Dear John

Okay, I've rethought the purpose of this blog, simply because it does not seem liable to work. For one, I haven't been able to get as much writing done as I had originally hoped, but on top of that, every time I do write something, I always end up going back and revising it, which is really just a nice way of saying that I basically rewrite whatever I have down (case in point: I now have a fourth version of the beginning of my story, the first and third of which you have been exposed to). Seeing as I don't want to have to keep putting up the beginning, I just won't put up anything at all. I feel less pressured that way, anyway.

That being said, I will, from this point forward, do what I seem to do best (at least in person): rant.

Today's topic will be "Dear John," by Nicholas Sparks. I will admit that I was excited about buying the book, particularly because I have been in the mood to read sweet, romantic love stories lately. I did my research before getting it, too, reading a few excerpts, watching the trailers for the movie that's coming out based on it. I even read a few reviews (although, in all honestly, I went this far only because I was left with no access to either a bookstore or library at the time). The reviews were all good, too, expressing that it was a typical Nicholas Sparks story, set in a small town, beginning through sheer spontaneity, faced with a difficult situation, fueled by unsinkable desire and longing - all that fun stuff that elicits envy and desire in most females (very heavy emphasis on most). It didn't seem like it would make a long-lasting impression on me, but it seemed good; seemed like something I was in the mood to read.

Which is why the first thing I am going to stress is that I was extremely, extremely disappointed when I read it. I felt almost betrayed, in a way, by all the hype. I have read numerous reviews on the book, and I've yet to read a single bad one. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places - I don't know. What I do know is that I only recommend reading this book if you are a) looking for something to use as a bad example, or b) desperate for some form - any form - of literature, and it is the only, only thing you have. (I may be exaggerating, but if I am, only slightly.)

Theoretically, the idea isn't bad: former bad boy meets naive good girl; boy is in the army, girl is studying how to help the mentally ill in college; boy falls head over heels for girl, and vice versa; time spent together; much, much longer time spent apart; after the first time, difficulties set in, etc., etc., etc. But the whole bad boy/good girl thing is so overplayed that Sparks' only saving grace is the somewhat different situation. Well, that, as well as the fact that the ending more or less makes sense, and that there are a number of underlying messages that make the story a lot better than it otherwise would have been.

But that's where my positive feedback ends. Maybe I'm being a little harsh, but so be it. I actually enjoyed reading "The Notebook" (not so much the movie), and absolutely loved "A Walk to Remember" (both the book and movie were spectacular), so I guess I was expecting a lot more from the world-renown Monsieur Sparks.

The story starts off with the main character and narrator, John Tyree, describing his life, explaining his reasoning for joining the army. He's home on his third leave, and is sitting at the beach, resting after a day of surfing, when two girls walk by. One of these girls is Savannah, the other main character and John's love interest. John calls out a greeting, and while her friend rolls her eyes and turns away, Savannah calls back. And kaboom! It's love! While John is somewhat interesting, Savannah, in my opinion, is not a compelling character at all, and neither is the way Sparks words her description. John mentions a lot about her "kindness" and "sweetness", but there really doesn't seem to be much else about her that would attract someone like him to her. She has an open face, and a good heart, and she volunteers to help the unfortunate, and she cares about everybody...straight-A student...valedictorian...very pretty...naive and innocent... I mean, come on. That just isn't enough. I didn't find that there was a truly engrossing aspect to her personality that could have pulled someone like John in. And yet somehow, she does. And then her bag falls into the water, and of course John is the one who gets it out, and their eyes meet, and he feels something (the Sparks spark) - again mentioning the kindness - and he never wants to look away. They end up spending that evening together, and the next, and the one two nights after that. So after knowing each other for a whopping four days, they are deeply, beautifully in love - and say so, too. Seriously. That's where the "I love you"s come in, and the situation could not have been any more unrealistic and unromantic.

Maybe it would have been more believable if Sparks had done a better job developing the emotions that played out, or by giving more details to the three days spent together, or just by giving more details. But there just wasn't enough of that. They don't do anything particularly exciting when they're together, and their conversations seem both unnaturally boring and conditionally improbable. (In fact, the dialogue throughout most of the book seems pretty stiff and unreal.) There's nothing gripping about them, so I don't see how they could have fallen so deeply for each other so quickly. I'll concede to the fact that Sparks did seem to try and make it seem as though their relationship was different, as though it stood out: Savannah took an uncanny interest in John's father (because "he was the one who raised [him]"), and John felt an irrepressible jealousy and protectiveness whenever around her, even that first night. But it was all just too dry. It wasn't captivating, it didn't entice me, and it certainly didn't move me. Seriously, four days and they're completely and utterly in love? Fighting a week in because there is now such a depth to their relationship that family is now involved in the emotional roller coaster? Entirely committed to each other less than two weeks later, as John leaves for the army? Really? I can only see that happening if they spent many, many hours together, bonding over unique and unusually romantic activities. I don't even know how to accurately explain what I'm trying to say: there just isn't enough development of the relationship.
 
So after the less-than-two-week-long period together, they manage to survive an entire YEAR apart through letters, occasional phone calls, and a ritual to look at the full moon every month and remember their two weeks. That way, they wouldn't ever forget. When John returns, things are smooth sailing at first, then troubles ensue - as they should. But the troubles, in all honesty, are pretty trivial, and they don't seem like the type that would arise if their relationship was plausible...and then the "solutions"...

Okay, I won't give away the ending, but all in all, this was a disappointment. In fact, I am going to return the book - something I never, ever do, because even books that I don't exactly love I tend to keep. But this one just does not belong anywhere in my collection. I refuse to have it anywhere on my shelves. It would be an insult to all that I stand for. You may think I was harsh, but I'm only being honest.

In all candour yours, 
Aya