The Perks of Being a Wallflower in DC Public Library

Sep 30, 2012 LadyTea rated it liked it

Sorry kids, I actually found the book to be a bit overrated the first time. I wasn't bowled over by "Charlie's writing" which, although appropriately conversational in tone, didn't always ring true as a 15-year old voice in my opinion. I do take into account that Charlie was relatively naive and emotionally fragile, but still I felt myself agreeing with Charlie's English teacher who encouraged him to develop his writing style and incorporate some descriptive vocabulary. At times the simplicity o Sorry kids, I actually found the book to be a bit overrated the first time. I wasn't bowled over by "Charlie's writing" which, although appropriately conversational in tone, didn't always ring true as a 15-year old voice in my opinion. I do take into account that Charlie was relatively naive and emotionally fragile, but still I felt myself agreeing with Charlie's English teacher who encouraged him to develop his writing style and incorporate some descriptive vocabulary. At times the simplicity of the language, and rhythm of speech made me feel like I was reading "Flowers for Algernon". I do recognize that when I first read this, it was several years after I had graduated college (but I still remembered what was like to be 15!). Clearly, many children of the 90's exalt this coming-of-age tale for being amazingly relevant and life-changing. Well, though I was never an emotionally scarred, white, adolescent male I still hoped that, given all the fan fervor, I would connect with whatever made it so "amazing". Well, despite some vivid scenes and some memorable lines here and there, I think I failed to do so at the time and in fact, I couldn't even recall if I ever finished the book. Btw, I never lived in the '60s as a mentally unstable, white female aspiring writer, but I deeply connected with "The Bell Jar".

Knowing that I was intrigued enough to see the very well-casted movie adapted & directed by the author, I re-read the book. I must say that I am pleasantly surprised that I actually enjoyed the movie more than the book. This is a rarity as most times the opposite is almost exclusively true. I probably enjoyed it because in the movie everything is filtered through Charlie's perspective, but the story is not solely dependent upon Charlie's narrative storytelling voice. There's a bit of a voice-over to set the tone but there's more dialogue in the film because characters more often speak for themselves and feel more real.

As with any film adaptation, many aspects of the story do not make it into the film. Although the much of the family dynamics were missing from the movie (the parents practically seemed ornamental, yet they served their purpose even with the few lines they had), ultimately in my opinion, Chbosky chose the right scenes to include in the film. He kept the movie centered around the kids and their experiences which felt honest and authentic and the script that the actors worked from almost seemed more literary than the book! After re-reading the book and seeing the movie I give "Perks" three stars mainly because watching the movie helped me better appreciate the author's writing. ...more

Like · see review