Sunday, October 26, 2014

The Darkness After: Need More Reasons Not to Read It?

Here's my final project for The Darkness After: a magazine ad and a radio ad.

Magazine Ad



Radio Ad


The Darkness After by Scott B. Williams may have a pretty cover, but don’t let that fool you.  Underneath the surface you’ll find a cliché dystopian wanna-be, featuring Mitch, a stereotypical forest boy who likes talking about guns a little too much, and April, a teen mom whose desire to return to her daughter gets just a little obnoxious.  Described as “flat and uninteresting” by Portland Book Review, this book’s boring plot, static characters and unnatural dialogue will make you want to put it down after reading just a few sentences.

Friday, October 10, 2014

The Darkness After: the Pain is Almost Over

I am so happy to be almost done with this book.  It's been a long time since I read a book this frustrating, with such awful plot, characters and dialogue.  If you know me, you know I am book-lover and like, if not love, every book I read.  But I didn't like this book in the least, and that's saying something.

There is honestly no hidden meaning or message behind this book.  All it is is "Watch Mitch and April walk around in the woods to find their families!  Yay!"  As a result, unlike some of my favorite books The Hunger Games, Divergent or The Fault in Our Stars (Yes, I'm a white fangirl, get over it), there are no eloquent quotes that give us a glimpse into the characters' perception of the universe or what this book could really mean.  Instead we have sentences like this, which no teenager would ever say:

"We've got to move really slowly when we go up this creek to make sure we are utterly silent in our approach" -page 222.  NO ONE SAYS THAT.

As for plot, something finally happened.  Woo hoo.  April and Mitch find Jason, Mitch's sister's friend's older brother (phew that was a mouthful), bloodied and bearing news that Lisa and Stacy were taken by some low-lifes in the area.  However, since the author never talked much about Mitch's sister and the experiences they've shared, the reader doesn't really care.  Compare this to the Hunger Games, where we feel Katniss's need to return to Prim deeply, since Katniss grew up caring for her and feels very protective.  In The Darkness After, Lisa is just a Family Member.  Similarly, for April, her daughter Kimberly is just another Family Member, a symbol of yo average family with yo average people in it.  We don't know anything about the characters' connections with their sister or daughter, so we feel disconnected.

Honestly, there's not much to write for this post because not much has changed.  It's still the same static characters who don't grow because they were already adjusted to their environment, the same stiff dialogue that would be acceptable for a Brit and a Brit only, the same plot that has dragged on with the same repetitive actions for so long that I feel like I've been reading this book for months.

Here is a summary:

Disney gifs are the best analogies
P.S. The author has written multiple other books, and those might be better.  If y'all are interested head on over to his website.

Monday, October 6, 2014

The Darkness After: Still Static, Shallow and Superficial

Image courtesy of amazon.com
Since my rather scathing review of this book last time, not much has changed.  The plot has picked up a little bit, but the excitement hasn't mounted to the extent that I want to keep reading and find out what happens.  It's honestly just more of the same: April and Mitch are still trying to get home, walking or canoeing through forests.  Nothing new really happens.  There was potential for a plot twist when Mitch and April arrive at Mitch's house, finding Mitch's sister Lisa missing as well as the old car and other goods.  However, Mitch immediately realizes that Lisa must have come by the house with friends to pick up the car and look for Lisa's friend's mom in Hattiesburg.  As a result, what could have been an interesting roadblock or complication just turned into another circumstance of their travels.

After looking through several reviews of the book on Amazon, I was surprised at how positive the feedback was, with an average of 4.3 out of 5 stars.  One review in particular completely contrasted my views of the book:

"Mitch and April's characters are well developed, with portrayals of strengths and weaknesses. Both of them draw strength from the other in various ways, learning to trust and adapt in a world cast into chaos. Each of them are forced to take violent measures when their lives are interrupted by those who prey on the weak. Armed with the skills taught by their fathers, Mitch and April team up and move toward their destination, but not without detours."

Mitch and April are not well developed characters.  Their only strengths and weaknesses are physical:  Mitch can shoot (with bows and guns) but can't fight, and April can fight but can't use a bow and arrow.  A truly well-developed character has quirks, a controversial past, and a personality with both good and bad qualities.  All we know about Mitch is his hobbies, his obsession with hunting and the outdoors, his family members, and where he lives.  April is a little more detailed, but not much.  Her parents both died a few years back, but she learned hand-to-hand combat from her father before his death.  Now she is a mother, determined to get back to her baby.  And that's it.  Everything about the characters can be summed up in one paragraph.

Back to the review: when the review describes the characters as "learning to trust and adapt in a world cast into chaos," the thing is we don't really see any of the chaos.  Mitch and April are always safely tucked away in the woods, and besides one or two encounters there isn't much interaction with other people.  As a result, the reader can't really experience or appreciate the interesting world the book is set in.  I would love to read more about what life is like without electricity, but we can't experience anything first-hand.  The plot of this book could take place in a world with electricity if the characters had different motivations for traveling in the wild.  The plot is not unique at all, and neither are the characters.

I continually find myself frustrated with this book and its style of writing.  Personally, I think that third person immediately distances the reader from the character, and as these are pretty shallow characters already, the way the book is written doesn't help.  Also, the word choice doesn't vary at all between narration and dialogue.  It all sounds the same.  All of these problems, both big and small, add up to my recommendation: don't read this book.

For more perspectives on the book from people my age, go on o'er to Molly's and Grace's blogs.