Alaska Young and Impacting Books

Today is Alaska Day. I didn't plan on writing a post about Looking for Alaska. But then the words just kind of came out. And here we are. 

I remember the first time I ever read Looking for Alaska. 

I was sixteen. I was pretty lost.

So much has changed since then, but so much of me has stayed the same.

It was my first John Green book. I had heard about them a lot. Meant to read them for awhile. My friend (who would later become my best friend) told me to read it. That I would love it. She hadn't been wrong yet, so I did. 

I was single then. It was May, 2010. I only mention that first part because it was that month I had my first kiss, my first boyfriend. And one of my most distinct memories about Looking For Alaska was texting him about it as I finished it. I remember trying to get the words out. Trying to tell him how much this little black book meant to me. I don't remember what I said. I do remember thinking it wouldn't do it justice. 

There are books that come along that impact you. Looking for Alaska was one of mine. And it first impacted me in such an unexpected way. Because I wanted it to be something. Pudge wanted escape and change and a new life. And I did too. It took me awhile to realize that wasn't what this book was about. It actually took me reading it a second time to really understand why this book mattered to me. But the first time impacted me cause I felt such loss. I felt like I didn't entirely get it. I sobbed and felt sorrow and hope but I also knew I was missing something. There was something beneath the words I didn't get.  Something that was going over my head. Because Alaska wasn't the person I wanted her to be. The book wasn't what I expected it to be. But that was the whole point, wasn't it? I expected one thing from this book, and got something else entirely.

I read it a second time the next year and that's when it really hit me. Right in the gut. I could relate to this book so much. I don't even know if I can tell you why, exactly. But I just do. I know I'm talking like this book is so profound and beautiful and something equally as pretentious. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that, to me, this book impacted my life. It asked me to look at things differently. It questioned my perspective. I love when books do that.

I reread this book for a third time in 2013. This time, alongside my bestie. We live seven hours away from each other, so our version of a read-along is setting a certain amount of pages and texting each other when we're done. I remember how we both were pretty emotional while reading it. (I was emotional with my EYES, her with her words.) It was one of those books we both just get why the other loves it. Even if neither of us can really express it right.

Just thinking about it now, I have so many stories about this book. Defending it, gushing about it, mostly texting the bestie about it. Working at a bookstore has afforded me lots of opportunities to talk about Looking for Alaska. I even convinced a former co-worker of mine to buy the John Green box set. I remember him coming up to me after reading Looking for Alaska. I remember hearing him talk about how much he loved it. He looked almost shocked by it. It's the greatest feeling for me. Getting people to read books that they end up loving. I'm happy to have been able to do that with Looking for Alaska. 

You know what's kind of funny about the first time I ever read it? I actually knew the ending. Well, not the very end, but those who have read it know what I mean. I accidentally flipped to the back of the book to check how many pages it was and saw a discussion guide with a massive spoiler. It didn't impact my reading of it though. I think it almost made it harder for me cause I knew what was to come. And it wrecked me. I get angry about it sometimes. And sad, a lot. I feel like the characters in this book are so real to me I sometimes find myself wondering what they're doing now. Wonder where they went after I turned the last page.

Anyways, this post got a bit longer than I anticipated. All of this is to say one thing: I love Looking for Alaska. It will forever be one of my favourite books. I will read it over and over again and never tire of it. And Alaska will forever be one of my favourite characters. One who challenged my assumptions. One who broke my heart. One who I think and wonder about even five years later. I will constantly site John Green as someone who has had a huge impact on my life (don't even get me STARTED about Paper Towns. You think this post is long? Seriously. It would be insane) and Alaska, Pudge, and the Colonel as characters who changed my way of thinking. 

I'll end this post how the book ends, with words of hope from my dear Pudge: "Thomas Edison's last words were 'Its very beautiful over there'. I don't where there is, but I believe it's somewhere, and I hope it's beautiful."

- Ciara (Lost at Midnight)   

A Change of Scenery: Crimson from Moonlight Gleam's Bookshelf

Hello, everyone!

How have you been liking the guest posts so far? Pretty interesting if I do say so myself! Next up, we have one of my very good friends and fellow blogger Crimson! Crim, who is a new blogger over at Moonlight Gleam's Bookshelf, also happens to be an aspiring author. I asked her the same question, but also said she could do it about general writing, not just a specific novel. She, of course, took this question and ran with it incorporating both writing in multiple novels and writing itself. It is a really intriguing post and I hope you guys love it as much as I do!

How does setting affect tone/feel/direction etc. of a novel?  

Setting is one of the most important elements of a good novel. It sets the tone and it influences how characters interact with each other. And, in fact, with the setting itself.

Think of it this way--setting is a character unto itself. And just as all good characters need to be fully fleshed out and made three dimensional, so does the setting.

We don’t live in a Paper Mario world. We get tripped up by construction, blown away by horrible Canadian winters or tropical storms, and navigate our way through frustratingly busy cities or frustratingly empty countryside.

And so should characters.

Some books really understand and utilize this, and some, well, don’t.

One of my favourite classics is Emily Bronte’s Gothic novel Wuthering Heights. I mean, sure, you’ve got the weirdly enticing and utterly terrifying Heathcliff, but I don’t think Heathcliff would be half as powerful (as a general character) without the isolated, dangerous moors in which the novel is set. The moors set the tone for Heathcliff’s character. The moors are cold, the moors are dark. The moors are strangely alluring, yet forbidding and dangerous and unknown. If you’ve read the novel, you’ll know that that description of the moors is pretty much synonymous for “Heathcliff.”

Not to spoil the book for anyone who hasn’t read it, but Heathcliff spends the majority of the book trying to (and succeeding in) keeping two households of family friends separated. Alone. Cut off.

There was this one moment while I was reading when I realize these two estates where only about 5 kilometers apart from each other, and I went, “Wait, what?” Because these characters were acting like they were never going to see each other again! Sure, a part of this is attributed to being set in the early nineteenth century, where there is a distinct lack of cars. But would this novel had have that same effect, that same element of complete isolation from only 5 kilometers away, if Wuthering Heights had been set in the city? Hardly.

Okay, but that’s a classic Gothic novel. What about some more contemporary ones? How about some fantasy? Can you imagine what a bore Lord of the Rings would be if they could simply walk into Mordor? Half the adventure is watching Frodo brave the elements, fight strange creatures, and navigate unusual places. I won’t go into detail here because, despite having watched the extended versions of the movies countless times, I can still barely remember the names of any places. I’m terrible like that. But I’ll still point out a couple examples. How about when Frodo and Sam meet Gollum and they have to trust him to bring them places? Or in the first movie when the Fellowship is trying to get up the mountain and then Saruman is all like, “I don’t think so,” and there’s a huge blizzard, so they have to find a new way? Or the Ents, who are, quite literally, both a setting and characters.

Obviously, setting is really important to fantasy novels. You simply cannot have a fantasy novel without having a good setting. Or dystopian, for that matter.

I think the first novel I read when I was younger that didn’t have a contemporary/realistic setting was Uglies by Scott Westerfeld. People, this is one of my favourite series. Prior to reading it, I had gone through a couple years where, despite being a huge reader as a kid, I kind of didn’t read anything. (Except Harry Potter because, hey, it’s Harry Potter). But I was immediately sucked into the world of Uglies. It was just so enticing. Cool technology! Sketchy surgeries! Oh the fun to be had! I love how detailed and well-thought out the world of Uglies is. From magnetic grids beneath the ground for using hoverboards, to the segregation of different “classes” of people based on their ages and whether they’re a “pretty” or an “ugly.”

Uglies would not be the novel it is without that setting. It wouldn’t be able to send the message it does about society and appearance if not for the setting. A lot of the time, dystopian novels are used to send a message about a certain element of society (The Hunger Games, anyone?). Giving a novel a futuristic dystopian setting creates a distance between the reader and the issue the novel talks about, and that distance allows us to look at the issue with fresh eyes (we can never look at things clearly when we’re too close to them).

(Er, not that you should be shoving a message down the reader’s throat if you’re writing a novel. Absolutely not. No, no, no. But you’re writing a novel. Say something.)

But I digress.

Back to setting.

And don’t think contemporary/realistic books get a free pass on setting. Sure, sometimes it might be a little less important, but it’ll still influence how people interact. If you live in a rural setting, or even in the suburbs, you’re not going to travel around in the same way a city kid is. And think about little things--the pristine blanket whiteness of snow in the countryside; the grimy grayness of snow alongside busy city streets. And the obvious one--think about how often authors utilize raininess to reflect a character’s mood. It’s a cliche because it works.

There are a lot of contemporary novels out there that would be completely different books if they had a different setting. The haunting town in Nova Ren Suma’s Imaginary Girls, the boarding school in John Green’s Looking for Alaska, the boarding school (again) in Melina Marchetta’s Jellicoe Road.

So the next time you’re reading a novel (and especially if you’re writing one) think about how the setting effects the characters and the plot, and the sometimes highly metaphorical way setting reflects the characters and the plot. It might just change the way you read.

Thank you, Crimson! Very well thought out and detailed! Hope it got everyone thinking about the importance of setting!

Check out all the books Crimson mentioned below! (Links to Goodreads)

- Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte 

- Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien

- Uglies by Scott Westerfeld

- The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins

- Imaginary Girls by Nova Ren Suma

- Looking for Alaska by John Green

- Jellicoe Road by Melina Marchetta

Make sure to stop by tomorrow for a very special guest post from an amazing author!

- Ciara (Lost at Midnight)