Response to “13 Little Blue Envelopes”

“13 Little Blue Envelopes”, by Maureen Johnson, is a story about a girl, Ginny, whose Aunt Peg leaves behind letters before she dies which include instructions for Ginny to travel around Europe. Although this book does include vivid setting descriptions and an interesting premise, I think the book could’ve been written better. The author uses too many depictions of the setting, fails to provide a plot twist or surprise ending, and finally does not display any true meaning behind Ginny’s trip.

The first reason the author could’ve done a better job at writing this book is because of the number and length of the setting descriptions. One example of this is when Ginny first gets to London, “The first thing that hit her was the smell of a recent rain. The sidewalk was still wet and was fairly thick with people who politely moved around Ginny and her backpack. The street was jammed full of real London traffic, just like in the pictures. The cars were tightly packed together, all going in the wrong direction. An actual red double-decker bus lumbered along.” The author is redundant with her word choice, which makes the quote feel even longer than it already is. Johnson describes multiple times the crowdedness of this scene, whereas once would’ve been sufficient. Another example of this is when Ginny is in Paris, “Even just a short walk around the area revealed that Paris was nothing but cafés. Cafés everywhere. Cafés and winding streets and broad boulevards. She spent an hour circling the neighborhood, peering into shop windows at displays of bread and pastries, stepping over little dogs, weaving around people intently talking on their phones, and basically accomplishing nothing. Paris was glorious and sunny, of course.” This demonstrates how the author makes each description longer than it needs to be, when she could just use a few beautiful sentences that make a great picture. A final example is when Ginny is in Amsterdam, “Amsterdam was damp...From there, countless tiny bridges spanned the canals that spidered out and cut through every street. Plus, it was raining - a slow steady drizzle … Everything was red brick or stone and low to the ground. And the place was swarming-it was a hive.” This represents how long and overdone Johnson’s descriptions are. Also, there are so many of them that after a while they get tiring to read.

The second reason the author could’ve done a better job at writing this book is because of the weak ending. For example, the story ends with a letter Ginny writes back to her aunt, even though her aunt will never be able to read it. In the letter, Ginny states “I always thought that I could only do things with you, that you made me more interesting. But I was wrong.” This quote shows that although yes, Ginny is proving how she discovered herself more, it’s no big revelation that she can be interesting without her aunt. In fact, I feel that this had already been demonstrated when she decided to go on the trip in the first place. Another example from Ginny’s letter is, “I’ve also decided to do what you never managed to do but what I know you probably wish you did...I’m going to go home.” This quote also shows that sure, it’s sweet and all that Ginny is going home, but wouldn’t it have been more captivating if Ginny had stayed in London with her Uncle Richard and her crush? It seems that the ending proved no difference in Ginny from the beginning of the book whatsoever, because if her personality had really changed, she might’ve stayed.

The third and final reason the author could’ve done a better job at writing this book is because of the lack of purpose behind Ginny’s trip. For example, in the first letter Ginny opens from her aunt, it says, “Notice that I have included $1,000 in cash in this envelope. This is for a passport, a one-way ticket from New York to London, and a backpack.” This shows how the author excludes any reason from Aunt Peg to be going on this trip at all. Another example is in envelope two, in which Ginny’s aunt says, “What if I just went to Europe?...This is the position you are in right now. You are about to go to England with no idea of what’s in store for you.” This quote also exhibits how there is no mention of why Aunt Peg is instructing Ginny to go to Europe. Plus, it makes the reader wonder why Aunt Peg would be permitting and even encouraging a 16-year-old girl to go to another continent by herself in the first place, considering that she is supposed to play a role of authority for Ginny.

Overall, I believe that this book could’ve been written in a way that would’ve fixed each of the problems in the story. I also feel that Maureen Johnson had a good premise in mind, but stretched the story too much to the point where it became problematic. Maybe, had the author recognized these issues and fixed them, the story would’ve been much more riveting. In conclusion, although this book far from a disaster, I think the author could’ve made more of an effort to resolve these difficulties to create a much better story.