I'll start by saying that I'm not arguing with the fact that it's ridiculous to say that reading Twilight leads to reading better things. What I don't agree with is saying that one is better off not reading at all than reading twilight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
islandclimber
But books like Twilight, Harry Potter, Dark Materials, etc. are not geared towards children but towards youth/young adults, that 14-18 age range... and by the age of 14 or 15 if one is living in a modern country with a decent education system, one has read things far beyond any of those books in English (or whatever language) class... so to say that they get one reading, expand on reading skills, help develop literacy as one person has suggested, is ridiculous..
But this is where my argument comes into play: just because a person has read words does not mean that they have gathered any useful knowledge through the reading. Everyone reads Shakespeare in school when they're 14 or 15, but how many of them actually bother to first of all figure out what's being said, and second of all to interpret it? There are a lot of people who go through good education systems and come out the other side barely speaking their own language correctly, let alone being really literate. For example, the Ontario Literacy test is a test all students take in the tenth grade (roughly 15-16 years old) and must pass to graduate high school.
Sample question: The dog went to the store. Where did the dog go?
If you answered in a complete sentence, you got the mark. People fail this.
If a person is taking some sort of interest in what he or she is reading, there is something to be gained, and that is better than nothing.
Quote:
personally I think any of these works, besides being read for mindless entertainment, which has no other benefits than being entertaining like a movie or a video game, well they are age appropriate for challenging an 8-10 year old if that... they are all extremely safe, as they don't challenge in any way shape or form...
I don't know about that. I think I'd be rather unhappy about an 8 year old reading the Twilight sex scenes, no matter how challenging the novel is.
Aside from that, if an 8-10 year old is not willing to be challenged by what you would consider an appropriate work (as many aren't), what is wrong with having his or her mind at least opened to the possibility of being entertained by a book? At the very least being entertained by a book is worth slightly more than being entertained by a video game- while reading Twilight more than likely won't lead to the reading of better books, it at least opens up the possibility of the person being able to form a complete sentence which is an accomplishment in itself these days.
Quote:
also if you turn reading into analysing, challenging, really thinking about what you're reading, well most of those people reading these kinds of books are no longer going to want to read them..
Isn't this the goal though? Or do you think that it would be enough to make them stop reading altogether?
Quote:
they are read for escapism, and entertainment, nothing more... if you make one analyse, think critically, change how they read, they are going to realize how mediocre the work really is... and no one can honestly say that any of these works challenge a 16 year old? the way say, Twain does, or Dickens, or Salinger? or even Le Guin in the fantasy realm?
That's my point though. If one is taught to read critically, one will look for something better. No, these books aren't challenging to a 16 year old. There's always something to examine though. Even if it's the most basic thing in the world. Even if they say they like Twilight because the relationship is impossible, they have looked a little bit. They didn't set out to analyze, but they did in the most minute degree. And if that's as far as their reading career goes, at least there was something. Maybe "better" readers would only get that much out of Romeo and Juliet as well, despite the fact that they are reading better works.
Quote:
so reading in and of itself can't really be regarded as any different than watching tv, or playing a video game... for the very idea of changing how young people read to be more analytical, would change the very books they read, as when looking closely and thinking critically as you suggest, no one would feel satisfied with such mediocrity... so Mark is right when he said the benefit of reading depends on what you are reading... for if you change the how, you will necessarily change the what in my opinion...
I disagree. That's saying that as long as a kid is reading Shakespeare, that's good. That is clearly not true. There is more to it than that, and if a person is not willing to put in the effort to learn old english and figure out what it means, at least he or she can get something out of reading Twilight.
Quote:
the point here is that people are singling out single authors for contributing so much to getting people reading, when in point of fact those who go on to read more substantial works would have done so regardless of what they began with... why does JK Rowling get such acclaim for getting people reading, yet during my generation when kids read RL Stine and several others no one mentioned them as starting people onto better works.. I don't think more children read now that Harry Potter and Twilight are around, what I think is that readership has been consolidated into one or two books and disregards all other options.. is that a good thing? not in my opinion..
I agree with you. These authors don't deserve any more credit for getting kids to read than R.L. Stein. Again, I'm not arguing with the belief that reading these books doesn't lead to reading better books. Reading Twilight won't lead most readers past trashy romance novels. I still think a person is better off reading a trashy romance novel than nothing. If they gain something from it, they do, if they don't then they're no worse off then before they started.
Quote:
and as I said, those who go on to read more substantial works, would have gone on to do so regardless of what mediocre garbage they began with.. but now that these authors are around it hasn't upped the numbers on who has gone on to read more substantial things as illustrated by the fact reading rates are still in decline...
That doesn't refute my argument either.
Well that was a marathon. :yawnb: