School Books That Set Us Up For A Lifetime Of Depression(manolith.com)
manolith.com
School Books That Set Us Up For A Lifetime Of Depression
http://www.manolith.com/2009/05/05/top-5-grade-school-reads-that-set-us-up-for-a-lifetime-of-depression/
5 comments
I think I agree with you about English class?, but I'm sure I disagree with you about whether this is fit for HN. Geeking out about books from grade school is absolutely stimulating: it made you talk about the meaning of The Giver, Ann Frank, and Catcher In The Rye.
I agree with the original comment. I don't have any problem with talking about books from grade school, and I do agree with you in that this has started an interesting discussion.
But I'm pretty much only finding the discussion interesting. While there is nothing wrong with the list of books, the article seems to be mostly listspam. It seems like he just gives a brief overview overview of the book and then complains about how inappropriate it is for grade school.
For example, I haven't read The Giver, and this article doesn't really give me any reason to do so. There are no themes discussed, well except that it sounds like the book might involve free will and predestination. All I really get from the description is that the book paints a really depressing picture of the future. I am more inclined to read the book from its description on Wikipedia.
But I'm pretty much only finding the discussion interesting. While there is nothing wrong with the list of books, the article seems to be mostly listspam. It seems like he just gives a brief overview overview of the book and then complains about how inappropriate it is for grade school.
For example, I haven't read The Giver, and this article doesn't really give me any reason to do so. There are no themes discussed, well except that it sounds like the book might involve free will and predestination. All I really get from the description is that the book paints a really depressing picture of the future. I am more inclined to read the book from its description on Wikipedia.
I guess, but I'd rather geek out about something other than what I disagreed with in an article.
For terribly depressing books aimed at kids even younger than grade school, check out the Thomas the Tank Engine series.
The basic lesson is that any deviation from the rules will be punished severely. One of the trains likes flowers so he leaves the tracks to smell them. Punishment: the entire village jumps out of the field to scare him. Another train gets vain about his new paint job. Punishment: he is bricked into a tunnel for a year, until he rusts. Oddly, little kids eat this stuff up.
I don't know if it's blind allegiance to trains, or if they really like the moral world portrayed.
The basic lesson is that any deviation from the rules will be punished severely. One of the trains likes flowers so he leaves the tracks to smell them. Punishment: the entire village jumps out of the field to scare him. Another train gets vain about his new paint job. Punishment: he is bricked into a tunnel for a year, until he rusts. Oddly, little kids eat this stuff up.
I don't know if it's blind allegiance to trains, or if they really like the moral world portrayed.
That's both amusing and concerning at the same time. I have always felt a little unsettled when I have happened to watch Thomas the Tank Engine, both as a child and as an adult.
There does seem to be something of a history of rather severe children's tales. Look at Roald Dahl or the Brothers Grimm. Not that I'm directly equating Roald Dahl or the Brothers Grimm (whom I generally like) to Thomas and friends (whom I generally do not like) but there does seem to be some strand of commonality in terms of the extremes of the underlying messages in long surviving children's tales, even if the lesson/message is not necessarily pointing in the same direction in all cases.
A little severity in ones entertainment as a child is a good thing in my mind (though lessons enforcing conformity do not fall into this "good" kind of severity for me). I remember watching Star Wars as a young child and being freaked out by that scene in the bar where Ben Kenobi cuts the alien's arm off with his light sabre. But it was moments like that which made the movie memorable to me, gave it impact and helped to make it more than just a series of movies, it became it's own mythology in my mind.
Conversely, I believe the lack of this was primarily what made the new Star Wars films crap by comparison. With the new movies, they made the mistake of trying to make them "kid safe" and easily digestible to as wide an audience as possible. In doing so, they ruined any chance of a new generation having a similar experience with the new movies as I did with the old, and of the the new films ever having any true soul.
There does seem to be something of a history of rather severe children's tales. Look at Roald Dahl or the Brothers Grimm. Not that I'm directly equating Roald Dahl or the Brothers Grimm (whom I generally like) to Thomas and friends (whom I generally do not like) but there does seem to be some strand of commonality in terms of the extremes of the underlying messages in long surviving children's tales, even if the lesson/message is not necessarily pointing in the same direction in all cases.
A little severity in ones entertainment as a child is a good thing in my mind (though lessons enforcing conformity do not fall into this "good" kind of severity for me). I remember watching Star Wars as a young child and being freaked out by that scene in the bar where Ben Kenobi cuts the alien's arm off with his light sabre. But it was moments like that which made the movie memorable to me, gave it impact and helped to make it more than just a series of movies, it became it's own mythology in my mind.
Conversely, I believe the lack of this was primarily what made the new Star Wars films crap by comparison. With the new movies, they made the mistake of trying to make them "kid safe" and easily digestible to as wide an audience as possible. In doing so, they ruined any chance of a new generation having a similar experience with the new movies as I did with the old, and of the the new films ever having any true soul.
I have a book called "The Rainbow Fish", which I refuse to let my kids read.
I think it has a horrible message, that individuality is bad, and you must give away all that is special about you in order to conform.
I never bothered to look it up till today, and I see that wikipedia has an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Fish about it, with almost exactly the same criticism I made.
Why do adults write such books (including the ones you mentioned) for kids? And why do other adults allow them to become popular (AKA buy them)?
I think it has a horrible message, that individuality is bad, and you must give away all that is special about you in order to conform.
I never bothered to look it up till today, and I see that wikipedia has an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Fish about it, with almost exactly the same criticism I made.
Why do adults write such books (including the ones you mentioned) for kids? And why do other adults allow them to become popular (AKA buy them)?
Dude, The Rainbow Fish is just a book about sharing. You know, like stickers and crayons and stuff.
I'm pretty sure we can take any children's book and, with some rhetorical gymnastics, reconstruct Harrison Bergeron from them.
I'm pretty sure we can take any children's book and, with some rhetorical gymnastics, reconstruct Harrison Bergeron from them.
I can see how you can read it that way. But the fish has to give away parts of it's own body! And not just that, but give away the very thing that makes it special.
And it's not like sharing one crayon when you have a box of them, no, here it has to give away every single one of it's scales until every fish has exactly the same amount.
To put it in human terms, it's like if a girl in class has long pretty hair, and all the other girls are jealous, so they make her cut off pieces of it to give to all the other girls.
Or in less dramatic terms, if I have a box of crayons, I don't just share one with the kid next to me, I go around the class and hand one out to each and every kid, until every kid has exactly the same number of crayons.
I also don't like the message from the friends, who insist on receiving the item. Sharing is about giving, it is NOT about demanding that the other person share with you. (Or snubbing them until they give you want you want.)
And it's not like sharing one crayon when you have a box of them, no, here it has to give away every single one of it's scales until every fish has exactly the same amount.
To put it in human terms, it's like if a girl in class has long pretty hair, and all the other girls are jealous, so they make her cut off pieces of it to give to all the other girls.
Or in less dramatic terms, if I have a box of crayons, I don't just share one with the kid next to me, I go around the class and hand one out to each and every kid, until every kid has exactly the same number of crayons.
I also don't like the message from the friends, who insist on receiving the item. Sharing is about giving, it is NOT about demanding that the other person share with you. (Or snubbing them until they give you want you want.)
The friends don't insist on receiving the scales. The friends are annoyed when the Rainbow Fish uses them as a reason he's better than they are. Which is exactly what little kids do when they get some awesome toy or a neat set of markers: show them off, and refuse to share.
Then the message should be about not showing off, rather than give it all away.
A Separate Peace. Oops, I'm the charity case and I accidentally pushed you, Rich Boy, out of a tree! And then you were crippled! AND THEN YOU DIED!
Watership Down. Three words: creepy rabbit ghosts.
Old Yeller. To Kill a Mockingbird.
And on and on and on... apparently the way to become respected, Serious Literature for children is to kill people. Or at least characters in your book.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathByNewberyMed...
This list seriously made me smile but yes, I agree, not HN.
Watership Down. Three words: creepy rabbit ghosts.
Old Yeller. To Kill a Mockingbird.
And on and on and on... apparently the way to become respected, Serious Literature for children is to kill people. Or at least characters in your book.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathByNewberyMed...
This list seriously made me smile but yes, I agree, not HN.
There was that book about the two friends, where the one friend pokes a beehive with a stick and the bees swarm him and it turns out he was allergic to bees and then he dies and I think his mom brings the other kid a pie or maybe it's the other way around.
Either way, we read that in 4th grade. We never had to read Terebithia, although my son likes that story. I won't let him read the bee book.
Either way, we read that in 4th grade. We never had to read Terebithia, although my son likes that story. I won't let him read the bee book.
Sounds kind of like My Girl, one of the few films that can make me cry.
I think it might have been "In Watermelon Sugar". Yeah, that's the one.
The only problem I found was Lord of The Flies and To Kill a Mockingbird in 6th grade because we were in an advanced english class, not really the best books for a younger audience.
On the other hand I read the Rye in 9th grade and found it to be a very interesting and relatable book and even though it is not the best book for a young audience there is not much of a difference when you have reached high school.
On the other hand I read the Rye in 9th grade and found it to be a very interesting and relatable book and even though it is not the best book for a young audience there is not much of a difference when you have reached high school.
I read "To Kill a Mockingbird" in fourth grade. I liked it. I still like it.
Personally I think it's a book that grows with you.
Personally I think it's a book that grows with you.
Lord of the Flies is a great book for late middle school kids, because it's ABOUT THEM. What if they could absorb the lesson that all their teasing and bullying is an expression of the very forces which, without social control, would lead to murder and war? Do you really think 12 is too young?
"The Giver" was pretty cool. It had a thought provoking premise and a good buildup, despite the homoerotic undertone.
I must admit that I didn't get "The Catcher in the Rye". Sure, I get that he's frustrated with everyone, but it annoyed me that there were only about three scenes playing on repeat.
I must admit that I didn't get "The Catcher in the Rye". Sure, I get that he's frustrated with everyone, but it annoyed me that there were only about three scenes playing on repeat.
The problem with English classes in a nutshell. You ruin a beautiful thing when you assign it a grade, no (or exceedingly few) exceptions.
That one comment aside: This is not only listspam, it is not at all Hacker News, it doesn't stimulate me in any way, and it's wrong. Bridge to Terabitha is about enjoying life in the face of that threat of its cessation; The Giver says that we should not accept our assigned place in society and that it's possible to be different; The Diary of Anne Frank illustrates the beauty in a single human life and reminds us that everybody is amazing (a lesson that many of us online tend to forget); and I wrote about Catcher in the Rye a few days ago, but it's not a bad thing to address alienation at a young age, because it's certainly there before most of us turn ten.