Choice Book Report Quarter 4

The main character in The Kite Runner, Amir, is a dynamic character. In the beginning of the story, Amir is passive and does not stand up for himself. Instead his friend Hassan stands up for Amir. As Amir grows older, he learns to defend himself. Amir is not loyal in the beginning of the story the way Hassan is. Hassan tells Amir on page 54, “Would I ever lie to you, Amir agha?”, and then, “I’d sooner eat dirt.”  Amir cannot even bring himself to save Hassan. The reason for this is because he feels he needs the blue kite to win over Baba. This does help Amir and Baba to get along, but Amir feels worse because he let down Hassan. On page 77 he says, “Maybe Hassan was the price I had to pay, the lamb I had to slay, to win Baba. Was it a fair price?” Amir is selfish in the beginning of the story.  Amir is also selfish when he plants his watch and money under Hassan’s mattress. Amir wants his father all to himself, instead, Baba pays equal attention to Amir and Hassan. Later he finds out why. Amir doesn’t always like Hassan because of the way Baba treats him. Amir feels jealous of Hassan after he reads his first story to Hassan, the one about the man who killed his wife so he could cry and his tears would turn into pearls. Hassan asks why the man couldn’t have smelled an onion instead. Amir is angry at Hassan for this because Hassan can’t even read or write. He thinks, “What does he know, that illiterate Hassan? He’ll never be anything but a cook. How dare he criticize you?”

Amir changes when he goes to find Hassan’s son in Afghanistan. Later in the story, Amir stands up for Sohrab, Hassan’s son, in front of the Taliban and Soraya’s father. Amir also stops being as selfish when his father’s friend tells him that he and Hassan were half brothers. Amir’s father’s friend, Rahim Khan, tells Amir that he and his father were both “tortured souls”. He says they were too hard on themselves. The older Amir gets, the more alike he realizes he and his father were. He and his father both felt guilty-Baba because of Hassan and not telling the boys the truth, Amir for not defending Hassan. Amir’s father helped others as a way to redeem himself, and Amir does the same by going back for Sohrab. 

Most of the story is Amir’s flashback of his childhood in Afghanistan, and then his life after that. Obviously, the reason why he told about his childhood was so the reader would know what happened between him and Hassan. 

There was also a lot of foreshadowing in this book. On the first page, Amir says, “I became what I am today at the age of twelve, on a frigid overcast day in the winter of 1975. I remember the precise moment, crouching behind a crumbling mud wall, peeking into the alley near a frozen creek.” This foreshadows Amir not defending Hassan in front of Assef and the other bullies. Then he says, “That was a long time ago, but it’s wrong what they say about the past, I’ve learned, about how you can bury it. Because the past claws its way out.” This foreshadows Amir trying to forget about it, and then going after the boy to redeem himself. On page 253, when Amir is at the orphanage trying to find Sohrab, Zaman says, “He’s great with the slingshot.” And then, “He’s inseparable from that thing. He tucks it in the waist of his pants everywhere he goes.” This foreshadows the part where Sohrab saves Amir’s life by hitting Assef in the eye. On page 275, Amir says, “On the table sat a bowl of red grapes. I plucked one and tossed it in my mouth. I had to preoccupy myself with something, anything, to silence the voice in my head. The grape was sweet. I popped another one in, unaware that it would be the last bit of solid food I would eat for a long time.” This quote foreshadows Amir’s ending up in the hospital and being unable to eat solid food. Another quote that foreshadows this is Amir’s thoughts on page 287, “He has gel in his hair and a Clark Gable mustache above his thick lips. The gel has soaked through the green paper surgical cap, made a dark stain the shape of Africa.” This quote foreshadows Amir ending up in the hospital and having surgery. The foreshadowing impacts this story by giving the reader a little bit of what happened next. The foreshadowing makes the reader more interested because when they know a little bit of what happens next, they will want to know more. 

Choice Book Report Quarter 3

The main character in Neal Shusterman’s Everwild is Allie Johnson. Everwild, the second book in the Skinjacker trilogy, continues the story after Allie and Nick’s deaths in a car accident. The unfortunate two then crossed into Everlost, a world between life and death.

Allie is headstrong and self willed. She won’t let anything stop her when she decides to find her family and figure out if her dad survived the accident. Allie is skeptical. She doesn’t trust anybody right away, including Mary Hightower, a self appointed leader. Most of the time (and in that case) she is right not to trust them. Mary turns out to be slightly insane. She has kids working with her who kill living children to bring them to Everlost because she believes blindly that Everlost is better. But at the same time Mary makes it seem like what she is doing is right. Allie isn’t like that at all. She doesn’t care if people think what she’s doing is right. Allie is on Nick’s side. Nick, the “Chocolate Ogre”, works to free the children of Everlost. Allie doesn’t care that Mary hates her for this.

Allie is persistent and clever. When she finds her family she has to make several tries to get to talk to her mother. She strategically skinjacks a young, curious boy, gets “lost”, and questions her mother about the accident. She finds her father alive and some shocking news about her own fate in the accident.

I thought this was a pretty good book. I would recommend this book to anyone who read and liked Everlost. You might like this series if you like fantasy. There are lots of fantasy parts, such as skinjacking. You will like this book if you like fiction of long books, since this book is 424 pages. This book was fast paced, so you will like it if you like action or adventure. You might like it if you enjoy murder mysteries or mysteries. This book was sort of a mystery because Allie is trying to find her family and find out what happened to them.

I would not recommend reading this book if you have not read Everlost. At the beginning it would be hard to follow. The author assumes you have read Everlost. You should also not read this book if you dislike fantasy. You would not like this book if you dislike long books. You would dislike this book if you do not like mysteries or murder mysteries. You would dislike Everwild if you do not like action or adventure.

I think most people would enjoy something about this book. 

I liked it because I like longer books. I also like fast paced books. I liked it because it was unrealistic. I liked the fantasy part of it. I thought the characters were interesting. I liked Allie and Nick because they are determined. They stay true to what they believe in no matter what Mary and her followers say. I like the adventure and action type of books. This book is adventure because Allie is trying to find her family and Nick is trying to rescue Afterlights. 

The part of this book that I did not like was the character Milos. I did not like Milos because he pretends to be Allie’s friend. Then he joins Mary in Chicago.

I also did not like Mikey, Mary’s brother, very much. Mikey used to be a monster until Allie turned him back. Mikey is traveling with Milos and Allie and he gets really jealous of Milos. He changes himself back into a monster. Later he changes back again.

The other character I disliked was Jill. Jill works for Mary. She used to be Milos’s friend, but she left him. She is one of the Afterlights who kills living children to bring them to Everlost.

I liked most parts of this book and I think most people would enjoy it.

Choice Book Report for Quarter 2

The book I read, Agatha Christie’s Curtain, tells the tale of the detective Hercule Poirot’s final case and of his death. Hercule Poirot is a little Belgian detective. Now aged, he is confined to his wheelchair and is told his heart may go out at any time. Yet he still does what he does best - sitting and thinking. Poirot is somehow confident that there will be a murder at Styles, and he is right. He knows who the murderer is, but with his secretive nature, he will not tell his good friend Captain Hastings. Poirot is also kind of vain or conceited. Even with his age, his appearance and his mustache are both still perfect. He is also intelligent. His detective techniques work perfectly. In Curtain, Poirot discovers five murders. In all of them, it has been very clear who the murderer was. In each case the person confessed. But Poirot knows that another person was responsible. He calls this person X. In each case X was there but was not suspected. Poirot knows who X is.

Hastings and Poirot could both be called the main character of the story. Poirot does the most in the story, being the detective, but the story is from Hastings’s point of view. 

Captain Hastings is Poirot’s younger friend. He has several children, one of which, Judith, is also at Styles. He is often like Poirot’s opposite. While Poirot uses his psychology to solve cases, Hastings would rather look for clues. This does not work out so well for him. Hastings is not confident like Poirot is. He almost never knows who the murderer is, or he has some totally wrong suspicion. He is protective of Judith. On page 144 he says, “But now, Poirot, what am I to do about this - Judith and Allerton, I mean? It’s got to be stopped somehow. What do you think I’d better do?” To which the much more relaxed Poirot says, “Do nothing.” Poirot and Captain Hastings are very different characters.                    

The point of view in this story was first person. The story was told from Hercule Poirot’s friend Hastings’s point of view. This point of view was chosen because Hastings is not as smart as Poirot. He does not think the same way as Poirot does. Hastings does not know who the murderer is, otherwise he has an incorrect idea that only confuses the reader. If Poirot told the story, the reader would know who did it. The reader would also understand why Poirot thought certain things were important or clues. If Poirot told this story, it would not qualify as a mystery. With Hastings telling the story, the reader can make a guess as to who it is. Poirot once said that when Hastings wrote the pages were full of “I”s. He is right. Hastings tells what he thinks and this makes the story a lot different. Poirot would not write in the same way. He would write about what other people did and what they thought. This is because Poirot is a more psychological person that Hastings. 

If Hastings hadn’t told this story it would have been very different. One part that would have been especially different was the part where Hastings felt that he had to take care of Judith. If he had not narrated that part the reader would not have understood why Hastings felt he had to watch out for her. After that part, Hastings was angry at Allerton and made up his mind to kill him. I would not have understood his instinct had I not been reading his thoughts about this. (Hastings never did kill Allerton. Poirot realized what he was planning.) I thought this was a good book but I think a lot of people wouldn’t agree.