There are many reasons that I gave this book four stars. One, the main characters. Spaz is very sympathetic. He has weaknesses but mostly strengths. He sees the truth about himself and the others around him, but he's also cynical and skeptical when he should be. There is nothing about him that I didn't like or that came off as unrealistic or unlikely. Ryter is a perfect hero: he follows Spaz but isn't a Sancho Panza; he's more like a whispering voice in the head of Don Quixote. He sacrifices in order to save others. He is wise but also has flaws and gaps in his knowledge. Otherwise, he would be too perfect. Second, the narrative technique. At first, I felt lost by the jargon and the slang. That's the point, though. The reader should feel disoriented upon being thrust into this world that comes from our own but that is hardly recognizable. The further along the narrative progresses, the more that is revealed to the reader, and the more the reader becomes accustomed to words like "splatgun" and "mindprobe," "proov" and "takvee." These words become recognizable and connected to an image the deeper the reader becomes immersed in Spaz's world, the Urb and Eden. Third, the plot and theme. Anything that has to do with the importance of reading, writing, and words is special to me. I've always been a reader, and I've been writing stories since I was seven years old. I read the Bible every day. Words matter, they last, and there's nobody that can dispute that. The book is action-packed. There isn't a dull moment, yet it's not the action that matters. The words matter, especially the last word: "Yes." Despite all the "stuff" that happens in the novel, the most important thing is that the book ends with a word of affirmation, with a hope of the future, with the idea that because words continue on, people continue on. To me, that's one of the most powerful messages that a book can have. A book about reading and writing, a book that promotes the importance of words, will pretty much always get a four-star rating from me.
The only things I didn't like about this book, that I thought were unrealistic, were the dialogue between Lanaya and her "contributors," which was choppy and awkward, and the scene in Stadium, which was also awkward and somewhat abrupt.
Other than these small things, I think the book is nearly perfect.
*****************************************************************************
Interesting. Above, the only two things I didn't like about the book, well, I don't agree with my assessment of those things at all upon this reread. I think that Lanaya and her contributors' dialogue was spot-on for the relationship that they have, and I think the scene in Stadium is well-done. I have no clue what I was looking for or expecting differently. Still, I'm keeping my four-star rating because I find some things in the book a little cheesy, like the names (Mongo) and the blatant characterization of the people in the Urb as animals. I get it, but it could have been done more subtly than having them called the Monkey Gang and then having the mob at the end literally be animalistic. Otherwise, I still find this book nearly perfect.
What struck me the most this time in reading the book in preparation to teach it for Children's Literature, a 200-level English class, is the social commentary. I love that there are social and class issues explored and that the differences seen between the proovs and the normals are boiled down to ignorance. Philbrick really explores what makes us human and how genetically altering people doesn't make them better. He also shows us the difference between science put to good use and science that is used frivolously. I hope my students like this book. It doesn't feel outdated to me since it's dystopian, but I'm not sure how they'll take some of the language and the weird animal-human scenes. We'll see!!
Addendum on 1/23/23: I don’t know what I was talking about AGAIN because after class discussion last semester, the animal scenes make perfect sense. When you dehumanize people and force them to rely on technology that is literally a drug and alters their mind, of COURSE, they’re going to act like animals, and of COURSE, it’s going to be blatant. My students loved this book, and we had great discussions about it. Also, Y2K anxiety—Philbrick was right. I’m teaching it again this semester, and I can’t wait. Based on the first two days, I think these students will have a lot to say about it!