John’s Comments (group member since Jan 22, 2013)

Showing 1-20 of 50

Kat (Le Pauvre Cœur) wrote: "Hey John. Did you know that the first time I found out about your book Looking For Alaska, I literally thought it was about Alaska the state (which I was born in) and not a girl named Alaska? Have .you ever been to Alaska?"



Yeah, in retrospect we should've called it something else maybe, because I think a lot of people are expecting an adventure novel, and then it's like, "Here's a moody novel set in an Alabama boarding school." And everyone's like, "I WANTED STARVING ON A MOUNTAINSIDE." But now the book has established itself well enough that people just give it to their friends or explain that it's about a girl named Alaska, which is wonderful, because it gets to have both an audience and the title I wanted it to have.



As for the state: Yes, I've been to Alaska several times. (My dad makes documentary films and has been in Alaska many times working with indigenous populations there. I've accompanied him on a couple of those trips.) I spent an entire summer on the Kenai penninsula in the little town of Moose Pass. Honestly it was the worst summer of my life (depression/heartbreak/etc.), but that was no fault of Alaska's. It's a beautiful state and I hope to go back someday with my dad and my son.

Yeah, in retrospect we should've called it something else maybe, because I think a lot of people are expecting an adventure novel, and then it's like, "Here's a moody novel set in an Alabama boarding school." And everyone's like, "I WANTED STARVING ON A MOUNTAINSIDE." But now the book has established itself well enough that people just give it to their friends or explain that it's about a girl named Alaska, which is wonderful, because it gets to have both an audience and the title I wanted it to have.As for the state: Yes, I've been to Alaska several times. (My dad makes documentary films and has been in Alaska many times working with indigenous populations there. I've accompanied him on a couple of those trips.) I spent an entire summer on the Kenai penninsula in the little town of Moose Pass. Honestly it was the worst summer of my life (depression/heartbreak/etc.), but that was no fault of Alaska's. It's a beautiful state and I hope to go back someday with my dad and my son.

Leslie wrote: "Hi, John! Thanks for writing such thought provokingly beautiful novels and building Nerdfighteria up to be the success that it is today!



1) What advice do you have to aspiring writers?



All of my advice is boring:



1. Read a lot. Read broadly and critically. Read the kind of books you want your books to sit next to on the shelves, but also read many other books. Read bad books, too, because I think it's sometimes easier to learn from bad books, because you can see the strings of the puppets a little better.



2. Tell stories to your friends, and pay attention to when they get bored. This is how I learned to pace and phrase stories, how to build in pauses and construct jokes and things like that. That mechanical stuff isn't the fancy and heralded part of writing, but it's a lot of what makes everything click together.



3. Listen to criticism. If you're writing for an audience, and readers you trust are telling you that something isn't working for them, they're by definition right. You can't ever see your own work as a reader sees it, so you have to rely upon them. Their solutions to the problems may not be quite the right solutions, but if they identify a problem, there probably is one. This is still hugely important to me as a writer--if I'm any good, it's because I listen to the readers I trust and basically just do what they tell me to do.

All of my advice is boring:1. Read a lot. Read broadly and critically. Read the kind of books you want your books to sit next to on the shelves, but also read many other books. Read bad books, too, because I think it's sometimes easier to learn from bad books, because you can see the strings of the puppets a little better.2. Tell stories to your friends, and pay attention to when they get bored. This is how I learned to pace and phrase stories, how to build in pauses and construct jokes and things like that. That mechanical stuff isn't the fancy and heralded part of writing, but it's a lot of what makes everything click together.3. Listen to criticism. If you're writing for an audience, and readers you trust are telling you that something isn't working for them, they're by definition right. You can't ever see your own work as a reader sees it, so you have to rely upon them. Their solutions to the problems may not be quite the right solutions, but if they identify a problem, there probably is one. This is still hugely important to me as a writer--if I'm any good, it's because I listen to the readers I trust and basically just do what they tell me to do.

Alex wrote: "John,



I recently read The Blood of the Lamb, by Peter De Vries and I could not help but notice some striking connections between De Vries's novel and The Fault in Our Stars (Aside from the obvious..."



I made a point not to read The Blood of the Lamb while working on TFiOS, because it is (by far) the best book I've ever read about childhood cancer, and I didn't want to be unduly influenced by it. But I was still greatly influenced by it, not just in small ways but in the larger sense of how the narrator must find a way to live in the world as he finds it. It's a brutal and brutally funny novel, and as close a thing to An Imperial Affliction as exists in the real world.

I made a point not to read The Blood of the Lamb while working on TFiOS, because it is (by far) the best book I've ever read about childhood cancer, and I didn't want to be unduly influenced by it. But I was still greatly influenced by it, not just in small ways but in the larger sense of how the narrator must find a way to live in the world as he finds it. It's a brutal and brutally funny novel, and as close a thing to An Imperial Affliction as exists in the real world.

Julia wrote: "Hi,

I've been planning to read TFiOS for quite a while but I haven't ventured to do so yet. The reason, in brief, is that I am a hypochondriac."



Yeah, I can't in good conscience recommend TFiOS. :)



(That said, I also live with fairly bad health anxiety, and I managed to write the book. I can't say that writing the book did anything to decrease or alleviate my health anxiety, though.)

Yeah, I can't in good conscience recommend TFiOS. :)(That said, I also live with fairly bad health anxiety, and I managed to write the book. I can't say that writing the book did anything to decrease or alleviate my health anxiety, though.)

Donna wrote: "I'm a hs librarian/big fan, like everyone else here and the millions who aren't. I am fascinated by your use of social media (and how social media has changed YA lit in general). Aren't you completely overwhelmed by the response here and elsewhere and exhausted trying to keep up?"



I overdose on the Internet sometimes, definitely, just like anyone else. But I really like the opportunity to continue the discussion with my readers outside the pages of the book. Like the great thing about reading is that you get to have this quiet, sustained conversation about stuff that matters to you.



But I can be part of communities online that, while they may not have that same kind of long-term quiet interaction, can do all kinds of cool stuff, like turn the earth into a sandwich (as sportsracers did in 2006) or raise over $400,000 for charity in 48 hours (as nerdfighters did in 2012). Some of these community-oriented collaborations are silly; some are deeply meaningful, but that feeling of making stuff together with people from around the world is very powerful, and it's something I really enjoy.



So I'm very grateful for the tools social media has given us to connect us and allow us to collaborate, and I am very happy when I feel that sense of connection with collaborating on stuff that interests me, whether it's the Project for Awesome or photoshopping Sherlock pictures on tumblr.

I overdose on the Internet sometimes, definitely, just like anyone else. But I really like the opportunity to continue the discussion with my readers outside the pages of the book. Like the great thing about reading is that you get to have this quiet, sustained conversation about stuff that matters to you.But I can be part of communities online that, while they may not have that same kind of long-term quiet interaction, can do all kinds of cool stuff, like turn the earth into a sandwich (as sportsracers did in 2006) or raise over $400,000 for charity in 48 hours (as nerdfighters did in 2012). Some of these community-oriented collaborations are silly; some are deeply meaningful, but that feeling of making stuff together with people from around the world is very powerful, and it's something I really enjoy.So I'm very grateful for the tools social media has given us to connect us and allow us to collaborate, and I am very happy when I feel that sense of connection with collaborating on stuff that interests me, whether it's the Project for Awesome or photoshopping Sherlock pictures on tumblr.

Ishmael wrote: "Hi John! A large amount of YA books involved the supernatural or imagining other worlds and societies, but yours are all set in the real world. Have you ever wanted to write a fantasy or a paranorm..."



I love reading fantasy and science fiction, but I'm awful at writing it. Truly awful. You can ask some of my fantasy-writing friends (Holly Black, Cassandra Clare, etc.) about this, and they will tell you that I really just do not have the gift for world-building.

I love reading fantasy and science fiction, but I'm awful at writing it. Truly awful. You can ask some of my fantasy-writing friends (Holly Black, Cassandra Clare, etc.) about this, and they will tell you that I really just do not have the gift for world-building.

Aja wrote: "Hello! My question is: what's your stance on smoking? It pops up fairly often in your books, and of course it's used as metaphors and symbolism, but I was just wondering what you personally thought..."



I personally find it very strange that anyone would pay a large corporation for the opportunity to acquire cancer.



But I also smoked throughout my teen years, and I'm fascinated with the why of it. There's a self-destructive impulse in many teenagers that is extremely hard to control; for me at least, adolescence often felt like a constant wrestling match between me and this urge inside of me to self-immolate. Smoking seems to me a pretty good symbol for the way this self-destructive impulse plays out in our lives.

I personally find it very strange that anyone would pay a large corporation for the opportunity to acquire cancer.But I also smoked throughout my teen years, and I'm fascinated with the why of it. There's a self-destructive impulse in many teenagers that is extremely hard to control; for me at least, adolescence often felt like a constant wrestling match between me and this urge inside of me to self-immolate. Smoking seems to me a pretty good symbol for the way this self-destructive impulse plays out in our lives.

Destiny wrote: "How would you respond to people who say Hazel and Augustus are unrealistic characters because they are intelligent?"



I'm pretty tired of adults telling me how stupid teens are. If the characters in my novels were unrealistically intelligent, if teenagers found my characters' astonishing intelligence utterly inaccessible, then TEENAGERS WOULD NOT READ MY BOOKS. But instead, lots of teens do read my books, and they also read many other books that credit them with intelligence.



Most Americans who read The Great Gatsby this year...will be teenagers.



Most Americans who come to a meaningful understanding of special relativity this year... will be teenagers.



But also: Hazel and Augustus aren't that smart. Yes, the language (particularly the dialogue) of the novel is obviously heightened, as is the case in every romantic tragedy ever written. The glorification of language as a tool to communicate love and pain is one of the most enjoyable things about tragedy. But Gus and Hazel both make mistakes all the time in the way that teenagers do. Gus doesn't understand the meaning of half the big words he uses, which is why he's always using them slightly incorrectly. Hazel, as previously noted, doesn't understand that the set of numbers between 0 and 1 and the set of numbers between 0 and 2 are actually the same size.



They're still young. But they're smart and curious and passionate teenagers drinking up the world. People can tell me all you want that such teenagers don't really exist, but I've been hearing from them every single day for many years.

I'm pretty tired of adults telling me how stupid teens are. If the characters in my novels were unrealistically intelligent, if teenagers found my characters' astonishing intelligence utterly inaccessible, then TEENAGERS WOULD NOT READ MY BOOKS. But instead, lots of teens do read my books, and they also read many other books that credit them with intelligence.Most Americans who read The Great Gatsby this year...will be teenagers.Most Americans who come to a meaningful understanding of special relativity this year... will be teenagers.But also: Hazel and Augustus aren't that smart. Yes, the language (particularly the dialogue) of the novel is obviously heightened, as is the case in every romantic tragedy ever written. The glorification of language as a tool to communicate love and pain is one of the most enjoyable things about tragedy. But Gus and Hazel both make mistakes all the time in the way that teenagers do. Gus doesn't understand the meaning of half the big words he uses, which is why he's always using them slightly incorrectly. Hazel, as previously noted, doesn't understand that the set of numbers between 0 and 1 and the set of numbers between 0 and 2 are actually the same size.They're still young. But they're smart and curious and passionate teenagers drinking up the world. People can tell me all you want that such teenagers don't really exist, but I've been hearing from them every single day for many years.

Ellie wrote: "Hi, John!

So I seen a Tumblr post that says something along the lines of "In the book Augustus says to Hazel "You used to call me Augustus" because after she finds out that he is going to die from ..."



Full comment: So I seen a Tumblr post that says something along the lines of "In the book Augustus says to Hazel "You used to call me Augustus" because after she finds out that he is going to die from his cancer, she starts calling him 'Gus'. To him 'Augustus' symbolizes his full health and his strength whereas 'Gus' symbolizes that he is weaker and Hazel started calling him this without realising." Is this true? Or just a rumour? I love your books, thanks for the adventures!



Well, books belong to their readers, so I can't speak to which symbols are "real" or "not real." But I do think there's a slow but very steady shift from Hazel calling him Augustus to her calling him Gus. Why is that?



Well, it may be that he's becoming weaker and less like the Roman Emperors for whom he was named.



Then again, it may also be that he's becoming less performed (his dialogue less rehearsed, his actions less self-consciously cool) and more a real, regular person.



This journey from strength to weakness is the opposite of the journey Gus wants to make. He wants to be Augustus--badass, performative, monologue-delivering Augustus*. But in fact, this journey from strength to weakness is I would argue the real hero's journey--and the love the Gus and Hazel feel for each other toward the end of the book is much stronger and more intense than their feelings for each other at the beginning of the book, even if they're both weaker and less hot and so on.







* One of the critical things to note about Gus, especially at the beginning of the book, is that he is constantly misusing big words. His intellectual reach exceeds his grasp, as is often the case with smart teens. So he calls, for instance, a monologue a soliloquy. Hazel, similarly, gets confused about the sizes of infinite sets. I wanted them to be intellectually curious people who make those kinds of awkward mistakes that we all make when we're trying to both be and sound smart.

Full comment: So I seen a Tumblr post that says something along the lines of "In the book Augustus says to Hazel "You used to call me Augustus" because after she finds out that he is going to die from his cancer, she starts calling him 'Gus'. To him 'Augustus' symbolizes his full health and his strength whereas 'Gus' symbolizes that he is weaker and Hazel started calling him this without realising." Is this true? Or just a rumour? I love your books, thanks for the adventures!Well, books belong to their readers, so I can't speak to which symbols are "real" or "not real." But I do think there's a slow but very steady shift from Hazel calling him Augustus to her calling him Gus. Why is that?Well, it may be that he's becoming weaker and less like the Roman Emperors for whom he was named.Then again, it may also be that he's becoming less performed (his dialogue less rehearsed, his actions less self-consciously cool) and more a real, regular person.This journey from strength to weakness is the opposite of the journey Gus wants to make. He wants to be Augustus--badass, performative, monologue-delivering Augustus*. But in fact, this journey from strength to weakness is I would argue the real hero's journey--and the love the Gus and Hazel feel for each other toward the end of the book is much stronger and more intense than their feelings for each other at the beginning of the book, even if they're both weaker and less hot and so on.* One of the critical things to note about Gus, especially at the beginning of the book, is that he is constantly misusing big words. His intellectual reach exceeds his grasp, as is often the case with smart teens. So he calls, for instance, a monologue a soliloquy. Hazel, similarly, gets confused about the sizes of infinite sets. I wanted them to be intellectually curious people who make those kinds of awkward mistakes that we all make when we're trying to both be and sound smart.

Joanne wrote: "Hi John!

Along with all your books, what other YA books would you recommend, which books influenced you the most as a young adult?"



I've read hundreds (maybe more than 1,000?) YA books that I would recommend, so it's very hard to narrow the field. But in 2013, my favorite YA reads have been Just One Day by Gayle Foreman, Code Name Verity by Elizabeth Wein, Beneath a Meth Moon by Jacqueline Woodson, and Eleanor and Park by Rainbow Rowell.



And we're only 23 days into the year! We are very blessed to live in a time when there is so much breadth and quality of YA literature.

I've read hundreds (maybe more than 1,000?) YA books that I would recommend, so it's very hard to narrow the field. But in 2013, my favorite YA reads have been Just One Day by Gayle Foreman, Code Name Verity by Elizabeth Wein, Beneath a Meth Moon by Jacqueline Woodson, and Eleanor and Park by Rainbow Rowell.And we're only 23 days into the year! We are very blessed to live in a time when there is so much breadth and quality of YA literature.

Michael wrote: "How did you balance your day job and writing at the beginning of your career?"



I wrote at night and on the weekends. It wasn't that difficult, because I didn't have many responsibilities. (I didn't have a kid or anything.) Also I'm naturally pretty introverted, and after 8 hours working with people, I was usually pretty happy to go home and write at night.

I wrote at night and on the weekends. It wasn't that difficult, because I didn't have many responsibilities. (I didn't have a kid or anything.) Also I'm naturally pretty introverted, and after 8 hours working with people, I was usually pretty happy to go home and write at night.

Michaela wrote: "If you could change one thing in human history what would it be and why?"



Malaria, because it impeded industrialization and kills a lot of children and disproportionately affects the poor and hampers economic productivity and generally sucks.

Malaria, because it impeded industrialization and kills a lot of children and disproportionately affects the poor and hampers economic productivity and generally sucks.

Brittany wrote: "Hi John! My question is:

Why do you think some adults have such disdain and dislike for teenagers and young adults? You touched upon this in both Alaska and TFIOS, but I would love if you could go..."



Okay, so a few things:



1. To be fair, teenagers are generally less intellectually impressive to adults than they are to other teenagers. This is partly because the way we think is a little different, but it's also I think because teens get a little bit intimidated around adults and still don't feel totally like they are talking to their peers. (This is why, I think, you sometimes see adults who read books about smart teens say, "Teenagers don't talk this way. They aren't this smart. I know because I have teenagers." But give that teenagers are buying and reading and loving the books in questions, maybe we need to reassess our opinion of teenagers rather than assuming that teens "just aren't that smart.") I think the truth is that teens are just as smart and intellectually engaged and curious as adults, and I get really offended on behalf of my audience whenever anyone tells me that kids aren't as smart as they're portrayed in my books (or anyone else's books for that matter).



2. That noted, there is a lot to dislike about teenagers from an adult perspective. As an adult, I place great value on stability and consistency and not acting impulsively. But for teenagers, a lot of joy and meaning in life is found in impulsive action, and life is full (in terrifying and wonderful ways) of instability and inconsistency. So to me, this can sometimes look like you are an unstable person hellbent on destabilizing my world, which makes me worry, because I value stability.



3. I have no patience, however, for anyone who thinks that because they tend to be more impulsive, teenager's experiences and feelings are less real or meaningful than adult experiences. A lot of adults seem to believe this, and I think they're just wrong.

Okay, so a few things:1. To be fair, teenagers are generally less intellectually impressive to adults than they are to other teenagers. This is partly because the way we think is a little different, but it's also I think because teens get a little bit intimidated around adults and still don't feel totally like they are talking to their peers. (This is why, I think, you sometimes see adults who read books about smart teens say, "Teenagers don't talk this way. They aren't this smart. I know because I have teenagers." But give that teenagers are buying and reading and loving the books in questions, maybe we need to reassess our opinion of teenagers rather than assuming that teens "just aren't that smart.") I think the truth is that teens are just as smart and intellectually engaged and curious as adults, and I get really offended on behalf of my audience whenever anyone tells me that kids aren't as smart as they're portrayed in my books (or anyone else's books for that matter).2. That noted, there is a lot to dislike about teenagers from an adult perspective. As an adult, I place great value on stability and consistency and not acting impulsively. But for teenagers, a lot of joy and meaning in life is found in impulsive action, and life is full (in terrifying and wonderful ways) of instability and inconsistency. So to me, this can sometimes look like you are an unstable person hellbent on destabilizing my world, which makes me worry, because I value stability.3. I have no patience, however, for anyone who thinks that because they tend to be more impulsive, teenager's experiences and feelings are less real or meaningful than adult experiences. A lot of adults seem to believe this, and I think they're just wrong.

Jenna wrote: "Hi John!

I've noticed in your earlier books, there is the brooding male protagonist trying to find the meaning of something and then the manic-pixie dream girl. I was wondering how you feel about that archetypal character."



Right, so in Looking for Alaska, the hideous lie of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl is never really exposed, right? Pudge is in love with Alaska, whom he consistently misimagines as a Manic Pixie Dream Girl. (In fact, she's just a person, like anyone else, but he constructs her as this larger than life brilliant broken creature, in the way that boys often do when it comes to the young women they like.) Now, it is BECAUSE he imagines her so poorly that he is so awfully negligent when it comes to being a good friend to her, and had he been a better friend (or had Takumi been a better friend, for that matter), [spoiler] would never have happened.



But because of the general arc of that book, I never felt like that was quite as clear to readers as I wanted it to be, so when I wrote Paper Towns in direct opposition to this idea: Here is this kid (Q) who romanticizes this young woman (Margo) in the way that so many young men mythologize the romantic other. But until his depersonalization of her breaks down, he can never uncover the truth of what happens to her, and even when he finally does, she disappoints him (and us) by not being the person we expected her to be. I mean I think Q at some point literally says, "Margo was not a miracle. She was not an adventure. She was a girl." (Or something to that effect. I don't have it memorized.)



So to my mind, these two books are opposites: Paper Towns is writing against this notion that it's okay for young men to construct their romantic interests as manic pixie dream girls. (To be clear, manic pixie dream girls do not exist. They are imagined--usually by men.) Q and Margo both equally experience the consequences of this misimagining, whereas in Alaska, problematically, Alaska suffers significantly more.



tl;dr: I'm very troubled by the way that young men construct young women as these larger than life manic pixie dream girls, and I worried that with Alaska I might've unintentionally written a book that furthered, however slightly, the pernicious lie of the MPDG, so I tried to address that very directly and in a sustained way in Paper Towns and really stab that lie in the heart.

Right, so in Looking for Alaska, the hideous lie of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl is never really exposed, right? Pudge is in love with Alaska, whom he consistently misimagines as a Manic Pixie Dream Girl. (In fact, she's just a person, like anyone else, but he constructs her as this larger than life brilliant broken creature, in the way that boys often do when it comes to the young women they like.) Now, it is BECAUSE he imagines her so poorly that he is so awfully negligent when it comes to being a good friend to her, and had he been a better friend (or had Takumi been a better friend, for that matter), [spoiler] would never have happened.But because of the general arc of that book, I never felt like that was quite as clear to readers as I wanted it to be, so when I wrote Paper Towns in direct opposition to this idea: Here is this kid (Q) who romanticizes this young woman (Margo) in the way that so many young men mythologize the romantic other. But until his depersonalization of her breaks down, he can never uncover the truth of what happens to her, and even when he finally does, she disappoints him (and us) by not being the person we expected her to be. I mean I think Q at some point literally says, "Margo was not a miracle. She was not an adventure. She was a girl." (Or something to that effect. I don't have it memorized.)So to my mind, these two books are opposites: Paper Towns is writing against this notion that it's okay for young men to construct their romantic interests as manic pixie dream girls. (To be clear, manic pixie dream girls do not exist. They are imagined--usually by men.) Q and Margo both equally experience the consequences of this misimagining, whereas in Alaska, problematically, Alaska suffers significantly more.tl;dr: I'm very troubled by the way that young men construct young women as these larger than life manic pixie dream girls, and I worried that with Alaska I might've unintentionally written a book that furthered, however slightly, the pernicious lie of the MPDG, so I tried to address that very directly and in a sustained way in Paper Towns and really stab that lie in the heart.

Tori wrote: "When you wrote about Alaska getting drunk That Night, and then the Colonel getting drunk to see how she felt, did you yourself get that drunk? If not, what did you rely on to write that scene hones..."



I was 25 or 26 when I wrote that scene, and by that time in my life, I had been on more than one occasion very drunk indeed, so no further research was needed.

I was 25 or 26 when I wrote that scene, and by that time in my life, I had been on more than one occasion very drunk indeed, so no further research was needed.

Jack wrote: "I study English Literature because I enjoy it and am pretty good at it. But one question plagues me when people who study the sciences ask it: what is the real point in studying literature?"



Well, here's my response to people in the sciences: Human existence is temporary and all the knowledge of the universe we acquire will in time be forgotten because there will be no humans left to benefit from any of the stuff we learned.



And yet, this doesn't invalidate scientific exploration to me. We seek to understand the universe because it makes our lives better and more rich. Similarly, we tell stories (and think about why and how to tell stories) because it makes human existence richer. Made-up stories matter. They bring us pleasure and solace and nurture empathy by letting us see the world through others' eyes. They also help us to feel unalone, to understand that our grief and joy is shared not just by those around us but by all those who came before us and all those still yet to come.

Well, here's my response to people in the sciences: Human existence is temporary and all the knowledge of the universe we acquire will in time be forgotten because there will be no humans left to benefit from any of the stuff we learned.And yet, this doesn't invalidate scientific exploration to me. We seek to understand the universe because it makes our lives better and more rich. Similarly, we tell stories (and think about why and how to tell stories) because it makes human existence richer. Made-up stories matter. They bring us pleasure and solace and nurture empathy by letting us see the world through others' eyes. They also help us to feel unalone, to understand that our grief and joy is shared not just by those around us but by all those who came before us and all those still yet to come.

Ina wrote: "Hello John,



was it hard to "hand over" Tiny Cooper to David Levithan? Did he invent his own version of Tiny or did he ask you about him? Did you have any kind of control over "his" Tiny, and if so..."



No, I like that process of handing over. I handed over Tiny Cooper to David, but I also hand over every character I've ever written to you the reader the moment the book comes out. You may imagine the characters differently from how I did. You may bring some richness to their lives that I had not intended. And that's the magic of reading and writing to me. That's what I love about it. I love what David did with Tiny; I think he becomes a lot more interesting as a character once he starts interacting with will grayson.

No, I like that process of handing over. I handed over Tiny Cooper to David, but I also hand over every character I've ever written to you the reader the moment the book comes out. You may imagine the characters differently from how I did. You may bring some richness to their lives that I had not intended. And that's the magic of reading and writing to me. That's what I love about it. I love what David did with Tiny; I think he becomes a lot more interesting as a character once he starts interacting with will grayson.

Shannon wrote: "Hi John,



I just wanted to tell you that I absolutely love your books, I think it's awesome how much there is to them and how relatable they are. I've read a lot of young adult novels, but yours a..."



(This question is about Susan Sontag's book Illness as Metaphor.)



Yeah, I think both Illness as Metaphor and Regarding the Pain of Others were tremendously important to me as I wrote the book. Sontag's work is brilliant at revealing to you biases you didn't know you had, and she also described the power and significance of metaphor in our actual everyday lives in a way that's just so clear and brilliant and really brought it into focus for me.



So I definitely did try to bring some of those ideas to TFiOS.

(This question is about Susan Sontag's book Illness as Metaphor.)Yeah, I think both Illness as Metaphor and Regarding the Pain of Others were tremendously important to me as I wrote the book. Sontag's work is brilliant at revealing to you biases you didn't know you had, and she also described the power and significance of metaphor in our actual everyday lives in a way that's just so clear and brilliant and really brought it into focus for me.So I definitely did try to bring some of those ideas to TFiOS.

Keely wrote: "My question:

Have you ever thought of creating a parallel universe where the main characters in all of your books somehow meet?"



I think Kurt Vonnegut did this better and more cleverly in Breakfast of Champions than I ever could.



My books feel like very different worlds to me, and I try to leave the characters in a place where I feel comfortable letting them go for good, so it would be hard to pick them back up again.

I think Kurt Vonnegut did this better and more cleverly in Breakfast of Champions than I ever could.My books feel like very different worlds to me, and I try to leave the characters in a place where I feel comfortable letting them go for good, so it would be hard to pick them back up again.