The Fault in Our Stars
discussion
Am I the only one who hates this book with burning passion?
I completely respect your opinion and your right to express it but I absolutely loved this book. I wouldn't describe it as life-changing but it did change some of my views. Having said that, it's very refreshing to hear a drastically different view on the book.As for what Leona said back in December, I don't think John Green was aiming for incredible depth, or one single thing like a love story or philosophic ideas. To me, it seems like he was trying to portray life, in all its complexity and simplicity and frankness. I think The Fault In Our Stars conveys reality and the befuddling experience that is being a human.
I also think that John Green was no trying to tell us readers that "teens with cancer suddenly become magically wise", as you put it. I think that's exactly what he's trying to dispel, the ridiculous belief that kids with cancer suddenly gain enlightenment and can see the world from higher up or some nonsense like that. He's showing that, hell, kids with cancer are just kids, like every other kid, and they have imperfections and they have questions and doubts and fears and likes and dislikes and EVERYTHING THAT A PERSON HAS. The character(s) who have "long monologues about the meaning of life" (I think you're talking about Hazel, although you may not be or may also be referring to additional characters) have these long monologues because they are the kind of people to ponder about the meaning of life and have long monologues about it. NOT because the cancer has given them some kind of insight or wonder for how the world works. Hazel is sometimes ungrateful but isn't everyone? And she does appreciate her parents and what they do for her, but she goes about showing it in a different way to what you might expect. She isn't going to thank her parents constantly for every single favour they do for her because that would make her feel weird and her parents feel weird and they already feel weird enough and she doesn't want the cancer to make her life any less normal than possible.
Anyway, that's my interpretation of TFIOS. Just to reiterate, I respect your views and I am not condemning you for expressing them. I'm just interested in having a lively discussion. I hope you have a nice day :)
Aly wrote: "@Mochaespresso: I understand what you're saying. I guess I'm just applying my opinion to life experiences related to the book. When my best friend had cancer, even when it wasn't at an advanced age..."I guess that depends on where your from and what health care you got.
I didn't like it either. I thought was boring and depressing and then I found out that my 15 year old granddaughter is reading it and loving it. So clearly it's aimed at her age group who seem to love this type of drama.
John Green didn't plot a best-seller or determine a best-seller, the reading public did by and large, along with critics. Of course there will be those who disagree. What book, no matter how popular, doesn't have its detractors?I am glad, too, to see that this thread has gotten more respectful overall among its participants. Well done. In that regard, please consider this. What is found among the opinions here is the word "I", as in I wouldn't never do that, I don't think that's possible, or I wouldn't react or talk that way, or the people I know in such circumstances would do or say that.
It's true, life experiences shape points of view. The challenge, I believe, is understanding, even accepting that actions or conduct we personally find not possible as "I" see them, are very much possible and realistic among others. Think of history and all the horrible things people and groups of people have done of all ages. And the wonderfully great things people have done - all of which are not "normal' or unexpected from the "I" perspective. As a result, we see people in this thread saying kids would never say that, or "I" have experienced cancer or "I" know people who have at that age in TFIOS, and they would never have said or done that; whereas others say, Oh yes they would.
Recently I overheard a bunch of 6th graders discussing Java programming and Higgs Boson. There was recently an article about John Green working with a teen cancer sufferer and her words, not Greens, were remarkable and advanced.
I don't know what any group of teens would say under any group of circumstances. Not with absolutes. The dialogue in TFIOS presented varying pov, hope, sarcasm, depression, realism, acceptance, infatuation, hope and hopelessness. None of that bothered me. "I" do not know what the absolutes are when it comes to how people react as a teen to cancer, just as I don't know why an upper middle class mother who has been loving all her life decides to murder her children one day. Our "I" is the way we're built, I guess, but can get us in trouble when deciding whether we're enjoying or passionately hating a novel because we limit ourselves to "I".
What bothered me most about TFIOS is the shallow way TFIOS handles most of the adults, except perhaps for Hazel's mother. The problem is even more pronounced in Looking for Alaska. "I" could be wrong about that, too, because Green spent time in a boarding school and would have observed things better than "I". That "I" could be wrong is why I do not like TFIOS, but do not do so with a passion.
Bekah wrote: "@pilcrow i wasn't talking about whether or not you liked the fucking book, i was talking about how you treated the people that may have actually been really inspired by this book. you do not speak ..."Bekah, slow your damn roll before you hurt yourself or someone else. You *are* judging us by popping up in this thread and telling us what the acceptable and unacceptable ways there are to hate this book, and telling me that it is insignificant that I think other books are better. And unless you "hate this book with the fire of a thousand suns", or whatever the title is here, you really have no business being here. Don't feel bad, though: you aren't the first nerdfighter to be a total fascist about this book, either. You guys are like obnoxious religious people who can't stop shoving their beliefs down people's throats. That's part of why I can't take this book seriously. If we think at least half the people drooling over this book are drooling over nothing, then get lost and let us discuss it amongst ourselves. You don't see any of us in the pro-TFIOS threads evangelizing about our hate for this book, so go away and don't do it to us.
@pilcrow i've moved on into agree to disagree territory and i'm not interested in bringing up an old fight. but, i will say i am not a nerdfighter nor do i worship john green; he's a decent writer, that's all. i only "popped up" in this thread because i thought you all were acting pretty rude to the people who liked this book. never said i had the right to censor your opinion on it. anyways.
Hannah wrote: "I completely respect your opinion and your right to express it but I absolutely loved this book. I wouldn't describe it as life-changing but it did change some of my views. Having said that, it's v..."I think he was aiming for it to be deep and meaningful, you know, unlike the cliche cheesy cancer romance, and that's is the problem I have with this book. Well, not that he was trying to aim higher, but that he never really pulls it off. It's like he had the observations and one-liners before he had the characters, or even the book in mind. And it seems like his characters mean more to him for their metaphorical value than they do as characters. In the end, it comes off being just as corny as the Lurlene McDaniel books I used to read when I was a kid. And it's harder to relate to symbols; I couldn't really feel anything for Augustus when he died, because I never really bought him as a character.
Ayesha wrote: "I happily bought the hardcover of The Fault in our stars back in December 2012 after seeing the high average GR ratings and raving reviews saying how beautiful, life-changing, thought-provoking and..."We float in the same boat!! I also didn't like this book, simply because i didnt connect to it. I think it shows off alittle and mocks everyone who is actually suffering these same diseases. Maybe you wont agree with me on this, but i feel the same way as you do. Angered. Reply Back, Ayesha!!
Bekah wrote: "@pilcrow i've moved on into agree to disagree territory and i'm not interested in bringing up an old fight. but, i will say i am not a nerdfighter nor do i worship john green; he's a decent writer,..."You are trying to censor it by telling us that there are "unacceptable" ways to hate this book or its fanbase. This thread was probably created so we wouldn't have to discuss TFIOS with the fanbase, so we could just rip on it without hurting anyone. You are coming in here and choosing to get hurt instead of discussing the book with people who share your views. Anyway, end of.
Anna wrote: "Amelia wrote: "People who are rating TFIOS 5 stars don't understand that this book is a very weak representation of what cancer really is like. It isn't meeting some hot guy and going to follow you..."No, I'm saying that TFIOS depicted an unrealistic version of what cancer was like. It was like Green sugarcoated it. I know it's just fiction, but TFIOS made it seem like having cancer was glamorous.
Ayesha wrote: "I happily bought the hardcover of The Fault in our stars back in December 2012 after seeing the high average GR ratings and raving reviews saying how beautiful, life-changing, thought-provoking and..."I agree on your review, the two main characters had absolutely NO growth through the whole book and were totally flat! Read my review: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Neats wrote: "I wasn't blown away by this book either. It was my first John Green novel and I'm not sure that I would choose to read another one in hurry."Agreed. If this is how Green always writes, it's going to take a lot of persuading to have me pick up another one of his books.
I like John Green as a person. His vlogbrother videos have kind of grown on me, although he gets on my nerves sometimes; like an older brother that you just have to laugh at. I don't think he is that bad of a writer, but I don't appreciate the assumption that he's the next great thing in literature. I agree with you on the fact that this book is overrated. I'm not going to lie, there are a lot worse YA books out there to read (Twilight, anyone?). But when you boil down to it, that's all this book is: a good young adult novel. It didn't make me cry. It didn't change my life or my views about life. And I feel a little sorry for all those who think that The Fault in Our Stars is one of the best books out there. There is so much more to reading than just devouring YA novels. It doesn't matter whether someone absolutely loved this book or not, all that matters is that you don't get all caught up in it, and keep reading other books. P.S. Did this book remind anyone of Romeo and Juliet? Two teenagers are infatuated with each other at first sight, declare their love through extensive monologues, end up dead, etc…
P.P.S. Did anyone else feel like John Green was trying a little too hard to be profound in his writing?
Katie wrote: "Have I ever been really rude on this thread? Just wanting to know..... I don't want to be rude."Not that I've seen.
I actually just flipped back through TFIOS to review some stuff, and I was thinking that it really rubbed me the wrong way how all of these kids with cancer - the ones Green wants us to sympathize with at least - are all so damn special. Cancer survivors are normal people, man. Some are smart, some are dumb, and not all of them have profound things to say about life. And the way some of the other kids in the group were put down for saying what they did (Lida, I think). People survive in different ways. It was like John Green made everyone he disagreed with come across as being totally dumb. Augustus's sisters were treated like they were retards. Except for Isaac, everyone in this book is either really "deep" or really dumb and superficial.
Glamorous was the furthest thing from my mind as I was reading. I really doubt that anyone who enjoyed the book came away with a glamorous view of cancer.
Mochaspresso wrote: "Glamorous was the furthest thing from my mind as I was reading. I really doubt that anyone who enjoyed the book came away with a glamorous view of cancer."Maybe "glamorizes" is the wrong word, but TFIOS certainly romanticizes it.
@Pilcrow. There was a book I read, forgot the title, in which the protagonist is 12, his sister 8, and the little brother is 7, when they've witnessed their loving father die of an aortic aneurysm. The 12-year-old becomes witness to a neighbor friend's father, when the friend, 10, is diagnosed with juvenile leukemia. He sees the father cry over the fate of his only child, and the boy observes something along the lines of - Children who've watched their father die are different from other children. We've had the sight forced on us, and we're thrown into a whole new world, with a struggling mother, looks of pity from neighbors - he realizes he doesn't cry, and hasn't cried over this new tragedy, and observes his little brother doesn't cry either. And concludes that he feels an odd jealousy over his ill friend's father, that he's jealous and wishes he could cry too.The point is, whether someone, as a child, is a genius, normal (whatever that is), or considered less intelligent, when something huge strikes us in a big, terrible way, is there not a high probability the child will be impacted, change, alter views, look for answers and, most importantly, change in unique ways from others, and perhaps not at all? After all, what IS the one right, normal, expected way to re-act to a tragic situation. Some children have sadly committed suicide - how normal is that? Some show no reaction at all. How normal is that? But these things happen, and every type of emotion / reaction in between. I just don;t get how you can say that survivors of cancer are "normal" people. How do you define a "normal" person and the limited ways to respond to cancer? And a person who is a cancer survivor certainly is entitled to return to their routines, but they are forever a person who has survived cancer, undergone radiation, surgery, chemo-type drugs, felt the agony, the pain, the fear, and watched their hair fall out and lose weight and have their lives turned upside down. They are people with these experiences of various degrees, and necessarily must be prepared for cancer's return as they undergo 3 to 6 month checks, each time wondering, Is it back? Am I clean?
So I'm back to square one of this thing about what you or "I" have experienced and why that in any way excludes the many, many possible reactions of so-called "normal" teens when they're diagnosed with life-threatening cancer. Green did work for five months in a children's hospital cancer ward, and is still works with cancer-stricken children. While that is admirable, I would also consider that he saw and heard things, unique stories and responses, that I have not seen or heard, from those individual children that certainly other children fighting cancer may not say or do. If we limit ourselves with books to what only we have seen or heard, we become provincial in our attitudes. Anyway, that's my speech. Sorry for the length.
@pilcrow. I certainly only respect what you went through, and the truth of your personal feelings. Your post, though, is filled with "I" observations even before your last sentence with the quotation marks around the "I". It appears clear that you approach TFIOS' dialogue and actions by the teens from a very definite "my experiences govern my opinions on this book" pov. How can anyone else say your opinion is wrong? That would be wrong. My experiences tell me otherwise - more so that "I" accept a lot of other people who disagree with what is a "normal" reaction to extreme difficulties based on their experiences, and on and on. There is romanticism between people in TFIOS suffering from cancer, but there is no romanticism expressed toward cancer. And, again, John Green could not have written any book because he wanted money. Money for a book only comes when enough people enjoy it and positive word of mouth spreads. How could any author possibly know when the first draft is started whether professional critics and / or the masses won't pan the finished product? The Book Thief has been praised in this thread, yet there is romantic love stirring between innocent, caring tweens /teens among Nazi Germany. As with John Green, he has had his experiences one-on-one with teen / children cancer patients, and even based Hazel on one young patient in particular. Maybe she talked to him about love, and her thoughts, and experiences, that to her are genuine, even as they would not be to you, as much as your beliefs are genuine. Anyway, please don't take this as saying you cannot feel the way you do. You absolutely do, and I'm glad you've overcome and, I hope, are enjoying life. all of which is much more important than any disagreement over a book. (Besides - we gave it the same star ranking; just for different reasons as "I" feel it).
I do believe you have the right to your feelings about this book, but you don't have to share with the world. If you didn't like the book, WHY DID YOU READ IT? That's my only question.
Trace, I think you confused Aly with me; the reply right above yours is hers, not mine. :) Anywho, I'm aware that Green did work with child cancer survivors/victims, etc., but this doesn't take away from my general point. The thing is, I know a few cancer survivors - one from high school and one from college - and they're not terribly different from how they used to be. A little anxious and depressed, sure, but my friend from high school is generally the same immature pothead gamer he's always been. I feel like books like TFIOS put the expectation on kids, or any cancer survivors, to "grow" and "deepen' from the experience, to deal with it in a certain way. Bad experiences don't always transform people, and if they do, it isn't often for the better. It usually doesn't turn them into wisdom-spewing machines, in any event. And I feel like we are supposed to be torn up about Hazel and Augustus because cancer is happening to two Extraordinarily Special People, not some average kids. (Average kids, and average everything else, get pissed on in this book.) I think the reason I liked Me and Earl and the Dying Girl so much better than TFIOS is because it totally turns this thinking on its head. Nobody in that book is special, and it's still a better read. It was relatable because most of us aren't special, either.
No illness, mental or physical, should ever be romanticized.
Pilcrow wrote: "Trace, I think you confused Aly with me; the reply right above yours is hers, not mine. :) Anywho, I'm aware that Green did work with child cancer survivors/victims, etc., but this doesn't take a..."
I agree with this. He also romanticizes the idea of "doomed" love. Like there is something beautiful about death and losing someone you love. It's the Romeo and Juliet, star-crossed lovers, "their love is too pure for this earth" type of crap. Losing someone you love is the worst kind of pain. It is not beautiful. It is ugly. Very, very ugly.
Aly wrote: "@Ana: How were we meant to know we wouldn't like it? We read it to find out if we WOULD like it. It's the same if I ask you, "If you liked it, why did you read it?" It makes no sense.
As for we d..."
There's such a thing as putting down a book.
@AnaIf I would've put down the book, you would've blamed me for not reading the book COMPLETELY and criticising it.
Um, excuse me, no. There are plenty of reasons not to finish that book.
@AlyCalm down, dear. She's just a child.
Sorry I felt the need to have a discussion. My age shouldn't matter.
Aly wrote: It doesn't change the fact that he romanticises it....I agree with everything you wrote.
Well I don't know about anyone else but I simply cannot start a book without finishing it, that I think would be nothing more than a huge waste of time.
Does my opinion hurt your feelings? Oh, I'm so sorry. Pretty sure this is a public thread.
Quick question- have you ever known someone with cancer, or someone who died from cancer at a very young age? Because it's so hard for me to deal with you bashing the book if you haven't had to live through that.
And I mean know, like really know. As in relatives or friends.
I've read 90% of this thread. I just got sick of you people saying the same thing over and over again.
I thought that was back in my first post.. If I didn't say it loud enough, sorry. I DISAGREE.
As I recall, you were the one who chose to respond in the first place.
You're right, it is a public thread. That means I can argue with whoever I want. *mock surprise gasp*
Can we stop arguing, please? Let's discuss the book...Quote the most pretentious and braincell burning monologue from the book. The best braincell burning monologue wins the prize.
Ana wrote: "You're right, it is a public thread. That means I can argue with whoever I want. *mock surprise gasp*"
Hahaha! I'm laughing at Mary Poppins...
Katie wrote: "I kinda agree with her first post. If I REALLY REALLY dislike a book, I usually don't finish it. And she's wont get an argument unless someone takes it to her."Don't get into it. Not worth the time.
"That's the thing about pain. It demands to be felt."
"My thoughts are stars I cannot fathom into constellations."
"My thoughts are stars I cannot fathom into constellations."
Ana wrote: "I've read 90% of this thread. I just got sick of you people saying the same thing over and over again."Then don't read the fucking thread. Also, you are doing bad PR for this book. Half the reason why I hate this book so much is because its fans get so dogmatic about a book that isn't even good.
Ayesha wrote: "Can we stop arguing, please? Let's discuss the book...Quote the most pretentious and braincell burning monologue from the book. The best braincell burning monologue wins the prize."
Ugh, like right at the beginning with Hazel's showstopper at the support group. I dont have the book handy so I cant quote it, but it's the one about how when you die nobody will remember you and we're all just trying to fight it or some shit. And, even though it is super trite, Augustus and the rest of the group act like it's the most profound thing they've ever heard.
I don't hate it but I definitely don't like it. I had it all figured out from when Augustus walked in. It was so obvious that he would die and Hazel live and it was such a cliche.But sure it was filed with cute quotes and that kind of stuff. I was actually quite surprised that it wasn't more.John Greens other books is not that plain and I had really expected more from it.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Daughter of Smoke & Bone (other topics)
Things I Know About Love (other topics)
On the Jellicoe Road (other topics)
Zombicorns (other topics)
More...
Lurlene McDaniel (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
This Star Won't Go Out: The Life and Words of Esther Grace Earl (other topics)Daughter of Smoke & Bone (other topics)
Things I Know About Love (other topics)
On the Jellicoe Road (other topics)
Zombicorns (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Lurlene McDaniel (other topics)Lurlene McDaniel (other topics)
I'm not so sure about the nurse. She didn't require one at home and they are not free. Someone would have to pay for it. I think it's rather unreasonable to automatically assume that a private nurse to accompany Hazel is some type of a "given". Disastrous things can happen to anyone at any time, though. Healthy people become ill while traveling, too. How far are you willing to take the "what ifs...." that you govern your life by? There does come a point where the worrying and the "what if..." fears become so limiting and crippling that you are no longer actually living life. Amsterdam is a major city in a well developed nation and there are excellent cancer treatment centers in Europe. We live in a technology age where medical records are accessible electronically. Plus, Hazel's Mom is probably very well versed on making doctors aware of Hazel's medical history by now. The book doesn't reference it, but there is no reason why Hazel's Mom can't travel with copies of her medical records and research where the nearest hospitals with oncology specialists are. Yes, it is a risk but it's also not like being close to home and near doctors who are familiar with your case can actually 100% guarantee that you'll be saved from dying from cancer anyway.