Trying to get my 14 yr old sister to read

[Alfred001]

I'm quite concerned for my sister's choice of entertainment and generally see her going so far in her life in a bad direction in terms of interests and what she is choosing to expose herself to, as it is all completely devoid of anything intellectually stimulating. My parents aren't helping any, so I think the burden is on me to intervene at this point.

She has agreed to read The Cather in the Rye if I get it for her, but I worry whether I've chosen the right book. She doesn't read much and I wonder whether The Catcher will be too much to start her off on.
What she DOES read is books which she is assigned to read in school, most of which she professes to not like (with the exception of The Secret Diary of Adrian Mole, which she says she liked because it was funny) and what she reads by choice are odd self help type books, I think one of them was called how to get people to do what you want, and another was 15 habits of succesful teenagers, or something like that.

Do you think I should go with something else?

She doesn't seem to be the kind of kid who goes for the geeky stuff, your Tolkiens and what nots (not that I'd wish to have her reading that, but I'm thinking in terms of gateway books).

The question seems to me to be whether to go for something substantial like The Catcher from the get-go, or whether to go for a a gateway novel (meaning something not substantial but easy and entertaining that might get her liking books), and if the way is to start with something substantial should it be The Catcher in the Rye or something else?

[Jackson Richardson]

Of Sarah Byng the tale is told
How when the child was twelve years old
She could not read or write a line.
Her sister Jane, though barely nine,
Could spout the Catechism through
And parts of Matthew Arnold too,
While little Bill who came between
Was quite unnaturally keen
On 'Athalie', by Jean Racine.
But not so Sarah! Not so Sal!
She was a most uncultured girl
Who didn't care a pinch of snuff
For any literary stuff
And gave the classics all a miss.

Hilaire Belloc

Seriously though, I don't know the relationship between you and your sister - are you her brother? What is the age gap?

I'd have thought she'd be put off reading by being told it will be good for her, unless she is very trusting (and the notorious effect of set school texts at putting people off confirms this tendency). She will read if she enjoys it and finds something to interest her. Suggest she browzes the Amazon books section and seeifanything attracts her. If she liked Tolkien, what business would it be of yours?

Reading can be empowering. Reading what you're told will be good for you isn't.

I was recommended Catcher in the Rye when I was 15 or so, and didn't get on with it. I've never read it since. (I was a very innocent child.)

[cacian]

I don't know. I would take her to a bookshop and I would suggest she choses her own books to read.
This should teach her about making decisions of her own and allow her to acquaint herself by herself to the thousands of books out there.
It will also make her feel important and give her a sense of responsibility. She choses now then she will go back to the bookshop and do it again this if she likes what she finds on the shelves.
Also suggest maybe she should try writing forums and perhaps taking poetry writing or art. She is at an age where imagination is the sky's limit.

[Delta40]

I don't know why you're imposing your tastes upon her for starters. The fact that she is prepared to read at all is a bonus isn't it? When my kids were young, I used to leave comics in the toilet and story books and their level of interest grew from there as did the literature. I found by not overtly interfering, they matured all by themselves. Why not allow her to do just that without being so obvious?

[Jackson Richardson]

You make my point rather more clearly than I did, Delta40.

[Calidore]

Telling her to read what's good for her regardless whether it's something she would like is a fail waiting to happen. What kind of movies and TV does she like? That will give you genres to start with (and us something to base recommendations on).

When I was trying to get my neighbor's 7-or-8-year-old son to like reading, I already knew he liked fantasy, so I started with a guaranteed winner: Lloyd Alexander's Prydain series. After that, we did Susan Cooper's Dark Is Rising. He asked to keep both of those. We read together for about five years, mostly fantasy but also plenty of other stuff, and now at 16 he reads plenty on his own, with me still supplying him books.

Main thing is, I promised him early on that everything we read would be something I thought he would like, and if he didn't like something after giving it a fair shot, he just had to say so. Only happened once that I remember--Ray Bradbury's Dandelion Wine (which, frankly, was boring me too, much as I love Ray).

[Delta40]

You make my point rather more clearly than I did, Delta40.

Oh I don't know. I think between us both we got it covered :biggrin5:

[Calidore]

Oh I don't know. I think between us both we got it covered :biggrin5:

Plus, we got to read


I don't know the relationship between you and your sister - are you her brother?

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Maybe she needs/wants some guidance, guys.

[Jackson Richardson]

Maybe she needs/wants some guidance, guys.

In which case she is free to ask here herself.

(On consideration whether it is two sisters or a brother and sister isn't very important.)

[Alexander III]

To be fair, literature like philosophy or film, is a hobby; most men get by in the world without ever having read a book of beauty. Literature is entirely superfluous from a pragmatic point of view; besides certain types of literature posses a corrupting influence like a casino, a homely drinking place or a too friendly marijuana dealer, things and habits extremely enjoyable and full of sensation in and of themselves; but from a pragmatic view, chiefly hinderances in life.

[FenwickS]

Not sure you're going about it the right way, no one likes to be told what to do!

I can relate this to myself growing up, my father is a HUGE beatles fan, and he always wanted me to listen to them, but of course, I'd rather listen to Britney Spears or the Backstreet Boys (my little secrets exposed! very unsleuthy of me!). Several years later, in highschool, I started listening to them on my own accord (no pun intended) and now they are my number one!

What I'm trying to get at is that if she doesn't want read now than she won't. Just because she can not read. If she sees the appeal of it later on (without somebody coaxing her to do so) she will feel like she made the decision (which she would have) and enjoy it tenfold.

But if you do want her to start I agree with cacian and take her out for a fun day at the bookshop! (and maybe some frozen yogurt to sweeten the first chapter :))

[qimissung]

Good points, all. There's also the library. And those books are free. If she's not used to choosing books for herself, she might fumble a bit at first, and you can be gently persistent (Well, let's try again). You should absolutely let her guide you as you guide her. Go slow, there's no rush. This could be something that you both come to enjoy very much. If she finds a book she loves, maybe you could give it a try.

I love Delta's idea of leaving a variety of things around for them to find, and Calidore's promise that his young protege would never have to read anything he didn't wish too.

[skyrise]

I'm glad my big bro curated part of my life, sometimes when your young you need some direction. What's the worst that can happen? she doesn't like his suggestions and decides not to read them or she discovers that reading is a pleasurable habit. My suggestions: start easy 'Bonjour Tristesse' Francoise Sagan, 'The Alchemist' Paulo Coelho, 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time' by Mark Haddon, 'Animal Farm' George Orwell, 'The Pearl' John Steinbeck, 'Memoirs of a Geisha' by Arthur Golden, 'The Book Thief' by Markus Zusak. Twilight and the Hunger Games are acceptable too.

[Delta40]

the worst that could happen is he could drive her away from reading and it could also have a negative impact on their relationship. One cannot tell how eager the OP is to impose his tastes upon his sister you see. Teenagers are so impressionable.

[MorpheusSandman]

Match your recommendations to her taste. Most don't start out in literature reading the canon; in fact, my gateway into serious literature was Neil Gaiman's Sandman comic, which made allusions to Milton, Shakespeare, and Chaucer. I was so engrossed in that series that it encouraged me to check out those writers, and from there it sparked my love for poetry and literature, in general. FWIW, I've had a lot of success introducing women to poetry simply by reading it to them... there's something about hearing poetry spoken that can be seductive in a way that being introduced to it in print isn't. You can also try to make a social thing out of it by, eg, doing a kind of book club.

[manuscript]

skyrise suggested hunger games, all of the cool kids seem to have been reading it! i didnt like twilight, it seems to purvey some unhealthy ideas about gender - but that doesnt really matter when the point is to enjoy reading enough to want to do more of it. just give her things she might be interested in and enjoy. like others have suggested, serious literature is not for everyone, people kind of have to discover their own self-motivating reasons to pursue it.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

:banghead:

[qimissung]

I don't think I suggested that serious literature is not for everyone-in fact I don't think anyone suggested that. But I do think for a young girl who is already choosing not to read, starting out with a book that is probably far above her reading level will probably not convince her that reading is fun or valuable in any perceivable way.

[manuscript]

sorry, i thought someone did suggest that serious literature is not for everyone, but i must have been mistaken. maybe i just became confused about meaning to suggest it myself! I Capture The Castle or Pride and Prejudice might be cool places for a girl that age to start. i sense that i have not taken this matter seriously enough, sorry if i have not been very helpful!

[mal4mac]

Why not buy her some more Sue Townsend? There are about eight books in the Adrian Mole series, and several others. Where are you from? Townsend is a phenomenon in the UK, a comic writer, but also a FRSL,etc. I think she's almost as substantial as Salinger, and a lot funnier. Also, she's a wise woman, rather than a strange recluse... Your sister has taste!

[Alexander III]

I'm glad my big bro curated part of my life, sometimes when your young you need some direction. What's the worst that can happen? she doesn't like his suggestions and decides not to read them or she discovers that reading is a pleasurable habit. My suggestions: start easy 'Bonjour Tristesse' Francoise Sagan, 'The Alchemist' Paulo Coelho, 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time' by Mark Haddon, 'Animal Farm' George Orwell, 'The Pearl' John Steinbeck, 'Memoirs of a Geisha' by Arthur Golden, 'The Book Thief' by Markus Zusak. Twilight and the Hunger Games are acceptable too.


skyrise suggested hunger games, all of the cool kids seem to have been reading it! i didnt like twilight, it seems to purvey some unhealthy ideas about gender - but that doesnt really matter when the point is to enjoy reading enough to want to do more of it. just give her things she might be interested in and enjoy. like others have suggested, serious literature is not for everyone, people kind of have to discover their own self-motivating reasons to pursue it.


Well damn, my comment was completely superfluous, I mistook what type of conversation this was.

[hillwalker]

The point is surely if she enjoyed reading something 'funny' she should be encouraged to explore other humorous books aimed at the YA audience.
She might develop more 'mature' or 'literary' tastes as she grows older - but if not, so be it.
Telling someone what's good for them often has the opposite effect and turns them against the very thing you're trying to promote.
'Catcher in the Rye' is one of those books everyone should read during their youth - as is 'To Kill a Mocking Bird' - but I'd suggest the kid-gloves approach for now.

I learned to read from comics - 'Beano', 'Dandy', 'Beezer', 'Topper' etc. Many criticised my parents for encouraging me to immerse myself in such rubbish but by the age of 7 I had the reading age of a 9 year-old (some would say it hasn't progressed much beyond) and it didn't mean that I was unable to appreciate classic literature when I finally chose to seek it out.

H

[mal4mac]

I'm glad my big bro curated part of my life, sometimes when your young you need some direction. 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time' by Mark Haddon, 'Animal Farm' George Orwell, 'Memoirs of a Geisha' by Arthur Golden.

Great choices! I haven't read the others you mention, but these ones are spot on. Careful with Hadden, though, although 'The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time' was great, I found 'A spot of bother' a bit tedious, and I think teens would find it even more tedious. Steinbeck's "Cannary Row" is lightest, most humorous piece work I've read by him. Orwell's also a bit hit and miss; if Animal Farm works, then 1984 should - I found the other novels a bit tedious (his non-fiction is great).

[manuscript]

did anyone mention Kiss Kiss by Dahl? i think i thought it was pretty funny at the time.

[Phocion]

To be fair, literature like philosophy or film, is a hobby; most men get by in the world without ever having read a book of beauty. Literature is entirely superfluous from a pragmatic point of view; besides certain types of literature posses a corrupting influence like a casino, a homely drinking place or a too friendly marijuana dealer, things and habits extremely enjoyable and full of sensation in and of themselves; but from a pragmatic view, chiefly hinderances in life.Completely disagree: literature has immense pragmatic benefits, for society and the individual.

[Alexander III]

Completely disagree: literature has immense pragmatic benefits, for society and the individual.

For every advantage literature (or any art form for that matter) gives you, there is an equal disadvantage. To read to better the self, is like to fvck to better the self; art is often masqueraded as something more than a pleasure; but that is all a book is, a pleasure; Hitler, Stalin, Washington and Garibaldi all where huge admirers of literature. The fact is that it did not make the latter better men just as it did not make the former worse men. Some enjoy tobacco and some don't, our pleasures in life have a sparse impact upon our characters or intelligence. History backs me up, but I see no similar Atlas holding up your claim.

[manuscript]

For every advantage literature (or any art form for that matter) gives you, there is an equal disadvantage. To read to better the self, is like to fvck to better the self; art is often masqueraded as something more than a pleasure; but that is all a book is, a pleasure; Hitler, Stalin, Washington and Garibaldi all where huge admirers of literature. The fact is that it did not make the latter better men just as it did not make the former worse men. Some enjoy tobacco and some don't, our pleasures in life have a sparse impact upon our characters or intelligence. History backs me up, but I see no similar Atlas holding up your claim.

but dont you think that literature and art entail abstract and philosophical content, and engagement with the problems of human existence on these levels, in a way that sexual intercourse does not?

i find it very bizarre that a literary forum should censor obscene language.

i think it is probable that without literature, women would not have been given the power to vote, and slavery would not have been abolished, in the US.

[Alexander III]

but dont you think that literature and art entail abstract and philosophical content, and engagement with the problems of human existence on these levels, in a way that sexual intercourse does not?

I was speaking of pragmatism, a good fvck leaves the majority of men more satisfied than philosophy; in fact in my experience philosophy and art are only useful when one is unsatisfied. Men have an instinct fro sex and violence and when those two primeval necessities are satisfied the need to philosophies diminishes drastically. It is no coincidence that Socrates was the ugliest man in athens and Alcibiades was the fairest.


i find it very bizarre that a literary forum should censor obscene language.

Here I agree with you completely. But Children and simple-minds can access this forums just as easily as you and I, so I suppose it is necessary to curtail for those who cannot protect themselves.


i think it is probable that without literature, women would not have been given the power to vote, and slavery would not have been abolished, in the US.

Anti-slavery literature was around since the time of the greeks and the romans, and quite possibly much earlier; either the abolition of slavery was a huge failure on literature's part, or it had less to do with literature and more to do with zeitgeist, in which literature and the arts played a part, but their part was of the symptom not the cause.

If we specifically speak of the U.S, I think it had less to do with literature and more to do with the men in blue uniforms having more canons, guns, and finance behind their bayonets.

[qimissung]

I think "Uncle Tom's Cabin" was influential, although it is probably a case of being published in the right place, at the right time.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

For every advantage literature (or any art form for that matter) gives you, there is an equal disadvantage. To read to better the self, is like to fvck to better the self; art is often masqueraded as something more than a pleasure; but that is all a book is, a pleasure; Hitler, Stalin, Washington and Garibaldi all where huge admirers of literature. The fact is that it did not make the latter better men just as it did not make the former worse men. Some enjoy tobacco and some don't, our pleasures in life have a sparse impact upon our characters or intelligence. History backs me up, but I see no similar Atlas holding up your claim.

Art can be different for everybody. For some it is just a pleasure, and for others it does change one's life in substantial ways. There is no universal truth as to what art is to everybody. And history does back up his claim. How could it not? Look at all the slave narratives that helped abolish slavery. Just one example.

As to this site's censorship: Admin has stated many times (though it's understandable that new members wouldn't know this, though a vet like Alex should) that the site is censored so it isn't blocked in schools and places like that. I don't see the big deal, really.

[Stosyl]

If you're talking about a 14-year-old girl who doesn't like to read, she's not gonna like Catcher in the Rye.

Try I Capture the Castle. It'll be relatable to her, it's charming and funny (laugh out loud funny), and best of all it's kind of an easy read for a 40s classic.

Also, not to be mean, but you must be a bit pretentious to say you wouldn't want her reading Tolkien, as if Salinger is a thought-provoking genius and he's a dimestore paperback writer. Next thing you know, you'll be saying Hemingway has more literary value than Hugo!

The most important thing is to show her she can LOVE reading. Literature comes afterward.

[manuscript]

For every advantage literature (or any art form for that matter) gives you, there is an equal disadvantage. To read to better the self, is like to fvck to better the self; art is often masqueraded as something more than a pleasure; but that is all a book is, a pleasure; Hitler, Stalin, Washington and Garibaldi all where huge admirers of literature. The fact is that it did not make the latter better men just as it did not make the former worse men. Some enjoy tobacco and some don't, our pleasures in life have a sparse impact upon our characters or intelligence. History backs me up, but I see no similar Atlas holding up your claim.

i have been trying to think about your ideas expressed in this thread as they interest me (despite offending my prejudices!). hitler probably did not really love literature exactly, as he banned a lot of it, and burned anything he didnt agree with, and just enjoyed anything in it that he could use to validate his insane obsessions. but i think its probably true about good people as well, that they are probably just naturally good, and what they read doesnt really change that much. and even i guess it is possible or likely that they use what they read in the same way to validate or support their "good" beliefs. it probably doesnt significantly change very much in their nature or their ideas about things.

i guess my reluctance to agree completely is mainly some sort of irrational attachment to the idea that reading literature has had massive impacts on my thoughts and choices. i find myself unable to verify the integrity of this idea, at least for the purposes of argument, but possibly further. it all provides good substance for further thought for me. thanks


Anti-slavery literature was around since the time of the greeks and the romans, and quite possibly much earlier; either the abolition of slavery was a huge failure on literature's part, or it had less to do with literature and more to do with zeitgeist, in which literature and the arts played a part, but their part was of the symptom not the cause.

If we specifically speak of the U.S, I think it had less to do with literature and more to do with the men in blue uniforms having more canons, guns, and finance behind their bayonets.

it is all pretty interesting to think about and debate. i think most people in those ancient times were probably very illiterate. and the printing press was not invented until much later, and even then for a long time general population literacy probably remained pretty low. anyway, you could be right about slavery. some studying i did made me feel fairly stubborn in my conviction that it is likely that first wave feminist literatures played a meaningful causative role in getting people thinking and excited enough to act, but i admit, it could all just have been part of a general movement that would have happened anyway.


I was speaking of pragmatism, a good fvck leaves the majority of men more satisfied than philosophy; in fact in my experience philosophy and art are only useful when one is unsatisfied. Men have an instinct fro sex and violence and when those two primeval necessities are satisfied the need to philosophies diminishes drastically. It is no coincidence that Socrates was the ugliest man in athens and Alcibiades was the fairest.

i am grateful that i have my mediocre amateur philosophising to keep me occupied. sorry that these responses i have written are not very interesting, i mainly just wanted to express that what you wrote interests me.

[mal4mac]

Also, not to be mean, but you must be a bit pretentious to say you wouldn't want her reading Tolkien...

What's pretentious about not liking Tolkien? It's pretentious to dismiss someone's opinion... you may disagree with it... but you can't dismiss it... because it's *her* opinion.

[manuscript]

As to this site's censorship: Admin has stated many times (though it's understandable that new members wouldn't know this, though a vet like Alex should) that the site is censored so it isn't blocked in schools and places like that. I don't see the big deal, really.

thank you for that explanation and it makes very good sense to me. it is a big deal to me because i disagree with controlling the use of language, as i believe that language is not only signification, but has also accrued other meaning in itself, and creates new meanings by the ways in which people choose to use it, and this seems good to me. and also because if it were controlled for some other reason say that did not have to do with promoting the accessibility of knowledge, i would not think much of the literary integrity of this forum, because taboo language has been a part of particular texts that have become canonical for longer than any of us have been alive. i respect that it is not a big deal to you, i am only justifying my reasons for why it is to me.

[ennison]

Oh don't get her to read "Catcher...". Specially not if you keep guns in your drawers back home. If she likes Mole then that's good. There's lots more funny stuff out there so build on that. Why don't you read snippets to her of funny things.