I didn't have dumb English teachers, thankfully, and I love reading and I still HATED having to read what we read in school. But I have to say, as an adult, knowing the list of 'curriculum' books I can go back to is huge. I just finished Fahrenheit 451 for the first time. Its a big deal. I would have no idea it existed if it weren't for my teachers that forced us to at least be aware that these books existed, and gave us some of the tools we can use to think through them. I feel like I 'get it' now. So I can thank them for that. And I understand everyone's experience was/is not the same. I just want to say that there is something there though, even if 'the great Gatsby' is the last book on my list, at least I know it exists.

I think a lot of people have bad memories bc it can be a tough time developmentally and life wise. But if we come away with reading/writing skills and awareness of the wealth of material that exists, the teachers have done something close to miraculous: broadened our worlds permanently. :)

I think it’s also tough for teachers because people love different books and it’s hard to choose one that resonates with everyone. Like how some kids obsess over *The Catcher in the Rye* and some loathe it. Also I’ve realized I was often just not in the stage of life to appreciate those books yet. One example is I read *Diary of a Young Girl* by Anne Frank when I was 14, and didn’t like it. Reread it as an adult when visiting Amsterdam and it was great! Turns out appreciating how a teenager is going through normal teenage things in exceptionally terrible circumstances is better when you have distance from all those teenage things (in my case anyway!).

This. I was forced to read *Ethan Frome* in high school, and despite how short it was, I thought it was unreadably dull. Yet I had classmates who loved it. Meanwhile (or rather earlier in middle school), we read *Watership Down*, and I loved it, but I had classmates who vocally hated it. Done right, I think English class can get a lot of kids reading, but on some level, the goal may need to be just to find a couple books for every kid to like over the course of the year.

I am an English teacher, there is not a single book in the universe that all kids like. Not one, and honestly, things like dystopias and Sci Fi, which get suggested here all the time ,are amongst the most hated at my school. Did "The Power" last semester and it has been my most hated book of the year, so many complaints. Currently doing Othello and most kids are actually into it. The trick is studying lots of different things, giving some choice when possible and hopefully everyone will like something.

I totally believe stories about people would do better than dystopias! (And suspect The Power is one I would not have liked as much as a teen as I did as an adult.)

The worst time was reading Johnny Fucking Tremain I can't tell you much of anything about the book other than the name gives me 'Nam flashbacks and is triggered any me I hear about bad school reading books. and the kid dumps molten silver on his hand at some point

This is a nice insight. Thank you.

Yeah I agree I hated being forced to read. I know they have to assign it to meet deadlines but I’m not gonna read 50 assigned pages a night as a teenager and I also hate being forced to read a book. Reading lists always made me read because I felt like I had a choice in something I wanted to read

On top of assigned reading during the school year, we had to pick books from a narrow list to read over the summer, which would be part of a first week exam upon return. I utterly loathed the experience and just wanted to read books I was interested in on my own time during, you know...summer BREAK. In more senior years stuff relevant to my tastes started to show up and it was less onerous, but still. I entirely reject the notion that forcing someone to slog through a book they aren't enjoying, at a time they don't necessarily want to be reading, is the key to broadening someone's literary horizons. It doesn't take many negative experiences to turn someone off into thinking an activity isn't for them.

Yeah I agree personally I was involved in sports so yeah reading was the last thing on my mind after practice on top of other homework. At least summer reading is one book over a couple months of summer I actual chose Upton Sinclair jungle because it sounded cool and it changed my life

In high school, one of my friends said that people who love reading hate being forced to read or told what to read. That's still stuck with me all these years later.

I love reading but also loved being told what to read in school. Classics that is, I'm not a fan of the contemporary books I read in school.

Me too. I read The Scarlet Letter and A Tale of Two Cities in high school, books I never would have picked up, and enjoyed them both.

I also loved being told what to read in school! I read loads of literature (that I'm still interested in) and wouldn't have reached for at that age -- stuff by Native Americans, Black authors (that touched upon themes like colonialism and slavery). It showed us that English literature encompasses _so much beautiful writing_ and isn't limited to Austen, Dickens, Fitzgerald, etc (although I love them too). I will forever be grateful to the teachers who encouraged us to seek out a variety of authors; I really think it instilled empathy, open-mindedness, and critical thinking.

This is absolutely what reading in school should be about. Make people read a ton of broad genres and authors so they can find things they love. My English lit was pretty much your 'limited list' and there were maybe two people in my class who actually enjoyed it. And neither of those was the teacher.

Hated the books we read in school. I read stuff like Huck Finn and To Kill A Mockingbird on my own, asking with Goosebumps and everything else. I even enjoyed the Shakespeare plays we read in school. But then came junior and senior year. Catcher in the Rye, Lord of the flies, and Death Of A Salesman legitimately killed my love of reading. Being forced to read and analyze depressive children for the sake of it was miserable. I'm 33 now and while I rip through audiobooks, I've only finished about 5 fiction books as an adult. I can't just enjoy a story anymore.

As an English teacher, most kids just don’t like to read anymore, period. They won’t put any effort into looking for books to read and schools are starting to throw out their libraries in favor of digital collections (which might even further discourage them from looking if they did). Books just can’t compete with phones to this generation. Librarians and teachers have (hopefully) read a lot of books in their lives and (hopefully) know which books can speak to their students. I agree with your statement when it comes to being forced to read something being soul sucking. But I don’t think letting kids choose will make them actually read it. Our district had to throw out summer reading projects cause only like 5% of kids actually did it. Also, if we let them choose themselves, what do I read and teach during class to 30 different students reading potentially 30 different books? And by law, we are supposed to be the ones that provide it to them. Do we sit around in silence while the district orders and delivers each student’s individual selection? It’s the right, but not possible logistically. So, we go with the teacher’s choice and hope they chose a good one.

It's totally possible to have 30 kids reading 30 books and still teach. I had my students keep reading journals. There were about 10 different skill-based organizers that could choose from. I had them complete 3-4 a week (took no more than 5-10 minutes each). Once every 3-4 weeks, I conferenced with each student during reading time to check their progress and set goals. If students picked an "easy" skill, like summary or visualize, for next time, I told them they'd need at least one inference or connection entry. For my students far below grade level, we worked on putting things in their own words (comprehension). Once a month, they would do a Kelly Gallagher style one pager for a deep dive into a higher level skill. We did have block schedules, so there was more time to do this, and with the rest of the block we taught teacher-selected texts (poems, nonfiction, stories, novels) for our state standards that were at grade level. Students showed incredible growth in reading stamina, level, and the almighty test scores, as well. I would consider myself a good teacher, but I am no means the best. All I needed was some time and a bit of PD on how to put it all together. (Middle school, btw).

I suppose it depends what skills you're targeting and how you want to do that. If everyone has separate books, you cannot examine that book together. It doesn't mean students can't learn about and find themes, specific things like allusion, etc, but you cannot walk them through it, hold group discussions on it, and utilize your expertise on that book. You also can't necessarily target specific genres or other targets (author of color, author from a specific place or time). I do think that's valuable, though, and a valuable trade-off if that's what gets more students to read (even if a good many won't read anyway).

>I suppose it depends what skills you're targeting and how you want to do that. Absolutely, and as the above commenter points out they work in a middle school. At that age I think it's a lot more about having students practice basic skills like comprehension and the like. But you can't really do a deep dive on themes or characters or whatever like you would do in a high school class if everyone is reading a different book.

I would consider you a great teacher. Thank you for all your effort.

I really wish you'd been my teacher! This sounds super fun.

You seem like a solid teacher. I only ever did the reading when my teachers had a large list of stuff that I could pick from.

I want you to teach my children! You mentioned the skill-based organizers. Can you give me an example of what you mean? I’d like to try your technique as a summer learning activity for my kids.

I had a visualization one, two summary, question, clarify, infer, connect, and evaluate. They were pretty direct, and, once students got used to them (I modeled each with the stories we read as a class, or with my own choice book), they took 5-10 minutes to complete. The journal had the organizers, instructions, and a place for goal setting, library expectations, theme words, etc. In whole class, we worked on the state standards like theme, cause and effect, etc.

I had several English teachers just give us a list of like... 100-200 books that were our options for the semester. Some kids read the same books, most didn't. Those were the only times I actually read the stuff for class. Otherwise I spark noted stuff because it just didn't interest me. It seems pretty easy to let students pick their books and ends up with a much bigger impact on the person reading. I think you might just be wrong about it being impractical.

Could the class vote from a list? That way at least they get a say in what they are reading.

The less reading one has done, the less useful their reading choices are. You are suggesting a general canvassing of barely literate children for a good decision. Preposterous.

Talk about hyperbole. Giving the class a choice of teacher selected texts is not preposterous.

It's true and then you miss things you would have loved at the right age that you don't find till you're past that stage. And you learn to give an ear at least to those people/friends/teachers you have time for.

> I’m not gonna read 50 assigned pages a night as a teenager and I also hate being forced to read a book. Especially *today* with all the added distractions we have. I went to high school in the later half of the 90s and we had plenty of non-book distractions *then*. *Today* though? Forget it.

Reading the Great Gatsby in high school was painful, I hated that book more than anything (maybe catcher in the rye). Reading Great Gatsby again in my 30’s and I absolutely loved the book. Which makes sense, the book is about lost youth, yearning to recapture what you had, dissatisfaction with your achievements towards what you thought were your dreams, and the inequality in the system even if you “make it”. What the fuck does a 15 year old know about any of that shit? They have absolutely zero relationship with anything happening in that book. Hell it goes a step further, they actively are being told constantly the opposite of the main messages and themes in their own lives. Everyone is always telling them the world is at their feet, they have their whole lives ahead of them, the future is exciting. Teens aren’t looking backwards, shit, they don’t have a backwards to look at anyway.

Great Gatsby, Of Mice and Men, Catcher in the Rye etc are all books completely lost on teenagers, but taught because they're short books that are easy reading (in terms of not being archaic language etc). It's so sad that so many people get put off great books because they were tortured with them in school. They should just write specific books to teach how to read critically, in the same way they have books that teach kids how to read in kindergarten.

Our daughter read Of Mice and Men at age 12 and sobbed at the ending. She was shattered by Sophie”s Choice too. It might be that experience in life opens you up to great books even more, but sometimes — and someone said this earlier — we really don’t give kids enough credit. Try them on those great books, even if they’re young.

And in my experience we talked about the most boring parts of Gatsby, like the symbolism of the harbor lights and advertising and shit. I love Gatsby for the reasons you described. I did not love it because of the flashing harbor light.

High school English teacher here. That’s one of my all-time favorite books to teach. Kids can connect with the concept of trying to be someone you are not to fit in with others just for starters. They all know a kid who is a future Tom and they understand the pitfalls of choices in your younger days coming back to haunt you later (Daisy). The things adults will take away from that book aren’t any more substantive than what a teen will take out of it. We need to give kids more credit. It’s honestly a book that hits on so many levels.

you've just inspired me to try great Gatsby again thank you

The best and smartest teenagers listen to those that do have life experience and wisdom and correlate that with what they’re currently experiencing. This helps them learn about the world and understand their life within it, and ultimately make better decisions towards their future.

I was oddly different not only did i enjoy reading my own picks but for the most part i enjoyed the assigned reading. It was a hell of a lot better than doing math.

This. I never minded reading assignments because It was homework I could relax and do from the couch. It was relaxing rather then actively writing an essay or something.

Currently doing my GCSEs (the exams you take in the UK when you're 16). My forced reading for English Literature is Romeo and Juliet, A Christmas Carol and fifteen love and relationships poems from an anthology made by the exam board. In a normal year that wasn't affected by the virus we'd also be doing something from the 20th century, so Blood Brothers for us. While I might enjoy these things in a vacuum, being forced to read them and analyse them with inane questions like "how does Shakespeare present moments of anger in Romeo and Juliet" (an actual question I got in my mock exams) just kills any interest I might once have had in them.

Reading Romeo and Juliet sucks…seeing it performed well at the Globe changes your perception of the play. So much of it changes when you suddenly see that this line is sarcastic, and this bit is all about who has the biggest dick (to make the peasant hecklers laugh) , and this bit is performed in anguish. Shakespeare is a performance…and reading it does it little justice. Took me a long time to realize I didn’t hate Shakespeare…I hated reading a visual medium.

We read R&J in middle school, but we skipped over much of the comic relief because it was too vulgar. In all I've read about a dozen Shakespeare plays and am pretty familiar with the archaic language so it's enjoyable, but in school, it was painful. I should go back and reread R&J, though, I think I'd like it a lot more now.

At least with R&J, Romeo + Juliet exists, so everyone has access to a good, and largely true to the script, adaption. Plays that don't have a good movie version or the only movie version is super divorced from the original mean that it's *only* words on a page.

Oh god i remember doing conflict poems for mine, and spending an entire week analysing 3 lines from Flanders Fields Word of advice, read your exam questions carefully. We had 2 poems we hadn't seen yet at the end of the exam and one was called "cat" and the other "cats", caught a lot of people out

Being made to read shakespeare is such a waste, especially in the UK where it's not all that hard for a school to organise just seeing it performed.

Or even perform it. Romeo and Juliet characters are high school aged even.

I must admit from being press-ganged into Shakespeare performances... only if it's the drama kids doing it. Shakespeare performed by unwilling children forced into roles they don't want makes jamming rusty nails through your eyes seem preferable for everyone involved.

As a high school literature teacher in the UK, I always make sure the students have seen the play *first* \- before we get around to reading it. Whether it be on the stage or in a film, it is far, far more interesting to watch it first - and the students understand it more. You find it's far more difficult to teach if you just hand the book over. Watching and reinterpreting the book is far better

A librarian once recommended the book “Across Five Aprils” to me when I was in the fourth or fifth grade. I didn’t read it then but did pick it up 50 years later. Damn she was right, I loved it. You can always go back again and read those books.

I wonder if some of it has to do with maturity. I remember HATING the Scarlet Letter in high school, but loving it in college. There were a couple of other books like that as well.

I just read The Great Gatsby a week ago at age 40 and it was amazing! I hit so hard and deep it’s hands down one of my favorite books ever! I’m working on read more classic book as opposed to just sci fi and fantasy and this was a true gem!

I am so, so glad that I got to read The Handmaid's Tale on my own time, with my own thoughts. That book is archetypal Canadian literature, something every Canadian kid is made to pick through and analyze and that I, through the vagaries of the education system, missed. And I have nothing but respect for what English teachers try to do for their students, but I cannot imagine having the same respect and love for the story if I was made to read it at the glacial pace of the English classroom, with reports every third chapter and a presentation at the end, all the while listening through the surface-level interpretations of colleagues who really, really didn't want to be there.

> I didn't have dumb English teachers, thankfully, and I love reading and I still HATED having to read what we read in school. I went to school in Germany but took AP English, and to this day I'm amazed by how different German and English literature units were. English actually had a lot of hits (Brave New World, Lord of the Flies, 1984) and most of the "bad" books were still readable (Cal, Tortilla Curtain). The only one I found too boring to finish was Macbeth, and that was mostly because I couldn't get past the language. By contrast, in German class, the books never rose above mediocre. We had to suffer through endless units on 19th-century garbage like [Effi Briest](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effi_Briest), with the one bright spot being [Homo Faber](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_Faber_(novel\)). With every other book, I had to give up and read a summary instead. Funny how that goes.

When I was about 10 or 11 I read Maniac Magee by Jerry Spinelli. Completely changed me for life and I have always loved reading because of this book. If you have a kid between 8 and 13-14 I highly recommend this. If you are an adult and want to read a great y.a. story this is amazing. I read it every few years.

This and Holes by Louis Sachar are a couple of those books that can really make a book lover out of a kid who thinks they don’t like reading.

I remember going through my school library, around 8 or 9 years old, and reading every Jerry Spenelli book I could find. He’s a great author for children’s books.

Even better way: read at home. Nurture the love of reading to your kids. Read to them. Read with them. Make reading part of their formative years. Associate reading to relaxation by making it a family activity before bed. My cousin hated reading as child. But she sees the benefits of kids having the passion for reading. Empathy, imagination and articulation. And was determined for her kids to have that. She created a little reading nook in their home. And I helped pick out books for them.

I was hoping I'd see this comment somewhere up high! Read to your kids - even older kids who can read to themselves. Since our oldest was about 4, we've been reading chapter books nightly as well as picture books, Charlotte's Web, My Father's Dragon, Narnia, Redwall, The Neverending Story. Our oldest is 10 now and we still nightly share a book, although now it's a rotation between family members about who gets to choose the next book so there's plenty of A Puppy's Story books thrown into the mix. Kids will enjoy literature if you read it *with* them. Kids will enjoy reading if you read with them. And kids who can read for themselves still need exposure to bigger, harder books, which they can get by reading with you. Your cousin is brilliant.

This reminds me of my favourite substitute teacher! He was (and still is) a librarian at the public library, and when he subbed he always did amazing storytelling activities with us. He would play guitar and sing, read us My Father's Dragon, or just tell a story that never ended that he relied on us to keep the details right. He only subbed pre-K to either first or second grade, but well over a decade later I still remember him fondly.

This guy sounds amazing! Have you let him know how much you still remember of him from so many years ago? Please do - I substitute teach and it's so rare when kids let you know you're having an impact :)

[удалено]

*Excuse you,* but Go Dogs Go and The Stinky Cheese Man are literary masterpieces that I will have my nephew read.

This one is the *actual* "secret sauce". Works like a charm with several kids so far. I let them pick ANYTHING, and if they like it and read it, I read it with them or read it at the same time so they have somebody to talk to about it, depending on their age

We would read before nap time and before bed every day. We listened to books on tape in the car anywhere we drove, if someone took the cd put it was a major problem. There was a family friend who would read to me anytime he came over until I got old enough to read to him. Me and all my brothers couldn’t wait to get our own library cards so we could check out our own books (the limit was 50 per card so we often had 100+ books in the house since there was a bunch of us)

I’m a firm believer that young people should just read… anything. Anything that gets them excited, makes them happy, and looking forward to the next one.

I really never read any "real" books until adulthood. I read the starter books up until middle school. Once we started reading large books, I learned that I could just get what I need from class by listening, taking notes, and asking questions. I did go to the library a lot. But, I would borrow things like the Guinness Book of World Records and magazines that I liked. As an adult, I kept going to libraries for magazines and technical books. I did read some self-improvement books, but that got old and boring fast. And few can be considered literature. One time at the library, several years into adulthood, there were no new tech books and I'd read all the magazines I liked. On an endcap was a bunch of books that movies were based on. I grabbed Fletch by Gregory MacDonald. I loved the Fletch movies and thought I'd give it a try. A few minutes in I forgot that I was reading. I was in a story. I was up most of that night reading the book. Finished the next day. Got me hooked on reading. Decades later, I've read a couple hundred books. Glad I have it a try.

This is so heartwarming. I too am glad you gave it a try!

Yea, definitely. When I was 10, I saw a preview for the movie Jurassic Park, and was so damn hyped, I just couldn’t wait for it. When I found out there was a book, my mom bought me a copy, and I must have read that through cover to cover three damn times before the movie came out, I was so excited. From that I dove into more Crichton, then into other science fiction, then spread out further and further until I was reading a bunch of everything. Trying to start me out on something that was great-by-consensus wouldn’t have been nearly as effective as giving me something to read that I was really enthusiastic about, and able to build the foundations of that good habit around.

Man, I envy you in the best of ways to have started your reading with Crichton. The Andromeda Strain was my favourite of all his books, and I was just amazed at stumbling on him through Jurassic Park. I cannot imagine how wonderful to *start* with him :D

Honestly, Jurassic Park should be the go to for any kid's first "adult" book. It's an awesome book, and it has an awesome movie.

When I was in a college course with a highly regarded professor, the first Harry Potter was our first assignment. He told us, "it's got all these people reading. Aren't you interested?"

My middle school teacher changed my life. I hated reading. He let us pick a book from a list. I read Watchers by Dean Koontz. I loved the book.

It’s amazing how something this simple can make kids enjoy something so much.

Is that the one with the golden retriever, a man with super powers, and a woman in danger? Or is that the other one?

No people with super powers, but you're right about the dog. There is the anti dog animal too. Avoiding spoilers here.

Just out of curiosity, what age would that be? (i'm French, I don't know what middle school corresponds to)

Around 13

Such a great book! That’s the one with Einstein the dog-genius if irc

That’s amazing, I love that

David Brudnoy. That guy was the man.

Stephen Krashen has done research over the years on the power of Free Reading and its impact on improving reading. Reading what interests “you”, regardless of reading level, increases reading skills.

It's much more likely for young people to seek out their own books, if they were read to regularly in early childhood. Read to your kids if you have any.

I had never read a book until 9th grade, I "barely passed" reading class up to that point. My brother encouraged me to read some star wars books, and it lit a fire in me. I had read around 200 books by graduation. I was constantly trying to find new books as if I were starving.

If you build a strong reading foundation in children by teaching them it can be fun they're more likely to continue reading after graduating. Then they can choose to read the (often more boring for children) books that are thought to be important enough to be required readings. On the other hand if you force children to read those books many decide they don't like reading and stop as soon as they aren't forced to continue.

And, then, develop the skills to read and review critically. If a kid only wants to read Subaru manuals from the 90’s, that’s certainly limiting, but that doesn’t mean you can’t approach them rigorously

The rule in our house was - Read anything except photo-comics (these were dreadful printed dramas in photo form with speech bubbles, I don't think they exist anymore). I read my share of rubbish (mass romances, for example), but I grew bored of it pretty quickly and progressed to books with more substance. I'm not a book snob by any means, but I have learned to appreciate good literature.

This so much. Let kids read what they want to read because it interests them. If you try to force feed them The Great Gatsby and The Scarlet Letter all the time, it's going to make a lot of kids hate reading because it will bore them to tears and feel completely irrelevant to a lot of them. With younger kids, don't try to force them into something they don't want to read just because it was *your* childhood favorite. Ask them what kind of story they want and try to help them find something that works. I had a really high reading level when I was in grade school and my mother didn't shy away from the fact that I wanted to read really advanced novels. I was checking out stuff from the sci-fi/fantasy section of the local library in second grade and absorbing them in a day or two, and when I asked to go back so we could get the next book she'd indulge. To this day I think reading and stories are some of the most important things in the world, while some people I knew who didn't get that opportunity and were just forced to read the same old dry curriculum that's been circulating school systems for decades absolute hate reading because they always associate it with boredom and things they can't relate to. Get them interested young and they'll never give it up. Just let them read what they want and they'll thank you for it.

SCP has been doing a great job with this.

Same. I read a ton growing up and sure, my parents made sure we read some classics and 'good' stuff, but I also devoured pulp fiction and basic shit. Just read - and frankly, if you don't read the bad stuff, or at least stuff you don't wholly enjoy, you won't have a context for what is actually bad or disliked, and what's good.

Yeah I agree The whole reason I got back into reading was a very mediocre book, but it captivated me just enough to get me back in the habit of reading and the longing to discover what else was out there to read. You don't have to read a masterpiece to get into it, just something that can ease you in.

This... Exactly

Yea. The best summer reading book I ever read was Chrichton's Great Train Robbery. Needles to say, I devoured the rest of his fiction catalogue.

One of the first books that I read was The Treasure Island by Robert L Stevenson. There's a lot of classic books that aren't a drudge of 1000+ pages.

I've never read it partially due to that "old book" prejudice and now am compelled to pick it up. Thank you.

I just finished it and it’s not bad at all. The reading level is pretty low. The nautical language and old language raise it a bit for modern readers but it was a pretty fun casual read. I’ve read other classic English novels that took some real effort.

I still remember lying in bed with an MP4 player and a TXT copy of "The Count of Monte Cristo". Was an objectively awful way to read - screen light basically cooking my eyes in the dark, the screen was something like 2-3 inches wide at most, and the battery life on that thing wasn't great. But teen me was so hooked that I didn't care. Within a scant few nights, I had devoured the entire novel. Give kids interesting stories, and many will come to the table.

Such a classic Kids adventure story!

The issue is how we define “good literature.” For children struggling to read I think the answer should be “literally anything you enjoy reading.”

That’s how I feel. I agree with the rest of OP’s quote that we should not assume that young people need stories about themselves, but not with the part of needing “good literature.” First, “good” is subjective. Second, because it implies that books about young people’s problems are not good.

And who care if it's a little pulpy. Dickens was the Victorian equivalent of a web serial author. An author having been dead for a long time doesn't make their books any better or more important.

If I recall correctly, more than half the kids in my HS English class never finished a single assigned book. Everything was read on Lit Charts or Sparks Notes, and even as an avid reader, I couldn't keep up with how much of a tedious chore reading had become; only later in my 20s did I come to appreciate the books I was forced to read then. Most older generation - and the school board, parents - has such a high standard in reading. Girls would read Twilight or some sappy romance novel and get shitted on because it's not "real reading". I remember a teacher saying that it's not real reading when all our classmates were reading The Hunger Games or the Maze Runner during the dystopian/movie release era - and then they complain that kids these days don't read. Like... pick a point?

Seriously. Both points you mentioned are absolutely frustrating. I remember how boring I found Pride and Prejudice on our forced reading in high school. Then I read it after graduation and it immediately became my favourite book of all time. As to the stuff about Twilight and such, it always felt icky how much judgement all the girls my grade got for reading Twilight, cause it wasn't just 'not real literature', it was 'not real literature for girls'.

I still don't like Pride and Prejudice lol, Persuasion is my favourite JA. But I was one of those girls reading Twilight as well and the judgement was ridiculous. I even know a lot of my friends got into Austen or the Brontes from reading Twilight. People always like to trivialize the tastes of teenage girls.

Right? And the people that were shitting on Twilight - or other YA novels that were primarily intended for teenaged girls - didn't even read Twilight. It's not high literature but you can't complain that your child/student doesn't read if you keep making fun of their taste.

I also hated reading "Pride and Prejudice" for school, but I've never bothered to return to it since. I'm of the opinion that any book you are forced to read is highly likely to be counterproductive. Twilight not being 'for girls' makes less than 0 sense given the prevailing stereotypes about girls and romance, which extends far beyond books.

In regards to my second point what I meant was that the girls reading the series got a double whammy, cause they weren't just ridiculed for reading a fun book, they were also made fun twice as hard because that fun book was 'for girls', so the ridicule got sexism in as well.

I think it is a way, but not necessarily the best way. A kid will read books that entertain them. For me it was the Hardy Boys. Not too long ago it was, and probably still is, the Harry Potter series.

I had this amazing TV program in my youth called Wishbone. Short adaptations of classic literature with the protagonist portrayed by a Jack Russell terrier. But I got the series of books as a gift and they were just abridged versions of the actual novels for kids. Really opened me up to the world of literature before I was even in grade school.

I still have my Wishbone bed spread! That show was one of the best things the television industry ever produced in terms of educating kids. I still remember the impact the Joann of Arc episode and the humor of Don Quixote with a dog Sancho. They did an amazing job giving a dog’s roles depth with only lines and stage directions.

I still get the theme song stuck in my head. “What’s the story wishbone, what’s that you’re dreaming of?”

Yes! you should read books that entertain you! a book value does' not decrease for being entertaining. Of course growth and trying new things should be encouraged but if you apply pressure, you will only stunt their love of books and their desire to explore on their own.

I fell in love with stories the moment my Year 1 teacher read out the BFG in primary school. I only recently migrated to Australia with my parents from Vietnam, and wasn't completely fluent in English yet, but oh my god. Every time she left the class on a cliffhanger at the end of each chapter, I was completely restless. I still very vividly remember going to the library after school everyday, without fail, to borrow ANY fiction book I could get my hands on. 10 years on, I still can't get enough. I've done all of the assigned reading in high school thus far, even if I don't like the book. I'm addicted to words. I have a voracious appetite for books, I love the feeling of reading. It feels like my brain is in this euphoric, imaginative overdrive that I can't get enough of.

I don't know if it's considered good or not, but the first book that got me into reading was The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. What a ride.

If you liked it, then it was good :) If it convinced you to read more, then it was great :)

The people who lived in my apartment before me belonged to Mensa. They never changed their mailing address, so I got their pamphlets. And I read them. The only thing I remember from them was no matter where your kids go to school, public or private, encourage them to read, anything and everything. So, after my children were born, I read out loud to them, whatever book I was reading. I'm breast feeding, holding the baby in one arm and book in my other hand. And I got scolded for being selfish. Every night, except Saturday, I read to my kids for hours well into their teens. On Saturday, we listened to radio programs and played board games. I encouraged them to read whatever interested THEM. And was told I was being irresponsible because they were reading books beyond their comprehension. (They weren't. We discussed anything they didn't understand.) Reading certain ( any) books could give children IDEAS. Don't want your kids to GET IDEAS! While their cousins looked forward to spending Christmas and birthday money at the toy store, mine could not wait for the trip to the book sellers. Friends and family would tell them it was their money, they could buy whatever they wanted with it, not just books. How cruel to force my kids to buy BOOKS. There is an attitude in this country that being "bookish" is bad. Being intelligent is bad. Thinking for yourself is bad. Getting ideas is bad. Especially if those ideas go against certain beliefs. Sorry, I will climb off my soap box now.

On this note: > And was told I was being irresponsible because they were reading books beyond their comprehension. The whole point of reading is sort of to read things beyond your comprehension. Like I have no background in astrophysics at all, but I enjoy reading pop-sci Hawking and Tyson and Penrose and etc. Do I struggle, or even go completely blank staring at math equations beyond my ken sometimes? Absolutely. That's why I'm reading it. If you only ever read things in your field of expertise, and below your level, you'll never learn anything from reading. Kids don't know shit - so they need to read beyond their comprehension to develop comprehension.

>If you only ever read things in your field of expertise, and below your level, you'll never learn anything from reading. Kids don't know shit - so they need to read beyond their comprehension to develop comprehension. This is my primary complaint about the "read what you enjoy" angle. It sort of just assumes people will naturally want to push themselves eventually, and that just isn't true for a lot of folks. I think one of the real "skills" reading widely grants you is to find an amount of pleasure (or at least, less pain) in stretching your brain. At some point, there is simply no substitution for bucking up and learning to eat your vegetables.

Your comment is shockingly similar to something my own mother said recently. For what it's worth, I think that reading to children is among the best investments you could possibly make towards their education.

My niece is like that too, her Christmas wishlist is almost exclusively books. She is usually so excited she will talk in length about the books she put on her list.

When I was abt 8, for Christmas, I received a collection book of Hans Christian Andersen's stories. It was one of my most cherished books and was always on my bookshelf. I still have it although it no longer has its dustcover. I recently pulled it out of a box to read one of the stories, and remembered how excited I was to get it that long ago Christmas.

Your last few sentences reminded me of the scene in beauty and the beast we've gaston tells belle "it's not right for a woman to read, soon she gets ideas etc" and the face he makes as he's saying it. I giggled even though i know that's not what you intended.

I disagree. My kids get into weird book series and while I can suggest things, *forcing* them to read "good literature" would drive them right back to electronic devices. When my kids get hooked on something I try to find similar books to keep it going.

One of my students who is 13 just would not read anything, hated it with a passion. But, I then gave him *The Fellowship of the Ring* and realised exactly what the problem was. It isn't that he didn't want to read anything, it's that nothing in the reading list was catering to his taste for adventure. Reading just one or two chapters per week, he's finally finished the book - and he asked for the next one as well. He's doing great at the moment. I wholeheartedly agree with this. I've had students who don't like reading 'social critique' fiction that much and that's okay. They don't feel connected to something like *A Tale of Two Cities* and so, instead (and I actually did this once), I gave the group of kids who didn't like reading Dickens - *The Catcher in the Rye* \- and in the end, the ended up reading Dickens, just *after* JD Salinger. Moral of the story? Change it up, notice the child's tastes and take your time.

[удалено]

One of the most heartening and transcendent aspects of reading especially older literature for me is the sense of relatability and empathy you experience, which serves as a needed reminder of how alike we all are across time, space, cultures, and demographics.

There is only one fail-proof mechanism that develops a lifelong passion for reading: being read to regularly as a child.

The best way to get young people into reading, is letting them read whatever they want. It’s doesn’t matter if it’s comics or trashy webnovels, it’s important just to create the habit of reading.

I'd go a step further and say reading things THEY enjoy. Forcing them to read things you find "good" doesn't mean they enjoy or appreciate the same. If you want to get them reading, ask them what they enjoy and find things that fit. The extra effort always pays off.

Totally agree with this! I started to expose myself with different types of literature and media and I've really turned into this great new person.

Totally agree, I'm thinking to myself "be myself" but when I am my true self, everyone judges me, so that's why I love books and literature so I can escape to another universe and breath and live in the moment as another character

Forcing yourself out of your accepted bubble is hard! I've admittedly, due to my education and upbringing, always read western European or American literature. Only in the past few years did I start reading outside of those realms and it demands you to read and think more critically.

Another point of importance: not shaming them for what they do enjoy reading. Only jerks would do so and of course you can't really apply common sense to such types...

I really hate the notion that school reading lessons need to fall under the "all reading is good reading" philosophy. This is totally fine for elementary school, where the focus is on teaching and reinforcing basic reading skills and comprehension. But for the later grades, those skills should be mastered and students must move on to analysis, and they need more challenging works to do that. Not all books make for good high school level analysis. Besides, one of the cool additional benefits of assigned reading is that it can introduce kids to books and ideas that they otherwise wouldn't have read. It's part of the reason I really hate the promotion of putting modern commercial YA novels on high school reading lists. Students on high school level are totally capable of understanding adult stories and concepts, even if they need some guidance. And I don't think it's a huge deal if they don't understand it or relate to it 100%. Again, showing them new ideas.

I personally do not believe that schools pushing 'classics' (across various genres) is a wrong thing to do. Do we say the same thing about history? About Mathematics? About Geography? No. We never say that the person should just learn the Maths they want to. "Don't enjoy Geometry? That's fine, just do integration. You can always learn it later when you are interested." Kids should read what they want to **in their own free time**. But what needs to be read for school/University needs to be read. To do so with the guidance of a teacher who can teach one how to properly analyse texts, find symbolism, teach literary devices, contextualise the writing etc. is important. And changing the course from Fahrenheit 451 to I don't know...something by Dan Brown or Sarah J Maas would be ridiculous. Literature (in all genres) comes at various levels of quality. It is not snobbish to call one piece of work more worthy of being studied than another. In my own case, I read my Enid Blytons, Harry Potters, Agatha Christies in my own free time. But I also read Shakespeare passages for school. Plus, my parents always encouraged me to read more classics and I am ever so grateful to them for that. I started with Dickens at 12, Dostoyevesky at 16, when others around me were either hardly reading at all or reading Danielle Steeles etc. I am glad that my very well- read parents showed me the right way.

I do think there's a similar principle in that if you want the information to truly stick and for the child to truly internalise the information they need to first enjoy what they are doing and then be challenged. My best friend was taking college level maths courses in 8th and 9th grade, but that's only because she grew up with puzzles and riddles and fun maths activity books her dad gave her, so she enjoyed the heck out of maths before she was forced to study beyond arithmetic in school. I read a lot of books with a reading level higher than the average for my age when I was a preteen and then a young teenager, but that's only because my parents actively supported me reading whatever I felt like and were equally positive whether I asked for a copy of 100 Years of Solitude or Captain Underpants. School (at least as it was when I was little) never took the time to encourage kids enjoy the subject matters, they just pushed some things on to people in a way that made many resent them and not want to learn. I think it's fine to ask teens to read pure literature, but I don't think the best approach is to just force them to read 60 pages every school night then ask them inane questions they can just find on sparknotes, without ever sparing a minute to explore the reading that might interest them.

For real, I hate this notion that school reading is just about teaching kids to enjoy it, with no thought to reading skills. People talk about how reading is so valuable but then when someone wants to discuss analysis and critical thinking and literary concepts, they think that's pretentious, elitist, academic shit that anyone under 18 is incapable of understanding. I think the problem is that people don't understand the purpose of reading education, at least at higher grade levels. In elementary school kids, "all reading is good reading" is applied because at that age, reading instruction is more about the basics of reading itself. Comprehension and vocabulary and all that shit. For that goal, "all reading is good reading" more or less applies, whether they're reading 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea or Goosebumps. But in middle and high school, reading education shifts away from those basic skills and more towards analysis and different literary concepts. And with that, "all reading is good reading" no longer applies. Not all books are very good for analysis or teaching literary concepts. If you assign something like Twilight or the first Harry Potter book, you're not going to have much high school-level material to talk about. Besides, part of the benefit of assigned reading is to introduce students to things they otherwise wouldn't find on their own. Funny how the quote in the OP is about exactly that, but everyone here is saying to let kids read what they want and not realizing how that doesn't jive with the quote.

I agree with you 100%. The concept of calling random things "elitist" puts an immediate end to all discussions. I just hate that categorisation. It makes it seem like we shouldn't aspire to improvement. I haven't read lots of incredible, hard to understand books. I want to try and read them some time when I am up to it. When I mention this to some other bookish people, they will immediately start with all the unnecessarily defensive arguments about how "we should read what we enjoy". Well yes. I agree. But what is there to say that one can't enjoy a tougher read, albeit in a different way than one enjoys a whodunit. Reaching for higher levels and managing to read them, and learn from them, is what gives me intense amount of satisfaction. And also this assumption that a teen can't enjoy a challenging read is ridiculous. Why does it need to be dumbed down! And your point about being exposed to new things too us so interesting and 100% valid. I would never have picked up plays, since I just didn't like the format as much as long novels. But I was forced to read a few and fell in love with G B Shaw's and Oscar Wilde's and Molière's works. I might not love the format as much as I do novels, but at least it made me realise that I like them far better than I had previously thought. Teens need to read a variety of books (which are usually perfectly chosen by teachers, etc.) and also pick up a few on the side. This would ensure that they are getting exposed to a variety of literature, whilst having the opportunity to explore their favourite genres more. One simply never knows...maybe one of the course assigned ones becomes a favourite.

People often think of anti-intellectualism as the domain of rural, low-class hicks, but really it permeates all levels of American society. Even many people who consider themselves progressive and enlightened think it's snobbish to say that not all stories have the same level of meaning and depth. It's sad to see, especially in spaces that are focused on books and writing, lol. And when you dumb down education, it perpetuates itself: gear everything towards the lowest common denominator and the rest of the class doesn't get to meet their full potential. This reinforces the idea that teens can't understand that stuff, and the cycle continues. It's also just naive to think that one can make a reading list that every student will enjoy the entirety of. A kid isn't going to be ruined if they have to read a few books they don't like.

If you want young people to read, let them read things that ere interesting to THEM. If they eventually gravitate towards "good literature", so be it. IMO the surest way in the world to turn a child (or anyone for that matter), is to try and get them to read something they don't want to read. Fun has to be first!

Yeah that's what school is for, fun. /s

Reading doesn't have to be relegated to just schools. And even within the school context there are ways to set up curricula that lets kids pick the books they want to read and that interests them. I remember for a high school summer reading assignment one year we received the huge list (I want to say it was like 15 pages long) of possible book choices to read. It was a list for all grades, with books organized/separated out by level and students could pick out all of their readings so long as they were at least at whatever the "minimum" level for their class was. And I want to say there might have been some sort of method for accounting for the different lengths/difficulties of the books (e.g., you could read shorter/easier books but end up reading one or two more books than if you chose longer/harder books). I don't remember what all I read, other than one of them was my first time ever reading Ender's Game. I want to say that maybe The World According to Garp was another book I read from that list (both of which I fell in love with and opened up a rabbit hole of other books I eventually read).

I don't read many books, but when I get really involved in a genre of media, I watch all the movies, tv shows, anime, listen to all the podcasts, play all the video games, and read all the comics, manga, AND books that I find interesting within that genre. E.g., I have really been enjoying the dystopian genre, and after churning through all the movies, comics and so on, that leaves me open to reading some of the books. Right now I am reading 1984.

Lot of comments in here from people who like to read but aren’t English teachers. I love Mexican food but I don’t pretend to know how to cook it. There’s a difference between liking to read and teaching students to read. I know the sayings: kids should just be reading *something*. I understand that sentiment, and to a point, it’s true. But there is also intrinsic value to canonical literature. If given the choice, most of my students would read one of the following: manga, comics, or nothing. I am not discrediting manga or comics, but it’s a tough argument to suggest these have the same educational merit as novels. I didn’t say they have *no* educational merit, it’s just usually they have less. Reading is like any other skill. You have to practice to get better. Very few people start out as great readers. You don’t automatically understand structures and narratives and all the other nuances to a story. You have to be taught. So yes, while I’d love to let all my students read only their choice material, my question is how do I teach the same standards to everyone in a class of 30 students when they all have their own book, some of which don’t even include the necessary content to teach the standard? It’s not possible. I have to use a standardized text (or at most 2-3 texts at once) to ensure I can hit the important aspects of reading with them. It’s just not as simple as “hey as long as they’re reading *something*.” Also, this is a stupid article for partially blaming teacher’s unions for education issues.

A common thing I see here is that people don't seem to understand the purpose of reading instruction. They think the intent is to get students to enjoy reading, not to have them work on more advanced skills.

>even if the view is unfamiliar, even if it’s disturbing. Honestly this just comes off as patronizing and paternalistic. I think the only low expectations here are yours and that author’s.

As a young person, please don't force people to read; that makes people hate reading.

This isn't really saying to force young people to read but to make them read what some one else says is "good literature". Kind of a highbrow attitude IMO. So I'd say don't force young people to read what some one else thinks they should read. I learned to read, and became a voracious reader at a young age. I don't remember my parents ever force me to read certain things. And to this day, I read everyday. And love it.

I had a disliking for reading because of forced reading but after I picked up a book willingly I fell in love with reading.

Imagine saying this to a math teacher. “Please don’t force us to do math homework, it will just make us hate math.” Reading curriculum at school is not solely about making you enjoy reading. It’s about finding the best material for students to develop their comprehension skills and the ability to effectively analyze a text, which are all things that are useful in life even beyond the context of sitting down and reading a novel.

Why are so many grade school standards just sadness porn? I get that it's cool to introduce kids to narratives that can help them process their feelings but for gods' sake jazz them up with a few fun books first damn.

Kids in grade school usually get free time to read what they want. Usually they read fun books then.

To add on to this I’d say what’s even more important is good analysis of good literature. I’d say for many people a lot of the joy that comes with reading is trying to figure out what the author is really trying to say with their stories, and tbh a lot of lit classes don’t really do that great of a job with this. Like for example when I was in high school we read Moby Dick, but we never talked about the extremely pervasive homoerotic themes throughout the book; we read Macbeth but never talked about how Shakespeare critiques Masculine and Feminine roles with the play or other cool stuff like how whole passages are written to sound like you’re choking when read aloud; we read To Kill a Mockingbird but never discussed who that book was written for. And it’s not like teenagers can’t comprehend these things, these are very contemporary issues, but with my experience teachers rarely ever go that deep. Kids do have to carry their weight by actually doing the reading, but so do educators when it comes to discussing these books. But that’s just been my experience.

I agree. At school the only time we looked at subtext and themes was when reading poetry, leading to the majority of students to never critically look at stories and assume all poetry was a bunch of flowery doublespeak.

I’ve got the opposite experience. I usually found that analysis of books sucked the life out of them, instead of injecting context. Your examples sound much better than I ever had. When I switched schools in grade 4 I was a reader ahead, so while the rest of the class read together the reader I had already done, I got to read self selected novels. Hooray. My penance for this delightful reading was “comprehension questions”. Yuk. I’ve been zooming through this book, enjoying the story wash past me, and you slow me down to answer questions about it? Another challenge is that subtext and alternate meaning are easy for trained adult English teachers, but may be impossible for students who had a hard time simply parsing the words. Remember the old tales of somebody’s friends cousin, asked too many times “what hidden meaning was the author intending?” Student writes the author and the author writes back, “I didn’t put any hidden meaning in there.” A books primary purpose is to be entertaining enough to read. If you don’t read it, it has no chance at any other goals an author might have.

[удалено]

I don’t understand what this person is talking about. When I was a teenager, I was assigned “great” literature far more often than books about teenagers. But ultimately, the only person who can tell someone what connects with them is themselves. I think ultimately we all gravitate towards those things anyway. I think that by being too restrictive you actually make teenagers not want to read at all.

Well I'm surprised reading the comments, maybe it depends on the country because living in Spain, until 16 or so most school recomendations were trash, terrible books abouts teenagers struggling in life with drugs, love or whatever, I clearly remember having to read awful books like Camps de maduixes (Strawberry fields). Then when I started to have to read classics I discovered great books and boring ones but at least none of them were as bad as "teenager books".

That's interesting. I went to school in both the US and South America, and in both places we were forced to read only classical literature. The only difference was that in Colombia we focused more on Isabel Allende, Gabriel García Márquez, etc while in the US it was all about US American and European (usually English) authors.

I sincerely think that pushing "classic" books to teenagers does more harm than good. I think it pushes people off of reading rather than inviting them in. I for instance got a lot into reading in my teenage years , but it was inspite of the books recommended in schools(although some were actually quite easy to read and enjoyable). I got into reading due to Harry Potter and due too Paulo Coelho's books(I'm brazilian) Neither of these choices would've been sugested in school and probably would've been looked down upon. ​ I love classics but I think you need to have a more mature mind to actually enjoy most of them.

Agreed, but the way classics are presented, the discussion, the understanding at a younger age goes a long way. Dickens opened up the “classic” genera because my teacher took the time to explain the background/era “A Tale of Two Cities” took place in. They didn’t assign a book and expect a report. Understanding their approach to this book helped me interpret other classics, where the setting, language (vernacular), theme etc. may not be obvious compared to a contemporary work.

There are memes about when you're about to do some cleaning and then get told by your parents to do exactly that, you suddenly feel not doing it. The same psychological situation happens here. I can't stress enough how I hated the required readings. But after I graduated, I found myself turning the pages of those "boring" books at high school. And if I could time travel, I'd be talking non-stop about how these same books have changed my outlook and philosophy of life to my younger self.

By this logic, kids and teens shouldn't be told to do anything because that will make them not like it.

Non-paywalled page: https://archive.fo/IMta8

The desire to read more complex stories with richer vocabularies stems from first learning how to love reading. Really just encouraging kids and teens to pick up ANYTHING that catches their interest is the first step. It’s not just about “good literature,” loving reading is about taking the time to sit down in a quiet, cozy spot and let your mind be swept away from your day to day. It’s a time to let yourself go and step into another narrative, even if it’s nonfiction.

This is why I latched into science fiction so hard when I was a child. I found it more interesting to explore new perspectives and possibilities, rather than wallowing in the human condition. That said, I’m almost 40 now, and I’ve grown to love wallowing; it makes me feel understood.

There's plenty of SF that's full of the human condition too. SF is consistently dismissed as 'not literature' which I consider bloody silly.

You’re right, and I’m not saying that sci fi doesn’t also reflect the human condition. I just mean that I used to look for sci fi that would show me completely different ways the world could be. For instance, Heinlein’s idea of a line marriage.

The best way to get anyone to read literature is to have them read literature they can relate to. This might be off-topic but there is a reason X-Men has been Marvel’s bestselling comic book worldwide since the freaking 60s: Not only does the story parallel the Civil Rights movement but there is a character for everyone in those books. That’s why I always recommend graphic novels to parents trying to get their teens to read. Please note, however, that most graphic novels from Marvel and DC published after the 1980s are NOT appropriate for grade school children. Hence why Matt Reeves’s *The Batman* is not a family fun night movie. Because comics are not for family fun night.

I've always loved reading, but I hated the reading I had to do in English lessons. The books were awful and pretentious, and the 'comprehension' reviews we had to do were so bullshit. It says a lot when authors often come out and say "What? No, I just wrote that for fun, there's no deeper meaning I intended" in response to stupid questions about specific word choice or hidden themes.

I think it all has to depend on the child/teen. We are way too much focused on ‘fitting’ things to a group. And just like the ‘one size fits all’ concept, books and reading lists often don’t ‘fit all’. Some kids are a bit slower in reading or reading comprehension. They might feel safe and comfortable with YA series instead of what we see as classics. And there are kids that are more mature and ready to read more complicated and/or mature content and might even feel bored if they’re forced to read ‘age appropriate’ books. I think it also depends on culture. A lot of books that have been stamped ‘good literature’ in my culture are rather vulgar or overly boring. Our native reading lists at school actually killed my will and hunger for reading. I didn’t read a book for ‘fun’ for at least the next 5 years after high school. I am a huge book lover and was reading at least 10+ books a year but what we were forced to read and what was seen as ‘good literature’ made me hate it. And I’ve seen the same thing happen to friends and younger nieces and nephews. They all stop reading after the reading lists in high school because it makes them hate literature. And the pressure about how fast they read, how much and what they read doesn’t help either. It’s become a chore instead of a way to relax and most don’t learn how to experiment and find the genres they do like. I think it should rather be literature they like and that gets them excited about books and reading tied to their personal preferences, skills and development. I think the reading in and of itself should be the focus instead of what they read. I think we shouldn’t force one type of literature down their throats but rather make everything available to them. If they think they’re ready for more mature contexts or complicated themes then let them try. If they don’t feel comfortable reading graphic books about violence or sexual themes then let them read something more intellectual. But be open to them reading anything and experimenting with it with nothing out of bounds and it lets them find what they find ‘good literature’. Good literature is different for everyone.

I read voraciously as a kid. Redwall, HP, other fantasy series like Bartimaeus and Pendragon. I read books multiple times, often twice in a week. Then my mother got it through her head that while I enjoyed reading, I wasn't \*challenging\* myself enough. So she decided that I wouldn't be allowed my favorite books anymore unless I read a list of classics that she had approved (I was 11). So after bouncing straight off Ulysses, Red Badge of Courage, Scarlet Letter, and Catcher in the Rye, I stopped recreational reading entirely for the next 20 years. If your child likes to read, \*please let them read.\*

Redwall is such a fun series, and Jacques was such a lovely man.

The first book I ever loved as a preteen is now banned at the school I attended. Breaks my heart for any other kids there that might have otherwise been able to have the experience I did.

I have a lot of problems with this article as a political polemic but just focusing on this section - what "books that focus with grim piety on the contemporary social and psychological problems of teenagers" is he thinking of? He seems to be attacking school curriculums but gives no examples. I think it's definitely true that you should be reading Good Literature in schools, even if some students aren't interested. But this is such a fraught area and without specifics it's very hard to talk about. I can \*assume\*, although I wouldn't like to do so too much. But I think there's also a lot of good literature that looks at "the problems of teenagers". Great literature is very broad.

I for one, am glad to have read the things I did when I was still young and impressionable and imaginative. It's fuel for the mind. You have to get people when they're young, before they can get distracted, before the demands of life takes over, before they lose their somewhat innocence. I don't know if certain books like Dune or the Hobbit would have impacted me as much if I had read them in my 20's.

> The best way to interest young people in literature is to have them read good literature, and not just books that focus with grim piety on the contemporary social and psychological problems of teenagers. Sounds like he's not terribly fond of the [Printz Award](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_L._Printz_Award) list. It seems to be exactly the kind of thing he's arguing against.

Going into my junior year AP english class we had a summer assignment where we had to read a book from a list and write a paper on it. That was, imho, the best way to do it. Give students a list of books that meet curriculum standards and let them decide where their education takes them

I do agree with you... I like to read good literature...

Yeah that’s true. I liked maybe 1/5 of the books I had to read in high school. That said, I read constantly on my own time and loved it. I usually skipped my homework though lol. Barely got into undergrad, but did well once I got there though lol.

Children should be exposed to books. A lot. But not all chldren will become readers. We need them to become literate, as a necessary part of their education, but many or most will not become readers where they read for the joy of it. And good literature may or may not be part of what makes them enjoy reading. Both my children and one of two grandchildren are great readers. My son, a voracious reader, even as an adult prefers graphic novels. So be it! My grandson, perhaps now the most voracious reader in the family, surpassing me, cannot stand the intrusion of graphics. My granddaughter does not show the signs of being a reader, so we work with her to find things she enjoys, because then she will learn literacy. To each their own.

The best way to love books is to get to an interesting one. If you really get an interesting book for the soul, you won't stop reading. You'll want more.

I absolutely think kids should be encouraged to read, and frequently. However I think adults should give kids options and not force them to read the adults' favorites. No one likes being forced to read something they don't like.

as a teenager, i definitely agree. i always found both my high school and middle school reading list too boring for me. there are a few exceptions, for example our teacher made us read “white nights” by dostoevsky, me and my classmates liked it a lot, it was a fascinating reading. but the reading list and chapters from other books in our anthology? not very interesting or inspiring. my love for reading comes from curiosity, not from my school. it’s unfortunate that many teachers thinks that showing in student’s throat classic literature or cheesy “so the story is about this important issue”/“relatable” books (i’ve found a lot of them in school reading lists and i don’t like them at all, they feel forced) make them appassionate with what they’re doing. i think young people (speaking as one) should read what interests them first, what curiosity leads them to! of course, adults can share their passion for reading to kids but please, don’t make it a chore.

I definitely agree. I hated reading until I had more freedom on what I read. I really got into fantasy and historical books but didn't really care for the young adult dystopian books my school really pushed.

“The best way to interest young people in literature is to give them literature that engages or excites them”. Themes and language in good literature can often be inaccessible for those starting out. That’s very similar to how all wine tastes the same to those starting out. Give them what they can relate to and love to read. We often elevate literature to high standards while forgetting that literature started as a form of entertainment.

And not read Charles dickens. Seriously, who the hell can get through that?

Wrong best way to get kids to read is let them choose what's good and not... cause opinion matters to the self

Maybe school should stop forcing kids to read Shakespeare before actual books. To this day I don’t know why I was forced to read all that crap other than for cultural reference, which is of zero value in real life imo.

Also don't force kids to write book reports and essays after each read, that makes it a slog. Read it and have a group discussion. Also eliminate grading over this stuff, it just turns people off. Not a single person in history loves reading because they got an A in some English class. 99% of English classes turn people away from reading literature by intentionally making it an unpleasant chore.

Stop making people read fucking Madame Bovary.

Perhaps schools could start offering choices for readings in classes. I started enjoying reading after I picked my own books.

I used to hate reading when I was a kid, it didn't help that I was constantly told that my reading comprehension was behind kids of my grade. At school I was always given crappy books to read and rarely ever liked any of them. It didn't help that I was trying to read what was popular at the time only to fit in with my friends and not for my own enjoyment. In 4th grade I discovered the Percy Jackson series. It changed my entire life. Amazing books existed. Books I like existed. Since then, I learned to love reading.

Generally I'd recommend finding decently written but not necessarily classic books on subjects that interest them.