"The Drummer Boy of Shiloh" by Ray Bradbury

The Drummer Boy of Shiloh, by Ray Bradbury, is a short story about a young drummer-boy, named Joby, the night before the Battle of Shiloh during the Civil War. It describes his nervousness and anxiety over fighting in a war at his age of fourteen, and how a general helps him overcome his fear. I think one of the themes in the short story is that often we, people, or armies, are usually more alike than different.

           

One example of the theme in the story is that people are usually more alike than different is that that Ray Bradbury never gives the protagonist, Joby, a side in the Civil War. The author talks about the soldiers and all their nervousness, hopefulness and feelings, but no one ever even briefly mentions the North or South. The author did this intentionally, as this lets us, the reader, a clear view of the emotions of both sides of the War without letting our personal opinions of the motives of either sides. The story is not a judgment of the North of the South, but just telling the story of a boy at war. This is one reason a theme in this short story is that we are more alike than different.

           

Another example the theme in the story is how people are more alike than different is that the author describes the soldiers in the same way. For instance, the general relates the soldiers, saying that, “I fear it will be full of boys again…”, representing each side as only boys, also showing the innocence in both sides in the Civil War. The general also says, “Counting both sides, there’s a hundred thousand men- give of take a thousand- out there tonight, not one as can spot a sparrow off a tree, or knows a horse clod from a Minie ball.” The author is trying to relate the sides further by using their innocence, again, and their inexperience.

           

In conclusion, one of the major themes of The Drummer Boy of Shiloh, by Ray Bradbury, is we are more alike than we are more alike than we are different. This is clearly represented in the story as referring to two sides of a battle, or two armies, but this can also apply to everyday life. People of different religions, morals or lifestyles are probably more alike than they think. I think that this feeds into a really important lesson in tolerance. Even when you’re ‘at war’ with someone, literally shown in the short story, you can still be quite a lot alike. If people can find common ground with each other, they can build up tolerance for all the things they have different. I don’t exactly know if that was a lesson the Bradbury was trying to teach, but it’s really helpful lesson to take out of the story.

           

I can really relate with this story. I argue a lot with my brothers, and when I try to calm down and look at the argument in a more responsible and calm way, I have to thin about how they could just be expressing their opinion, just like I am. I have to find common ground, either to base a further argument on or to stop the argument all together. When I get angry with someone for something, I have to think about why they did it. I could have the same idiosyncrasies that they have, and can be awkward or annoying in the same way. I just don’t realize it because I’m myself. We all have to find common ground with people so we can get along. That’s how we all build relationships and friendships.

"The Rivals" by Daisy Whitney

**Spoilers!

First of all, I just want to say this was an amazing book. Besides the ending, which was fine, I just really wanted to Ms. Merritt, the oblivious and frustrating dean of the school, be forced to kick them out, possibly waking her up as well as all the doubters of the Mockingbirds. I really just like the whole mood of the series in general so far. For a seemingly silly topic (a book about a student vigilante group could have easily turned into a cheesy superhero-esque book), Daisy Whitney handled it really well, even with the introduction of a 'villain' organization. It deals with a lot of fresh and important issues for teens today too, like date-rape and academic drugs.

One thing I thought was really great in this book was it's conflict. The conflict tested the main character, Alex. She was a victim in her own case, so she immediately tried to help any other "victims", like Beat (who ended up being a terrible person), or Delaney, and later Theo. But then the supposed criminal was just like her- Theo was an aspiring artist- He loved dancing more than his life. It was his life. Alex could relate to this, as she loved piano. This made it harder for her to believe the terrible things being accused of him. This drove her to make silly mistakes- like not convicting her friend Maia, when she was suspected. I mean, I feel bad about saying this, as Maia was framed, but still, Alex was worrying about being respected as leader, right? She kept making stupid mistakes, and didn't function as a court should, even if it's just a really screwed up private boarding school. Thought this did all lead up to the right perpetrator, she still should have tried to be more professional if she wanted to be taken seriously.

That's one of the few things that annoyed me about the book. Alex messes up multiple times, but it all ends up well, with basically no consequences, and none of the characters care about it. The book is all about justice, but not much justice is done to right the wrongs that Alex did. Everything is just ending up dandy. The whole book is about how if adults were basically taken out of a kids world, how would they function? Even with adults in control of punishment, there is never a perfect ending. It's a disappointing change in a very harsh and realistic book that the book has a fairy-tale ending.

Of course, that is another thing that made the book more realistic, all the mistakes that the main character makes. It makes you relate more to the characters, and feel for them.

And on the note of themes (kind of), I want to talk about a theme in the book. The book really, I think, shows well what kids would do if they didn't have adults to control them. There would be the ones who just cause havoc, and bully, and cheat because they can get away with it. Then there were those that would rise up and try to fight. I kind of noticed this in the Hunger Games, but in a different way. When they didn't have a fit government, the people of Panem rose to the occasion, or specifically one entity/thing did (Distric 13/the separate districts), just like Alex's sister did when she created the Mockingbirds.

Overall, I thought this book was great, and I'm really excited to see if there's another one! (Though I doubt it.)

Update: "The Rivals", by Daisy Whitney

Right now I'm reading The Rivals, by Daisy Whitney, sequel to, The Mockingbirds. It's a great book, and I really love how Daisy Whitney stays strong with the events from the first book to the second.

**Slight spoilers
For one thing, the conflict in Alex's heart is so realistic, and painful to watch her go through. Just seeing her have the images and memories of Carter flash through the head of Alex whenever she's with Martin  is really hard, even for a reader with no experience in this issue. Alex's inner conflict of proving herself carries on to the second book with the same fears and basis, but a totally different goal, which is amazing. I really dislike it in books when former conflicts or problems that the character had are kind of throw out. For instance, the thing that drove Alex to prove herself in the first book was that she didn't want to be called a 'whore', or a 'slut' when she was date-raped. It still affected her when people didn't believe her, but she wanted to clear her name and serve justice to Carter for what he did. In the second book, so far, Alex wants to prove to her fellow Mockingbirds that though she was appointed because she was a former victim who worked with the Mockingbirds, she could hold her own as a leader because she had that experience, and can deal with others who feel victimized. Not just to people who doubt her (Parker), but to the people she knows she can trust as well (Martin, Amy).

The 'case' itself in the second book is very interesting because though Alex still wants to help, the case has no clear victim(s). Frankly, I think there was no better way of doing a sequel, because it would have been, though probably interesting, no where near as interesting as Alex's conflict now. She tries to investigate, but so far, she's continually frustrated because she's only relying on her previous feelings about her case with Carter. She's not taking in the whole picture, and being a little stupid sometimes because she trusts too much in the people who she thinks are victimized.

That's another thing I like about this book so far. Alex is wrong. I really don't like it when characters just guess everything right, or are wrong for stupid reasons, and refuse to believe anything else. Alex knows she's wrong, but she can't help it, like with her frustration with Parker accusing Maia. She let her personal attachment clear her judgement, making it easier to relate to her. It was kinda of frustrating for me seeing Alex make silly mistakes for no good reason, but it just shows that the book is good enough it can make you clearly react to the character's actions.

Overall, so far this book is really, really good, and I can't wait to finish it!

"The Future of Us", By Carolyn Mackler and Jay Asher

"The Future of Us", by Carolyn Mackler and Jay Asher, is about two high school students and ex-best friends who discover modern-day Facebook on an early internet browser in 1996. Personally, I thought this was  a great book that commented on the almost obsession teenagers have with social networking today. I thought that a theme in the book was that teens and kids shouldn't worry so much about the future, and live in today.

For instance, one of the main conflicts (or conflict starters? I don't know) in the book was that the character, Emma, is messing with the time stream, changing things about her life that she doesn't like, such as her husbands, her job, even small things like where she lives. She makes unwarranted assumptions about the future based on 420 characters or less wall posts. She experiments with the small changes, or 'ripples', in her time to the Facebook's future because she's insanely concerned about having a perfect life in the future. Now I don't know much about college applications, which I can assume are much more stressful than high school applications, but I can relate to stress over the future. So many kids in my grade and really riding on one specific high school they want to go to, or freaking out over hypothetically not getting into a high school (not saying that I'm not), and I think "The Future of Us" is trying to say that you can still have a happy life if not everything goes exactly the way you want it to.

The book also says something about spending too much time on the internet, which is pretty funny, because the book is set in 1996, and the problem is really massive in 2012. 

I think this book was great, and had a nice mix of romance and great concept, as so many seemingly cool books get lost in sappy love triangles and obsessive girlfriends these days. Jay Asher is the bomb, and I'm definitely more interested in checking out Carolyn Mackler's books.