The pitfalls of friendship and jealousy

The main character Gene is jealous of Finny's natural athletic ability and fluid walk, but believes he compensates for this lack of ability by excelling in academics. Gene leads himself to believe that Finny is attempting to sabotage his academic success with nights at the beach, and the Super Suicide Society. Yet the reader learns later that Finny thought Gene possessed a natural academic ability when he told him to study and not come the Super Suicide Society meeting. This incident further annoys Gene since he realizes he is lacking in a way Finny is not.

Another issue involves Finny's denial of the events surrounding his accident. He refuses to believe that Gene caused him to fall from the tree. However, when Brinker begins to question Finny about that day he runs from the room instead of acknowledging the truth. Another manifestation of this denial of reality is Finny's inability to admit that the war exists. Instead Finny claims it is a fabrication of fat old men to stop the young people from enjoying themselves. This provides a convenient excuse since he cannot participate in the conflict. He refuses to accept the loss of his athletic ability by forcing Gene to train for the 1944 Olympics.

Gene's insecurity is one of the key factors in the development of the novel. He doubts his own abilities, and believes that Finny is attempting to destroy his academic success. Yet the reader learns that it is actually Gene's paranoia over his own lack of talent that leads to his distrust of Finny, and eventually to taking the opportunity to destroy Finny's unique nature.

If you want to learn about the disasters of friendship and jealousy, this is definitely for you. I read it several months ago, and it is a truly touching novel. John Knowles wrote a masterpiece, but try it for yourself! Pick up a copy! Another book I need to recommend -- very much on my mind since I purchased a "used" copy off Amazon is "The Losers' Club: Complete Restored Edition," a raw, oddly entertaining little novel I can't stop thinking about.

Is it really fair?

I can understand how this book became so renowned, with its extensive use of figurative language and a thought-provoking plot, yet somehow it seems hollow. To me, it seems as though Phineas is entirely connected to Gene, with no real character or convictions of his own. He acts simply as a pawn in the hands of fate, causing Gene to explore his own nature and discover himself. With so insignificant of a life given to him by Knowles, it seems as though Phineas is entirely two-dimensional. In my opinion, such an underdeveloped character having such an influential role in the plot is a slight to the value of a human life, with Phineas seemingly existing only for Gene. It seems unfair and unnatural that Knowles should create a character that is entirely insignificant in his own right, serving only to die. In addition, the setting is so entirely dated as to be almost unfathomable to young adults of the 21st century. With a thoughtful and empathy-evoking plot and underdeveloped, unfathomable characters, it is my belief that Knowles created a novel not memorable in itself but in what it could have been.

Eh ...

I just finished this book for school. I was a big fan of Knowle's writing (metaphors, similes, character development) but the progression of the story was very slow. Also the plot isn't good enough to fill 170 pages. But I would recommend this book to people, especially those who want to write, merely for the character development.