I haven't read Moby Dick, either, nor do I plan to ever read it. Reading it doesn't interest me. Neither does reading Hemingway (not after managing to read only 3 pages of one of his books in high school). I can always find information about those books should I feel the need to have that knowledge.
As a librarian, I want people to read. Anything. I don't care what. After all, Charles Dickens was once the pulp writer of his time. Classics aren't written as classics. That happens decades later. They're books that stand the test of time. Who knows how Danielle Steel and Stephen King will be viewed 50 years from now.
A society that reads will retain knowledge. I'm much more concerned about retaining scientific knowledge in society than a taste in "classic" literature.
Lists of Books Everyone Should Read are nice if you're looking for recommendations. But to consider them required reading once you're out of school and not getting them as assignments is to be bullied by people you give authority over you for your "cultural" well being.
Read what you enjoy. As long as you're reading, you can't go wrong. And yes, that goes for porn, too. Or perhaps, just erotica. ;)
What I find really really interesting is that three weeks ago I posted that poem as my Poem of the Day. I'm not sure if I should be wondering if Karen Funk Blocher reads my blog, or amazed at another example of serendipity. Or maybe it was a Poem of the Day somewhere else this month....
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, I've read over 3/4 of Moby Dick and refuse, on principle, to finish it. I hate Hemingway, and The Grapes of Wrath makes me want to puke after merely 4 chapters (I love Steinbeck otherwise, though).
Here's the deal: like you I think we need to know about the books in terms of cultural relevence if nothing else. So, no, don't need to read the Bible; do need to know how it has influenced civilization.
But I say reading is reading: magazines, manga, memoirs, even blogs (the horror!).
As for porn, hmmm, I immediately assumed that all porn is visual. But it's not...necessarily...is it? :-)
I just stumbled upon this blog and have spent a chunk of time delightedly reading in it - so imagine the irony, that the first comment I post on it is a TESTY DISAGREEMENT! Ulp!
ReplyDeleteStill, I disagree - mildly with what Shelly wrote, and much more strongly with what Cat wrote. I agree that some reading - any reading - is better than none at all. But that being said, there's still such a thing as bad habits. People who read only 'easy' stuff (their favorite kind of light fiction, stuff read ONLY to derive immediate pleasure) are doing the mental equivalent of dining exclusively on cake-icing - something you'd never advise anybody to do. I don't see why it's OK to advise they do the same thing with their reading.
My point is, reading is a muscle. And just like any muscle, the more you exercise it, the better it works. If you ONLY read Nora Roberts, although you'll still be in better mental health than a non-reader, you'll be in no 'condition' to read, say, Jane Austen, or George Eliot. And there's just no point in denying that those books SHOULD be read: not because they're 'classics' but because they're so damn good. They give enjoyment on a wholly greater intensity-level than less complex stuff.
But it's Cat's contention about the Bible I really don't understand! Not only is reading about how it's influenced civilization a pale shadow of actually reading it yourself (after all, it only influenced civilization because people read it, right?), but by not reading it, you deprive yourself of some of the most beautiful writing in the whole of literature. You don't have to be religious to glory in some of the passages in the King James, for instance - and honestly, what kind of a reader can you call yourself, if you'd rather Google the cultural effects of great books than actually read them?
Gotta agree with you on "The Grapes of Wrath," though ...
Welcome, Steve. Disagreement is the spice of life.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I'm more concerned with literacy, and any reading, other than product labels and traffic signs exercises the reading "muscle." I don't think Nora Roberts compares unfavorably with the "classics." I hate Hemingway, but people like him. Many of my friends read "easy books" and not much else and that's fine. I don't judge their reading and they don't judge mine.
And I read Grapes of Wrath in High School. I loved it. It was the book that got me started reading Steinbeck on my own.
Anyway, feel free to express your opinions here. That's what seeds discussions. :)
Here Here! So true. I don't care what you read as long as you read something! I tried Mody Dick and put it down not too long after I started.
ReplyDeleteAs a librarian and an avid reader, I like to get some classics under my belt, but this was too tedious for me.
There are sooo many other books waiting, I can't waste my time on something I don't enjoy!