Perfect Match by Jodi Picoult (reading response)

In "Perfect Match" by Jodi Picoult, Nina Frost, a prosecuting district attorney deals with the unsuspected rape of her son. When Nina realizes who the rapist might be, without absolute proof she demises a genius plan to get away with his murder. In this book an overall question is, how far should you go for someone you love. Generally in this book, the answer is however far it takes.

One example supported in "Perfect Match" of doing anything for 

someone you love is when Nina tells Caleb, her husband, "Don't come home tonight," after Nina falsely interprets Nathaniel's accusation of "Father" as "Daddy", not as the priest. Nina is described to love Caleb very much before this, and when she tells him this, it signifies her putting her son above herself. This shows how much Nina loves Nathaniel and how willing she is to do anything for him.

An example of someone doing anything for someone you love is illustrated when Caleb kills the rapist after Nina's murder was carried out on the wrong man. To Caleb, he simply "did what [he] had to do" because that's what loving Nathaniel means to Nina and Caleb. Not only does the murder symbolize Caleb's love to Nathaniel, but it also symbolizes Caleb's love and dedication to Nina. He carried out what she tried to do, but could not. He only "finished what [she] started]". This shows how they will do anything for each other because they love each other so much.

A final example of people doing anything for someone they love is described when Nathaniel runs away from the court when he thinks he is saving his mother from a life in prison. Although his plan would not have worked had it succeeded, the intentions are clear and appreciated. Nina says that she will be mad once "I'm finished being so happy" that Nathaniel is back. This shows how close Nina and Nathaniel are and how they would do anything  for each other.

All in all, Nina, Nathaniel, and Caleb's lives probably would never have bee the same again after such traumatic events on all of them; Nina and  Caleb's murders, and Nathaniel's rape. I really loved this book because the author used such interesting perspectives to put the story together. It was a very disturbing idea to write about, but Picoult did not exaggerate and this made it all even more realistic.

Why the Best Kids Books Are Written in Blood (critical analysis)

Sherman Alexie wants readers to know that dark kids books help troubled and privileged young adult readers deal with major issues in their lives. Alexie also wants reader to know that most disturbing kids books are not nearly as disturbing as the lives of the kids the article. Alexie discusses the affects of "disturbing" books on troubled teens and how the books helped them reach ethical, healthy decisions. Alexie uses examples of not only kids and teens  who are victims of rape, abuse, and other traumatic events, but also those who "have never been to a funeral" and are "privileged" yet also used these books to lean on. Using both examples really helped Alexie prove his point; troubled and privileged readers need to use dark and violent books to  help them get through problems in their own lives. 

Sherman Alexie wants readers to think that young adult books are essential to the lives of kids as they deal with issues. He wants the reader to feel that young adult literature helps kids deal with issues in their lives that they wouldn't otherwise be able to deal with. He wants readers not to underestimate the real issues that kids are going through. He also wants Meghan Cox Gurdon (the author of an article denouncing young adult fiction) to be proven wrong about her opinion; young adult fiction is much too dark for kids to read. When Shermen Alexie writes about how Gurdon is immature and biased, he uses choice words and an appropriate tone to prove Gurdon's opinion wrong. He writes that she has "complaints" and writes that he "laughed at her condescension." By writing this he hints to the reader that he is mature enough not to take her insults personally and taking lightly about her writing, making it seem unimportant. Alexie also writes "[Critics] aren't trying to protect the poor from poverty. Or victims from rapists." Alexie's wording and tone here seem to make the critics seem evil and unethical. 

This article seemed very personal and raw to me. I thought that it was extremely interesting to hear the perspective that kids are "already liv[ing] in hell" so the dark books can only help them by relating them to the characters. This point becomes extremely indisputable when Alexie proves it by relating the issue of kids reading dark books to his own troubled life. All in all, I found the article to be well written and powerful. I am not entirely sure what my opinion on young adult literature is but thought that Alexie dealt with it well.

Faithful Elephants by Yukio Tsuchiya

   In "Faithful Elephants: A True Story of Animals, People and War," by Yukio Tsuchiya, three elephants are killed by the people who they trust to keep them alive every day. Throughout the short story, things continuously fall from an "above," symbolizing betrayal, and the progression of the stories conflict when the falling things become drastically more severe.

   At the beginning of the story, Tsuchiya describes cherry blossom petals falling and sparkling. This corresponds with the innocence of the reader, who hasn't yet felt the pain of the elephants' death. It also symbolizes the innocence of the "crowds of people... pushing to enter the zoo on such a beautiful day."

   Once the zookeeper begins to retell the elephants' story, the falling things become more severe. Instead  of floating, drifting cherry blossoms, we have falling rain. The falling rain is also compared to bombs, which are indirectly and directly mentioned throughout the entire story. This makes it obvious that the conflict is beginning. And then the falling objects become even more severe. Poisoned potatoes are fed to John the elephant, who is smart enough to "(throw) it to the ground, kerplunk!" This symbolizes the conflict getting even worse as the elephant is subjecting himself to a tortuous, slow death and condemning the other two elephants, Tonkey and Wanly to it also.

   As Tonky and Wanly are dying, the author describes them trying hard to lift their weak bodies off the ground.  As they "stand up, tottering," they are holding up the heavy sky with bombs ready to drop inside of it. As long as the elephants are alive, the war is on hold, and that is one of the reasons why everyone wants them to live another day; they are defying war at the very conflict of the story. As soon as the elephants are dead, the "white clouds floating in the sky" can no longer hold the bombs, as everyone has given up. The bombs fall again, and this is the turning point of the story.  The zookeepers have to deal with their grief and return to the modern day zoo.

   Overall, faithful elephants is an incredibly moving, beautiful story.   The snowflakes, which are meltable cherry blossoms, floating rain, and  tiny clouds are compared to the cherry blossoms that slowly fall on the graves. This symbolizes the grief, which won't stop falling, yet still is falling slowly and softly. It is frozen, and no longer innocent. The story is very personal and whoever reads it identifies with it differently, which is something I love about it.  I like to read it over and over again, and I uncover something else each time. Maybe if enough people remember Tonkey, Wanly, and all the other animals who died at the cost of World War II, it will bring them back to life in peoples' hearts.