Monster

Monster by Walter Dean Myers

What is a "monster"? Is is an internal quality, an external characteristic?

How fair is our justice system? Is it really free from prejudice? Can one really over-look stereotypes placed by society when trying to judge the guilt or innocence of someone sitting before them accused of a crime?

How do you find yourself in a world who is trying to define you as they see you? Can you fight against what other people say you are to show who you think you are?

There are so many questions that arise in Walter Dean Myers' Monster. The list of questions here only begins to get at what is addressed in this novel.

I read this novel for my Young Adult Literature class, and I'm glad that it was one of the chosen texts for the class. I learned a lot about how I see the world and how it can be different for different people. I think that growing up in a rural Iowa town I certainly was naive about how things worked in "the real world". It's not that our small farming community wasn't "real", but it certainly wasn't near as diverse as much of the U.S. population and didn't come anywhere near addressing the diversity found globaly.

I think that one of the most interesting things about this book was the authors choice in style and formatting. This book contains journal entries as well as movie scenes which include the dialogue as well as the setting. There is certainly something different about reading a novel only from the outward perspective. Might the reader feel differently about the characters if they knew what they were thinking and feeling on the inside? We get a few small glimpses of this from Steve's point of view (he's the main character) through his journal entries, but most of the book is comprised of the scene scripts. We see the trial through the eyes of the jury. We see and hear what they see and hear and we get very little else. What we do get outside of what the jury perceives is not even always helpful as it often presents contradictions and mixed feelings. In the end, the reader is left to decide along with the jury whether or not they believe Steve to be guilty. And for me at least, "the jury" is still out.

This book is an excellent book to use in a classroom and with the multitude of resources available it can be used to discuss any number of themes and elements. There is some material that has been questioned in schools, but I would like to address that as well. Writers are often trying to conserve their words. Words are chosen wisely (if the text is written well) so that they do not become excessive but still get the authors point across and convey a message to the reader. Reading things in a book (such as the scene in the book where the main character is trying to ignore the sexual harassment happening on the other side of the cell from him) are placed there to better help the reader. I didn't read that scene and find myself disgusted with the author for including it, but rather, I found myself more empathetic toward Steve and his situation. I certainly think that parents have a right to know what their children are reading, but why ban them from reading it and keep them blind to the situation until the time when they may have to confront it in some way without the guidance and controlled setting offered in a classroom? Why not read the scene (or even the whole book) with your child and discuss the issue? Why not talk to your student and let them know what you think they need to about the situation? Answer their questions. Talk to them. But don't tried to hide it from them. Don't let them ignore it and don't rob them of the experience and understanding that they will gain from the book.