I read this last November, but I'm just getting around to reviewing it now because I heard that "Every Day" got nominated for a Lambda Award (which celebrates excellence in LGBT literature) in the Children's/YA category and that immediately rekindled my anger towards this book.
First of all: Lambda, I notice that you have 10 nominees for Children's/YA. That's a bit much, don't you think? That's basically every YA/children's book featuring a gay character, isn't it. Have higher standards for yourselves, for Gary's sake. If you go around handing nominations to every Tom, Dick, and Horace, people will be laughing at you behind your behind. Much like the Oscars with their 10 nominees for Best Picture, where once it was but a mere five -- now the Oscars are such a joke, they let the guy from "Family Guy" host it.
Second: It annoys tremendously how much I wanted to love this book, and how disappointed I was when I finally read it. I liked "Will Grayson, Will Grayson," which David Levithan co-authored with John Green. Was that book trite at times? Make that a lot of times? Yes; but it also had scattered moments of wit and piquancy, and trust me, I don't use "piquancy" lightly -- mostly because I have no idea what it means, but still. It was a decent book.
The concept -- "A" is a mysterious sentient entity who wakes up every day in a new body, and falls in love with the same girl -- is brilliant. That alone made me want to throw down everything else and just dive in. (Bad idea when you're experimenting with test tubes full of acids or holding a baby, by the way.) A fantasy romance is one of my top ten genres of romance, and when there's originality afoot -- rare as it is -- I get excited.
This story, however, is not a romance. Unless you consider stalking somebody and manipulating their emotions and fucking around with the memories of the body of the person you're inhabiting romantic, and I do not. "A" reeks of the typical Nice Guy. I get it, Rhiannon (yes, that's the girl he/she/it falls in love with -- I know, the name also made me raise an eyebrow too) is the most special girl in the world. She's absolutely beautiful and amazing in every little way, and nobody knows it, not even herself -- except, of course, you. You're only one capable of loving and appreciating her. Not the scumbag boyfriend she's currently in love with for no reason. And it's up to you to save her from her douche of a boyfriend -- to save her from her own bad judgment and poor decision-making skills -- for you to swoop in, become her best friend and confidante and then when she's ready to open her eyes and accept that her boyfriend sucks and dumps his ass, she'll totally fall in love with you. This is basically the fantasy that every Nice Guy makes up for himself, and there's nothing remotely original about that.
For once, can the female love interest in a novel or a One Direction song who happens to be beautiful and amazing in every little way despite there being no known evidence to substantiate her awesomesauceness -- can she be conscious that she's awesome? Can she possess the minimum IQ and self-awareness required to know that she's pretty and smart and has a good personality? I'm not sure why it's admirable for a woman or girl to be so stupid and have such a low self-esteem that she doesn't know a thing about herself.
In that same vein: Can she also be given credit for knowing what's good for her and what's not? The problem with Nice Guys like A (and I'll get back to A in a minute) is that they think they know what's best for their "love interest" -- which is, of course, himself. It never matters to them how the girl/woman feels. The Nice Guys will manipulate and downright lie in the guise of being "nice" to the love object (and object the girl/woman always is) when, really, it's always about getting what the Nice Guy wants.
Now, Rhiannon seems like every other teenage girl in the U.S. of A. I see nothing that suggests that she's the next Xena the Warrior Princess but that's neither here nor there. The point is, she should be allowed to make her own mistakes, if mistakes they truly are. That's just an essential part of life. If anyone has the right to make her decisions, it should her and her parents -- until she's 18, and then it's nobody else. A doesn't give Rhiannon that much credit, and gets frustrated with her for not wanting to be with him/her/it unconditionally, regardless of how he/she/it looks, male or female, fat or thin. Yeah, like it's such an irrational request to want to fall in love with someone who has the same body every day. Or for a straight thin girl to be attracted only to straight thin males. Guess we didn't realize what kind of a stuck-up bitch she was.
Perhaps the biggest failing of "Every Day" is David Levithan's complete lack of nuance. He wants every sentence to be poetry, to be a nugget of irrefutable, profound wisdom on love that he crams down our gullets like we're too stupid to chew. He's trying to make grand gestures, trying to convey universal truths -- you know, bullshit. It's basically philosophy for people who don't know the first thing about philosophy. Wisdom cannot be found in "universal" statements (if such a thing exists); to find Truth, you must look to the specific, to the minutiae. (LOL, that sounds almost like a line from "Every Day" -- yeah, it's that bad.) In extension, A is intended as a metaphor for the "unconditionality" (IS THAT EVEN A WORD?) of love, that love knows no gender, no race, no body size, and all that hackneyed shit. Yet, even though we're supposed to think of A as an entity that has consciousness but no corporeal identity of its own -- meaning it presumably has no gender, race, sexual orientation, size, etc until it occupies the body of random person who's lucky enough to host A unwittingly (oh yeah, did I mention that A's Host of the Day never realizes they've been somebody's meat suit for 24 hours; except for this one boy who becomes a bit of a nuisance, but that storyline, which could have taken us to exciting and thrilling new realms, goes nowhere, WHAT THE FUCK) -- and we're therefore supposed to think of A as a "universal" voice without bias or prejudice, at no point did I believe A was anything other than a straight white male. Mostly because of all of the above. Interesting, considering that David Levithan, although white and male, is gay. It's a common white (male) fantasy -- the idea that a white voice can co-opt and authentically replicate the voices and experiences of people of all different racial, ethnic, gendered, and sexual backgrounds because white people are apparently neutral and can therefore speak for anyone and everyone. But that's a kettle of fish that I don't have time to touch right now. (Believe me, I'm busy enough touching all these other fish.)
In any case, I didn't find this book romantic or fantastic at all and I find mass murdering for love fantastically romantic. That's saying something (about me, I think). It ends in extreme seediness when, in a final act of manipulation, *SPOILER ALERT* A actually sets up a guy for Rhiannon to fall in love with by messing with the poor guy's memories. Like, I'm going to leave you alone, but let me fix you up with a nice boy that you can fuck and eventually marry and have kids with in my place. Nothing says eternal, selfless love like an arranged marriage.
I'm tired. Did any of this make sense? Don't care; I'm going to read a better book now. Oh, there's another book I read a while ago that I need to review that totally pisses me off, but I don't have the strength or time. Tomorrow is another day!