Lola and the Boy Next Door

Ever since the surprise smash hit of Anna and the French Kiss, fans have eagerly been anticipating Stephanie Perkins' companion novel, Lola and the Boy Next Door. I know I have. Anna redefined the genre of chick-lit, leaving readers in love with the main characters and wanting more about them, reveling in the charm of exploring France while falling in love and meeting fabulous new friends. However, Lola falls flat of the sparkle of Anna.

It's not for lack of trying. In fact, Perkins seems to be trying too hard to make Lola unusual, unique, and standout. Lola comes from a family with two gay dads, dresses eccentrically in costume every day, has a druggie/alcoholic birth mom who lives on the street and drops by from time to time, and has a boyfriend, Max, who is 22, while Lola is only 17. As individual plots, these are intriguing. But thrown together, it overwhelms the characters. Could Lola possibly have any more unique things about her? It doesn't feel realistic, which is why Cricket and Lola's relationship is almost less adorable- because Lola isn't a character that many people relate to easily.

Although Anna and the French Kiss had a slightly flimsy premise, Perkins grounded the narrative through relationships: Anna and Etienne's friendship, Anna's growing friendships with her roommate and other groups of friends, Etienne and his parents. But Lola is isolated: her parents, her birthmom, her Nancy Drew-like best friend, even Max are all simple props in the narrative of Lola. Cricket Bell, the "Boy Next Door," cares for Lola, but I never really felt like I knew his character. Even now, thinking about how to describe him, I can't. There isn't anything really distinctive about him: he invents little gadgets and systems, and he has a twin sister Calliope. That's about it. Though technically, the book is about Lola and Cricket as they grow closer and eventually date, it in actuality showcases Lola more than anything. We know how Lola feels about Cricket, we know that Cricket feels the same way- so why is Lola still dating Max, and why doesn't Cricket say something? It's all very dramatic and doesn't need to be. Max is so clearly not the right guy for Lola- he's so much older, much sketchier, much more rebellious, not going anywhere. Lola's infatuation and naive belief that are meant to be together is so frustrating. Actually, Lola as a character is frustratingly less mature and more dramatic, which made it hard for me to like her.

Sadly, the characters from Anna and the French Kiss are the best part about Lola. Anna and Etienne work at the same movie theatre as Lola does, and Anna watches out for Lola through some of her more destructive decisions. The two of them ground Lola in her more dramatic moments. Reading that part felt like bumping into an old friend and instantly falling back into the grooves of your friendship. Familiar and relieving, Anna and Etienne's sweet relationship reassures the reader that their favorite characters are doing fine.

I know I sound very down on the book, and I sort of am. But that's only because I had such wonderful high expectations for the sequel to Anna and the French Kiss. Of course, I didn't think it would be equal to Anna, but I was expecting something slightly better. Held to the regular standards of chick lit, this was pretty good.

Perkins has a third planned- Isla and the Happily Ever After. Let's hope it fixes the slump.

One Day

It rarely happens that I see a movie trailer and want to buy the book for it, but that's exactly what happened for One Day. I mean, isn't this the cutest trailer? (It might have something to do with the fact that they play my new favorite song, Good Life, in it...) So my friend Lucy bought the book, having had the same reaction as I did to the trailer. And while we were in Boston last week, I read it.

Basically, Emma Morley and Dexter Mayhew met at university in the 1980s, and the book follows their relationship, for one day each year. You get snapshots of Dexter and Emma through the years, through what they each are going through, how they keep in touch with each other, how they change, where they end up. I expected cute fluff, a sweet friendship and eventual "everyone-but-us-saw-it" romance. But that was not what I got.

I got unlikeable main characters. Emma, until maybe the last 3 chapters, is complaining, bitter, self-pitying, self-concious, and sarcastic. She's clever, certainly, but she spends nearly the whole book unhappy, complaining to herself, and suffering through her boring life. Really, the only interesting thing in her life is Dexter, who, by the way, I don't think was sober in the entire book. He literally spends his life drinking, doing drugs, social climbing, all the while blind to his shallowness and mistakes. He's too cocky, too carefree and childish to ever be likeable. So while these two people have an enduring and close friendship, I really didn't like them enough to want them to be happy.

I also got a long, dragged out friendship, with relatively little change. As I mentioned before, Dexter spends nearly the whole book drunk or high or both, and so his portions of the story are all the same: he feels empty, he's half ashamed, half elated to be living the high life. He misses Emma. And Emma, though she travels around, never really progresses in her character enough to make her story change. Though different events occur, she remains static, giving the impression that no time has passed. Actually, by the end, I felt as if neither person was much different or changed than in the beginning.

I got some clever dialogue- in particular, Emma and Dexter's strict "no Scrabble" rule cracks me up. Their banter is cute and amusing, perhaps the only light part of the book. It's also all we're meant to base their relationship on, so it had better be clever, right? And in the classic When Harry Met Sally way, the flirty dialogue shows that Emma and Dexter are never truly just friends; the pair can't feel platonically towards each other, no matter how hard they try and convince us otherwise. This was slightly frustrating, as the majority of the book neither of them admitted this, insisting they weren't attracted to each other outwardly. That gets a little tiring after a couple hundred pages...

Finally, I got an example of how empty relentless partying and life without purpose is. Though Emma is successful eventually, and Dexter too, they don't ever feel fulfilled. They are continually looking for more in their lives. It's such a telling example of the emptiness of a life without purpose; of the "God shaped hole" in everyone's life. Without any higher calling, Emma and Dexter's lives were empty, each driven to despair in the face of a meaningless existence. In being part of restorative work in God's kingdom, I have a higher purpose and calling for my life. I know that what I do is important to the kingdom work. So I don't have to live my life empty, the way Emma and Dexter do. Because at the mini-twist ending, Emma and Dexter don't seem much happier than they were to begin with, more fulfilled or content. And that leaves the book feeling incomplete.

Anna and the French Kiss

Let me start by saying that I do NOT normally read cutesy "chick-lit" books that are written for teenage girls (especially all the new vampire books). I read Sarah Dessen novels, and that's about where I draw the line... I just don't care to read a sexually charged, poorly written book designed only to please the romantic tendencies of a teenage girl. But when my friend handed me this book, Anna and the French Kiss, with the recommendation of John Green and herself, I figured I'd give it a try. After all, John Green had said he couldn't put it down, and he didn't seem like the type to recommend bad fiction. So, before I went to bed, I read the first couple of pages. And then more. And then more. I couldn't put it down!

I stayed up way too late to read this book (11:30, on a school night? Unheard of!), captivated by it's characters and the romance. It's about Anna Oliphant, from Atlanta, who's father decides to send her to Paris for a year (her senior year, no less!) to study and get a taste of other cultures. Though digging in her heels at first, the transition is quickly eased by the presence of a very cute boy, Etienne St. Clair, a French-British-American. So yes, he has a British accent (!)... and a girlfriend. As Anna steps outside of her comfort zone and into a new culture, she also gets to know St. Clair very well.

The core and majority of the story is a romance, but it's also a narrative of friendships: of the thin line between friends and more-than-friends, of loyalty and honesty, of betrayal and forgiveness. And it is this added dimension that gives the novel depth and moves it from typical teenage girl fodder to an entertaining, slightly instructive novel appropriate for all ages.

One of the great strengths of the novel are the characters. Anna Oliphant, the protagonist, is a neat-freak, left handed, who loves movies and runs a blog with movie reviews (sound like me? Except maybe the neat-freak part). Unlike many romance novels, where the girl falling in love is frustratingly annoying (cough cough Bella Swan), I actually ended the novel still liking Anna. She's not a hopeless, lovesick girl, but a logical and realistic one, who thinks, "If I can't date this guy, I'll just be a friend to him... no use moping around after him." Thank goodness for that!

Etienne St. Clair, the male lead, is better than Edward Cullen. Who is supposedly perfect. While St. Clair (as his friends call him) is far from perfect, his character is so loveable and realistic that I couldn't help falling in love with him along with Anna. His jokes and teasing, his kindness to his friends, his devotion to his mother, and of course, his British accent all are loveable attributes. I give huge kudos to Stephanie Perkins for giving him actual flaws and actual problems that are easy to see. He's not the perfect guy who comes along, sweeps a girl off her feet, and they live happily ever after. Both Anna and Etienne have problems, and they build a real friendship supporting each other through those problems. Perkins does an excellent job of developing this relationship without boring us with unnecessary exchanges. Their relationship is real, not forced, because we actually believe that they know each other very well.

Anna and Etienne's friends are Meredith, who's in love with St. Clair, and Rashmi and Josh, who are dating. Etienne's girlfriend, Ellie, used to be in their group as well, but she graduated the previous year. Each one of these supporting characters, with maybe the exception of Ellie, is developed so well, even though they aren't the focus of the story. They're all incredibly believable and real, not just plot devices to support Anna and Etienne. The five together, Anna, Etienne, Rashmi, Josh, and Meredith, counsel each other, go through betrayals, fight, forgive each other, and encourage each other. I loved every one of them, and their interactions added so much to the story.

One thing I didn't like: by the end of the book, Anna's misunderstanding seemed unbelievable, and her confusion stupid. The very last fight seems a bit stretched... but maybe because I was just really eager to see them get together!

Yet another thing I loved about this book: they're all believably real teenagers, but Perkins doesn't use excessive language or drug use or crazy partying all the time or sleazy hookups to emphasize this point. If or when these things are used, it's necessary to the plot- and not glamorized at all. This is such a rare quality in a teen book! It feels unexaggerated and simple, so refreshing. And the writing! So well written: the chemistry between Anna and Etienne is unbelievable: I was so wrapped up in the urge for them to finally get together! They compliment each other perfectly. Also, the general narrative is subtle but well written; Perkins has a clear control of language. It's so rare to find a book such as this one in the teen world. It's wholly entertaining, engrossing, adorable, squeal-able, just like watching a chick flick- but with added depth. I. LOVED. IT. Go read it if you're looking for a sweet, fun, light read. You won't be disappointed!

Middlemarch

For about a week before my Israel trip this summer, I looked through all my books and tried to sort out the ones I wanted to read. I had a stack of lighter reading and a stack of classics my dad gave me for Christmas. I had tried to read Vanity Fair with little success, read Portrait of a Lady (reviewed in this blog) and wasn't particularly keen on starting a new classic, which would take me months to read. But Middlemarch, by George Eliot, didn't look so bad, and I knew I wanted to expand my classics vocabulary. So I put Middlemarch in my "to read" pile, and resolved to bring it to the beach with me.

While in Israel, Middlemarch came up in casual conversation on the trip. I told myself, again, that I had to read it at the beach. In Jerusalem one night, we had dinner with a lovely family, and one of the guests, in hearing that Jane Austen was my favorite author, remarked that I should read Middlemarch, by George Eliot. "It's on my list!" I said, surprised that this same book would come up again. I returned from Israel with a new zeal to read it. It took me two months, but I finally finished it recently, and was surprised at how much I loved it!

Those who know me well know that I love Jane Austen. I've read all of her books, and love her wit and humor, along with her hysterical characters and compelling love stories. I've also seen the movies: Pride and Prejudice (both the BBC and Kiera Knightley versions), Sense and Sensibility, Mansfield Park, Emma. I love them all. I've read biographies of her, and one of my favorite movies (though it's inaccurate) is Becoming Jane. Middlemarch was recommended to me because it was similar to Jane Austen's books.

Middlemarch is written around the same time as Jane Austen's novels, but it delves into the characters lives much more extensively than Austen novels. The novel is about a town, Middlemarch, and it's inhabitants. The book opens with Dorothea Brooke, a pious, Mother Theresa-like figure, very quickly becoming engaged to Mr. Casaubon, an elderly gentleman and renowned scholar. The gap in their ages is almost comical, and several people, Dorothea's family included, object to her choice. But Dorothea has dreams of helping Mr. Casaubon in his research, and so marries him quickly. She soon realizes what a mistake she has made as Mr. Casaubon is distant and careless with her, and finds a friend in Will, Mr. Casaubon's cousin.

Rosamond Vincy is the town darling, beautiful, serene, and sensible. Her brother, Fred Vincy, is almost the opposite: he's a dandy, can't settle on a profession, and is hopelessly in love with Mary Garth, his childhood best friend. When Tertius Lydgate, an idealistic doctor with dreams of scholarly discovery and honor, comes to town, Rosamond falls in love with him. The brother and sister pair each go through their own trials of love.

All of these complicated plots are woven against the background of a busy town and many, many minor characters, all fully imagined. What was fascinating to me about Middlemarch was its span: some couples don't become engaged until the end of the book (some 800 pages) due to various plot twists, while others marry quickly. Middlemarch deals not only with courting, but with what happens after marriage, as well. Lydgate encounters debt problems, and the struggle which he and Rosamond go through is how many couples today would act. It's such a cool continuity, that debt strained a marriage in the 1800s just as it can strain a marriage today. It makes the entire novel more realistic and relatable, and fully fleshes out Rosamond and Lydgate. Their flaws are showcased under financial pressure in a very honest way. Their conflict is what takes the novel beyond a simple romance. In fact, it could be the sequel to any romantic comedy movie.

That's not to say all the romances in this novel fail. Will and Dorothea's sweet, blossoming relationship is what spurred me to read to the end. Their journey is filled with great twists and turns of plot, and brings the whole book to a satisfying, believable conclusion. Their talent for great romances are where George Eliot and Jane Austen are similar.

As is true of so many of the 19th century novels, the elegant prose and wise musings of the author beautifully complemented the story. In the hands of another author, the same story could have been vulgar or boring, but the plot and prose worked together so well under George Eliot's intricate sentences. It's one of the reasons I love the classics: nowadays, novels (especially those for teens) have fast-paced plots with bare minimum sentences. It's as though authors have a toolbox full of state-of-the-art tools in front of them, but only use a simple hand screwdriver to tell the story. Eliot, and many other writers in her time, chose their words with great purpose, and wrote their message clearly. It's something that I, as an aspiring writer, try to learn from as I read Middlemarch.