Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Welcome
to BookAndReader!
We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences
along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site
is free and easy, just CLICK
HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click
here.
I'm past the half-way point, but still finding this to be true. All the characters seem to be stereotypes, without much depth or an original thought among them.
This seems like a modern American sex romp, with just enough of a plot to give the reader an excuse to stay with it. Somewhat like those who used to say they read Playboy magazine for the articles, not the pictures.
Our introduction to Carrie seems typical. We aren't told whether she is tall or short, fat or thin. All we know is she has "long straight hair and startled-looking blue eyes" and "her breasts were plump and pillowy".
Even when we are not looking through Tim’s eyes, we find Grace Park being described as “a solidly built girl just an inch or two shorter than [her mother], with a bigger bust”.
I'm past the half-way point, but still finding this to be true. All the characters seem to be stereotypes, without much depth or an original thought among them.
Our introduction to Carrie seems typical. We aren't told whether she is tall or short, fat or thin. All we know is she has "long straight hair and startled-looking blue eyes" and "her breasts were plump and pillowy".
I think this is intentional. From what you might see later in the book this is pretty much the most thought Tim seems to give his new wife. We're only given the details that are pertinent to Tim, we only know her as well as he does, which proves to be not at all in the end.
I never connected with anyone in this book, which is not a requirement, but usually happens. I was let down again when scenes where I thought I might gain some insight just fell flat. I was disappointed in the characters more often than not. Why could Ruth not stand up for herself? Why in all that inner dialog we got from Tim did he never admit he'd replace substance addition with an addiction to Religion. Actually he wasn't even practicing a Religion, he was just shamed into this life. God never seemed to enter the equation. It was a constant jumbling of keeping up appearances, and defining Them from Us.
That annoyed me. I don't like sports at all so naturally reading about sports games was not going to be fun for me. I felt like those scenes could have been trimmed or taken out (possibly to make room for an improved ending ). It's not like soccer was really an important aspect of the novel, aside from being something Tim, his daughter, and Maggie participated in.
Exactly. I've spent a few hours of a slow Sunday reading this book, and with less than 100 pages to go I'm still waiting for Perrotta to use the whole religion debate as anything but a plot device that will create a them-vs-us conflict among his (rather flat) characters. With a few adjustments, he could basically have written the exact same book about any controversial subject. At this point, I want a hell of a payoff in the end to be satisfied with this book.
Exactly. I've spent a few hours of a slow Sunday reading this book, and with less than 100 pages to go I'm still waiting for Perrotta to use the whole religion debate as anything but a plot device that will create a them-vs-us conflict among his (rather flat) characters. With a few adjustments, he could basically have written the exact same book about any controversial subject. At this point, I want a hell of a payoff in the end to be satisfied with this book.
Like other commenters here I was disappointed in the book, but more in Ruth than in Tim. She seemed so one track, unable to enter into what might be driving Tim and seeing him principally as a sex object. Or maybe that was the point. Regarding her career and commitment to teaching teen agers about sex, she proved surprising unable to state this clearly, resorting mostly to one liners. If her commitment was so strong, why lend herself to such a dishonest program? As it developed later (unfair!) she had tenure and could have asked for a transfer at any time.
I started out disliking Tim, but developed some sympathy for him. He was using the religious group as a refuge and a tool to redeem his life. Belief or religious experience came into it very little. Maybe it was the power of community he was feeling. The author seemed ambivalent, sometimes mocking the group and at other times not.
The final chapter of the book was a total let down.
I think this is intentional. From what you might see later in the book this is pretty much the most thought Tim seems to give his new wife. We're only given the details that are pertinent to Tim, we only know her as well as he does, which proves to be not at all in the end.
I never connected with anyone in this book, which is not a requirement, but usually happens. I was let down again when scenes where I thought I might gain some insight just fell flat. I was disappointed in the characters more often than not. Why could Ruth not stand up for herself? Why in all that inner dialog we got from Tim did he never admit he'd replace substance addition with an addiction to Religion. Actually he wasn't even practicing a Religion, he was just shamed into this life. God never seemed to enter the equation. It was a constant jumbling of keeping up appearances, and defining Them from Us.
I agree with your analysis of Carrie. That makes sense to me.
I actually did come to connect with Tim a bit. I liked him from the get go and I felt bad that he couldn't break through the mirage that was being fed to him by the pastor.
I was disappointed by the ending though in the sense that, while I can handle an ambiguous ending, it felt like Perrotta left the situation unfinished. Tim and Ruth were both beginning to become truly cognizant of their beliefs and to shed the masks that they'd been hiding behind. Instead of truly developing that, Perrotta just left us hanging.
I finished this book yesterday, and unfortunately found it as lacklustre as it seems everyone else has. There was the opportunity to tackle some interesting and important issues, but I felt that it was never really done properly. Neither Tim nor Ruth really fleshed out their arguments, each more focused on other problems in their life. It seemed to me as though Perrotta tried to tackle to many issues all at once, and ended up failing to address any of them to a reasonable extent.
Despite the book looking as though it may improve, I was disappointed to find that the writing remained rather plain and bland. And boy was the last chapter a let-down. I like those kind of endings when the author leaves us with a number of possibilites of what happens next, where the reader is left with a feeling of hightened anticipation and is able to construct the future of the characters themselves. But this ending just fell bland. Not only was there no lead up to the end-point (it really felt as though Perrotta had just decided he couldn't be bothered writing any more) but I just didn't care enough about any of the characters to bother postulating what might happen next. And that's definitely not a good sign.
It was an okay read in terms of plot, but I would certainly never call it thought-provoking. The characters - especially the church-goers - were just too stereotypical to ever create a new point of view in which to discuss some of the issues.
Like other commenters here I was disappointed in the book, but more in Ruth than in Tim. She seemed so one track, unable to enter into what might be driving Tim and seeing him principally as a sex object. Or maybe that was the point. Regarding her career and commitment to teaching teen agers about sex, she proved surprising unable to state this clearly, resorting mostly to one liners. If her commitment was so strong, why lend herself to such a dishonest program? As it developed later (unfair!) she had tenure and could have asked for a transfer at any time.
Ruth was not the character I was expecting. The human sexuality teachers I have had in my life, all the way from the 3rd grade to college were nothing like this shrinking-violet of a women.
But then I wonder, not having read anything else by Perrotta, if it's an inability of his to capture a female character correctly, or honestly.
I still found this book to be quite thought provoking, actually, despite its faults.
The religious aspect, especially the argument of when and where prayer is appropriate, really struck a chord with me. I spent a lot of the book reflecting back on what my own opinions are on the matter, although how much of that was Perrotta's doing is something I can't answer.
"Oh boy, here's the stereotypical gay best friend from every Julia Roberts movie who's going to get bullied by the mean fundamentalists."
Now I'm 60 pages in and he's already been fleshed out more, so perhaps I'll turn out to be completely wrong - maybe it's me who's a victim of too many stereotypes. Who knows, maybe that's part of Perrotta's plan: make us think we're seeing a stereotype and then surprise us.
Turns out the only thing I was wrong about was the being bullied part -
since the character wasn't even in the book again until Perrotta needed to wrestle up an ending of sorts
.
My first, and until I read this only, exposure to Perrotta was the movie adaptation of Little Children, which I really liked. Of course, it's possible that Little Children is a vastly superior book to The Abstinence Teacher, but I'm leaning more towards the idea that Todd Field and Kate Winslett can make anything look [-]great[/-] really good. Because The Abstinence Teacher didn't agree with me at all. Which annoys me even more because it's such an interesting subject; the collision between fundamentalism and secular society, faith and doubt, freedom of religion and freedom from religion, etc... a great author could have made a great novel of this.
Unfortunately, Perrotta is competent at best. He writes like a journalist, padding his pedestrian prose with endless pointless asides as if he were paid by the word, and except for possibly the two protagonists, his characters are little more than clichéd parodies that we've seen hundreds of times before. Remember that bit at the beginning, where Ruth almost gets suckered in by the (in her view, at least) obviously exaggerated stories of an abstinence supporter? Well, that's the kind of novel Perrotta has written; every single backstory is so generic, so simple (apparently, every single Christian is either a former junkie or severely depressed) that it doesn't convince.
Even his two "heroes" are far too flat and unengaging to carry the novel, though Tim at least gets a little character development. And while Perrotta occasionally uses them to ask an interesting question or two about the supposed subject, for the most part it's treated like a generic backdrop that serves no purpose but to advance the plot - which, granted, works pretty well, and it's certainly a quick, painless, harmless read. But for the most part, his own contribution to the debate seems to mainly be to line up the arguments from both sides, then he goes "people disagree, everybody makes mistakes, nobody can do much about it. Shrug."
According to wikipedia, Perrotta wrote the book because "I did feel somewhat inadequate as a novelist, just like I'd missed something huge happening in this country." I'm thinking maybe he should have trusted that instinct and handed this plot idea to a more than just barely adequate novelist.
I actually wasn't as upset with the ending as some others here, though. Quite frankly, it was as good an ending as I could have realistically hoped for.
Given their lack of personallity, initiative or, well, spine, Ruth and Tim deserve each other. And given that he sent that e-mail from her computer in the middle of the night, and given what we know of this small town, they won't really have a choice now, will they?
The religious aspect, especially the argument of when and where prayer is appropriate, really struck a chord with me. I spent a lot of the book reflecting back on what my own opinions are on the matter, although how much of that was Perrotta's doing is something I can't answer.
The idea sturck a chord with me, but Perrotta didn't add anything interesting for me to mull on. The thoughts that the idea raised in me were entirely my own; as BG mentioned, Perrotta seemed to just present the arguments without going any further. And that disappointed me.
The reason I decided to read this book was because of this quote "He was inspired to write the novel after reading of the influence of evangelical voters on the 2004 presidential election, stating, "I did feel somewhat inadequate as a novelist, just like I'd missed something huge happening in this country. I really did set out to kind of investigate that world." The novel also touches on other issues such as homophobia and sexism in the suburban setting."(which beergood also mentions)
The stereotype from the begining was apparent about Randall : "he was a cultured gay man,an opera-loving dandy with a fetish for Italian designer eyeware" and "he set his cup down on the Wonder Woman coaster he kept on his desk,next to an autographed picture of Maria Callas"
These comments are not far from what homophobes think and not say out loud,that is the reality.
What I expected,or should I say hoped to get out of this book was some good strong characters debating/discussing about abstinence,sexual education and the religion factor in between.What I got out of it is the extremes of every side and not well put together,but,it did hit on alot of issues that were thought provoking and not dicussed openly.
Ruth as a sexual education teacher I was hoping to find a strong woman defending what she has taught for years and believed in,instead she was a woman full of self doubt,hoping someone shows up in her life,having to back down of her opinion because she didn't want to lose her her job and a woman living the best way posible with her mistakes and all. Her escapades I could have done without but they really didn't bother me,it just seemed at these parts the story and the main issues went off in another direction for a while but then again it shows what a teenager may do and would it not be better if they knew how to protect themselves.
What did everyone think of the way she answered Theresa?(p.11-12) Was it appropriate or not? and at the game,did she overeact when Tim prayed with the girls?
I don't think she had anything against Christianity but I have to say that in a team where there are kids with different religions,it is not the place to do what Tim did.MO ofcourse.
Tim was all over the place with trying hard,supressing his thoughts and feelings.His ex wife not allowing him to take his daughter to church was another issue that was raised.
Was it right or wrong? Should one parent have that right of what religion a child should be raised as?
Pastor Denis,what can I say,having heard first hand a priest telling a nineteen year old girl she had sinned after her miscarriage does not surprise me of the words that came out of his mouth like "pathetic" and "immortal".
It might not have been written by a great author and yes, someone else might have done a better job,but the issues were there and the book was thought provoking for me.
Libra - You may find this journalistic critique of news coverage on the abstinence pledge study to be of interest: http://www.getreligion.org/?p=5313. The critique points out the limited scope of the study, the difference between an abstinence pledge and abstinence education, and the tendency of the media to jump to conclusions that are not warranted by the study.
I didn't think she was completely out of line. Perotta does mention that Ruth lectured about various methods of protection and sexual hygiene, so I just took Ruth's side comments as her trying to be funny. As for her overreacting about Tim praying . . . well, yes and no. As you mentioned, prayer really has no place on the soccer field and I think the coaches really should have been more aware of the other girls' religious beliefs. However, Ruth should've handled the situation differently. The thing is, I was on Ruth's side at first and was convinced we'd get an explanation as to why she was so shaken up. Since that didn't happen, I ended up looking at that moment differently. I now think that she looked like a drama queen. She could've just taken Tim aside and politely asked him to not pray at games.
Libra - You may find this journalistic critique of news coverage on the abstinence pledge study to be of interest: http://www.getreligion.org/?p=5313. The critique points out the limited scope of the study, the difference between an abstinence pledge and abstinence education, and the tendency of the media to jump to conclusions that are not warranted by the study.
I didn't think she was completely out of line. Perotta does mention that Ruth lectured about various methods of protection and sexual hygiene, so I just took Ruth's side comments as her trying to be funny. As for her overreacting about Tim praying . . . well, yes and no. As you mentioned, prayer really has no place on the soccer field and I think the coaches really should have been more aware of the other girls' religious beliefs. However, Ruth should've handled the situation differently. The thing is, I was on Ruth's side at first and was convinced we'd get an explanation as to why she was so shaken up. Since that didn't happen, I ended up looking at that moment differently. I now think that she looked like a drama queen. She could've just taken Tim aside and politely asked him to not pray at games.
Personally, I think the whole prayer issue seemed like a cheap way to make Ruth's situation more problematic. As long as her major conflict with the church was over the sex ed issues, Perrotta seemed to be pretty much solidly on her side and her opponents were presented as a bunch of kooks. But Perrotta needed a conflict where she was the aggressor, and so he had her overreact at the prayer thing (a fairly harmless issue compared to what to teach in school, you'd think) and portrayed Tim as basically having no will of his own (I don't know how many times Tim claimed that he didn't even know why he started it) so he could point a finger both ways and say "See? We're all bigots!"
Personally, I think the whole prayer issue seemed like a cheap way to make Ruth's situation more problematic. As long as her major conflict with the church was over the sex ed issues, Perrotta seemed to be pretty much solidly on her side and her opponents were presented as a bunch of kooks. But Perrotta needed a conflict where she was the aggressor, and so he had her overreact at the prayer thing (a fairly harmless issue compared to what to teach in school, you'd think) and portrayed Tim as basically having no will of his own (I don't know how many times Tim claimed that he didn't even know why he started it) so he could point a finger both ways and say "See? We're all bigots!"
Libra - You may find this journalistic critique of news coverage on the abstinence pledge study to be of interest: http://www.getreligion.org/?p=5313. The critique points out the limited scope of the study, the difference between an abstinence pledge and abstinence education, and the tendency of the media to jump to conclusions that are not warranted by the study.
oskylad,very informative,and yes,the report I heard on CNN was not so analytical on the studies.Makes you never want to listen to the news again,or at least go search yourself and making sure of all the facts.
If I understood correctly,the studies were done on teenagers with similar backgrounds/religion,not taking account different religions/cultures etc and if they had abstinence education or not.They just based it on a group of kids that had the same beliefs but some took the pledge and the others didn't?
). It's not like soccer was really an important aspect of the novel, aside from being something Tim, his daughter, and Maggie participated in.
