I thought those words would never leave my lips (or fingertips), but it does seem that many people who gave negative reviews for this book were missing the entire point, at least as I understand it. It even says in the back of the book that the author wanted to write about how someone can struggle "with the isolation of wanting to do the right thing when there was no right thing to do." The hopelessness of the novel at the end was intentional. There are not always concrete conclusions, let alone HAPPY concrete conclusions. In life, there are no definite beginnings and ends, except for birth and death of course. And that would be a long book. So if it ends on a kind of "well, what now?" note, it's all the more realistic.
The writing style I think is more a matter of aesthetic than anything. I didn't really like it the first time I read it, but it grew on me.
As for Chris, and his personality, it's actually pretty realistic. If I look objectively, I can see a lot of myself in him. Especially me a few years ago when I was his age. For the guy who said he was swept away by other people's actions and never did anything, well, he actually mentions that IN THE NARRATION. That was intentional, too. How many teenagers do you know that actually take charge of their life? I certainly didn't.
And the people who are complaining about vampires being a fact of life, come on man, it's an allegory!
So, ok, this book isn't for everyone, I guess. But before you criticize it, make sure that you're not missing the point.
Then again, maybe I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. In which case, just ignore me.