Sing You Home

      In the novel "Sing You Home", written by Jodi Picoult, the author introduces many complex, more difficult topics throughout the story. The book is about Zoe Baxter, a music therapist who desperately wants a child, but has suffered from infertility her whole marriage. When what almost becomes Zoe's child is born a still borne, Zoe completely breaks down, unable to deal with yet another failed pregnancy. Max, Zoe's husband, leaves her, done with dealing with her overpowering love for an unborn child instead of him. In her post-break-up state, Zoe meets Vanessa, a lesbian therapist, who instantly clicks with her and becomes her best friend. This friendship spurts into romance, and as the two marry and decide they want Vanessa to carry a baby they can raise together, they begin to face obstacles. Throughout the story, Jodi Picoult explores the complex disagreements over gay marriage, and all the many sides and opinions of what is "right" and "wrong" concerning it. 

      In the book, Zoe and Vanessa want to have children from the embryos that Zoe and Max created and froze when they were together. When Zoe asks Max to sign off on papers, allowing her to use them, he begins to question whether or not he should- especially because of his lack of support of gay marriage. After he left Zoe, Max struggled with alcoholism, and turned to his brother, Reid, and sister-in-law, Liddy, who are strong Christians and who helped Max out of his dark place and converted him to be a devoted Christian who worships God. They feel that Zoe and Vanessa are not fit for raising a child since they would be lesbian mothers. This brings up the controversy of gay marriage and families with gay parents. While in court, over the debate of who gets the embryos; Max or Zoe, Max's attorney stands up and says, "We are gathered today to mourn the loss of something near and dear to us all: the traditional family." 

      This quote really made me think about the idea of a "traditional" family. What does that even mean? The attorney's case is that God didn't want men and men and women and women to be together as a family-- he wanted a man and a woman. But I personally think God and marriage have nothing to do with one another. I think that you can't make it a state or country law that someone can't marry whoever they want because it's "not right" according to God. First of all, not everyone believes in a God figure, so you can't put the two together-- just the way you are supposed to have separation of church and state.

      This book really opens my eyes up to how many people are so small minded in our world. The book is like a slap of reality, that some people honestly think that a child can't grow up in a household where two parents are the same gender-- that somehow there is something wrong with that. I understand its opinion, but to me, that just seems like intolerance. That is just being intolerant of other people's lifestyles that may be different from your own. 

      Because of the way the author explores this more complex issue of gay marriage, she teaches real, valuable life lessons, and really opens readers’ eyes up to how important it is to be accepting. And being accepting doesn't just mean with gay marriage; it means with all different people with different lifestyles. I think that what everyone can learn from this book is that being different on the outside most certainly does not determine what a person's character is on the inside. And we can't deny people opportunities because they may be a little "different"-- or whatever that means. Everyone deserves to live a happy lifestyle- however that may be- without intolerant people getting in the way and telling them how they should live their life even if it would make them miserable every day. Happiness is so much more important that “traditional standards” in whatever way that may be for you.  

Blog Reviews: Praise for Maja's "Thirteen Reasons Why" Post

      As I was reading various blog posts this past week, one that really stuck out to me was "Thirteen Reasons Why" by Maja. Her post was really well written in both its style and content. She begins by setting up the story with just enough detail so that readers can fully understand the post, without giving anything away. 
      Right away, Maja starts off by relating the book to the world by discussing possible lessons someone could take away from it and apply to their own life. She says that the book "teaches readers that it is important to love yourself". As she beautifully puts it, loosing your love for yourself makes it that much easier to loose your confidence. She then brings this idea back to the story, and talks about how this is what happens to a character in the book. One of the things that makes this post so powerful is this flip-flop of talking about the world, and then reconnecting it to the book-- this is something I definitely will take with me and keep in mind as I write more of my own blog posts. 
      The next thing Maja does really well is she takes a specific moment, and completely dissects it and studies it. She uses a quote, and then unpacks it and talks about what she thinks about this moment in the book, and what this particular line says about the character(s). She quotes a line that Hannah Baker says: "Only one person stands between you and this collection of audiotapes: Mr. Porter". She then talks about how she thinks this is the moment Hannah gave up on her life. Zooming in on one moment and totally unpacking and elaborating ideas off of it is a really great writing style that provides readers with clear examples of the points you're trying to make and ideas you have. 
      Another reason I really like this blog post is because it's very unique in the sense that she doesn't talk so much about the main character, but instead a character who it is a bit harder to elaborate on. All that readers know about Hannah Baker is what they hear from the tapes, and what Clay says, so Maja's ability to create a whole blog post off of just taking everything we hear Hannah say and interpreting it at a much deeper level is very impressive. 
      I have read "Thirteen Reasons Why", and I completely agree with all of the points Maja made, especially about how the book makes readers really understand how our actions affect other people, and the damage we can do without being fully away of what we are doing. I really like how at the very end of her post, Maja connected it back to herself, and how she personally took a lot away from reading the book. 
      Overall, Maja did a really great job on this post. And I have read many others of her post which are equally great. I think this one stood out to me because I have read the book, and was completely agreeing and found myself nodding at certain times while reading the post. Maja wrote with a sophisticated and very insightful voice, and this blog post was really thought-provoking and entertaining to read. http://billions0fbooks.blogspot.com/2013/10/thirteen-reasons-why-by-jay-asher.html

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time

      In the book, "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time", written by Mark Haddon, Christopher John Francis Boone is a very complex character, being incredibly intelligent when it comes to math and science, but completely lacking social intelligence. The book is somewhat of a "murder mystery", the murder being a neighbor's bog who was stabbed with a pitchfork, and Christopher being the "detective", while narrating the story. Christopher decides to make it his mission to go about and find who committed this crime, and even though I'm only at the beginning of the book, I already see the complexity to Christopher's personality and character. 
      On one hand, Christopher is incredibly intellectual-- almost like a genius. He introduces himself saying, "I know all the countries of the world and their capitol cities and every prime number up to 7,507". Also, he is always contemplating science related issues to the readers, discussing storms and his confusion with different aspects of them. He has a very reserved kind of intelligence, being very quick with numbers and facts, but his social skills show a different, less intelligent side to him.
      Christopher interacts with people in very strange ways, making me question just how "smart" he is. One of his social problems is that Christopher is extremely hesitant to trust anyone. For example, he meets a neighbor while going about his inquisition, and she invites him inside for tea. He says he doesn't want to go into a strangers house, so she offers to bring it out to him. But as he waits for her to come back, he questions whether she will actually bring tea like she said, and decides to leave, without saying a word. Christopher never reaches out to anyone, but instead shuts people out as if they are a danger to him. 
      Christopher also never lies, he is always telling the truth even when it would benefit everyone if he just lied a little. Because it's such a natural habit, it really shows how Christopher has some weird perks to him. This along with his lack of trust in people adds to his inability to make friends, which is sad, but the reality in his life. He lives almost completely inside his own head, in his own little world. 
      Christopher's characteristics make me question what really determines if someone is smart. There are so many levels to it, so much more than just being good at math or getting good grades in social studies. There's a difference between being a good student and being intellectual. The dictionary definition of smart says, "having or showing a quick-witted intelligence". But what does that mean?
      This made me think about the world, and how many non-intellectual people are so high in command. It seems like it should be so simple, either you're smart or you're not, but yet it's so complex. Most movie stars are not what I would call intellectual people, however socially clearly they know what they are doing. And then there are people like Christopher, who have no social skills whatsoever, but yet are still very, very clever people. Christopher is a fine example of how people are so complex, and what you see if most definitely not all you get in a lot of cases. People and children probably judge Christopher by his lack of friends, and lack of ability to make friends, however if they got to know him, and if he let them get to know him, I'm sure there's a lot you could learn from him. It's important not to make assumptions just because a person may not be the easiest one to bond with. Because once you get past the rough, awkward stages of trying to make conversation, I'm sure there is a lot more to Christopher, as I learn as I read more and more of the book.