Boy Meets Boy by David Levithan stimulates alot of interesting discussion about the role of the novel in homosexual culture. The book takes place in utopian town, where people of all sexual fantasies are embraced and celebrated. The main character, Paul, is caught in a stereotypical YA romance novel situation as he finds caught between the affections of two boys, Kyle and Noah. In the end of the novel, Paul ends up with Noah, and the reader is given the same satisfactory feeling that most YA romance novels give as they neatly tie up all of the loose endings into a big happy bow. The novel is relevant because it serves as a template for new homosexual or bisexual fantasy YA novels. Until recently, anyone with a sexuality other than "hetero" didn't have very many examples for what a relationship could be. Levithan's novel tells readers that gay relationships do not have to be taboo, secretive, shallow; they can be romantic, fulfilling, and/or passionate just like any other relationship. I think this sends an encouraging message to young people of marginalized sexualities.
There are some things that raised questions in my mind thought. Was it necessary for the novel to be set in a utopian setting? Does that subliminally tell readers that non-hetero romantic relationships are only possible in an idealized world, and not in the real world? Could the novel have been set in a non-utopian setting and achieved the same goals?
Also, Tony comes out to his parents in a non-utopian town nearby, but his journey is much more difficult than Paul's because his parents are religious zealots and do not respect his right to choose his own sexuality. Tony's location outside of a utopian town suggests that his situation is closer to reality than Paul's, who has loving and accepting parents. I think Levithan made the right choice with Tony's location; his situation suggests to the reader that his circumstance may closer echo real life, and although he has difficulties, he overcomes them (though not quite entirely) by the end of the novel.
All in all, I liked the book and think it would stimulate good discussion in a classroom.
I agree about Tony's reality being outside the utopia, and I believe he was a great character in this novel for just that purpose.
ReplyDeleteI think you've raised an excellent point. The author almost undermines his message by saying that the only happy gay relationships have to take place in a fantasy world. Though, at the same time, I think it's almost impossible--even in the most accepting of company to not struggle with the potential intolerance someone could face. While it is possible to tell a story in the "real world" about a happy gay couple, I think it would be unrealistic in that context to not address the heavy decision to "come out". Even to one's self, "coming out" in the most accepting environments could be an immense struggle.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Susan about Levithan almost saying that happy gay couples can only exist in this Utopia. However, I loved how he presented Tony to us, and how we learned so much about him and his struggles with his parents. He recognizes that his parents love him and that is why they are being so hard on him, which I think is important and our students might be able to reflect on that in their own lives. I also like how he showed the parents coming around--letting Paul come over, but only in the kitchen--being accepting but still protective and not abandoning those deep, religious fears.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with this being a book that can spark good discussion in the classroom. Being a high school classroom, there is no way any student can relate to a school filled with biker cheerleaders and a quarterback homecoming queen. If he wants to get the word across I think he should have made the story a little more credible.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nicole that this book could definitely spark good conversations (or maybe even not-so-good ones, but the idea is that the students would be talking about it, which is more than what happens now). Although I think there would be some snickers and maybe some immaturity, I think if it is approached the right way by the teachers, it has real value. And along with the question of whether or not this novel could have been done in a non-utopian society, I don't believe it was possible. I think that in order for Levithan to get his point across that homosexual love is no different than heterosexual love, the stereotypes need to be removed. And Tony's role in the novel is to bring us back to a reality, as you stated. He serves that purpose that the utopian society can't and doesn't.
ReplyDelete