Reading matters...

[Mythsaje]

It doesn't really matter WHAT a person chooses to read, as long as they CHOOSE to read. I realize that some people are a bit snobbish about what's "acceptable" or "worthwhile," but, on that note, I remember catching shit from certain people in my youth about what I chose to read. "What good is all that fantasy and sci-fi going to do you in the long run?"

Since one of my goals from the 4th grade on was to be an author, I had some very good reasons for reading what I did. Since I've achieved at least part of that goal--becoming a roaring success on top of being published would be nice, but I'll settle for just being published.

I like different books and authors for different reasons--even ones with questionable political viewpoints. Except Orson Scott Card. I didn't particularly like his stuff even before I found out he was a fundamentalist mormon right wing asshole.

I have to laugh at some of Dean Koontz's commentary here and there...talking about how the world is going to hell in a handbasket because of this or that, ignoring that the Earth has always been in that particular handbasket. Fact is, I enjoy his work regardless. No one's all bad. He has a flair for poetic description I quite enjoy.

People occasionally say "well, how can we promote reading over such new-fangled entertainments as video games and television?"

I wish I knew. I think JK Rowling did a good thing helping to turn a bunch of kids to the joy of reading, and hope that joy continues into adulthood. Even if they're reading "mindless" fiction.

I remember my stepmom trying to force me to read the "classics" when I was a kid. All that did is make me really good at faking it. I think I skimmed "Mutiny On The Bounty" in about half an hour, just so I could explain the gist of it. Never did get around to reading it for real, though a host of references in other works, plus what little I remember of it, gives me a fair approximation of it.

Whatever it takes to get kids reading is okay by me. If it means silly teenage romances, or the modern equivalent of Doc Savage books, I'm all for it. Let's get our kids reading. Find what interests them and let them consume to their hearts' content.

Reading IS fundamental.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. With my oldest, it was the Hardy Boys..

With my middle son, Harry Potter
Damned if I can get the young one to pick up a book without being threatened with lost privileges. :( At this point, I'm about ready to give him erotic novels. Whatever it takes. :evilgrin:

[Mythsaje]

2. Well, what's he into?

My niece doesn't like reading for pleasure, really, but the only books she ever enjoyed were ones that had relevance to her own life. Simulated or genuine "real life" stories about girls her own age.

She was illiterate until she was eight (mother's a drug addict, father's a redneck jackass drunk)...so she didn't get the best start.

Sometimes it's just about finding the right subject matter.

[Blashyrkh]

3. Why are books superior to video games?

And if reading *anything* is better than reading *nothing*, do you recommend I read Ann Coulter instead of daydreaming for an hour? Is the practice I get from reading that book worth the logic, stupidity and inanity headaches, not to mention the rage, I'll suffer?

No, it's not. Unless the subject matter is of some interest to you, you are wasting your time. What kind of people read things for the sake of reading something? I read to learn something, not to practice reading.

[Mythsaje]

4. I don't suppose it's impossible to learn something from reading Ann Coulter...

Even if it's just how not to throw up on cue.

Some people only read for information...if that's what gets them going, fine. But those who read for pleasure get more out of it.

[Blashyrkh]

8. I read for pleasure. I like learning about stuff.

I've just totally gone off fiction. The only fiction I read now is graphic novels. I find myself far more interested in esoteric and conspiratorial writings and high concept books (ie Infinity, Zero, Time) and the like.

As I said above, reading for the sake of reading is pointless. Forcing your kids to sit and read something they don't want to read is only going to reinforce their negative stereotypes.

Here's an idea. The next time one of your kids asks you a question, suggest they look up the answer themselves. You have the net. Help them use Wiki to find the answer, then let them read it to you. If you are old school, dig out the old written encyclopedia's. A positive situation that reinforces reading as a useful tool for gaining information has to be more beneficial than forcing them to read some crappy fiction.

Ann Coulter was intended as an example of a book with ZERO positive qualities, as in more effective as kindling, than a book. I stand by that.

[Mythsaje]

10. My point was that to encourage kids to read

let them read about the things they enjoy reading about. And, yes, it's always good to encourage them to research things that interest them too. That's part of the whole thing as well.

[blondie58]

5. and for kids that read

there is a definite link in good spelling. I never understood how anyone could have not enjoyed a good book and I myself, won the spelling bee in 6th grade. My two daughters both love to read and they are both excellent spellers.

[Mythsaje]

6. Spelling is memory...

Some people, even good readers (my father is one example, my best friend another) aren't necessarily good spellers. It's a matter of how much effort a person wants to delegate to that particular skill. In my best friend's case, it was enough of an effort for him to read, considering he was severely dyslexic.

[blondie58]

7. that is true, Mythsaje

I guess that dyslexia changes the equation. However, I find that there is a very strong number of people who are excellent at spelling and they are avid readers. I can't imagine learning such things with the added challenge of being dyslexic. And that is perhaps right, as I can personally look at a word and it must be from memory as to how the word looks- and tell whether it is spelled correctly by how it looks.

[Mythsaje]

19. I think one goes with the other

but the other doesn't necessarily signify the one.

Most good spellers are avid readers, but avid readers aren't necessarily good spellers. I'm probably one of the best spellers I know, but, then again, I'm a writer. I have dedicated a lot of my mental resources to learning how to spell.

[FloridaJudy]

23. I have a good friend who ovecame dyslexia

And now reads a lot, but when I read her emails, I have to ponder "WTF is she trying to say"? The poor woman still can't spell to save her life. Spell check will only get you so far: it won't catch "I chews not to go out to night". It doesn't help that English is not consistently spelled phonetically.

BTW, F. Scott Fitzgerald was supposed to be a dreadful speller. He still managed to write The Great Gatsby.

[Mythsaje]

24. His poor editors...lol

A lot of people, if they read anything he writes, vastly underestimate my friend's intelligence because of his spelling.

[Skittles]

13. yes

sometimes when I see the simple misspellings my coworkers make in their emails I think, "Don't they ever READ?"

[Mythsaje]

14. Worse yet... Signs around the workplace...

Those make me nuts.

[Skittles]

16. yes

getting a generation of folk now who are completely lost without SPELL-CHECK :o

[JackintheGreen]

9. I'd comment, but your post is too long

So I didn't read it :evilgrin:

[FloridaJudy]

11. Dean Koontz is rapidly going downhill

With his rabidly right wing diatribes. I used to enjoy his books a lot - they're not Great Literature, but literate brain candy. But his last three books have been almost unreadable to me with their rants against Godless Liberals and Scientists. And the last was a rip-off of Forbidden Planet (which he himself admitted). I'm not about to burn his books. I'm not about to burn anyone's books, though Ann Coulter's and Billo's are a waste of perfectly good home insulation. I just won't buy and read them any more. YMMV.

People forget that many "Classics" were written purely for entertainment. I'll probably be shot for stating that some of Stephen King's books are at least as good as a lot of Charles Dickens'. I was once flat on my back on bedrest for half a year, and worked my way through almost all of Dickens and Twain (they were the only books readily available in English - I was living overseas), and those guys wrote a lot of potboilers.

I'm reading Tolstoy right now, and can't help thinking every now and then "You know, this guy could have used a good editor. There's way too much repetition here". Maybe it's just the translations, but I think his prose could be a lot tighter.

This is probably just a long winded way of saying I don't see any line between entertainment and Great Literature. The really good books are both, but if you learn something, or just have a good time, the time wasn't wasted. And good Science Fiction and Mysteries are Classics.

[Mythsaje]

12. I've found the same thing

for the most part. Never dived into Tolstoy, but I've read Dickens. And, frankly, what I remember from my college Lit class was that a lot of the required reading was just BORING.

The latest Koontz book I read was Brother Odd. I think his world view is a bit skewed, all things considered, but I don't ALWAYS disagree with him. He's commented that he thinks a lot of damage has been done to people by would-be utopians and he's probably right. But his whole "look how screwed up the world is getting because people give this or that a pass" is just nonsense. Back in the day the homicidal maniacs just joined mercenary outfits and romped across Europe. Or led them. Or found some other "socially acceptable" means of satisfying their urges. Became witch hunters or something.

On the other hand, Koontz is a tireless advocate for the disabled, particularly those who suffer from various mental disabilities, so he's not a complete RW asshat.

And, yeah, it's literate brain candy. Then again, so's my stuff. :shrug:

[hfojvt]

20. None of his latest have been that good IMO

The Odd Thomas books, for example, seemed like a copy of "The Sixth Sense" but his earlier stuff like "Lightning", "Watchers", "The Bad Place", "Shadowfires", and "Twilight Eyes" seem like science fiction classics to me.

[Mythsaje]

21. Watchers was great...

So are the related "Moonlight Cove" books--namely, Fear Nothing and Seize the Night.

I didn't find the Odd Thomas books in any way similar to The Sixth Sense. Oh, the main character can see and communicate with ghosts. That's hardly a concept unique to "the Sixth Sense."

[FloridaJudy]

22. Twilight Eyes was superb

I still remember it, though it's been over 20 years since it read it. Great paranoid fantasy: some of the images are still burned in my brain.

{sigh}

I wish he were still writing like that.

[BelgianMadCow]

15. Reading requires involvment and your own reason & imagination

I agree it is crucial.

Al Gore's central point in "The Assault on Reason" is exactly that the shift from the written word to TV has caused the democratic dialogue to become shallow and one-sided.

[Didereaux]

17. Reading their biographies you discover every great writer was an avid reader!

[Mythsaje]

18. And that goes for us merely "good" writers too... n/t

[waiting for hope]

25. Thanks Mythsaje -

I used to read A LOT - then I had two kids, now my six year old is reading to me. I wish I had more time, my favorites have been Sean Russell, Terry Goodking, and Ursula K. LeGuin. Maybe if I stopped DUing and DKosing, I'd have more time....;-)