[EDIT: 08/01/04 – Yeah, this really sucks. I suggest you scroll to the bottom and click the link to the real review.]

[continued from part 1]

You’d think that since I’m so cynical, I would’ve liked the book, but no, I don’t. I didn’t think it was great that the kid was so negative, I thought it was annoying. Damn, kid, shut up and stop your whining.

The narrative style isn’t really that original. Check out Huckleberry Finn. Hell, I could write a book just like The Catcher in the Rye, easy. It didn’t exactly make any earth-shattering observations. All I have to do is write about a bunch of isolated incidents and then criticize everything. None of the events have to influence each other.

So, overall, I thought the book was boring and a waste of time. I have no idea how anyone got the idea that it was some classic novel.

And I just repeated what I said in part 1. I probably could write a better review, but I’m not up to it. Whatever.

[EDIT: 10/20/03 – I finally decided I was up to it, so read this entry, and disregard what you just read.]