This book reaffirms my belief in the horribleness of everyone. ( )

For all the hype surrounding this book I expected something spectacular. It was good, but not that good. Perhaps the hype is because this is one of the few books about boys, for boys, written boy (well, man). ( )

"They don't actually want you to do your thing, not unless it's their thing too."

Every year Trinity Boy's School runs a chocolate sale. Each boy 'volunteers' to sell a quota of boxes in a fund-raising effort that is also a display of 'school spirit'. But this year is different, because new boy Jerry Renault has refused to take part. Initially he does so for ten days at the command of a secretive student group the 'Vigils' but once those ten days up he decides unilaterally to continue with his stance.

This book was first published in 1974 and has spent most of it's time since on the 'top 10 banned books list' in American schools because of it's content, in part sexual (masturbation), in part religious (it is a Catholic school and some of the teachers are good and some are bad) but mainly because it features bullying.

The book is relatively short but packs a punch. It features some of the best and worst facets of human nature. Jerry is idealistic, Archie is egocentric, Brother Leon is manipulative abusive whilst Goober who is privately supportive of Jerry's choice isn't willing to do so publicly and Carter has a false sense of control.

I found that I had a love/hate relationship with this book. I loved the way that it sucked me in, made me think and how I struggled to put it down. I hated the fact that Cormier felt the need to write it, I hated the fact that the story was realistic and represented real life for some students the world over, I hated the fact that Jerry's ostracization was easy to relate to, I hated the mob-like attitude of the other students, I hated the fact that even the 'good' teachers were willing to intervene, I hated how disturbing the norm was shown to be dangerous and brave but most of all I hated being asked if I would have been strong enough to say 'NO'. The book ended inconclusively despite my fervent hoping that somehow Jerry would gain some sort of reprieve and hating the fact that it had to do so to be realistic.

Personally I would have liked to have seen a little more in depth characterisation but despite being many decades beyond the book's intended market audience I found it a powerful and moving piece that made me sit up and think, as such I would highly recommend it. However, I doubt that I will read the sequel in the fear that it won't be as good. ( )

I had not read The Chocolate War since it came out originally! Yep, I am dating myself... I had forgotten most of it. While some of the descriptions clearly show the era in which it was written, the themes are universal.

There is no clear "happy ending" for all involved. Jerry, as the "underdog with a heart", doesn't come out on top; Archie isn't punished for his actions; Obie doesn't finally triumph over Archie and become his own man. The tension is so well written that I was uncomfortable the entire time I was reading it.

The thing I loved the most was that, even though it was written 38 years ago, I could absolutely see teens (mostly boys I think) relating to it today. Robert Cormier's writing doesn't pander to what people think teens would read. He doesn't play down language or use "easy" words. He bolts headlong into the story and never looks back. ( )

There isn’t much of value in Robert Cormier’s The Chocolate War. The plot (and the “chocolate war” itself) is nothing but a MacGuffin. The characters are archetypes with only a thin skin of dialogue stretched over their skeleton. When the reader is told a character is amazing and leagues above other humans in innate skill and ability, it's reductive. Show me, don't tell me. This doesn’t even begin to deal with the fantasy-like elements of a secret society running a high school

But the moments of Jerry's longing for his dead mother and explosive resistance to not living out his currently unknown dreams is effective. Robert Cormier is clearly a man who has lost, yet retains his dreams. Too bad this single scene appears early in the book and fails to connect Jerry’s actions to his dead mother and dreamless father. I understand what Cormier is going for, but come on, to “dare to disturb the universe” by not selling chocolates? T.S. Eliot's pearls thrown before swine.

In the end, the villains remain villains and the heroes end bloody or powerless. Is this the way the world is? In some ways, yes, but in other ways, absolutely not. “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” My major problem here is I've read several books that do what The Chocolate War fails to do. Infinite Jest gives us real high schoolers with cruelty, love, doubts, and fears; The Lord of the Flies give us the brutal humanity. ( )