The many critics who comment on Rule of the Bone tend to discourse the word picture of Chappie, the supporter, in relation to the manner other writers, both modern and authoritative, have depicted boys his age. Those who focus on the modern facet are seeking to make up one’s mind if Chappie represents the usual 15 twelvemonth old male child, or if his narrative is one of an unusual childhood. The other critics see Chappie s narrative as a analogue to a male child who has had a tough beginning and so returns to abandon his current state of affairs for a life of escapades. Both attacks, nevertheless, are accurate in that they depict a state of affairs which, while slightly bizarre, does look imaginable to many teenage male childs populating in the terminal of the 20th century. Guy Lawson acknowledges this position, but attempts to turn out that Chappie is truly a male child with authoritative values trapped in the 1990 s. Specifically, he compares the word picture of Chappie with that of Paul from Independence Day by Richard Ford. Paul does many “bad” things which his parents do non wish, and is meant to be viewed as a rebellious adolescent who merely seems to desire to make every bit much as he can to acquire in problem.
Much like Chappie, he has a unusual haircut, pierced organic structure parts, a tattoo, and has a wont of shrinkage. But Lawson points out that Chappie does non make what he does to be bad, but instead “to retrieve the artlessness of his childhood … like the clip when his grandma read Peter Pan to him .” Lawson contends that Chappie should be viewed more similar Huck Finn, non as a bad child, but a “man-boy concealment from society .” Both male childs are forced to go forth place because of the maltreatment they suffer at that place, both meet interesting and life-long friends along the manner ( Jim and I-Man ) , and both go on intriguing escapades while everyone else presumes they are dead. Additionally, and most significantly, both Huck Finn and Rule of the Bone are told from the male child s position, while Independence Day is told from the position of the male parent. This leads to different accounts offered by the storytellers for the male child s actions, and consequently different sentiments by the reader.
There is more to the analogue between Huck and Chappie harmonizing to Lawson. He says “For amll its satirical border, Twain s novel is set in a stable, little town society with households integral. Huck, the bottom Canis familiaris, was the exclusion. Chappie, for Banks, is the regulation. Entirely in the universe, Huck and Chappie are seeking to make their ain sense of morality. But Huck s journey is a narrative of American artlessness. Chappie s rovings are disjointed, frequently grim the travels of experience .” Lawson feels that Banks was doing a statement that while Chappie and Huck appear similar on the exterior, they are really different because of the ways their assorted societies have acted upon them. Chappie has been corrupted, and hence his journeys are non 1s of artlessness, but instead of flight.
This sentiment is echoed by other critics, such as Jess Mowry. Mowry says that no longer should Huck Finn or Holden Caulfield ( Catcher in the Rye ) “stay the Bibles for childs of wining ages … because neither Huck nor Holden would last 24 hours homeless in most American metropoliss today .” Mowry continues that Chappie s narrative is less like a true narrative of a child entirely on today s streets, than the “summer afternoon dope-dream of a suburbanite 9th grader sprawled on his bed with bong in manus,” and that “I know existent stateless childs who d give all their trim alteration to be in Chappie s topographic point .” So the sentiment is that Bank s narrative is non an accurate description of what goes truly goes on, and that non merely is this narrative implausible, but would look as a approval to many existent homeless child. This review destroys the image Rule of the Bone had of being a true word picture of life for a existent adolescent. Other critics, nevertheless, do non hold with such a negative reappraisal of this book. Ann Hulbert feels that Bank s narrative has the possible to go a greater authoritative than Catcher in the Rye. The ground is that Chappie has an original voice which speaks non merely to young persons but besides to grownups, as she feels the narrative is intended as “an indictment of a decaying and divided epoch, which is meant to be heard by grownups .” Chappie is meant to convey a feeling through his narrative which will be recognized by grownups as a remark on the jobs of the universe, but he does this in a manner where no one reading the narrative views him as complaining or holier-than-thou.
