Book Review: "TTYL"

Lauren Myracle's Internet Girls series isn't exactly anything new. In fact, the books have been floating around for several years now at least, and I just finally got around to reading them myself finally. I have heard a LOT of mixed reviews about them, from both sides of the controversy surrounding them, so I finally decided I had to see for myself whether the criticism was well warranted, or if that was, in fact, yet another instance of worried mothers' groups getting all bent out of shape over practically nothing...yet again. As I was perusing aimlessly through my local library's shelves, I happened to find all three books of the trilogy sitting side by side on the bottom shelf in the teen room (shut up, don't judge me). As they're fairly thin paperbacks, I snagged up all three. I'll be writing reviews about the other two as well shortly, but for now, let's just stick to the first book, TTYL.

As a long-time patron of the internet, and especially of AOL Instant Messenger, the book cover alone heralded to me and to my borderline internet addiction. Anyone who's used the program knows that the emoticons above the title of the book are snagged directly from AIM itself. Likewise, the style of the book is just that: written in instant message style. Cover to cover. Every page has a border around it to make it appear as though it were an instant messenger window, and painstaking effort has been placed into making every page look as though it were an instant messenger chat transcript between friends, complete with date and time of the conversation. I can't say as I've ever seen a book written quite this way before, and outside of this series, it's questionable whether the style will ever be seen again. Regardless, I tend to like things that are a little bit different, and I give the publishers top marks for all the effort they placed into this. That said...

The target audience for these books are young teenagers. And this is where the controversy comes in, because I even have to admit - there's plenty of things in this book that are not appropriate for such a young audience. Now, this is also where I can understand both sides of the arguments about these books, and I would never imply that a book should be banned, ever. (After all, this comes from the girl who's re-read Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita more times than I can count, despite its VERY controversial subject matter and personal convictions against real life occurences like those portrayed in the story, but I digress.) I believe that it should be a case by case basis decided by the parents of younger teenagers whether they feel comfortable letting their children read these, as sure, there's plenty of parents out there who'd be absolutely appalled by what's between these covers, but for every parent like that, there's another who wouldn't feel that it's all that big of a deal. (For the record, I fall more towards this side of the line myself, but I'm also not a parent.) I'm in my late 20's; it hasn't been all that long since *I* was a teenager. Overprotective though some parents may be, that will never stop teenagers from talking about (and sometimes, engaging in) racy and inappropriate things. It's when many people start getting their very first exposure to raunch, sex, and drugs. I'm not condoning anything other than the fact that girls talk, and there's not a thing in the world that will stop these sort of topics from coming up in their conversations at some point of another. The story revolves around three high school girls; Maddie, Angela, and Zoe, who all share everything via their instant message conversations.

With all this in mind, I have a 13 year old sister who I feel quite protective of myself. I paused many times as I was reading this book to think about just how I'd feel if I knew she were reading something like this, and found myself growing pretty defensive. I'm by *no* means a prude whatsoever (anyone who's ever talked to me knows this within the first 5 minutes) and yet, it's quite possibly the first time I have ever felt that something might legitimately not be appropriate for its intended demographic. Everyone is going to have their own set of opinions here, and it's easy to preach, but...oh hell. Let me let the book do the talking for itself. I took notes as I read about notable passages I felt ought to be quoted that might help some parents make up their own minds about whether they feel the book is appropriate or not for their child.

On PAGE TWO (yes, you read that right!!!), we already have a conversation revolving around pubic hair going on:

SnowAngel: come on, it would suck to have your friends drop u like that. leigh has a blog on grrl.com, and supposedly she posted an entire enrty about how susie needs to shave her pubes. isn't that awful?
mad maddie: have u read it?
SnowAngel: not yet, but I will
mad maddie: my brother's new girlfriend doesn't shave her pits OR her pubes. he brought her to this family party at lake lanier last weekend, and she wore a bikini.
SnowAngel: that's sick
mad maddie: it was basically like she had a pelt. the pops pulled me aside and said in this really loud whisper, "guess she forgot to mow the lawn, huh?"
SnowAngel: SICK!!!
mad maddie: he was drunk, of course
SnowAngel: i could NEVER not shave my pubes. that is just gross. but even if i did have a pubic hair problem, which i do not, u and zoe would still luv me, right?
mad maddie: hmm...

Sure, the passage isn't all that completely terrible, and even a little humorous. But at the same time, you can of course understand the controversy, both because of the nature of something like this (and being on only the second page of the book!! What does this say for the tone of the rest of the book, you know?) and because it may lead young, impressionable minds who are already feeling self conscious about their changing bodies to feel like they HAVE to be a certain way, lest they feel like they're gross to the rest of the planet. Let's take another example here. By page 6, we already have hinted conversation about oral sex and a perverted teacher:

SnowAngel: hey, zoe!
zoegirl: hi, angela. how r ya?
SnowAngel: ooo, i am good. wanna know why?
SnowAngel: cuz--drumroll, please--ROB TYLER is in my french class!!! *breathes deeply, with hand to throbbing bosom* on friday we have to do "une dialogue" together. i get to ask for a bite of his hot dog.
zoegirl: u do not
SnowAngel: yes, and it will be tres sexy. he is SO cute, zoe. today he was wearing this yellow button-down that was quite unexpected on a retro boy like him. he had the sleeves rolled up, and i'm telling u, he's got the greatest forearms.
zoegirl: does he, now?
SnowAngel: it's from doing construction work all summer. isn't that cool that he worked construction? it's so...manly.
zoegirl: sounds like u guys actually talked.
SnowAngel: our seats r right next to each other. and tonite when i do my homework, i get to fantasize about his summer sausage. *nudge, nudge, wink, wink*
zoegirl: great, while i'll be reading 5000 pages of The Great Gatsby and answering probing discussion questions about the american dream. mr. h expects us to read a book a week. can u believe that?
SnowAngel: like that'll be a problem for u.
SnowAngel: did he stare at your boobs?
zoegirl: who, mr. h?
SnowAngel: maddie and i had him for journalism last year, and he was always staring at some girl's boobs, mostly maddie's. he was always "reading" her shirts.
zoegirl: ewww!
SnowAngel: so watch out. he makes a big deal of being all Christian, but what that MEANS is that he's majorly sexually repressed. whereas i, on the other hand, am not sexually repressed at all. speaking of, better start practicing for rob. bye!

Yeeeeeah...it's like that. But does it stop there? Oh, no. No, no, no. That would be far too easy. No, by page 11, we've got talk about female ejaculation...

SnowAngel: anyway, jana's totally backstabbing margaret cheney. did u know that?
mad maddie: exsqueeze me?
SnowAngel: it almost makes me feel sorry for margaret, cuz she and jana r supposed to be best buds. but i guess it's margaret's own fault for ever trusting jana in the first place.
mad maddie: explain
Snow Angel: well, i was in the bathroom after 5th period, right? and jana and terri were there, and jana was going on about what a bitch margaret was for flirting with rex saunders. i guess rex is like jana's property cuz they went to some party together over the summer. jana was all, "she is such a whore," and then she lowered her voice like she was telling some big secret and said something REALLY gross.
mad maddie: and that would be...?
SnowAngel: omg
SnowAngel: well, she said that margaret...er...ejaculates.
mad maddie: WHAT?!!!
SnowAngel: well, actually she said she squirts when she comes. and then she was like, "shit, i can't believe i told u. u've gotta swear not to tell, terri. terri, u've gotta swear!" while the whole time i was 2 sings over going, "HELLO! do u even know i'm here?"
mad maddie: that is disgusting
SnowAngel: i know. i was like, "margaret is your friend, u asshole. how would u like it if she went around spreading rumors about u?"
mad maddie: i meant the other part. about margaret.
SnowAngel: oh. well, yeah.
SnowAngel: some girls really do, tho. i read it in our bodies, ourselves.
mad maddie: ick

Now, I don't know about you, but for a book that's aimed for young teenagers, having a book that even in the first handful of pages has more content that's questionable than content that isn't seems...questionable! If done correctly, and any all of these topics could have been addressed without it seeming contrived or like the author was trying to throw in a bunch of random sexually themed conversations just because it's a well known fact that sex sells. But in the opening pages, doing it that quickly? Just out of nowhere? I don't know, it just strikes me as being really weird. But, that's not the only example in this book seeming like it's trying just a little too hard to be authentic, and ends up coming off as retarded and maybe even a little pathetic. For instance, the following passage would never happen:

SnowAngel: hey, doug must have gotten off-line, cuz his name's off my buddy list. maybe i'll call him just to chat so he'll know i'm not a jerk. and then afterward i'll call rob and turn on the ol' charm, so that he'll know i'm NOT disinterested.

 ...okay. Someone may point out that someone must've gone offline, but having to clarify HOW they know it? And explaining it's "cuz his name's off my buddy list"? Trying too hard. Just, too too hard. The person you're talking to on the other end knows how the damn program works. It's not like you'd EVER have to explain that to someone! Oy... Also, the use of asterisking to make it seem authentic? Yes, girls really do asterisk. I do so quite often, actually. (Both in my legitimate IMs and in my roleplaying games, but I digress...) However. The way that they go about it in this book is WAAAAAAY over the top. Generally it's a couple, maybe a few words. It's not all super descriptive in the way that this book portrays it, generally. It's quite rare that it's a lengthy asterisk for a typical run of the mill conversation. (Roleplaying, on the other hand - before anyone sends me any comments about this - uses asterisks every time your character performs some sort of action. Just clarifying for anyone who's never indulged, because I am that nerdy.) While we're at it, since when does everyone on the planet - or at least, in the universe of this book - use their real name as part of their screen names?? I've only known VERY few people who've done this. My own "jennionenote" screen name is not my typical one I've used the majority of my internet life. It was a play on words of the Judy Garland song, "Johnny One Note" just to change things up a little, but it is the only time I've ever personally had a screen name with my name in it. And as far as instant messengers are concerned, I think I've only known 4, maybe 5 people ever, out of HUNDREDS (if not thousands) of people I've chatted with online over the years who used their name as part of their screen name. Another hit against authenticity...

Another small thing that grated on my own nerves as a gripe, but only because it's an actual pet peeve of mine, is the overusage of chatspeak. Now, I'm not talking about acronyms like "LOL" or "BRB" or anything like that. I'm talking about the lazy "u" instead of "you", "c" instead of "see", etc. For the most part, there's a complete and total lack of capitalization. In the real world, for the most part, a complete lack of capitalization all the time when you're talking to someone seems to convey great disinterest in talking to you, so this is why that bothers me. Now, people do all of this on cellphones, or even Twitter, because the number of characters you're allowed to use per message is so limited. But on IM, where there's really not much of a limit (unless if you literally type paragraphs and paragraphs - which basically only happens if you're a roleplayer anyway)? There's no excuse for this. It takes you what, half a second the type the extra few letters? I'll tell you what, it makes me read your message slower rather than faster, so your efforts in saving time really don't pay off whatsoever. Teenagers generally DO NOT type like that. Middle schoolers who're trying too hard to be cool like their own personal visions of teenagers? Maybe. But not real teenagers. Sorry. (Either that, or maybe I'm more of a nerd than I thought and was just blessed with exceptionally literate friends who actually put effort and thought into their instant messages...)

So this brings me to still yet another point. 90% of the type of drama that these girls seem to endure day in, day out, is SO middle school drama, not high school drama. (As are their solutions.) There's a huge difference here. I find it hard to believe that anyone who has experienced this firsthand in their own life going through those ages could ever forget it and mix up the two, but I suppose that's just how it goes. I don't care who you are, this is not an accurate portrayal of the high school experience.

Likewise, if we're talking about the author seemingly not knowing the territory as well as she claims to, here's some more perfect examples of being both dated and just plain irrelevent in today's teenage world. Talking about having to get off the computer because someone was waiting for a phonecall. Ummmmm....this book was published in 2006, who did Lauren Myracle think she was kidding here? Just about anyone who had the internet by that point either was on DSL or wi-fi - or both. Nobody was still using freakin' dial-up anymore! And as even more years have passed since the book was written now, it seems even more wildly dated in today's increasingly ever-digital world. You're not going to sell anybody on that kind of a mistake. Similarly, talking about That 70's Show as if it were a brand new series is also not very convincing for trying to sound hip and modern. Unless this book was written almost a good ten years before it ever got published, then what's up with that?? The book also dates itself with mentions of Geocities, although there was no way the author could have known that the service would be defunct just a short 2 years after the book was published, so I can let that example slide. But as a reader, it was something that mentally had me going "wow, that takes me back..."

So now that we're back in the proper realm of talking about things in the book seeming non-realistic, let's delve into this a little more here. The way the girls are ALWAYS taking online quizzes and demanding each other take them and share their results - NOT realistic. These are the sort of things you tend to see pop up with the results banners on people's Livejournals, and that's about it. Nobody's going to sit there and harass you, day in, day out, to take really stupid quizzes with you. Nobody. If they did, something tells me it wouldn't be long before you'd go hunting for that 'block' button.

Just as one wouldn't really go harassing their friends to take really stupid online quizzes on a daily basis and get all butt-hurt if they didn't, one wouldn't obsess to their friends about what they're wearing to different places. Okay yes. I know that teen girls are obsessed with clothes, fashion, and what to wear, but NOBODY is going to sit there and type out every last article and accessory of clothing they're wearing down to the tiniest detail, plus the styling of their hair and what perfume they're wearing, EVERY time they go out. Even the little fashionistas don't go about it in the way the girls in this book do. It's hard to explain unless you actually see it for yourself. But it struck me as EXTREMELY odd every time it came up - almost as odd as one of the girls flat out admitting to her friends about her chin hair. (....because that's normal to talk about with your friends at that age, right??)

Now, this next bit, I know I'm biased about and I've spoken many, many times about different things on this very matter, but yet again in this book too, there is just waaaaaaay too much emphasis placed on the notion of losing your virginity. The whole 'the sooner you lose it, the sooner you'll be cool!!!' attitude that I've grown to loathe in modern culture. WHY everyone is in SUCH a rush to lose it, I'll never understand. I know people are trying to fit in, but... how did society do SUCH a 180 in such a short amount of time, from placing so much emphasis on *keeping* your virginity until your wedding night to now, where seemingly everyone on the planet wants the bragging rights of losing it ASAP? I hate that. I absolutely hate that, and I think that it's terrible that a book that's aimed for such young, impressionable girls has this recurring message throughout the entire thing.

I also resent the recurring gay slurs throughout the book. Granted, the author tries to basically save her own ass by having one of the characters defend against it and say how terrible it is to make a comment like that, but the slurs are STILL there in print, and the story very easily could have done without those and not lost a thing. I both realize and acknowledge the fact that this is another personal bias of mine, just like the last point, but it still really bothers me and made me put the book down a couple of times because it pissed me off. There's enough homophobia in the world as it is, it doesn't need to be perpetuated even more.

There's other points I could bring up as well, but this review's getting rather lengthy and book-ish itself, so I ought to wrap this up. Anyhow, I do like that because of the style in which the book's written, you can easily pick it up and put it down at a moment's notice without having the whole 'get back into reading mode' experience there usually is with more orthodox books. It also helps you breeze through a lot of pages quickly, which is another nice point I can give to it.

Overall, I really don't feel like I can give this book anything better than a lukewarm review at best. Maybe it's just me, but I crave more intellectually stimulating material rather than non-stop gossipy fodder. I wish I could say that I hope the other two books in the series will be better, but I can't say as I'm exactly holding my breath here.