"But it gets them reading."

[Terramax]

True, but the general idea is that most people these days consider reading to be "gay"

I predict the reason for that are most kids only read these terrible books.

Had they been given accessible yet clever, rewarding, intelligent books then perhaps that wouldn't be the case.

It's like pop music. Most are ridiculed for liking it because 'pop' is considered synonymous with 'bad taste'.

What are the chances you?ll start listening to a respectable, intelligent band like Radiohead after listening to a Aqua?s albums?

Although if they never read they'll never get onto "harder" books later on.

I think you've miss-understood this statement (either that or I have). When he means 'hard' I think he's referring to 'better'.

In other words, reading a terrible book doesn't mean someone will then seek out something better. In fact, if they're anything like me, they'll give up and never want to read ever again.

I was so sick and tired of being introduced to the same pretentious, cliched books in school and by friends that I reverted to anime like Evangalion, Akira and Ghost in the Shell (back in the days before the Internet was widespread, and anime in the west was mainly for grownups i.e. still cool) and videogames. I didn't read books for years.

It was only through watching GitS recently, an anime, that has interested me to read books on psychology, NOT books like Twilight or Harry Potter.

 

[The King And His Fool]

Did anyone explain exactly how reading a book can be bad?

The only book that you can even consider to be educationally bad are the ones that are littered with bad grammar and spelling mistakes. Other than those (and tv magazines and game magazines and p*rnor other irrelevant stuff, stop giving bad examples to prove a point), I fail to see how they could detract from my overall intelligence.

Are you saying people shouldn't read AT ALL if they'd rather chose a Harry Potter over a work of Tolstoy? If you ask me, it's better to hear a "at least it got them reading" instead of "They're not reading, but I suppose it could be worse.."

Every book has its merits and will contribute one way or another to its reader. If not for the masterly way it was written, than at least for the story that compels the reader to keep those pages turning. Heck, even pretty picture can make a book worth the read.

Let people read what they enjoy reading. That's what books are for anyway.

True, but the general idea is that most people these days consider reading to be "gay"

I predict the reason for that are most kids only read these terrible books.

Had they been given accessible yet clever, rewarding, intelligent books then perhaps that wouldn't be the case.

It's like pop music. Most are ridiculed for liking it because 'pop' is considered synonymous with 'bad taste'.

What are the chances you?ll start listening to a respectable, intelligent band like Radiohead after listening to a Aqua?s albums?

Yes, I can already imagine the hordes of illiterates flooding towards you when you offer them one of those "clever, rewarding, intelligent" books. People don't read for other reasons. No time, no interested, other forms of entertainment and pastime that are more thrilling to them than reading words on white paper.

I'm actually glad you brought up "pop" music as being inferior to other genres. Considering the other thread about pop music and how people have been bashing it for no other reason than the fact that their favourite band doesn't make it, proves just how much (my apologies for using the term) elitism is going around. Your music, books and movies are all better than theirs. It doesn't have to do with tastes. No, it's just a fact. Right? Why would radiohead, as a band, be more respectable and intelligent than pop artist? Sure, it's good music, for you, and me, but you can see how it doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone, right?

It's the same for books.

De gustibus non est disputandum, but apparently here, it can.

 

[Jirlond]

It's not just books - the amount of crap that magazines and tabloids produce attributes to people wanting shameless substanceless same story over and over again!

 

[Librarian Mike]

There is one big problem with this idea of people reading the 'wrong' stuff. Basically, there seems to be an assumption that they are the authority of what is good and bad. I hate to break it to you, but it's all subjective. Different people have different reading preferences, not to mention different reading abilities.

If you can get young people to the point where reading is something they choose to do rather than something like mowing the lawn, you've already climbed the mountain. If it takes Twilight, or Harry Potter, or hell even Ninjabread Man to motivate young people, so be it. The idea is that it opens a door to more things. As we say in the library business, the trick is getting them in the door. Once they're in, we've got 'em.

 

[Terramax]

Did anyone explain exactly how reading a book can be bad?
...I fail to see how they could detract from my overall intelligence.

I'll explain.

In this world there are children (and grown-ups) that are encouraged to read fascist, racist, negative books that'll only influence them to grow living under extremist ideologies and carry on reading books in the vein, and to inflict harm on.

"Oh, but it gets them reading..."

Reading good books can educate self-respect, free-thinking, to develop your mind and soul, feel joyous, unique and give you inner strength to be proud of who you are and to pursue your own goals and ambitions.

A bad book teaches you to conform to the norm, not because it makes you a better person, but safer from pain and fear, to expect more or the impossible, to live on false dreams, to commit acts of cruelty.

Reverting this back to children's books. It's encouraged this mass pop-culture of dressing and acting in idiotic conventions, expecting some perfect human to pull them out of their mundain lives and giving a better one.

From what I understand, most generic, pop-culture books don't teach you about the hardships of life, and give you the information and strength to overcome your problems on your own, but to rely on other super-beings or magic. False hopes and dreams.

And most of the kids won't go on to reading deeper, more thought provoking books. They'll just grow out of the them then start buying Cosmopolitan Magazine or FHM instead.

But, hell, the books get em reading, huh?

 

[Blurbl]

In this world there are children (and grown-ups) that are encouraged to read fascist, racist, negative books that'll only influence them to grow living under extremist ideologies and carry on reading books in the vein, and to inflict harm on.

"Oh, but it gets them reading..."

Reading good books can educate self-respect, free-thinking, to develop your mind and soul, feel joyous, unique and give you inner strength to be proud of who you are and to pursue your own goals and ambitions.

A bad book teaches you to conform to the norm, not because it makes you a better person, but safer from pain and fear, to expect more or the impossible, to live on false dreams, to commit acts of cruelty.

Reverting this back to children's books. It's encouraged this mass pop-culture of dressing and acting in idiotic conventions, expecting some perfect human to pull them out of their mundain lives and giving a better one.

From what I understand, most generic, pop-culture books don't teach you about the hardships of life, and give you the information and strength to overcome your problems on your own, but to rely on other super-beings or magic. False hopes and dreams.

And most of the kids won't go on to reading deeper, more thought provoking books. They'll just grow out of the them then start buying Cosmopolitan Magazine or FHM instead.

But, hell, the books get em reading, huh?

I think you're overblowing the effect books have on people; the only written works I've seen change people are religious texts. I've seen a particularly well written piece of poetry make someone think for a minute, but then it is forgotten.

And I'm not sure what you mean by a bad book; do you mean a book that teachs or contains poor lifestyle choices, or a book that doesn't make the reader think?

 

[Terramax]

Yes, I can already imagine the hordes of illiterates flooding towards you when you offer them one of those "clever, rewarding, intelligent" books. People don't read for other reasons. No time, no interested, other forms of entertainment and pastime that are more thrilling to them than reading words on white paper.

I'm actually glad you brought up "pop" music as being inferior to other genres. Considering the other thread about pop music and how people have been bashing it for no other reason than the fact that their favourite band doesn't make it, proves just how much (my apologies for using the term) elitism is going around. Your music, books and movies are all better than theirs. It doesn't have to do with tastes. No, it's just a fact. Right? Why would radiohead, as a band, be more respectable and intelligent than pop artist? Sure, it's good music, for you, and me, but you can see how it doesn't necessarily appeal to everyone, right?

For the record I'm not a fan of Radionhead. I do think they're talented, but I don't listen to them. And I like pop music (my favourite band is 'Cast'. Rock bands don't get much more pop than that).

Why are Radiohead more intelligent and respectable? I think it's reasonable to say that their music has been produced to be more thought provoking, emotional and meaningful than the average pop record. It doesn't necessarily make them better, but definitely more intelligent and probably more deserving of respect than the Pussycat Dolls.

Going back to the original subject, I made a * theory * on how children/ teenagers think about books, not me personally.

Perhaps kids think many books are gay, nerdy, for losers, etc, because the only ones they've been introduced to at that time are books deliberately dumbed down for the teenage audience.

What many pop-books have a habit of doing is treating their readers like they're more stupid than they actually are. At least, when I was 11, I felt patronised being expected read Goosebumps because everyone else was, when I wanted to read the later Discworld Novals and mangas like Ghost in the Shell, which I found more appealing because they didn't treat me like an adolescent.

Going right back to what ninjablu said, wouldn't it be better that instead of selling blandly written, pointless, reproduced, cliched stories that kids enjoy to a point, why not sell intelligent, interesting, deep, memorable plots that inspire creative, improved ways of thinking that is also just as much, if not more enjoyable? Not only that, but these books deliberately provoke kids to read all kinds of other books (other subjects, genres, etc), instead of what they actually do is try to get them to only read the sequels, buy the T-shirts, watch the films and buy into the other merchandise until the franchise falls out of favour to another pop-book?

 

[dalek sec]

I'm going to get flamed for saying this but honestly I don't care. Books like the Twilight series should just be banned, for god sakes look at how crazy the fan base for it are.

 

[Librarian Mike]

I'm going to get flamed for saying this but honestly I don't care. Books like the Twilight series should just be banned, for god sakes look at how crazy the fan base it for the nonesense.

~Yeah totally. It's just like those video gamers...~

 

[Xojins]

This seems kind of elitist; you shouldn't force people to read books they won't understand, like, or have any interest in just because they're 'more sophisticated.' People are supposed to enjoy reading.

Why do people keep insisting I'm using force here? At what point have I argued that people should be forcibly kept away from stupid books? At what point did people not notice the obvious link to Good Fairies of New York which is a mushy comedy book with nary a difficult idea?

Seriously, my point is in relation to the educator's acceptance of poor material as standard, not that poor material is the worst thing ever. At most, I have stated that poor material has no right being movie-making popular.

Well you do bash these "terrible books" so it kind of implies you think people should be reading "better" material.

 

[Terramax]

I think you're overblowing the effect books have on people; the only written works I've seen change people are religious texts. I've seen a particularly well written piece of poetry make someone think for a minute, but then it is forgotten.

And I'm not sure what you mean by a bad book; do you mean a book that teachs or contains poor lifestyle choices, or a book that doesn't make the reader think?

Basically both. I know my post may sound blown out of preportion, but you can't deny the fact that some kids do idolise the characters in certain books to the point of being obsessive and copying their very ways of thinking, living, etc. Maybe just reading one book won't effect a child, but continously reading the same types of single sided stories over and over.

Think of it like a reader of a Superhero book. Superhero defeats all his enemies/ villains by shooting them. If the reader idolises the superhero, he may even come to the ideology that shooting villains is the way to deal with all those who've commit crimes, or even those who simply don't see eye-to-eye with the superhero's ideologies.

A reader of these books will likely go on to read many, many more books in the same way. Yes, they will eventually (or hopefully) start reading more complex books, but not after having spent years and money on these fictitious books for which they've learned nothing from. Furthermore they may inherit those same pro-violence for peace ideologies that the superhero promoted.

Instead, they could've enjoyed reading a book with the complexities of a Studio Ghibli film, where the heroes and villains are multi-layered, the villains often not bad people at all but simply miss-directed. Right and wrong may be blurred in this story, but they prompt the reader to think individually about what it really means to be a good or bad, coming to their own conclusion instead of one being thrust upon them, all whilst still enjoying a fantastic story.

 

[Dramatic Flare]

No. I'm saying they shouldn't be marketed for profit only, when publishers know damn well its a bad book. I'm saying it should not be blithely accepted. I'm saying that teachers, the people we look to educate the next generation, should not lower the bar because of popular materials.
I'm saying there should be as much fluffy crap books written as anyone damn well wants, and it should remain fluffy crap. There are plenty of quality books that I don't enjoy, and likewise there are quality books that I enjoy that others won't. That's natural.

Phenomena such as, say, twilight, aren't natural.

But teachers are not lowering the bar.

I don't know how things work in America. But in Britain you get one classic text, which an exam is based on. They are other things too, poetry, a play (we had An Inspector Calls). I forget exactly how it works because it was a long time ago. But in my case the classic text was Jane Eyre. There was never any discussion on what we wanted to read or any modern, popular books.

So if the kids are reading what they want in their spare time then how are teachers lowering the bar?

Also, publishers are businesspeople. They attempt to make a profit, nothing else.

And I am in America and I can successfully say they are. Now, not every one of them is and I read as many good books as did bad books during my high school career. However I went to a private school with a corporate work intention. I had to also spend time in public schools and let me say- there were some schools where I just felt sad looking at the other kids. In one I was proudly informed the student had actually made his english teacher run out crying.

Also, let me draw the line and say that progressively getting better at reading as you get older is natural. I am not expecting a fourth grader to read Tolstoy. I am saying, however, that a society that argues that an young adult who doesn't push themselves, or at least try something beyond the unusual is okay has something intrinsically flawed.

And publishers are business people, however it is a relatively new phenomena to make a profit by marketing crap as good. Used to be you would attempt to simply outdo your opponents by having a better quality product. Now you can outdo your opponents by having a better quality marketing, and I do feel the average joe suffers in more ways than one.

If you think the world of literature is going to Hell. Need I remind you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers_2 ($823,275,835)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ugly_Truth_(film) ($83,718,135)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_Wars ($115,049,554)

I am no movie snob, I mean I love Will Ferrell movies. But come on. The medium of films suffers worse from your problem. Especially seen as every popular book gets made into a movie. It is even more profitable as you don't even have to be able to read to go to the cinema.

Meh. The movie industry has always been relatively bad, actually, just with some gems that are produced infrequently. My dad created a list by grouping together a large group of people's suggestions on the best movies of all time, and we started in 1914 with a political movie in favor of the Ku Klux Klan that had just a completely ridiculous storyline.
Secondly, who's going to say, "Well, at least they're watching movies," when they see people watching bad ones?

 

[Dramatic Flare]

I'm going to get flamed for saying this but honestly I don't care. Books like the Twilight series should just be banned, for god sakes look at how crazy the fan base it for the nonesense.

No, I have to go Voltaire on this one.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

I'm not flaming you, just going to gently inform you that as a person who works at a book store, banning of any book for any reason is pretty much a bad idea.

 

[EchetusXe]

And I am in America and I can successfully say they are. Now, not every one of them is and I read as many good books as did bad books during my high school career. However I went to a private school with a corporate work intention. I had to also spend time in public schools and let me say- there were some schools where I just felt sad looking at the other kids. In one I was proudly informed the student had actually made his english teacher run out crying.

You can't push a wall. Not with any success at least. If children are brought up to believe that reading books are for homosexuals and that sport is the man's pursuit then how can a teacher combat that? Read 'Agnes Grey' to see just what effect a teacher has on a student compared to a parent.

Now I love sport, well one sport anyway, but American education systems put ridiculous amounts of money into pushing sport down the pupil's throats.

I understand that some college football coaches get paid millions. That is completely unheard of in Britain. Here sport is an optional, after school activity. As well as basic P.E. lessons which are about getting fit and having fun rather than any serious attempt at being ranked above competing schools. Nobody gives a toss how well well or poorly their school, college or University does at any sport. There are exceptions, like the Oxbridge boat race.

Hell, even the kids who were good at sport and bad at education would prefer to bunk off P.E. lessons and after school matches so they could go and do their own thing.

In conclusion, I would think the avocation of a mediocre sporting talent over learning is a bigger concern for America than the Twilight series.

 

[pigeon_of_doom]

I think the main problem is that literature aimed at younger readers rarely "scales up". It's rarely a lite version of a classic, it tends to be escapism intended to be popular and compulsive but without anything important to say. It reassures rather than challenges their beliefs and sets readers into reading habits they continue for the rest of their lives. They're on a course set more for pulp fiction and, despite the best efforts of their teachers, usually reject the classics forced upon them as "boring" or "irrelevant".

 

[Dramatic Flare]

And I am in America and I can successfully say they are. Now, not every one of them is and I read as many good books as did bad books during my high school career. However I went to a private school with a corporate work intention. I had to also spend time in public schools and let me say- there were some schools where I just felt sad looking at the other kids. In one I was proudly informed the student had actually made his english teacher run out crying.

You can't push a wall. Not with any success at least. If children are brought up to believe that reading books are for homosexuals and that sport is the man's pursuit then how can a teacher combat that? Now I love sport, well one sport anyway, but American education systems put ridiculous amounts of money into pushing sport down the pupil's throats.

I understand that some college football coaches get paid millions. That is completely unheard of in Britain. Here sport is an optional, after school activity. As well as basic P.E. lessons which are about getting fit and having fun rather than any serious attempt at being ranked above competing schools. Nobody gives a toss how well well or poorly their school, college or University does at any sport. There are exceptions, like the Oxbridge boat race.

Hell, even the kids who were good at sport and bad at education would prefer to bunk off P.E. lessons and after school matches so they could go and do their own thing.

In conclusion, I would think the avocation of a mediocre sporting talent over learning is a bigger concern for America than the Twilight series.

Or perhaps it has the same root cause?

Honestly I don't disagree with you it just seems rather tangential and inconsequential to the matter at hand. I'm sure there are bigger problems than the one we are currently writing about, I'm simply bringing up a new subject for debate and discussion and presenting my opinion on that subject.
If you wish to bring up a different thread which details the level of idiocy that goes into the American sports system, be my quest.

 

[Deleted]

Tween girls insert them self into the empty shell that is Bella and use the book as their dream material. I could make a poetry book about a poor guy who also happened to be hot fall in love with a princess who doesn't say anything more than 'guards take him out' and it will be a best seller. Because they imagine them self as the princess.

As for eragon, it was alright. I'm not a dragon fan but the story was too much like "we gotta save this thing because its the right thing to do and we will meet a lot of people and split up at one point and I'll have to use something I had for the whole book to get though the last part weeeeeee"

 

[Seras54]

Make love to me, right now.
I lol'd so hard I think I broke my lolometer

Unfortunately, due to time constraints, I am incapable of agreeing to your request.

A suitable replacement has been sent in my stead.

And yes ladies. He sparkles.​

And now i must ask you to stay away from me, theres only one male vampire i'm interested in

Protip: Spell his name backwards