Three words: This. Book. Sucked.
I wish I could give it no stars, but alas I have to give it at least one, so that is all it will get. That book will take that little peace of meat I gave it and eat it like it's Thanksgiving dinner!
I. Will. Rant. On. This. Seriously.
Summary:
In some horrible, useless, and senseless future in a "dystopian" society, love is a banned emotion. Gag me with a spoon and hang me by a thread, Aldous Huxley, I am begging you, man! So they erase love with a lobotomy called the "cure", which erases love and makes a person all calm. And Lena, short for Magdalena after Mary Magdalene meets some guy named Alex where they have a friendship-lust relationship that is called "love". Tie my hands, arms, feet, and legs together George Orwell, doing so will make you a saint! And apparently it is super bad and illegal where they are in Portland, Maine. Beat me to a pulp, Margaret Attwood! And it's so popular right now I can't even understand it! Now hurry up and saw me in half, Lois Lowry!
So anyway, love is banned and all the great dystopian writers since forever are busy destroying me because I read this book. What they are doing to me right now is no crime.
Reasons why I DESPISED this book:
1. The Science. A lobotomy just to remove "the love from a person's brain?" As in cut off one part of the brain, destroy love, be calm, and basically have every other emotion? That isn't possible, the lobotomy would destroy all emotion because no part of the brain is segrgated only for "love". The people would be feeling-less robots, not love-less people.
The power issue? In this book cars that were driven were rare, electricity cost an arm and a leg, and yet no windmills or solar power was used! No nuclear, no burning garbage (which they easily have a lot) for power, nothing but fossil fuels! You complain so much about electricity but no other sources but fossil fuels are used! And the government isn't doing anything about it! Someone should be complaining to them about it. Aagh!
2. The "Love" A.K.A. Crazy Lust that isn't Even Normal Lust. There is a difference between sexual lust and this book's crazy, unhealthy lust that isn't close to love, and yet at the same time lacking sexual desires. It almost is a whole new thing, but clearly Stephanie Meyer invented it. Their relationship was as stated before a mix of friendship, lust, and other things that are now considered "love" rather than actual feelings for each other. The list of stuff that causes "love" isn't normally stuff I go through. Gag.
3. The Asexuality VISIBILITY and EDUCATION Network. I am an asexual myself, with romantic attraction, but I have a cousin who is an aromantic asexual. We both were shunned by this book because it once again makes everyone a person who wants sex and has romantic feelings. I am sick of there being no asexual characters in teen novels! We want to be VISIBLE in society and everyone be EDUCATED about us so that we can be accepted for who we are! But apparently everyone falls in love and wants sex so therefore they must have the cure! This is an offense to asexuals, especially the aromantic everywhere!
4. The GLBT of the Book. I am attracted to women, not all women just like striaght men, but I am still attracted to women. I have no sexual desires since I am an asexual, but I am attracted to women romantically. They are referred in the book as "unnaturals", which was not what made me angry. I was angry because:
The American Health Association removed homosexuality from a list of diseases (in which being gay is NOT one) in 1973, the same year as abortion became legal, which is what I consider to be two good steps in only a year for America. However, then The American Health Association adds love to the list and homosexuality to the list, also. A HUGE step backwards, not to mention that the chances of abortion being legal there also 1 percent above ninety-nine. Isn't heterosexuality not also a disease and shouldn't it not also be cured since being gay is also added? What about being bisexual or transgendered? Nothing is explained and nothing makes any sense. But since sexuality is rooted to the brain and is unchangeable no matter what right wingers say, if they had to remove the sexual part of the brain, wouldn't they also do it with heterosexuals? And if the person were asexual would they have to mess with that part of the brain at all? And wouldn't the people who were feeling sexual attraction losing their sexual desires and therefore lose their entire ability to orgasm? Why isn't Lauren Oliver explaining any of this to me? Plus EVERYONE had a stupid gender role placed on them. So here's a question Mrs. Lauren Oliver: The girls who don't go to college end up getting married quickly, so what about the guys?
5. The Religion!!!! It is now legal for students to take Judeo-CHRISTIAN courses in public schools in Texas, emphasis on Christians. This is really bad, they aren't teaching Hindu, Islam, Pastafarianism (The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster), or any other religion but Judeo- CHRISTIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is no one getting a warning here? It's even stated that they teach biblical science in school, this sent off a warning bell in my head! And they even twist the religion of Christianity like so many Christians do today, they mess with the love. Today we have Christians who scream this: "God hates fags!" "All Abortion is wrong!" "You're going to hell!" "Muslims are evil!!!" Yeah, this is really the religion of love made by some Jewish guy who died on intersecting pieces of wood. And the scientists even point at what happens after death in the book as going along with that, really bad. I would hae claimed suicide if America left secularity.
As a (former, now Atheist) Christian I did feel bad for Mary Magdalene, her life was obviously miserable as Lady Gaga stated in her song "Bloody Mary". Naming someone after her depresses me. But I couldn't relate to this "mary magdalene" at all.
And of course Lena is a good girl who always prays to god. I just about threw the book at the wall!
6. This Book Is In America? I was dissappointed to discover that there was no mention of suspending The Constitution like it was in The Handmaid's Tale. Either it doesn't exist or is completely ignored and nobody ever questions it. Clearly making a certain surgery required by law would be breaking The Constitution and no one complains but instead try to run away? In The Handmaid's Tale there is originally rallies and then people try to escape. This just isn't working. And they probably don't even have the president since jobs are decided for you and you can't run for the election, maybe they can vote.
So, let me now explain: In 1984 propaganda was used for antisexual and anti-love purposes, mainly linked to sex. It is far more effetive than this garbage and far more believable. This like many other young adult dystopians make no scientific sense and are unbelievable, the only purpose they have is to be a love story. If you want a dystopian love story than read about Winston and Julia or fr something more sexual read about Winston and the literally pianted lady A.K.A. prostitute. And don't forget Brave New World and The Handmaid's Tale for a great dystopian. Also go for the Lois Lowry books, they are also believable.
This book left me like this:
So yeah, love can makes you do crazy stuff, but nothing near this awful book.
No comments:
Post a Comment