I Am the Messenger

I Am the Messenger

Cover image for I Am the Messenger
Cover image for I Am the Messenger

I put a lot of effort into liking this book. The Book Thief is one of my favorite books, so I fully expected to be blown away by this other novel by the same author.

“Ed Kennedy is an underage cabdriver without much of a future. He’s pathetic at playing cards, hopelessly in love with his best friend, Audrey, and utterly devoted to his coffee-drinking dog, the Doorman. His life is one of peaceful routine and incompetence until he inadvertently stops a bank robbery.
That’s when the first ace arrives in the mail. That’s when Ed becomes the messenger. Chosen to care, he makes his way through town helping and hurting (when necessary) until only one question remains: Who’s behind Ed’s mission?” —Indiebound.org

Have you ever had that reading experience that sort of feels like you’re out of your body? Your eyes are reading the text, and your brain recognizes that you should be connecting to the text and feeling things, but your heart just isn’t there? That’s how this book was for me. I’m not sure if it’s because I had trouble relating to Ed, the deliberate vagueness of the location (which annoyed me to an unreasonable degree), or if the events just weren’t written in a way that gripped me, but I finished this book very reluctantly.

Ed Kennedy is a character that really wishes he were cute and dimensional but is sort of flat and empty. He’s not nearly as amusing as he thinks he is, and even in his moments of introspection, connecting with him is difficult. None of the other characters were really interesting, either. In fact, the only one I felt anything for was a minor character somewhere in the middle who only lasted for a few pages.

The vagueness of the location frustrated me, too. I finally caught on that it was supposed to be Australia, but only because that’s where the author is from. The thing that gave it away was that Christmas happens in the middle of the summer, which was interesting to read about. As for specifics, he just refers to “the city” and “town.” We never get to know anything past that. I do not understand an author’s purpose for doing this, and it irritates me every time I encounter it in a novel. It feels like a glaring omission and makes the text feel dishonest. Is this irrational? Probably. But we can’t help what we like and don’t like.

The plot was odd, too. This go-nowhere kid gets playing cards with missions attached to them. He has to essentially be the guardian angel for the people who are the object of his mission. Sometimes this involves tough love and sometimes it’s an easy fix. What I didn’t understand is why this mysterious person giving him these missions–which are benevolent in nature–would use scare tactics and violence to force Ed to act. It’s incongruous with the nature of the endeavor, and it didn’t give me nearly as much of a warm, fuzzy feeling as if the unseen hand had found less malevolent ways to coerce Ed to do its will. Perhaps Zusak thought the fear and violence would add suspense to the novel, but it didn’t really work for this reader. And the end, though I know it was going for uniqueness and shock value, just felt like a cop-out. I was not impressed.

I know that several people have said they loved this book. I really, really wanted to love it too, but I didn’t. It was painful to read and difficult to finish. I’m going to recommend that, if you’ve never read Zusak, you read The Book Thief (and let it change your life) and just give this one a pass.