Which book has had the most impact on you this semester?

I think that The Invention of Hugo Cabret had the most impact on me this semester because I had never read a graphic novel before, so it made it a strikingly unique experience for me. I also have a connection to that book because I studied abroad in Paris and absolutley love it, so I could connect to that book especially because of that. I also think that reading that book first made me dive right into YA lit in a spectacular and exciting way, so I will always remember that.
Coming in close second to Hugo Cabret would be Sherman Alexie's novel. Again, it was nothing like what I had read before and its humor was incredible. I loved both these books and they will remain on the top of my YA list.

This course in general has introduced me to Children's and YA books in a way that I never thought would happen. I have such a different outlook on these books than I did before and now consider it a genre that I really want to read more of.

Intertextuality in Alexie's novel

As far as influencing and being related to other texts, I think that Alexie's book is very interesting, because it is the first book like it that I have seen. This is not to say that others like it don't exist, just not that I have heard about. In that way, I think this book has a connection to other books that tell stories of groups of marginalized, outcast, "weak", or otherwise suppressed groups. This doesn't necessarily mean other Native American/Indian stories, but any group that has faced similar problems. I know this is a broad statement about intertextuality, but I think that his book connects to other books in this way. As far as influencing, I think the boldness of his writing will affect other stories and books to emerge that tell a similar story about the sadness and hope that can come out of a struggle like Junior's. Alexie's novel repeats and reinforces the story of an underdog who overcomes suffering and difficulty to achieve his goals, and the idea that it is possible, to a certain extent, that if you don't give up, you can achieve great things. I think Alexie does a great job of "repeating" this story with biting wit that reminds us it's not always as easy as it may seem, and that there will be hurt and sadness along the way.

Scenes from The Giver

I can actually answer this as what scenes I remember from reading The Giver more than five years ago. The scene that stuck out most to me was the scene where Jonas and Asher are throwing around the apple and Jonas starts to see it in color. This was a turning point for me the first time I read it because that was when I realized they didn't see in color, at least not the way we do. Learning that their experience of the world is so bland and different from ours is a really important element of the book, and this moment in the book stands out so much because of that.

Another scene that I could always remember was when Jonas first sees the video of a release, in this case the one of the twins. As a younger reader, I didn't really have the impression that release meant death, and so that scene was horrifying and stuck with me until I just reread the book this semester.

Other than that, there is so much imagery from this book that has stayed with me and that I will always remember... for example, the red of the apple and Fiona's hair. This book has such interesting imagery in my mind, and it is one of my favorite YA novels for this reason. The picture that it paints in my mind is so amazing. I love utopic and dystopic novels, and this is a perfect example of this for young readers. it isn't that often that we come across a novel like this for this age group.

Feminist criticism of "Gamma Rays"

Consider the portrayal of the female characters in The Effects of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-Moon Marigolds from a feminist critic's perspective. What do you notice?

The first thing that comes to mind when thinking of a feminist critique or reading of this play is the fact that Paul Zindel, a man, wrote a play that has almost exclusively female characters in it. This would make me want to look closely and try to figure out what he does which each of them-- how he constructs them to represent women or femininity in general. (My personal opinion is that none of the characters have enough depth, and what they do show us is not great).

For example, Beatrice and Ruth are contrasted with Tilly because they both wear lipstick, smoke, and talk about or are referenced as having relationships with men (in Ruth's case not terribly explicitly)-- in other words, they have characteristics that are "stereotypically" feminine or female, whereas Tilly is just interested in her science project, and shows no "typically" (or stereotypically) feminine characteristics. Although a brief and perhaps superficial examination, I feel that this is one example of what a feminist critique might show when thinking about this play.

Although this is certainly not all there is to these characters, I felt that there were no positively strong female characters, and that not of them are telling a "feminine" story that is distinct and unique. Perhaps because the feminist reading can be so diverse and can look at a work from so many angles there might be something in this play that would be positively read in a feminist critique.

What I noticed the most when thinking about this play from a feminist perspective was how flat all the characters were. I know this may be my personal opinion of the play getting in the way... Mostly the fact that it was written by a man and the lack of depth in the characters make me feel like a feminist critique would tear this play apart.

What makes Judy Blundell's book worthy of the National Book Award?

I thought that What I Saw and how I lied was well-written for the YA age group and that the story was compelling. Considering it's worthiness for the award, I would say that it was probably judged based on the way the story was constructed-- as a fairly dark coming -of-age story that has historical merit as well as romantic intrigue. I really enjoyed this book, especially because it was a little more adult in its content. Who wouldn't?! On a serious note, the message that the book sends isn't about just doing the right thing all the time, and it doesn't present clear, cut-and-dry situations that get resolved at the end. By the end of the book, there are still so many questions (as we saw in class). Evie learns so much and grows up a lot, but has to make an extremely difficult decision which is not necessarily the right or moral thing to do. Like we said in class, it shows how complicated life and relationships can be, while creating an intriguing and well-constructed story in a very interesting time period. I think it was well-deserving of the award.

Reactions to a novel written in verse (late because I got food poisoning last week and totally forgot!)

Reading a novel like Make Lemonade was interesting because I had never read a novel like that before, and had only enjoyed poetry in very different ways-- getting it in smaller doses for a class or just for fun. When I first heard it was going to be all in verse, I was nervous about the possibility of reading a bunch of rhyming, cheesy poems strung together to make a novel. I was pleasantly surprised to find this wasn't the case... Not that I thought we would read something bad, just that thinking about a YA novel written in verse makes me immediately think like that. I was a little suspicious. I think I have mostly been exposed to either classical poetry (I'm a French major, so a lot of 19th century sonnets come to mind) or really contemporary or more abstract poetry and verse. Make Lemonade is really great because it is just a bunch of free verse poems connecting together to make a whole story. Wolff didn't make it seem too contrived, which was a good thing. Her style seemed really innovative to me because I have never seen anything like that done. I loved it. It was not what I was expecting at all, and was very different from what I was used to. Having LaVaughn be the speaker of the novel also made all the poems have a really interesting feeling. I thought it was wonderful.

Likeable characters

I have found something very likeable in all of the main characters of the books we've read so far. First of all, I liked how inquisitive and mechanical Hugo was. I liked the fact that he was good at tinkering with gadgets because of what he learned from his father. I think this made him interesting and different for me, as I haven't read a lot of books about anyone who was mechanically inclined.

Secondly, H.F. and Bo were incredibly likeable because of the humor that they always showed and the love that they had towards each other. I could relate to H.F. because of her strong emotions and her humor, and Bo was just a great and lovable sidekick because of the grief and support that he simultaneously gave H.F.

Crispin was not quite as likeable as H.F. and Bo, but I did find him likeable because he was absolutely genuine. He was so ignorant at first, but so earnest. That, along with his caring nature, made him a great character that I was able to like and identify with.

Out of all of these characters, Bo and H.F. win the contest for most likeable in my opinion. They are just too funny, and because the setting that they exist in is much closer to my own, I was able to relate to them more easily, which made me like them even more.