While I can really appreciate the impact that Forever has had upon YA literature and the honesty with which the author broached the topic of teen sex (something she was probably aware would be controversial, considering it was 1975 and all), for me, it really fell flat as a novel. I think it's something definitely worth having teenagers read (the preachiness isn't overly obvious, and I can think of many of my teenaged friends who'd gain something from it), but from the perspective of a reviewer, it was disappointing. Let's continue in dot points:
- The book consisted largely of dialogue that was pretty unbelievable and these dots '...' of which I don't know the name were used between every second word, making the dialogue hard to follow and also making me very confused. The characters were dull, and I really wished Katherine and Michael had have had some life outside of their obsession with each other (remind you of another book?). I felt Erica and Artie were very odd and underdeveloped, and the plotline with Sybil felt very rushed.
- The sex in Forever is really quite tame (I was expecting it to be grossly graphic, for some reason. I don't know if I'm desensitized, or if other people overreact). I think what people take issue with is the fact that Katherine and Michael's relationship progresses so quickly, and it seems if the relationship progresses physically because he wants it to, and she wants to please him (I think there's still an attitude among teenage girls - at least the ones I know - that sex is something you do to please your partner, regardless of how you feel about it). There also appears to be no emotional or mental bond between them, as their relationship consists mainly of small-talk and making out. Probably representative of most teenage relationships, but I expect a little more from books.
- A lot of things date Forever - they go and see a Robert Redford film, for instance. They call condoms 'sheaths' (I have never heard this term before). When Katherine goes to get birth control, she's given a prescription for The Pill - there's no consideration for STDs here. I found it odd, also, that it seems as if it's expected birth control is the responsibility of the woman (and that Katherine is so blase about it. It seems to be as if it would be a big deal. I guess I'm just a prude, though, even on 1975 standards).
- There are still people claiming in Amazon reviews, and probably elsewhere, that this book encourages teenagers to have sex with people they barely know. Let it be said that I continue to have no desire to sleep with teenaged boys after having read this book.
Have you read
Forever? What were your thoughts?
13 notes passed:
Wow. Just wow.
I never thought that I would ever read a negative review of forever, but here you've done it.
For me, because of this book, judy bloom will last forever. I loved it.
And I wish I could say something in regards to what you've said, but I haven't read it in so long that I don't think I would be able to fairly present my case for its awesomeoness.
Maybe I'll read it again and get back to you.
Oh, and for the record, When I was in junior high, we called condoms sheaths. Or rather, *I* never did, but I heard people calling them that.
The triple dots are called ellipsis, for future reference. ^_^
Forever is very dated, and by today's standards it's both kind of tame and also...kind of boring, but that's because today's YA books are so much edgier.
I think it's worth reading for anyone seriously interested in YA literature, because it really is one of the greats, and it's important to see the difference between now and then.
I like and agree with your last point. I think the hype revolves around the fact that Forever was uncharted territory at the time it came out.
haha. steph i LOVE ur review... i read this book and my thoughts are the same as ur (of course i word things differently, lol) and i love the last statement and i too do not want to sleep with teenaged boys after reading this book.
The ...'s are called ellipses. And you're right... the book... has zillions of them! So frustrating... you know...
I haven't read it, but in regards to the birth control, a lot of my friends who are girls get prescriptions for the pill and just use that. Yes, it's silly on their part because of the whole STDs thing. I think a lot of people worry about pregnancy more so than STDs, as messed up as that is.
Oh, and the majority of people I know consider birth control to be the woman's responsibility, myself included. I guess it's just because it has more than the function of preventing pregnancy and that's regulation. Besides, she's going to be the one that's taking it everyday at the same time. I only think cost on all forms of birth control should be split if you're in a committed relationship that has spanned to sharing finances. Plus, it's not expensive (at least not these days, I wasn't alive until the 90s, so I can't say about 1975).
Hmm...I think I'll have to read it sometime though.
admittedly it's been a while since reading this book voraciously in grade 6 - covertly passed around our class, though i'm sure the teachers and our parents knew EXACTLY what we were doing - but i never got the impression that katherine and michael were particularly hasty about getting into the sack. i remember her being a bit scared and unsure at first, but she was excited too, and never coerced.
i always thought 'forever' was a really realistic portrayal of teenage relationships. he was definitely more eager than she was, but then he had more experience (was he older, too?). i believed in their relationship - very very normal teenage relationship, in my experience! - and thought that michael was a fairly considerate boyfriend (though i am quite glad it ended the way it did). their first few sex scenes were awkward and almost embarrassing - reminding me of that hilarious fellatio scene in 'looking for alaska'.
and as far as the pill versus condoms etc in the STD question, i think because katherine and michael were in a committed and exclusive relationship there really was no question. and i never really thought it was her responsibility - more her choice. this book is a product of the women's lib movement and choice.
i did read it again a few times as a teenager but i can't remember how it flows as a novel. i don't even remember the ellipses!
glad you're reviewing some old books! great to revisit them. and talking about them. aces.
i think a lot of the fuss was because michael had a nickname for his penis (Ralphy?? Ralph?) TMI even for back then! I was much more struck by Are You There God it's Me Margaret (I loved the idea of the Pre-Teen Sensations and Nancy was such a cow) ... am trying to think of other books from that era that had an impact - Paul Zindel's My Darling My Hamburger about killed me ... see what you think of that one.
Yeah, I think I read it and wasn't all that wowwed by it. Def. a real "Is that all there is?" moment.
I think it was so popular not because it is particularly excellent (there are MUCH better Judy Blume books, I particularly love Starring Sally J Freedman As Herself), but because it gave a glimpse into something that girls desperately wanted to know about: sex.
And even when I was growing up in the 80s, there wasn't anything else that detailed sex in that kind of detail (and I know it doesn't seem like MUCH detail now). But it was pretty exciting, especially as a curious 9 year old.
Although Simmone's right. RALPH? REALLY?
I read this one just a few weeks ago when I saw it featured on someone's blog as a sort of classic of teen lit. I have to say I was underwhelmed. Perhaps it's the fact that I've read so many books and know of so many more which are much less tame than this?
My 'ah ha!' moment with reading and sex came when I read Tess of the D'Urbervilles at age 10, or thereabouts. That was my really 'shocked' moment, and then I went in search of the rest of the information to fill out the picture, and like any voracious young thing, I found out what I wanted to know.
One 'classic' that I wasn't disappointed with was Laurie Halse Anderson's Speak. Also recommended by bloggers, also read on a lark, and actually pretty good.
I reread this one recently, having thought it was pretty amazing as a young teen. I concluded that basically if you read it at the right time it makes an impact, but that for me now it was too dated and I just didn't like the main relationship very much. I think there are other Blume books I might enjoy rereading more, but now I'm little nervous to - in case I trash any more of my memories!
The series of three dots ('...') that occur so often in Forever are called ellipses. They are usually used to indicate an intentionally omitted part of a speech, or a pause in talking. The way you refer to them defends your point about the teenagers being dreadfully dull, and I'm quite glad you, as a writer, have never heard of them, because that means there is never a dull moment in your characters' conversations.
:) Glad I could assist a fellow writer with terminology.
-Lindsey
Post a Comment