Comments on: Chopsticks

By: Miriam

Miriam — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 14:17:12 +0000

I just read this, and found it *unbearably* pretentious. And I honestly might not have gotten some of the twists/deeper levels because not caring about the characters–as Sarah mentioned–made me not care enough to dig deeper.

I’m also an immersive reader, so it didn’t even occur to me to stop reading and go to youtube.

I’m still working through my first emotional rubbed-the-wrong way reaction, and will hopefully be able to produce a more intellectual/intelligent analysis on a reread (which I’ll give it if it makes the Pyrite shortlist… otherwise not so much).

By: Beth

Beth — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 20:17:16 +0000

Yes, the stationary was purposeful and a big part of the clues that something wasn’t as it seemed.

I think that this is a book that only gets more interesting the more times you read it and that’s always a good sign to me. It is in some ways the ultimate in unreliable narrator books. In the end we don’t know how much of anything is real and how much is in Glory’s head.

By: Mark Flowers

Mark Flowers — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 23:09:27 +0000

@Christopher. I read this book without looking at any of the links and found it to be one of my favorites of the year. I just put it on hold so I can read it again. I think I did at some point go look up a few of the clips, but it was totally separate from my reading experience. So I know that for me it stood on its own without a doubt.

The same stationery issue – um . . . isn’t that kinda part of the mystery/twist?

By: Karyn Silverman

Karyn Silverman — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 22:19:27 +0000

I haven’t read this one yet (I know, I know!), so I can’t speak to how well it does what it sets out to do, but it has me thinking about the P&P and that line from the classic version (as Sophie called it) about books standing alone. Is a book with an additional, non-print aspect permitted? Without that line, there’s nothing to say it isn’t.
That said, I do wonder about whether this should be a contender. I’m not arguing it shouldn’t, merely pondering how that changes, or doesn’t, the playing field. What if Monster contained clips of Steve on trial? How does that change the reader response and the reading experience?
If Chopsticks gets an honor, it certainly opens up a whole new way of considering “books” and “reading.”

By: Christopher

Christopher — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 17:20:37 +0000

I had issues with this particular book. I felt that it really didn’t stand on its own. When the YouTube links appear in the text, generally there are pictures showing what those videos are about (as in the Feist photo mentioned), yet there are just as many instances where the link appeared and that’s it.
The design of the book put me off as well. When anyone wrote something on official stationary (whether it be schools, hospitals, etc.), the logo was the EXACT SAME making it difficult to distinguish just who was talking or where they were from.

If this was presented without the videos, links, pictures, this would boil down to a generic realistic romantic novel. Yet, having said that, I’m glad that a book in this style, which I’m sure is the beginning of more books to come, may be considered for an award like the Printz.