Yolcu Nereye Gidiyorsun PDF'de kitap

veloveshieffa

Ugh. Having enjoyed the first two Jessica Darling novels, I was amused by Bumped's description as a "dystopian world where only teenagers can procreate, due to a virus that renders every adult infertile." McCafferty and HarperTeen introduce the book as stunningly close to home, given the new obsession with pregnant teens. I tag this book "dystopian" with trepidation. I get annoyed when writers don't do their homework. You want to write a dystopian novel? You have to think about stuff, okay? Like how culture evolves, how trends form, what happens when something on the margin becomes the norm. It helps if you read other proper dystopian novels, like 1984 (dry) and Brave New World (less dry), or good YA contemporary examples (Ship Breaker, Unwind, etc). [As an aside, I realize this is guy-writer heavy... never fear, I have read some LeGuin and will tackle Margaret Atwood next!] It also helps if you read academic stuff. For instance, the virus McCafferty writes as the catalyst for this dystopia would be a total social fact, something that would permeate through all aspects of society. Everything from religion to international trade would change. I think I'm mostly annoyed because apparently "dystopian" is the new big THING. I hate "the new" anything. First everyone wanted a slice of the wizarding school pie, now it's the vampire/werewolf/zombie/steampunk/fallen angel WHATEVER pie. With The Hunger Games, it's like, ooh, dystopian pie! Let me get some of that! Apparently this has turned into a bit of a rant. The premise of Bumped was an intriguing one, and McCafferty is a good writer... but her style is much too light for what this book is trying to be. A world where only teens can get pregnant is only funny as satire for a little bit, but if you start thinking about the economics, where girls can be sponsored to get pregnant by a genetically desirable guy, it stops being funny and starts being icky.

2023-07-20 19:07