Take a photo of a barcode or cover
onclout99 's review for:
Give a Boy a Gun
by Todd Strasser
Okie dokie.
Before I get into this, I want to disclaim that I am pro-gun control. This stems from my Pakistani background and personal Pacifism, and I am not going to justify that further. So.
This book seemed entirely too dogmatic to me, and I am legitimately in favor of Australia-style mass banning of guns. As literary merit goes, I like Strasser's method of splicing quotes and viewpoints into a broader narrative; it's transcendental in a way, and definitely more effective in generating pathos than a first-person or third-person narrative would be. I simply can't get over the sheer antagonization of even moderate viewpoints on gun control, as those holding these views are presented as utterly incompetent in the novel. This doesn't sit well with me, and impeded my ability to value the social commentary aspect Strasser was going for.
Dogmatic writing is not good writing. If you want to provide a thoughtful critique, be subtle about it, or hit the reader over the head with it while simultaneously acknowledging nuance. One thing that really rubbed me the wrong way with this book was how Dustin was used as a method of comparison versus the shooters. The whole dialogue about African American struggles somehow being on par with those of a white kid that gets bullied? No thank you. That's not discourse, that's bullshit. That's really what disappoints me about this book. There's plenty of things to be lauded; the characterization, the rhetorical choices, etc. Yet without nuance, it becomes difficult to swallow such a rigid, I-have-an-agenda work.
So yeah. Peace.
Before I get into this, I want to disclaim that I am pro-gun control. This stems from my Pakistani background and personal Pacifism, and I am not going to justify that further. So.
This book seemed entirely too dogmatic to me, and I am legitimately in favor of Australia-style mass banning of guns. As literary merit goes, I like Strasser's method of splicing quotes and viewpoints into a broader narrative; it's transcendental in a way, and definitely more effective in generating pathos than a first-person or third-person narrative would be. I simply can't get over the sheer antagonization of even moderate viewpoints on gun control, as those holding these views are presented as utterly incompetent in the novel. This doesn't sit well with me, and impeded my ability to value the social commentary aspect Strasser was going for.
Dogmatic writing is not good writing. If you want to provide a thoughtful critique, be subtle about it, or hit the reader over the head with it while simultaneously acknowledging nuance. One thing that really rubbed me the wrong way with this book was how Dustin was used as a method of comparison versus the shooters. The whole dialogue about African American struggles somehow being on par with those of a white kid that gets bullied? No thank you. That's not discourse, that's bullshit. That's really what disappoints me about this book. There's plenty of things to be lauded; the characterization, the rhetorical choices, etc. Yet without nuance, it becomes difficult to swallow such a rigid, I-have-an-agenda work.
So yeah. Peace.