straight I am, clearly it still impacts me) and I have some work to do about my assumptions next time I attempt to read a lesbian romance. Even so, I wanted more of them together and I think this is maybe not an unreasonable expectation based on the flap of the book! This premise was awesome and what was done here for representation of queer characters was necessary, but I expected more somehow, even disregarding their lack of passion (if that's what it was). I am past the need for the heterosexual crutch or foil or whatever it was that happened in the text; even though I am bemused and disappointed in myself, I am still more annoyed about the dude in this book.

In the end, I am cursed by triangles! Math! Always my arch-nemesis, even when it comes to literature.





The End

I swore I was going to read one book over spring break that was not a British novel, was not by a dead white dude, and that I would definitely not be graded on. I went to the library, even though every library trip I have taken has failed, utterly failed! and has resulted in me checking books out but never having time to read them. I said, "Self, this time it's going to work. CHOOSE YOUR SPRING BREAK BOOK!"

So I did. Although, now I am uncertain about my choice because I am flat out bemused after finishing it. Irony: now I wish I had read this book for a class, where I could discuss it in a group of people! Because I am at once intrigued and lost! Justine Larbalestier has stated that the book can be read two ways, but boy I feel like there's more than that! As if this book contains multitudes of avenues to reach the real Micah, the one at the center of all the lies.

Micah is a liar. She owns up to in immediately and the title makes it impossible to doubt (unless you're like me and you get to the middle of the book and start to wonder what in the hell is happening and if even the premise of her as a liar should be questioned). I don't even know how to classify this book inside the YA tree. What branch does it go on? This is pretty smart writing and plotting; I've never read YA quite like it. The closest comparison I can think of, narrative wise, is I am the Messenger by Markus Zusak, and that book wasn't as confusing — it comes clean. Liar, on the other hand, is still turning over in my head. It's like a puzzle, and reading it is only a way to acquire the puzzle. Figuring it out involves thinking of it after the fact, or re-reading.

It's really impossible to discuss the book without spoilers beyond what's given as a summary of the book. Micah is a liar. Her boyfriend is killed, and things start to unravel. Then, when you think you have it figured out — surprise! Actually, you definitely do not and let the book turn you upside down and shake you. Hard. I find that I agree most with this:

The experience of reading a novel with a narrator who is known to be a liar is different, I think, from reading a novel in which the narrator is revealed to be unreliable. When you know from the beginning that the narrator lies, and that the lies are not white lies of the no-really-your-hair/dress/[fill-in-the-blank]-is-nice variety but outrageous ones, you read that much more closely, trying to parse truths from untruths. And yet, at the start of Part 2, Larbalestier shocked the hell out of me with what she did, and she made it totally work. It turned Liar from a somewhat intriguing book to utterly unputdownable. [source]

This is really true for me, because once I hit the second part I gobbled this book up. Whether I can say I liked it or not is one thing — I don't flock to unreliable narrators like others do, I think, because I am very picky with them. At times this book felt like a massive experiment in a taking a particular type of character and pushing them to the very edge. I mean, a few sections in it felt like it could get real gimmicky real fast, but for me it never hit that point.

However, it really is impossible to break this book down and really talk about it without bringing up the spoilers and the twists and revealing the maybe-maybe-not-lies. You really do not want to be spoiled for this book. It is not like other spoilers, where you know what happens, oh well. If you know, you fail to engage with Micah at all, and engaging with her is the point of the story — you're not just spoiled for the plot, you're spoiled for the entire journey through her mind, which I think is entirely different than a plot spoiler.

Although I would not mind people who've read it finding me in the comments of this post and going, "OMG!!!" with me. You know, if you want. >.>

In summary: a literary adventure! Although maybe I should just have done some catch-up reading on Nora Roberts on spring break, instead. Ha! Who needs a break from thinking, anyway?

Friends, I imagine you are you going to take my courses with me as I seriously crack myself up at the readings I'm assigned. Oh, 1800s! You are so cute! I want to dress you up and show you to everyone! Then maybe leave you in a dark alley where the people who wear black and write tons of free verse live.

"For as to the devotees of the circulating libraries, I dare not compliment their pass-time, or rather, their kill-time, with the name of reading. Call it a sort of beggarly day-dreaming during which the mind of the dreamer furnishes for itself nothing but laziness..."

Oh, but poetry, that was fine! TOTES FINE, guys, but screw you if you read something that didn't have rhythm and meter! Coleridge didn't like the nerds in libraries, and in fact, come any closer to him holding that novel and he would have been forced to give you a swirlie. ( Read more... )

Also, this:

renay: "Robert Louis Stevenson: British novelist and poet. Also incidentally, the author of "A Humble Remonstrance" as essay answering James. The result was an exchange of letters and a warm friendship between the two writers."
owlmoose: Uh oh
renay: I am now SLASHING THEM IN MY HEEEAD
renay: WHHHY
renay: WHY EDITOR
owlmoose: you have a whole new realm for rpf!
renay: Why did you tell me this thing
owlmoose: robert louis stevenson/henry james!

So, reading challenges.

They are hugely popular in book fandom! I suck at hosting them and suck at completing them. However.

"Oh no!" you're saying. "That never means anything good when Renay starts using words like "but" and "perhaps" and "however" and "just this once!" I'm getting the fuck out of here before she makes something explode that covers me in goo, or possibly glitter." Internet citizen, I cannot blame you!

I saw shanaqui do this project last year and it appeals to me (they have a community for it now, readheightetc). I was always a fan of lego towers when I was a kid, or various-toy towers, such as How High Can I Pile This Mountain Of Toys? This was before my habit of creating Barbie beds out of washcloths and VHS tapes, where Skipper and Courtney were BFF and Ken wanted both of them but they only had eyes for Barbie. It was a lesbian love fest in my room. But first, there was me building toy mountains because then I could have the leftover toys scale them. I was clearly a discerning child when it came to my imaginary pursuits. I had to express my progressive nature somehow!

This, combined with the fact I barely read at all in 2009 yet continued buying and mooching books, leads me to believe that a challenge for reading my height in books would not be a terrible idea (we will not discuss the logic of this statement)! I'm 5'8'' (173 cm), give or take a few ticks, so that's a pretty big pile!

Now all I need is a wall, some paper, and some rules. ( blah blah blah! )

This will never end in tears and failure! Guaranteed!