I really enjoyed The Perks of Being a Wallflower. I think students would be able to relate to some of the characters, but I think the most important aspect of this story is that students can learn about how people think. Charlie might not be a character everyone can relate to on account of his being a wallflower. Students who are outgoing might see Charlie as people in Charlie's class see him at times--a freak. Since the story is told from Charlie's point of view I think students would be able to at least understand why he is the way he is if they are unable to relate to him. This teaches students that everyone has a story and no story is the same.
I have something I would like everyone to weigh-in on. Why does Charlie choose to name some characters and not others? Charlie's sister, his parents, and his sister's boyfriend remain nameless in his letters. Charlie has no problem naming almost everyone else in his life so it is not on account of remaining anonymous. He even chooses to name insignificant characters like people he sees when he is out and about who are only mentioned in one letter. As I sit here writing this I am trying to rule out the reasons for Charlie's nameless family. It can't be because they are the closest to him because he would probably argue his friends are the closest and they all have names. The only reason I can think of is Charlie does not refer to his parents by their first names because he does not do that in real life, and he mentions that he writes like he speaks. His sister remaining nameless is not explained by this however because most siblings refer to each other by name (most of the time).
I agree with students reading the book and gaining a better understanding of people who don't blend in with the crowd. Knowing this might actually let them know that it's not nice to be prejiduce about these people and just classify them as weird/crazy. But as to why Charlie never named his parents, I believe that may have to do with the begining of the book when he referred to being vague about names. Since the narrative is written in first person, the reader is unlikely to get confused with who these people are.
ReplyDeleteI am also wondering about the choice to not name certain characters. It mainly seemed that the characters not named were his family or people related to his family (like his sister's boyfriend). Maybe these people were too close to Charlie and naming them could hurt them? He wouldn't want anybody to find out about his sister's abortion or the history of abuse in his parents families.
ReplyDeleteI did find it interesting that they were named in the film. His sister was named Candice and her boyfriend was referred to as Ponytail Derek the entire film. While the filmic medium changes the necessity for names, if Chbosky really wanted them to remain nameless they could have. He made some interesting and intriguing choices!
-Allison