The bestiality was definitely the most beautiful part of this story. It may seem obvious to you that such would be the case, but it was not obvious to me. I am not typically a fan of falling in love with dogs. There was truly something surreal and creepy about that part of this story that grabbed me, though. If only this had been a short story about one girl’s creepy obsession with wolves, I think I could have really liked it. It starts out with a ghostly beauty that is legitimately respectable. And it ends with the same stark, Midwestern haunting feeling. But, the middle of this story is really, really douchey. It’s like when your friend falls in love, and it’s fun to talk about the boy she likes for a little
while; and then your eyes glaze over, and she’s still talking; and then you get a little uncomfortable about the obscene level of detail she’s giving you (about what they ate for breakfast and how their elbows touched like fifty times, nothing exciting), and she’s still talking
; and then you realize that both she and her boyfriend are morons, and you were wrong to have been friends with her to begin with. But didn’t she say something pretty about trees once?
I just wanted these kids to get a room, and then they did
get a room, but kept telling me about everything. Gag. It was like being the third wheel in a makeout session that lasted foooooreeeeveeeer. One of the most boring, boring, boring stories ever. And, man, the guy is such a douchebag. He’s, like, composing douchey poetry while they’re making out and stuff. Like, just make out if you’re going to make out. I don’t want to know about any
of these things. And I certainly don't want to hear your douchey poetry. Talk about a Shelley complex.
And, I listened to it on audio, so I couldn’t skim. The audio wasn’t bad, other than how boring this story was. I mean, I wanted
to read my administrative law cases sometimes while I was listening to this. That’s how boring it was. Then there was a really douchey interview with the author at the end of the CDs. Oh, man. She was talking about how she wrote this book to make her audience cry. Fail. For me, at least.
So, the narrative in the book goes back and forth between the boyfriend perspective and the girlfriend perspective. That kind of makes sense to me as a device, but I always get caught up in thinking about narrative voices. Like, in first-person narratives, I have to create a background story in my mind for how the characters decided to write the book. It just seems like such a douchey thing for a boyfriend and girlfriend to impose their sappy story in the world and think it’s a good idea. Also, in this case it doesn’t really make sense because they make it out like the girl practically doesn’t speak English and only understands numbers, but her narrative has the more beautifully written moments in the book. That’s a petty complaint, but it’s true.
There is a thing about evil parents in here that I like, though. I liked how the kids reacted to the horror of their parents but didn’t seem to hold it against them. All of the parents were interesting to me, and they actually came off as nuanced. They were very villainous, but I think I like villainous, unreliable parents in stories. They are interesting to read about. If only this whole book had been about the parents. Because, as it was, this experience was like only
reading about the pastoral couple in [b:Anna Karenina|152|Anna Karenina|Leo Tolstoy|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41%2ByPuObjAL._SL75_.jpg|2507928]. So. Boring.
Did I mention that this is a boring book? That is your takeaway message.