"The Hero" is one of those books that stars younger, teenage characters and the decisions that mark the difference between childhood and adulthood (similar to "On my Honor," another book with a similar theme.)
The MC, Jamie, is an incoming-freshman living on a small farm in Idaho in a very small town. The relative newcomers up the road, the Leapers, are generally disliked by everyone, and Jamie particularly dislikes the awkward Dennis Leaper, the only one his age. Although he isn't one of the ones who bullies him, he doesn't mind pitching in when someone else starts it.
The plot, overall, is slow, but it is, after all, really on the decisions we make and how we deal with the consequences. I thought it did a good job, overall, and the story was a quick, interesting read. My main problem, however, was the ending.
To really understand, you have to understand that these sorts of books, I feel, are trying to put up a model for people to follow. Like "On My Honor," the books present a normal circumstance that many people get in through their own actions, and try to guide the morally right and responsible way out of it. In "On my Honor," two boys go swimming in a dangerous river. When one drowns, the other has to decide if he should tell the truth and accept the blame for his part of the tragedy. He decides in the end to tell the truth and accept the consequences.
Here, we have a similar situation, but in the end, the MC saves the day by lying to the entire town. The emotions and circumstances are more involved- you're dealing with unreasonable people who have just lost a child- but still, the end of the story is "Lie, if you have to. Sometimes it's better than the truth."
What kind of moral is that?