
Perks of Being a Wallflower – Stephen Chbosky
M: It's interesting that we chose Stephen Chbosky's THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER for this week, Julie. It being Banned Books Week recently and WALLFLOWER being one of ALA's (American Library Association) top ten most frequently challenged books in 2009 due to the book's treatment of drugs, homosexuality, sex, and suicide. WALLFLOWER is an epistolary novel that takes place in the early 90s, narrated via letters from Charlie, a sixteen-year-old boy, to a stranger. The letters describe his family, falling in love, trying drugs and simply living. I was captivated by Charlie's voice and frankness. There was something so interesting about the character’s seemingly naive narration and the very complex and adult situations he found himself in. Julie?
J: As I started PERKS I thought, I don't know--too derivative of THE CATCHER IN THE RYE? As I kept going I thought, Too many social issues, one after the other? But eventually I closed my critical eye and just kept thinking, I love this book. Because ultimately Charlie's voice is so engaging and so loving and so sympathetic that I was happy to glide right over flaws that have ruined other books for me. I loved the twists in Charlie's character, too. He's physically small and cerebral and an outsider, but because of training from his brother, he's perfectly capable of beating bullies up. Almost too capable. He has to hold himself back. And sometimes, after pummeling someone, he cries. And he's a teenage boy experimenting with powerful drugs and (to a limited extent) sex, but he's also very open about how much he loves his mother. He's flawed and immensely lovable. Mia, do you agree? And what do you think about some of the other characters?
M: Very much so, Julie. I fell for Charlie and the way emotions just pour out of him. I like how even though Charlie loves Sam so much, she isn't a perfect character. She has her flaws and is very human. I particularly enjoyed the very complex relationship Charlie has with his sister, who at times both saddened, worried and infuriated me, yet I liked her very much! What about you?
J: I agree entirely about his sister! I somehow love her, though at times she is truly appalling. I feel the same about Charlie's brother, though he’s largely absent. I wish Chbosky had trusted the compelling nature of Charlie's relationships more and omitted some of the more sensational plot twists--particularly the secret that's revealed at the end. Mia, do you know which one I mean? Do you agree with me that it feels needless and contrived?
M: A bit. It had me wondering if I'd missed something important in Charlie's words. Had I overlooked a hint, a vague memory that was perhaps too vague for me? I'm not saying that Chbosky had to drop clues like a mystery novel, but the revelation came a bit out of nowhere; and I felt that if he was doing it to explain Charlie's sensitive and emotional nature, then it wasn't necessary. I was already there. Do you think that's why it felt contrived to you?
J: Either Chbosky was (needlessly) trying to explain Charlie's sensitivity, or he was interested in exploring an issue that was sensational at the time of the book's publication. Regardless, it doesn't quite work for me. Nor does the fact that Charlie is writing all along to a stranger. I still wonder--did I miss something? Is he in fact writing to someone we know? If he is, oops! And if he isn't, why not? To add to our sense of Charlie as unusual and an outsider? Again, I'm not sure that’s necessary. But in the end, I don't care! I like being inside Charlie's world, immersed in his thinking. It's the kind of book I'd be happy to read again and again.
I just learned, by the way, that PERKS is being made into a movie, written and directed by Chbosky himself and starring Emma Watson as Sam. Will I see it the first moment I can? Yes I will!
M: I'm interested in seeing how they adapt this as well! Here's one final question for our trusty readers: What banned book are you interested in reading (or re-reading)?