There's a similar dilemma that shows up in the elementary education world -- namely, if kids are reading nothing but the ghost-written, mass-market megaseries "novels" (Goosebumps, Sweet Valley High, Animorphs, etc), is it a success that they're reading, or a failure that they're not reading something better? And it's no easier to decide at that level, either.
Oh well.
I can say this -- in my experience working with kids, the ones who were reading R. L. Stein during required reading were far less likely to pull out a book to read of their own volition when they weren't being forced to. Now, I know that corrolation doesn't equate to causation, but I can tell you that one day one of the R. L. Stein kids showed up with Gary Paulsen's The Hatchet, and spent pretty much every moment of his free time that afternoon reading. I'm pretty sure it was the only time I saw this particular kid focus on any one thing for more than five minutes straight. Anecdotal evidence, I know, but still...
You know, I will have to say that your comment made me remember something about my own childhood.
I read all of R.L. Stein's Fear Street books for young adults from about second grade up 'til about sixth grade. Of course, I was just as likely to pick up The Neverending Story or The Chronicles of Narnia or a book about the dragonriders of Pern...
But I believe it all led to my current standing as a ravening book omnivore. I'll try to read almost anything. I will not, however, always succeed. But I have my guilty pleasures among my book collection.
Bizarrely, though I was never without a book growing up (and still rarely find myself without one), my brother has only read about three to five books in his entire 23 years (all by Raymond E. Feist).
What I'd always tell kids was those books were kind of like popcorn -- they're tasty, but you're missing a lot if they're all you ever read. I hope it got across to at least some of them.
Not a fan of the story, or other hammy works such as Twilight, but I do agree that giving a child something to read that they enjoy is more important than trying to get them to read better ones, based on your own tastes. They kind of need to develop it on their own.
Me? I'd rather they read -something-. Preferably something that provokes thought and discourse, though often that comes after you've been reading awhile. Everyone starts somewhere, it's a matter of where you go with it.
As hard as it is to say I'd rather people read crap than nothing at all. I have to remind myself that this is my opinion, every day at work. Because I ring up a lot of people who read shit tons of crappy romance novels and mysteries, and other crap. All the stereotypical grocery store/airport novels you see are there for a reason. I didn't believe it before, but lots of people actually read them. And it hurts me.
...But I do in fact console myself with the fact that the crap could be a gateway to better books...and I've seen it. They devour the crap books and some people get ravenous enough to try something new, and that's when I get to go "Ooh. Try this one." Not everyone, but a surprising number of people will.
Indeed. Is reading crap sort of like subtraction? Quite possibly. It is certainly not to say that all popular fiction is badly written, but I would say "Twilight" in particular seems to have a rather narrow grasp of a large but limited demographic. Whereas Stephen King has, to my knowledge, a pretty diverse demographic- a true test of appeal, in my opinion. Worse, I don't think that the "Twilight" saga's readers are typically book-savvy, and fans don't even use it as a motivating factor for reading more books (especially ones not dealing specifically with teen vampires and romance). Have they slipped pheromones into those pages or something?! I am admittedly biased; I hate the "Twilight" phenomenon... hell, I can't even get through the trailer for this new one coming out without cracking up in that "10,000 B.C.," painful kind of way. And the author is very odd to me. I don't trust it/ her. I like the "Harry Potter" saga--- I'd say that's the flipside to the "Twilight" coin.
Comments 9
Oh well.
I can say this -- in my experience working with kids, the ones who were reading R. L. Stein during required reading were far less likely to pull out a book to read of their own volition when they weren't being forced to. Now, I know that corrolation doesn't equate to causation, but I can tell you that one day one of the R. L. Stein kids showed up with Gary Paulsen's The Hatchet, and spent pretty much every moment of his free time that afternoon reading. I'm pretty sure it was the only time I saw this particular kid focus on any one thing for more than five minutes straight. Anecdotal evidence, I know, but still...
Reply
I read all of R.L. Stein's Fear Street books for young adults from about second grade up 'til about sixth grade. Of course, I was just as likely to pick up The Neverending Story or The Chronicles of Narnia or a book about the dragonriders of Pern...
But I believe it all led to my current standing as a ravening book omnivore. I'll try to read almost anything. I will not, however, always succeed. But I have my guilty pleasures among my book collection.
Bizarrely, though I was never without a book growing up (and still rarely find myself without one), my brother has only read about three to five books in his entire 23 years (all by Raymond E. Feist).
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
...But I do in fact console myself with the fact that the crap could be a gateway to better books...and I've seen it. They devour the crap books and some people get ravenous enough to try something new, and that's when I get to go "Ooh. Try this one." Not everyone, but a surprising number of people will.
It's something.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment