Scan barcode
A review by liz_ross
Dry by Jarrod Shusterman, Neal Shusterman
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
1.5
"When we've lost the strength to save ourselves, we somehow find the strength to save each other."
Do you know those books that have such an amazing concept that you can't imagine any way the author (or in this case authors) could possibly mess it up? This was one of those books. And the authors did find that way to mess it up that I had missed.
California finding itself without water may not be a reality, but it's easy to imagine it as one. There is already a crisis whether people acknowledge it or not. If we don't do anything to change our habits and start living in a more susteinable way, it won't take many years for California and other places to find themselves in a situation like the one in this book.
Quite similar even, because if there's something the Shusterman duo did well, it was describing the whole scenario. The denial, everyone rushing to supermarkets and other places to buy as much water as they can find without thinking about everyone else around them, the chaos that followed when people found themselves without enough water. The authors created a very realistic and frightning picture of what would happen if people ever find themselves without access to water, an unvaluable resource that we so often take for granted. The world crumbled and shattered and all that mattered as to survive at all costs because that's the sad reality about being human and that we often forget as well - if we see ourselves in deadly danger, there's nothing that distinguishes us from wild animals, except for our exceptional and much more effective capacity for violence.
But the good things about this book end here. Yes, the concept was amazing, and yes, it was developed in a brilliant way. But choosing a bunch of teenagers as main characters? Not the authors' best idea.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against underage main characters. As long as they don't look like they can barely make reasonable decisions when the world is fine, let alone when it is quickly racing towards the apocalypse. Which is exactly what they look like in this book.
Alyssa, the female main character, is meant to be the good, smart girl who cares for everyone. First of all, she is clearly too dumb to be smart. Secondly, I would have no problem with her being a good person trying to keep her humanity in a world where everyone seemed to have lost it if all her good actions weren't used to either show how bad and cruel everyone else had became or for the authors to remind me once again of how selfless Alyssa is. Not to mention that all her good actions ended up putting herself, her friends and her brother (who she said over and over again that she would always protect) in danger. So, I just have one thing to tell Alyssa - Alyssa, dear, a bit of self-love and taking a moment to think before doing anything wouldn't hurt, you know? In fact, they could have saved you and your friends a lot of trouble.
Alyssa's brother, Garrett, is barely more than a background character and for me he is just there. Kelton is a creep. Period. I don't care if they were all almost dying every day, there's no excuse for what he did. The only character of the group that I did like was Jacqui - if the other teenagers were like her, the fact that they were all teenagers wouldn't have been a problem -, but ever her annoyed me quite often.
But wait, wait! I almost forgot Henry. And oh boy, I have a whole ranting about him. Well, not him. I couldn't care less about him. About how everyone else treated him. Like, seriously?! And you still wonder why I think they shouldn't have been the main chracters! In what world does anyeone decide to trust someone like Henry knowing what they know about him?! It almost makes me want to say that what happened to them served them right! Just why?!
And along with this bunch of annoying, unlikable characters, comes a plot that not only has a painfully slow pace, but that is boring as hell as well. The state the world is in is amazing and realistic, yes. But do you know how I had the chance to know that? The authors made the group travel around on something that felt way too much like a quest. Which would have been fine if I didn't keep reading the same thing over and over again. It was basically losing hope and freak out, find a way to deal with it, travel, arrive at somewhere. Repeat. And repeat. And repeat. But jeez, the book was so bad that I would have dealt with it as well if I didn't know fully well how it was going to end.
You know what would have been amazing? If I was wrong about the ending, if for once there wasn't a happily ever after waiting for the main character. The rating of this book would have been much higher that way.
And the point is, there wasn't no need for an ending like that at all. I appreciate the message the authors wanted to share. And trust me, they were successful in that department and it would be a mistake for anyone who read the book (whether they liked it or not) to ignore that message. But it would have been just as successfully shared if the ending would have been diffetent. In fact, if it had been different, less of a happy ever after I even think the message would have been stronger. And damn it, the book would have been much better.
Overall, the message the authors want to share is one that is extremely important. Everyone should be aware of how precarious is our situation right now. And all I wanted was to be able to reccomed this book to everyone I know. But the authors failed to deliever a story that would make justice to its message and I can't reccomed a book just for its message, because that's not all that matters about it. The book had a lot of potential and could have been amazing. But the characters choice, the pace and the predictability of the plot just ruined it all.
"As a kid you idiolize your parents. But there's that moment when you realize they're not superheroes, or villains. They're painfully, unforgivably human. The question is, can you forgive them for being human anyway?"
Do you know those books that have such an amazing concept that you can't imagine any way the author (or in this case authors) could possibly mess it up? This was one of those books. And the authors did find that way to mess it up that I had missed.
California finding itself without water may not be a reality, but it's easy to imagine it as one. There is already a crisis whether people acknowledge it or not. If we don't do anything to change our habits and start living in a more susteinable way, it won't take many years for California and other places to find themselves in a situation like the one in this book.
Quite similar even, because if there's something the Shusterman duo did well, it was describing the whole scenario. The denial, everyone rushing to supermarkets and other places to buy as much water as they can find without thinking about everyone else around them, the chaos that followed when people found themselves without enough water. The authors created a very realistic and frightning picture of what would happen if people ever find themselves without access to water, an unvaluable resource that we so often take for granted. The world crumbled and shattered and all that mattered as to survive at all costs because that's the sad reality about being human and that we often forget as well - if we see ourselves in deadly danger, there's nothing that distinguishes us from wild animals, except for our exceptional and much more effective capacity for violence.
But the good things about this book end here. Yes, the concept was amazing, and yes, it was developed in a brilliant way. But choosing a bunch of teenagers as main characters? Not the authors' best idea.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against underage main characters. As long as they don't look like they can barely make reasonable decisions when the world is fine, let alone when it is quickly racing towards the apocalypse. Which is exactly what they look like in this book.
Alyssa, the female main character, is meant to be the good, smart girl who cares for everyone. First of all, she is clearly too dumb to be smart. Secondly, I would have no problem with her being a good person trying to keep her humanity in a world where everyone seemed to have lost it if all her good actions weren't used to either show how bad and cruel everyone else had became or for the authors to remind me once again of how selfless Alyssa is. Not to mention that all her good actions ended up putting herself, her friends and her brother (who she said over and over again that she would always protect) in danger. So, I just have one thing to tell Alyssa - Alyssa, dear, a bit of self-love and taking a moment to think before doing anything wouldn't hurt, you know? In fact, they could have saved you and your friends a lot of trouble.
Alyssa's brother, Garrett, is barely more than a background character and for me he is just there. Kelton is a creep. Period. I don't care if they were all almost dying every day, there's no excuse for what he did. The only character of the group that I did like was Jacqui - if the other teenagers were like her, the fact that they were all teenagers wouldn't have been a problem -, but ever her annoyed me quite often.
But wait, wait! I almost forgot Henry. And oh boy, I have a whole ranting about him. Well, not him. I couldn't care less about him. About how everyone else treated him. Like, seriously?! And you still wonder why I think they shouldn't have been the main chracters! In what world does anyeone decide to trust someone like Henry knowing what they know about him?! It almost makes me want to say that what happened to them served them right! Just why?!
And along with this bunch of annoying, unlikable characters, comes a plot that not only has a painfully slow pace, but that is boring as hell as well. The state the world is in is amazing and realistic, yes. But do you know how I had the chance to know that? The authors made the group travel around on something that felt way too much like a quest. Which would have been fine if I didn't keep reading the same thing over and over again. It was basically losing hope and freak out, find a way to deal with it, travel, arrive at somewhere. Repeat. And repeat. And repeat. But jeez, the book was so bad that I would have dealt with it as well if I didn't know fully well how it was going to end.
You know what would have been amazing? If I was wrong about the ending, if for once there wasn't a happily ever after waiting for the main character. The rating of this book would have been much higher that way.
And the point is, there wasn't no need for an ending like that at all. I appreciate the message the authors wanted to share. And trust me, they were successful in that department and it would be a mistake for anyone who read the book (whether they liked it or not) to ignore that message. But it would have been just as successfully shared if the ending would have been diffetent. In fact, if it had been different, less of a happy ever after I even think the message would have been stronger. And damn it, the book would have been much better.
Overall, the message the authors want to share is one that is extremely important. Everyone should be aware of how precarious is our situation right now. And all I wanted was to be able to reccomed this book to everyone I know. But the authors failed to deliever a story that would make justice to its message and I can't reccomed a book just for its message, because that's not all that matters about it. The book had a lot of potential and could have been amazing. But the characters choice, the pace and the predictability of the plot just ruined it all.
"As a kid you idiolize your parents. But there's that moment when you realize they're not superheroes, or villains. They're painfully, unforgivably human. The question is, can you forgive them for being human anyway?"
Content Warnings
Graphic: Murder, Violence, and Gun violence
Moderate: Fire/Fire injury