There is a disturbing trend in our society. In our society there are those among us that do not read, and they are proud of it.
There is great love of the Harry Potter series, yet they are the only books that children ever read (and sadly some adults two). Harry Potter is not exactly great writing, and there are other much greater works of fantasy and literature.
For instance, parents could introduce their children to Narnia and Lord of the Rings. And as they get older they could read Lilith and Beowulf etc.
These are all superior book to Potter and should be read. It is not enough that children only read seven books in their lives, and if they are only going to read seven they should choose other British authors like Lewis, Tolkien, Shakespeare, Doyle, Chesterton, Dickens, Marlowe, Chaucer, Carrol....
Or how about some non-Brits: Homer, Hesiod, Vergil, Dostoevsky, Aeschylus, Stienbeck, Twain.....
Or maybe read books with unknown authors like Beowulf.
But no, we are proud of our children when they read a Potter book. But perhaps this is why no one ever reads any of the great works of western thought. We do not encourage good literature, nor do we encourage reading in general.
All of these authors wrote
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I don't think half the parents out there unserstand the impact of reading literature and recognizing the different characteristics of authors. There is so much out there in the world to find out! Wizardry isn't the only thing..
-loree
I agree that we need to encourage our children to read, and yes, literature is underated (I'm in love with my lit. class). however, i do think it's going a little overboard to attack harry potter. i think harry potter is one of the better things to happen to the written word. of course i am speaking as someone who has read the series, but mostly, i find the books valuable because they are assessed at a 4th grade level. this is the age where reading is no long "cool". if we need books like harry potter to get our kids interested in reading, then i'll take it. as they get older, yes, fine literature should be pushed, but perhaps this is a good introduction.
I agree that Harry Potter is overrated, but recommending Narnia and Lord of the Rings isn't exactly a step up. Narnia is one-dimensional, and LOTR is terrifyingly wordy. There are plenty of great books for children out there, but those two aren't among them, sorry.
I also question the title of your post. If by "real literature" you mean books that employ archaic grammar and writing style, and if you are suggesting that these are the only books that we should read, then I disagree. Modern writers can publish decent books, too.
C.S. Lewis was a master of the English language, and was one of the best authors of the past century. By LOTR, I meant the Hobbit, which is also absolutley beautiful writing.
I challenge you to name three writers that are still alive that publish books that take a step beyond sex and violence.
I mean books that have said something about western thought. I never said that we should not read modern authors, I enjoy Grisham, and the Sci-Fi short stories produced in the 40-60s are some of the finest ever written.
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis
j/k
I have read and enjoyed books by Nick Hornby, Yann Martel, and Don Lee. They are all still alive, and I don't recall any explicit sex or violence that scarred me for life.
I have read a few books by C.S. Lewis myself. I enjoyed his essays and his poems, but children fiction isn't his area of expertise. His writing style in Narnia is redundant, and his interjection of himself into the story is arbitrary. I did find some of his quirky characters interesting, but the main characters themselves lack personality. Eustace sounds just like Edmund, and Jill like Lucy. Speaking of whom, Lucy is too perfect to my liking.
And considering the target audience, the ending is disturbing.
The Hobbit is the only book by Tolkien I have read, and I never even went to the LOTR trilogy after I got a taste of his writing style. But that was a long time ago, so I guess I have to reread it to see if I still hold the same opinion.
Tolkien, while wordy, illustrates linguistic mastery. He's just...inimitable, I suppose. His passages describing the waterfalls when Faramir rescues Frodo and Samwise outside the gates of Mordor--they're exquisite. Lord of the Rings is for the lover of language, though. And though the plot is dark, the writing is beautiful. He has this immense and evident joy in the words and the syntax and diction are just phenomenal.
Just saying. I love Tolkien, I read The Hobbit when I was eight.
I'm also enjoying my AP British lit class. We're starting Chaucer soon with The Canterbury Tales, and Tolstoy around Christmas (Anna Karenina for the long break).
fyodor dosteovsky's the brothers karamazov is a must read ..
you cant die without reading it.
arguably the best novel ever written !!
I agree that parents need to make sure their children read something other than Harry Potter. Harry Potter is okay but it is over rated. Narnia is a good series to pick up as is the Boxcar Children, the Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew, Clue Jr. and Clue, Marley and Me, and my personal favorite the Anne of Green Gables series by Lucy Maud Montgomery.
I tried to read Narnia. It was incredibly boring. Shakespeare has some good stories, but the language makes it a turn off when reading for fun. I like some Dickens, even though I haven't read him in a while. Homer made me fall asleep. Steinbeck did pretty much the same. Twain is pretty good. Kipling makes me want to yank out my hair.
I prefer contemporary authors, myself. Orson Scott Card, F. Paul Wilson, James Patterson, Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child... those are most of the authors I've read in the past year, the rest are pretty much teen/young adult books, because that's a nice way to unwind from the heavy language of Kipling.
~C
Visit my blog.
Kids should read, but they should read what they enjoy. As a "kid" I wasn't reading Dickins and Chaucer. I was reading Harry Potter, and Goosebumps, and other stuff like that. Now? NOW I have an interest in the classics. It's best to let kids read what they enjoy, and not try to force the "real" literature on them so they don't end up resenting reading. A healthy interest in reading stems from being provided with things that spark your actual interest.
Harry Potter and Goosebumps can have just as much of a message to them as the classics, and other than that it doesn't really matter. Let people have their interests, expecially children.
Not only did I read Harry Potter and Goosebumps as a child, and enjoy them. Not only did I NOT read Dickins and Chaucer as a child...Now I am going to college to be a Literature teacher. Obviously, not reading heavy classics as a child is not going to scar anyone for life.
When it comes to something as important as the minds of our children, why settle for less? We cannot justify Harry Fodder like, "Hey! Our kids are reading now! This is good." No, it is BAD. They nEeD to rEaD good literature.
Honestly, I can hardly plod my way through some of the classics and make sense of them. (Some of them, that is) How do we expect children to? And are they really going to grasp the things that are being presented to them?
I think Harry Potter books are very well written for children's books. I enjoy them still myself, and I don't think I'm a bad reader, or undereducated.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
Kids can understand far more than we give them credit for. I was reading the "classics" when I was eight years old. Sure, I didn't get everything out of them that I get out of them now that I'm seventeen, but I could understand a lot of what they contained.
Can most people read Goethe's "Faust" and make perfect sense of it? No. But why not try? It took me two times through to really grasp all of the underlying themes, but it wasn't too hard to understand once I thought about it enough. What about Fyodor Dostoevsky's "Notes from Underground?" Luigi Pirandello's "Six Characters in Search of an Author?" Victor Hugo's "Et nox facta est?"
What's sad is the fact that I'm seventeen and I've already read more classic literature than most adults [that I know of]. Most of the reason why people can't understand classic literature is because they don't really try. Do we want to teach children to stop trying? People need to stop being so lazy.
TxY
How about we let the kids read what they want to read? If they enjoy HP, great, if they want to read Dante's Inferno - go for it.
I don't think anyone is going to develop a passion for reading if it's crammed down their throats and they don't get to get the "pleasure" part of "reading for pleasure".
I'm not talking about in school, either. In school it's only necessary to have them read the things we need them to, to gleen the ideas from it that we want them to. Use literature that teaches them the concepts, and all. But also: If something we need to teach is represented in Harry Potter, woohoo! If something we need to teach can only be found in Shakespeare, then bring that in too.
Literature is literature, just because it's old doesn't automatically make it better than all of the new stuff out there.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"So stuff that in your pipe and smoke it!"
I think it is so important that parents encourage their children to read various types of literature. A friend of mine had to read a chapter a day out of a book when he was younger. I think that is so great, and I definitely want to do that with my children. They should be able to read book that they would enjoy and also classics.
Danielle
In a way I agree with Ransom. I don't think that most kids can be expected to get through some of the writers mentioned. I think that there should be a greater push for children to read, but let them read the kid books first. I think that higher level books should be available to them, but I don't think it's wrong that kids are reading books like Harry Potter.
If you can get a kid to read ANTHING these days, you're doing better than most parents.
percivale
As a parent of two teenagers who do read I have to say that you teach by example. I read to them when they were still in the womb. My children read books from all genres: Harry Potter, Tolkein, Sci-fi and Fantasy like Robert Jordan and David Eddings to Stephen King, to Beowulf, and the Odyssey and Homer or the Illiad, to The Bell Jar or Gulliver's Travels. My children are both in Honors classes, though my son has dropped some honors subjects to take some engineering classes offered at his high school. When they were small we read Dr. Seuss, we progressed and eventually they were reading Goosebumps, Harry Potter, The Chronicles of Narnia (which is still ONE of my favorite childhood books, other than Charlotte's Web and Stuart Little (my fav). I read Shakespeare, Dickens, Hemingway, Steinbeck, and numerous other classics while in school on my own time, and still read some of the classics. I also read Robert Jordan, Eddings, James Patterson, Stephen King, Harry Potter, and other various authors.
My kids love to read, I love to read. I remember getting in trouble for reading under my covers with a flashlight after bedtime--both my kids have gotten in trouble for doing the same thing. As a parent I am proud that they are both avid readers, and that they will carry their love of books onto their own children when they have them.
"A prime part of the history of our Constitution...is the story of the extension of constitutional rights and protections to people once ignored or excluded." ~US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
"Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil."-C.S. Lewis
I think that today's youth could use more literature in their life. Especially America's young kids, they are just not reading enough these days.
For the record - 'and sadly some adults two' - that should actually be too. If you're going to complain about how little people read, it sounds better if you prove yourself intelligent enough to be using the correct grammar.
Also, forcing children to read will do no good. If you force them to read things - especially books such as LOTR which took me a year to manage at 13 despite the fact Jane Eyre at 11 took a week - that they don't enjoy, they'll never learn to read for pleasure.
I'm a firm believer like a few others that children should first create a love of learning and reading. They should read things that interest them as a child. If they are forced to read things that are above their level/over their heads, how will that benefit them in the long run?
It won't. By starting with Harry Potter, which the writing style matures as the series progresses, then eventually they can move on and read more challenging and rewarding books. But until that time, I applaud anyone who reads Harry Potter, because I think it is a small step towards becoming an avid reader.
Classics are important. In my workd literature class, we read a lot of stories by non english speakers. As a college student, I sincerly enjoy Aenid, Dante's Inferno, and Doctor Faustus. But I could never get through them in middle school. I started out with my parents reading picture books at bedtime, and moved on to baby-sitters club, Animorphs, Harry Potter, and Chronicles of Narnia. Now, I read Stephan King, Ann Rice, Lewis' adult work, which is his forte, Narnia was the only children books he ever wrote, and several 20th century books.
At a younger age, I wouldn't have been able to grasp a lot of the things I read now, because they include a lot of references to mythology and history that I understand much better now. (That's one way in which Harry Potter bridges the gap between child and adult fiction.) Also, they would have not kept my attention span for very long, being so wordy.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/tricia0711