the personal journal of Brent Stewart
One of the coolest things is having your kids suggest books. I’ve tried to share my love of reading with them. In fact, we read to each child (we have four) every night until they were in middle school. I’ve read everything from Goodnight Moon to Harry Potter, Little House of the Praerie to Angelina Ballerina, and treasured that time with them. I’m proud of my kids and all that they’ve accomplished, but I tend to believe that parents have a lot less impact than we’d like to think. That said, I see a straight-line connection between the time we spent reading together and their academic success, their ethical centeredness, and their continued love of reading.
My youngest suggested Scythe by Neal Shusterman, and tells me that Shusterman is one of his favorite authors. So Neal, if you’re reading this, thanks. Scythe is set in a future where humanity has become effectively immortal - even major trauma only results in someone being “deadish” and revived. Scythes are a form of population control, but there’s some rumination on the value of life and the way in which death provides that value.
I enjoy young adult books. There’s a certain straightforward viewpoint, earnestness, and interest in big concepts that are very approachable. I think Harry Potter was just a class in plotting and world building, for instance. But I also read Hunger Games and found it disturbing and disappointing.
In keeping with my practice for fiction, I’m not going to give a detailed review of the book. I’m just going to answer two questions:
Yes. I read it in two days, including staying up too late last night. I was prepared to be uneasy with a book about people whose job is to kill, but death is an important part of life and holds a certain fascination for young readers. I thought the treatment was interesting. It is strictly from the perspective of Scythes, so we get only hints of how other folks feel about the process, but the different thoughts and approaches that Scythes take shows a thoughtful approach. Plus, there’s a clear through-line of tension through the book that draws the reader in.
Yes.
In Emile Jean-Jacques Rousseau argues that children cannot appreciate things like religion and philosophy until they understand mortality, a moment he put in the mid-teens in the 1700s. I suspect that younger readers are going to miss a level of this book for the same reason. Even on that level, it’s a good story and there’s a lot that they will enjoy. It might be interesting to read this book at 13 and again at 18 and talk about what changed. I had that exact experience with Stranger in a Strange Land.
Not all parents appreciated Harry Potter (which frankly is beyond me), so I strongly suspect that some parents are going to object to a story about appointed killers. There are death scenes, but they’re not over played and are only detailed enough to reveal the character of the people involved. I could see the Hollywood version playing that angle up and turning this into a pornography of violence, but I didn’t see that in the book. I also think that some young adults, by temperment, are going to find this disturbing.
I enjoyed it and thought it had something to say. My son liked it and I’m looking forward to discussing it with him. As with anything our children consume, I think parents know their kids and how they process things and will need to show judgement about the right time to share our suggestion with their young adult.