Alexie VS Peters – Win Luna

In comparing Julie Anne Peter’s book Luna to Sherman Alexie’s Absolutely true Diary of a Part Time Indian. It is really no surprise that despite Alexie’s better crafted writing style, I enjoyed Peter’s Luna way way better just on relateability. People accuse the characters of being pretty one dimensional in the book but considering how many one dimensional people there are in the world sometimes to me “one dimensional” characters seem more realistic and plausible than those that lend themselves to better crafted writing.

Sometimes I think that being a Lesbian I will identify more with guy stuff, I know some lesbians identify and get along with guys fairly well but for me it’s all about the ladies all the time. Most books told from a male perspective just do not interest me, I date girls, all my good friends are girls and outside of my family unit my interaction with boys is pretty darn limited. One of the huge challenges for me was getting into Alexi’s humor and I just failed at that, which is odd because I always joked around with guys just fine when I worked in hospitality but maybe my tastes have changed since then. I found myself more often than not having to analyse the concept of “funny” I had to look at all his jokes from a completely different point of view than my own and while I could see where some people would find it funny it just didn’t translate with me.

To contrast Peters’ low brow one dimensional, slapstick sort of comedy with main character Ragan  in Luna was enjoyable and relateable (if somewhat over done) I’m about that much of a klutz and watching youtube videos  or reading stories of other people falling down both entertains me and makes my ungraceful existence seem not so trying.  I think many girls (and boys) of the age group go through a stage where they feel klutzy. Seeing characters portrayed in this light can make that day you smashed your head into the desk trying to pick up the pen you dropped, or when you slipped on the ice on the last step of the bus and fell on your ass (or on someone else) in front of everyone, seem not as crushing as it felt at the time.

I think young people will like Luna for the "Taboo" aspect of the story too. It’s going to be a new concept to many of the people who read it and even though there is fairly little "questionable content" outside the aspect of Luna’s gender identity, I think it will give teens that feeling that they are reading something that isn’t generally approved of. As much as I don’t like the thought of that personally, in the context of the acceptance this book is encouraging, the feeling that you are reading something that your parents might not approve of is still a selling point for many teen readers.

I could talk about my likes and dislikes in the context of what the novel offers in its content about gender identity, but I’m not sure that would be what most teens who read the book would say like found “likeable” about the book.  So I’m going to refrain on recapping what we went over in class and comment on Luna as how it was intended to be viewed. When you strip away the social context I think it’s an enjoyable read for the age group.

Alright I changed my mind I am going to comment on how the book’s context of gender identity. The thing about this book is it’s so darn girly. I mean I’m sure Luna wouldn’t have had it any other way, but I mean the only way this book would get more girly would be to slap a pink cover on it. I would be very hard pressed to recommend this to the majority of straight male teens because I don’t think there is a lot there other than the acceptance of other gender identities that they can grasp onto.

Had this been a book focusing on the brother of a boy transitioning to female it would have been a very different story, but it would have reached more of an audience.  I think it would have had enough elements that way, to attract both genders to the story. This story is aimed at G-I-R-L-S and those who identify that way. I think this is both good and bad.

I think that if you look at it statistically the male side of the population is where trans-acceptance really needs to be pushed because statistically (not exclusively) men are more likely to not accept transgendered persons. However the support structure for men transitioning to women is within the female social structure. If more girls in the future accept Trans women (and persons) as “normal” then it gives trans women a more accepting social structure for them to fit into the gender roll socially of who they really are.

When we look at the popularity of gay males in modern social society (not that gay men are not still subjects of discrimination as are Lesbians) in their relation to women we see that a good deal of the acceptance of gay men by straight men comes from women with gay male friends. Perhaps the road to acceptance of gender and sexual diversity is through the primary acceptance by women of these individuals. That’s not to speak ill of men just my experience coming from a small country town that when gay men are accepted by straight men it is usually from the standpoint of, if the guys want to hang out with the girls the “Gay Best Friend” is usually along for a ride. The attitude starts off as a begrudged “necessary evil” to look cool with the situation but humans are adaptable to situations once they normalize something they once perceived as dangerous, acceptance is almost involuntary. Before you know it the uncomfortable jock is standing up for the gay boy in the bar when harassment occurs because the gay friend is part of “the group”. 

When you look back on how scary it was to drive at 16 years old and how little you even think about getting in your car to get to work on a daily basis you see how easily just being exposed regularly to something that is perceived by those around you is normal abates your fears and how you naturally adapt. I think Luna offers something of starting point for this context, after all driving is way more dangerous than trans people…. Although don’t get me started on women drivers…. Just kidding.