A Monster Calls (2011) by Patrick Ness is a sad, somewhat difficult YA book that borders on a novella and, in the end, is rewarding. It is also magical, but avoids the obnoxiousness of overly-fable-y books to drive home some very real points about coming of age, death, and guilt, while the backstory about this book is almost just as intriguing. And while it might be a little predictable overall, the details keep the author guessing and turning the pages.

Conor is thirteen years old. It used to be that he had a pretty normal life, with his single mom after his dad left with a new wife to America, a best friend, a bothersome grandma who stayed distant, and everyone knowing him at school. But after his mom got sick, all that changed. And as she didn’t get better, everything got worse. Then one night, during a recurring nightmare, Conor finds a monster outside his window for him, and it won’t be the last time he returns, waiting Conor out for the truth.

I want to start with the story about the novel itself. It is written by Patrick Ness, the award-winning author of the Chaos Walking Trilogy and other YA (and other) books. He is an American living in London. (So cool.) However, despite his writing chops, this was a book that did not originate with him. He was asked to write the book and given the beginning and the notes, and he said “Yes” and then wrote it and the rest is, shall we say, history. (It is probably his most famous book.) Where did this story come from? British, YA author Siobhan (shuh-bvahn’) Dowd (most famous for Bog Child) was dying of cancer when she came up with the idea to write a YA book to help children deal with the very thing she was going through (grief and loss during a protracted illness). She had not finished the book when she died, and Ness ended up with the task of completing it (and, I think, mostly writing it, therefore his name on the cover). I wonder what sort of story-within-a-story this movie would make, you know, like Miss Potter, Capote, or Tolkien. (Apparently, it would be titled Dowd; see also Kafka, Colette, Shirley, Emily, Dickinson, Iris, and to a lesser extent: Mary Shelley and Becoming Jane).

Now back to the novel and its content. I was a little distressed when I saw how fable-y and sparse it was written. Despite feeling like I of course would like fable and fairy-tale-leaning stories, I have not had a good history with reading and reviewing them. While I love Grimm’s Fairytales and Arnold Lobel’s Fables (like the old-style originals) and have written a fable-y novel myself (The Night of One Hundred Thieves), I have more often been disappointed by modern fables/fairytales (like The Alchemist, The Prophet, The Little Prince, and The Castle Corona). It turns out, there is something about a sparsely-written, show-more-than-tell, keep-an-eye-on-the-actual-writing, and then teach a lesson (or many), that I simply don’t like. A Monster Calls felt like it was going to be like that. And to some extent, it was. But then to much extent, it wasn’t. There was an actual story there, and there were layers and stakes and the lessons learned weren’t as spelled out for the reader (and protagonist) as the other books I just listed. But still, they were, because a magical being was telling fairy-tales and spouting wisdom and the format was short. Looking back, though, on an experience that I pretty much enjoyed (of reading the book), it settled with me that this would be best read by its intended audience, which is listed as 12-15 but I think is more accurately 12-18. There, I think the modern fable works better, especially since it’s reigned in and tempered with some realism.

As I said, the book’s genesis story is very intriguing and very poignant for knowing the outcome. I was a little bothered by the italics and boldface type as unconventional formatting, but I can understand why it would have been done (to make the monster’s words like they were coming from Conor’s head); still, they could have used normal typeface instead of bold, within the italics. That is commonly how it is done. All in all, the book kept me interested and reading even though I could kinda see the end from miles away, because there were other questions, other mysteries. It’s a good book, and I understand why it appears consistently on YA lists. Of course, there are trigger warnings: it’s a book about a teen having rough times (including bullying and acting out aggressively) as he deals with his mother’s terminal cancer. But there are things to contemplate here that go deeper than that, to guilt and anger and isolation, even stuffing one’s emotions. A quick read with lots of emotional punch, A Monster Calls would make good classroom reading that kids would actually enjoy, and it would also make a special read for the person who needs to hear this story, right then.

By the way, you want the original–not the movie promotional copy–with illustrations by Jim Kay.

QUOTES:

“’The justification of men who kill should always be heard with skepticism’” (p68).

“’There is not always a good guy. Nor is there always a bad one. Most people are somewhere in between’” (p70).

“’Many things that are true feel like a cheat …. and sometimes witches merit saving. Quite often, actually. You’d be surprised’” (p70).

“’Stories were wild, wild animals and went off in directions you couldn’t expect” (p149).

“’Stories are important,’ the monster said. ‘They can be more important than anything. If they carry the truth’” (p155).

“’The answer is that it does not matter what you think,’ the monster said, ‘because your mind will contradict itself a hundred times a day’” (p212).

“’You do not write your life with words,’ the monster said. ‘You write it with actions. What you think is not important. It is only important what you do’” (p213).

MOVIE:

I had watched this movie, must have been about when it came out (2016). With Liam Neeson, Sigourney Weaver, and Felicity Jones, as well as the magical realism (or light fantasy) and the CGI needed to create a monster from trees, I would have been totally excited. Somehow, though, my husband and I could only recall that we had found the movie “boring” and “slow” and “sad,” and almost nothing else. So maybe it’s not the world’s best movie. Sometimes movies work like that—they seem like they have all the parts but then there is some sort of special spark that is missing.

On a re-watch, I can say that it is a movie worth watching once, especially after you have read the book. There is nothing particularly wrong with it, except they took out some of the more touching threads of the book. (Where is his bestie? I agree the book didn’t do enough with this storyline, but she was one of the brightest things about the story. I guess they try to make up for it in the movie with a trip to the carnival.) I don’t know why it made such a flat and small impression on us (maybe we watched it with our kids? It’s not for kids), but the movie is better than decent. It maintains high ratings, and if you know what it will be: a tough, fable-y, story about grief and youth, well then, go on and rent it. It probably won’t disappoint you, but it may make you cry or even ponder while you’re enjoying the effects, the lush artistry, and the fairly flawless acting along with a surprising story.