Books everyone should read

sleepydumpling · Post by **sleepydumpling** » 15 May 2007, 15:24

I think it's the kiss of death to force anyone to read anything, and especially if you're going to force them to analyse what they read.

So many good books are ruined for teenagers because they're not allowed to just read them and enjoy them for enjoyment's sake. They're expected to know (and care) what the author was thinking about when he/she wrote it, how the book "reflects on society today" and all that hoo-ha. Sometimes, well actually most of the time, a good book is great because it just tells a story that we enjoy. Analysing anything can just ruin the magic of the skill of a writer.

A writer's job is to take us on a journey, and if we try to look at the map as we go along and try to tell the author where they should be taking us, well it just spoils the enjoyment of the trip.

Can you tell I'm a tad passionate about recreational reading? They'll never make an academic/educational librarian out of me... Public libraries all the way!!

lifelongreader · Post by **lifelongreader** » 16 May 2007, 10:53

Looks like we are on the same page with this Kath

Pardon the terrible pun, it (of strawberries!) wasn't intentional.

kaytie · Post by **kaytie** » 16 May 2007, 14:42

sleepydumpling wrote:I really have a problem with "shoulds" when it comes to books/movies/art/television shows... anything that is subjective to taste.

It depends on what the purpose of the list is, I think. If we're talking books teens might consider when pulling a book off the shelf for entertainment purposes, then yeah, suggestions are great and there's no room for "shoulds."

If we're talking books that would help a student understand the concepts prevalent in modern literature, then yes, there are books they should read because they are widely alluded to in literature or are widely regarded as representative of a particular time.

Personally, as a writer, I appreciate education's broad goal to teach students to be critical thinkers when it comes to literature. If we can't look at a text and form a critical thought about it, we're not doing much more than passively scanning text. And since a lot of literature is written with the intention of reflecting on society, it's not paying much service to the writer if students don't know how to find it.

Of course, some teachers are better at conveying a love of reading alongside the learning than others.

My fear is, if we relegate reading to the realm of simple pastime and mere enjoyment, we'll lose readers who are interested in a more active reading experience, the readers who want to be challenged, who want to learn something about society, who want more than escapism.

I want both.

sleepydumpling · Post by **sleepydumpling** » 17 May 2007, 04:26

Honestly Kaytie, I don't think we're ever going to lose the ability to question or explore the written word if we stop forcing kids to analyse writing to pieces in school. I think a lot of folks underestimate the natural curiosity and yearning to understand and learn more that people generally carry in their own minds. Of course there are always exceptions to that rule, but generally speaking, human beings are a curious lot.

I read wholly and solely for recreation, but that doesn't mean I don't want to understand what the messages writers are trying to convey to me in their work may be, or that I don't want to learn more about the settings, language or character types they use. Or that I don't want to talk about what I have read and hear how others have felt about it. Nor does it mean that I don't want to be challenged by what I read - that's certainly not the case, I LOVE a book that makes me think and that sparks my curiosity, and one that inspires me enough to read more on that subject or setting is usually one that is going to be added to my favourites list.

But I don't want to be told how I should interpret it, or told what questions I should be asking of any piece of work.

I think to suggest that leaving people to their own devices when reading means they won't ever be able to think critically or beyond the surface value is actually a bit insulting to most people's intelligence. Just look at the natural proliferation of book clubs and reading groups. People do love to read, interpret and discuss books on their own initiative.

For example, the two years of high school I had a teacher that stuck to the curriculum and the old fashioned methods of teaching literature, I can honestly say I did not get anything from the eight books we had to read over those two years, because my own natural curiosity was pushed down in favour of set questions.

The three years of high school I had a teacher who used the method of asking us what questions we drew ourselves from the novels, I was fascinated, even though some of the novels were not to my taste. I found my own questions, enjoyed those of my peers and as a class, having our own natural curiosity and intelligence lead the way made us actually want to delve further, to learn more. I still have most of those books, I remember them better and I can even remember the questions we came up with on our own.

kaytie · Post by **kaytie** » 17 May 2007, 14:57

I just think it's important to remember that reading comprehension skills are just that, skills, and not every person is born with talent in that area, just as not every person is born with a natural affinity for math (like me--I didn't start "getting" math until university).

Fortunately, because it's a skill it can be developed, and sometimes that means teachers must lead discussions and sometimes it means for them to allow discussions to unfold naturally. I would say it depends on the age group and the varying reading levels within that group. Some students are perfectly capable of coming up with their own reading questions, but others are not, for a variety of reasons--because they read below their age level, because English is a second language, because they're better at quantifiable subjects such as math, because their parents never had books in their houses.

It's not an insult to recognize that students learn subjects in different ways from each other. I've worked with students who, floundering in all of their schoolwork, respond the best to literature when they can approach it with specific questions in mind. Their confidence in their own ability is so shot they need the assurance of "correct" answers to bolster them. The courses are designed to bring them up to the level of readers who can and do form their own questions about a work.

If young readers don't learn how to think critically, not all of them will naturally grow to be mature readers who think critically. It's not a given.

It's like that old Robin Williams movie, Dead Poet's Society. Yes, he tore the introductions out of the literary theory books and brought the students right into the poetry he taught, but when you listen to him, he's using and teaching the same critical thinking skills I'm talking about.

So in the end, are we really saying the same thing? No to stodgy lit. courses and yes to bringing the literature back to the student?

kaytie · Post by **kaytie** » 17 May 2007, 17:32

(PS It's not my intention to be adversarial here, so if I'm coming across that way I apologize to you, Sleepydumpling, and to the board, and I'll try to be better. It's something I feel strongly about, though, so my opinions, however well-intended, might come across in a way that wouldn't be true if we were all in the same room, discussing this over coffee.)

sleepydumpling · Post by **sleepydumpling** » 18 May 2007, 10:11

Don't worry Kaytie, I love a great debate! I am not one of those people who can't debate without thinking less of someone whose opinion differs from my own. In fact, someone who can argue their point clearly gains my respect, kwim?

I dunno though, I do think people have better comprehension than regular Western schooling credits them for. I do think that while there is an element of skill that can be honed and improved, I also do believe that most people, given encouragement and inspiration, can grow and learn without being forced into boxes or set patterns.

I do agree that confidence in one's ability is often one of the biggest hurdles. But "set" answers aren't the way to boost confidence IMO, inspiration and encouragement will go much further than being told what's "right". Some folks do need a little guidance more than others, yes, but I also think that with encouragement to ask the questions that naturally occur to them, that ability to comprehend will also grow and expand.

You do draw the link with maths, but I think that's a whole different kettle of fish. In mathematics there is no room for interpretation, emotion, creativity. It's a very black and white subject. But in literature, there are so many colours in the subject that to box it up in packages just dims all those colours, shades and tones.

notrorygilmore · Post by **notrorygilmore** » 27 May 2007, 18:42

[Well, with sites like Spark Notes and such, teens need not to read anything. All they have to do is print off a few summaries and voila! A 75 on the test!

I despise this approach as much as the next reader, but I don't see the situation changing.

Anyways, I have read 6 (in the process of Don Quixote nad only half of Machiavelli's The Prince, so this is an estimated amount

) from the list. I own around 5 more that are also mentioned, but I have not gotten to them yet. But I still have 2.5 years left of highschool.

I best get started

[/quote]

Very true. When my friends would be discussing homework and I would mention the books I had to read for my homework they would always reply, "That's a lot of books, but that's easy. Just get the spark notes." I would just stare at them. First of, I don't do the whole spark notes/cliff notes thing. Secondly, at lot of my English classes in college involved reading books that are not on those sites. I got so sick of explaining to people that I don't cheat my way out of the books and even if I did, the books aren't on the site. Most of my classes did read books or play that those websites offer, but I took an Intro. to Fiction (I took the section of the class that covered the mystery genre) class at my community college, none of the books were classics. Same with my Literature for Young Adults, The Literature of Crime and Detection, and Children's Literature classes.

Then, just last week, I told one of my friends how I got 6 books from the library, including one book I'd been waiting to read for a while. After I told him about it he told me, "You should just go get the sparknotes. I'd save you a lot of time." I finally told him, if I didn't want to take the time to read the book, I wouldn't go to the library. Or, I'd just read the last chapter of the book. I mean, seriously, if I don't want to take the time to read books while bother reading the blurbs about them? Ugh. Some people just confuse me.

callalilly · Post by **callalilly** » 01 Nov 2007, 19:32

Well, I have to tell you, I work with juvenile delinquents. Most would never read any of these. I try to get the kids I work with to read period. I usually can get the females to read Jodi Picoult, and Nicholas Sparks. The males usually read Harry Potter which is really good considering those are HUGE books for that age, especially when your dealing with kids who have ADHD/ADD. Reading anything is good!

MacGyver · Post by **MacGyver** » 04 Jun 2009, 15:31

Ishmael by Daniel Quinn

MarcomMom · Post by **MarcomMom** » 19 Jul 2009, 17:53

I am very humbled by this list! I thought myself well-read, but have only read a few of these. (And my public high school is rated very highly in the nation.) Guess I'd better grab a couple of these and get going.

danialkon1 · Post by **danialkon1** » 06 Aug 2009, 09:43

Great book for all teens out their and also for adults.
Come checck it out at tarraem
great novel that is just fun to read and inspiring.
It will amaze you, so come check it out.
you will ove it, tarraem.

Bowlie · Post by **Bowlie** » 06 Aug 2009, 13:15

Middlemarch by George Eliot is a beast of a book. I tried reading it a few years ago after I read Silas Marner (which I loved) and failed miserably. I will eventually finish reading it because it is quite well written, but I think taking on a book like that in high school is a little much.

I've read 23 books on that list and started a few others but never finished them. Most of the 23 books I read after high school in my college lit class or on my own in my late 20s.

I think some of the books are probably better reads when you are a little older rather than high school age. Just my opinion. Nice list though!

selfer · Post by **selfer** » 06 Sep 2009, 11:14

I wish I'd read all those, and I'm 29! I might add a few more modern classics to the list: The Thing They Carried (by Tim O'Brien) and maybe a collection of Raymond Chandler shorts. Nice list, though!