December 18, 2016
I had a hard time rating this book one star, because up until the end I really liked it. But the end is the most important part of every book because it's what stays with you and after that I just can't bring myself to rate it anything but "did not like it".
I am honestly shocked after reading all those 5* reviews. Not because people liked the book, but because people somehow manage to get something "inspirational" and romantic out of it... Seriously? I don't want to judge people for their opinion, but that's just disturbing.
---------Spoilers ahead-------------------
Before I start, I want to say that I don't dislike this book because I'm strictly against any and every form of assisted suicide. It's a difficult subject with some valid arguments on both sides - in some cases, at least.
I also don't have a problem with sad endings. I have different reasons for disliking it.
Like a lot of people, I cried at the end of this book, but unlike probably most, not out of sadness, but out of anger. God, I was angry...
Then I get on here and I see people quoting the book:
"Some mistakes... Just have greater consequences than others. But you don't have to let the result of one mistake be the thing that defines you. You, Clark, have the choice not to let that happen.”
"You only get one life. It's actually your duty to live it as fully as possible.”
"Just live well. Just live."
How inspirational. Only... then Will basically drags all the meaning out of those quotes by deciding that this all applied to Lou, but not to himself.
Why does he have to let his disability define him? He tells her to "Just live." but it's okay for him to "Just die."?
"Live boldly. Push yourself. Don’t settle."
What if Lou was happy with a simple life in a small town and a loving family? Is it really better to never settle than try to actually be happy with what you have?
"The thing is, I get that this could be a good life. I get that with you around, perhaps it could even be a very good life. But it's not my life. It's nothing like the life I want. Not even close. I loved my life, Clark. Really loved it. I loved my job, my travels, the things I was. I loved being a physical person. I liked riding my motorbike, hurling myself off buildings. I liked crushing people in business deals. I liked having sex. Lots of sex. I led a big life. I am not designed to exist in this thing - and yet for all intents and purposes it's now the thing that defines me. It is the only thing that defines me."
Oookay... What? The f*?
So it could be a very good life. But it's just not good enough for me. So, all the people who love me, go to hell, and I'm going to die. Because I just won't settle for less than perfect.
I would have had an easier time understanding the book if he had been miserable until the end. If the book had showed us that his life really was miserable and he couldn't go on, it would have been incredibely sad and depressing (still entirely unromantic), but I would get that. Let him die of pneumonia. That would be sad, but at least it wouldn't send such a disturbing message.
As it is, the book spends two thirds showing us that they can actually have happy moments and that he can actually love and be happy. But it's just not enough. Because: Don't settle.
Now, I'm not claiming to even remotely be able to imagine what Will must feel like or how difficult his life is - but there are thousands of people out there, who live very difficult lives and still manage to be happy or at least try. I have a very deep respect for those people. But Will can't be happy or try because he can no longer go to Paris and go skiing and do all those super-amazing things he did in his life before - and just enjoying music, loving and being loved simply won't do. It just seemes to me like the overall message of the book is a very shallow one for this.
Another thing, that makes me a little mad, is how in the book he says something like: dying is the first time he's actually made his own decision since the accident (or something along those lines).
This just blows my mind!
You don't lose all your choices because you can't move your legs and arms. He made tons of choices during the course of the book. He chose to be rude to Lou, he chose to be nice to Lou, he chose not to go out, he chose to go out, he chose to go to Alicia's wedding, he chose to go to Mauritius... All those things weren't his choices? He also had a lot more choices, considering all the money they had - yes, he was very limited in some "choices", but that doesn't mean he didn't have any.
So, no, dying wasn't the first time he made his own choice. What it was, was the last time he made any choice. It wasn't the accident that took away all of his choices, it was deciding to die. And that's not brave, let alone romantic. It completely blows my mind that there are people reviewing this who found that ending romantic - I'm not sure how romantic you would find it if the person you loved wanted to commit suicide...
Also, it was incredibly selfish. Will didn't just make a choice for his life, he made one for the people he loved and who loved him. And no matter how unpopular that opinion may be in today's super-individualistic world that sees self-fulfillment as the highest achievable goal, I actually believe that our duty not to hurt the people we love is - in general - a little more important than the duty to "live our life as fully as possible."
"I liked riding my motorbike, hurling myself off buildings. I liked crushing people in business deals. I liked having sex. Lots of sex. I led a big life."
Maybe this explains it. Maybe Will is just an incredibly shallow person. He didn't really feel like that to me for large stretches of the book, but maybe that's just it. And maybe that's what made me so angry.
___
P.S.: There's been some controversy about the story in connection with the release of the movie, and since I've discussed this a little in the comments, I thought I'd add a few notes into the body of the review as well - on why the message this story sends is so problematic.
Starting with what the message actually is: I don't think the author intended to tell us that a disabled life is not worth living and I would never accuse her of that. She made an effort to show that Will's life could be a good life and I have a feeling most readers understood that. The problematic part comes in where she presents it as a (psychologically) normal thing for him to still want to die.
This reenforces very dangerous assumptions society already has about people with disabilities. Many (able bodied) people have commented that they completely understand Will and if they were in his position they'd want to die too.
They are wrong. And I can say this, because there is actual data on this - the vast majority of people with similar disabilities as Will do not want to die. They adjust - with time and the right support and treatment.
So when a disabled person has suicidal thoughts it is not our duty as a society to "empower" them to take their own life. It's our duty to give them the best possible care, treatment and support so they stop being suicidal.
One argument frequently brought up is that this is the story of just one man. That it's not meant to be representative of all disabled people. While this may be a valid argument for any single story, the problem remains that these kinds of stories are vastly overrepresented in mainstream media. When was the last time a major Hollywood movie featured a quadriplegic lead character who didn't want to die? When you're creating content that has such an impact on such a gigantic audience, you cannot flinch from the responsibility of the message you're sending by claiming that it's "just one story". It isn't just one story. You're influencing people's opinions about disability and suicide on a huge scale. And you're doing it in the worst possible way.
I am honestly shocked after reading all those 5* reviews. Not because people liked the book, but because people somehow manage to get something "inspirational" and romantic out of it... Seriously? I don't want to judge people for their opinion, but that's just disturbing.
---------Spoilers ahead-------------------
Before I start, I want to say that I don't dislike this book because I'm strictly against any and every form of assisted suicide. It's a difficult subject with some valid arguments on both sides - in some cases, at least.
I also don't have a problem with sad endings. I have different reasons for disliking it.
Like a lot of people, I cried at the end of this book, but unlike probably most, not out of sadness, but out of anger. God, I was angry...
Then I get on here and I see people quoting the book:
"Some mistakes... Just have greater consequences than others. But you don't have to let the result of one mistake be the thing that defines you. You, Clark, have the choice not to let that happen.”
"You only get one life. It's actually your duty to live it as fully as possible.”
"Just live well. Just live."
How inspirational. Only... then Will basically drags all the meaning out of those quotes by deciding that this all applied to Lou, but not to himself.
Why does he have to let his disability define him? He tells her to "Just live." but it's okay for him to "Just die."?
"Live boldly. Push yourself. Don’t settle."
What if Lou was happy with a simple life in a small town and a loving family? Is it really better to never settle than try to actually be happy with what you have?
"The thing is, I get that this could be a good life. I get that with you around, perhaps it could even be a very good life. But it's not my life. It's nothing like the life I want. Not even close. I loved my life, Clark. Really loved it. I loved my job, my travels, the things I was. I loved being a physical person. I liked riding my motorbike, hurling myself off buildings. I liked crushing people in business deals. I liked having sex. Lots of sex. I led a big life. I am not designed to exist in this thing - and yet for all intents and purposes it's now the thing that defines me. It is the only thing that defines me."
Oookay... What? The f*?
So it could be a very good life. But it's just not good enough for me. So, all the people who love me, go to hell, and I'm going to die. Because I just won't settle for less than perfect.
I would have had an easier time understanding the book if he had been miserable until the end. If the book had showed us that his life really was miserable and he couldn't go on, it would have been incredibely sad and depressing (still entirely unromantic), but I would get that. Let him die of pneumonia. That would be sad, but at least it wouldn't send such a disturbing message.
As it is, the book spends two thirds showing us that they can actually have happy moments and that he can actually love and be happy. But it's just not enough. Because: Don't settle.
Now, I'm not claiming to even remotely be able to imagine what Will must feel like or how difficult his life is - but there are thousands of people out there, who live very difficult lives and still manage to be happy or at least try. I have a very deep respect for those people. But Will can't be happy or try because he can no longer go to Paris and go skiing and do all those super-amazing things he did in his life before - and just enjoying music, loving and being loved simply won't do. It just seemes to me like the overall message of the book is a very shallow one for this.
Another thing, that makes me a little mad, is how in the book he says something like: dying is the first time he's actually made his own decision since the accident (or something along those lines).
This just blows my mind!
You don't lose all your choices because you can't move your legs and arms. He made tons of choices during the course of the book. He chose to be rude to Lou, he chose to be nice to Lou, he chose not to go out, he chose to go out, he chose to go to Alicia's wedding, he chose to go to Mauritius... All those things weren't his choices? He also had a lot more choices, considering all the money they had - yes, he was very limited in some "choices", but that doesn't mean he didn't have any.
So, no, dying wasn't the first time he made his own choice. What it was, was the last time he made any choice. It wasn't the accident that took away all of his choices, it was deciding to die. And that's not brave, let alone romantic. It completely blows my mind that there are people reviewing this who found that ending romantic - I'm not sure how romantic you would find it if the person you loved wanted to commit suicide...
Also, it was incredibly selfish. Will didn't just make a choice for his life, he made one for the people he loved and who loved him. And no matter how unpopular that opinion may be in today's super-individualistic world that sees self-fulfillment as the highest achievable goal, I actually believe that our duty not to hurt the people we love is - in general - a little more important than the duty to "live our life as fully as possible."
"I liked riding my motorbike, hurling myself off buildings. I liked crushing people in business deals. I liked having sex. Lots of sex. I led a big life."
Maybe this explains it. Maybe Will is just an incredibly shallow person. He didn't really feel like that to me for large stretches of the book, but maybe that's just it. And maybe that's what made me so angry.
___
P.S.: There's been some controversy about the story in connection with the release of the movie, and since I've discussed this a little in the comments, I thought I'd add a few notes into the body of the review as well - on why the message this story sends is so problematic.
Starting with what the message actually is: I don't think the author intended to tell us that a disabled life is not worth living and I would never accuse her of that. She made an effort to show that Will's life could be a good life and I have a feeling most readers understood that. The problematic part comes in where she presents it as a (psychologically) normal thing for him to still want to die.
This reenforces very dangerous assumptions society already has about people with disabilities. Many (able bodied) people have commented that they completely understand Will and if they were in his position they'd want to die too.
They are wrong. And I can say this, because there is actual data on this - the vast majority of people with similar disabilities as Will do not want to die. They adjust - with time and the right support and treatment.
So when a disabled person has suicidal thoughts it is not our duty as a society to "empower" them to take their own life. It's our duty to give them the best possible care, treatment and support so they stop being suicidal.
One argument frequently brought up is that this is the story of just one man. That it's not meant to be representative of all disabled people. While this may be a valid argument for any single story, the problem remains that these kinds of stories are vastly overrepresented in mainstream media. When was the last time a major Hollywood movie featured a quadriplegic lead character who didn't want to die? When you're creating content that has such an impact on such a gigantic audience, you cannot flinch from the responsibility of the message you're sending by claiming that it's "just one story". It isn't just one story. You're influencing people's opinions about disability and suicide on a huge scale. And you're doing it in the worst possible way.
