Why didn't I like this book?

[Ralph]

I love The Smiths. I was a wallflower in high school. I generally like books about mixtapes, unrequited love, overly sensitive young people, being misunderstood, and so on. But this book really rubbed me the wrong way, it felt very phony and unrealistic. Sure, there was a sense of sadness permeating the narrative but it didn't make up for the narrator's child-like voice. Am I alone in feeling this way? Anyone else chafed by the imagery-less writing style?

[Donna]

The protagonist is obvioously mentally ill, and so his narration is intentionally written to make us uncomfortable. It was recommended to me by someone close to me, so I pushed through it and was impressed once I saw how it unfolded at the end.

[Sabrina]

Charlie's just doesn't makes sense to me. He befriended with his 'two new friends' that barely suitable with his character and personality. The only thing he does in this book is ruining himself by getting involves in drugs and sex ever since he met those two. These two topics definitely doesn't represent a wallflower because a wallflower usually very self-conscious and quiet, knows how to differentiate between bad and good things, afraid of trying out 'new things', doesn't get comfortable in the crowd quickly and last but absolutely not least, starting a dialogue or approaching someone unrecognized will be the last things a wallflower ever do. Unfortunately, he is the total opposite from the first page to the last.

[Scott]

You can be a wallflower when left to your own devices but if you meet the right person or persons they can bring out other aspects of your personality, make you try new things. People aren't as simple as you make out.

[Ralph]

I don't see Charlie as a wallflower, and that probably is my biggest complaint. A wallflower to me, is painfully reflective to the point of shyness. Charlie actually reflects very little on himself and isn't shy at all--he almost entirely lacks self-consciousness. When he reads he doesn't think about his own life. I had trouble believing that anyone would think he's the smartest kid they've ever met.

[Julie]

I saw Charlie, Patrick, and Sam as all being wallflowers of sorts--kids who feel invisible to the others around them at school. While they seek to feel infinite, they each struggle to learn how to love themselves and others around them. Charlie is created in the mold of Holden Caufield--recent loss in his life, struggling to succeed in school and socially, and pushing himself beyond his limits into illness. Infinite is the new phony. ;-)

[[deleted user]]

Because some people just don't like some things. Maybe you weren't in the mood for it that day. Who knows?

[[deleted user]]

Maybe you didn't like it because people made such a big hype about this book when really it's nothing special or new. I finished this book feeling highly disappointed. Honestly I think it's overrated. Charlie isn't a wallflower he's just a mentally unstable, misfit who had something tragic happen to him as a child.

[Jacque]

Don't feel bad, I actually had to abandon it. I'm not a huge stream-of-consciousness, contemporary YA fiction reader.

[Tehreem]

I found the book to be disappointing too. Mostly because I felt-after reading it- that it is very much over-rated mainly because of the author's reputation as a screen writer. Besides, there are other books on the same subject that tell a better story than this one did.

[Dina]

I liked the book less than I expected.

But we all have our different opinions.

And as Sebastian says, maybe it's related to mood. Maybe on another day, I would have liked it more.

[Julie]

Sabrina wrote: "Charlie is just doesn't makes sense to me. He befriended with his 'two new friends' that barely suitable with his character and personality. The only thing he does in this book is ruining himself b..."

I loved this book, and I think the reason he ruins himself is because he's depressed. I have a friend who is and he acts like Charlie does, with the drugs and sex. I think that he is a wallflower, but his need of self destruction counteracts the fact that he's a wallflower.

[Cathy]

You probably didn't like it because of all the hype it has. Not that I blame you -- I was more than a little skeptical when the copy I borrowed from the library was covered in boasts about how it's a major motion picture, a New York Times #1 bestseller, 2 million copies in print, etc. And I admit, when I started reading the book, I felt really underwhelmed by Charlie's childlike narrative. However, I did end up liking the book in the end, mainly due to the fact that Charlie reminds me of my nephew. I couldn't hate him after that.

[Jivenal]

I know we all have our opinions, but I'm challenging everyone who hated(even a little bit) TPoaW to try this.

Instead of reading the book normally, read it back-to-back with A Raisin in the Sun. Read a couple pages of TPoaW (4 maybe?), then switch to ARitS and read a couple of pages. Then just repeat the process over and over again.

I'm not trying to make you love the book, or change your perspective of it; I just want to see your reaction of it. I first read TPoaW independently, whilst reading ARitS for a class, and it gave me a very different perspective of the book.


WARNING: If you've watched the movie adaptation of TPoaW, don't try this AT ALL. I did this before watching the movie (never got through the first 10 minutes), and the movie just seemed wrong.

Lastly, sorry about the abbreviations. I'm just lazy to type out the same thing repeatedly.

[Vansh]

I loved the characters, but the plot was kinda vague and the ending was stupid.

[Emma]

You didn't like this book because the writing style is dull. The main character had no personality. Nothing made sense. The obsession with the songs and all that is really annoying, because I don't see how 'Asleep' is that good of a song... If not, that's why I didn't like this book.

[Natalie]

Everyone prefers a different writing style. The writing style really irritated me in the beginning, but I gradually became used to it and the writing became more complex after a while. If you didn't like this book despite the subject, all I can say is that it definitely isn't for everyone.

[Christine]

I didn't like the book, either. I consider myself not a Wallflower, but kind of aloof. I just didn't enjoy the writing style, and I guess I didn't like the characters. Maybe I'd like the movie? The world may never know...

[Margaret]

I was completely against reading this book, because usually I hate coming-of-age stories. But when I actually read it, I loved it. The writing style grew on me, and I think that style got the point across about how mentally unstable Charlie was. The one annoying part is when the group Charlie is with calls themselves wallflowers, because that word usually had a different meaning than it did in the book. I agree with everyone who says that Charlie and his group weren't really typical shy wallflowers. They were more like people who chose to be outcasts by shunning high school society.

Maybe I liked this book so much because i had such low expectations of it. Even though I loved it, I can definitely see how one could not like it.

[bubblegumpopper]

The book was mediocre, but they did a fantastic job adapting it to movie. The movie is really touching and emotional and affected me a lot more than the book did.

[Elizzy]

Tehreem wrote: "I found the book to be disappointing too. Mostly because I felt-after reading it- that it is very much over-rated mainly because of the author's reputation as a screen writer. Besides, there are ot..."

I agree completely. Due to this, I ahven't seen the movie.