Reading Recommendations for "Children"

[Guest]

The story is well reasoned action and there are no "miracles," just simple [once Poul Anderson points it out] reasoning. Read it!

RR, thanks for the response. Your emphasis on 'reasoning' makes me want to mention that besides being a good story, I do think that literature used in a child's education needs more than that. Obviously we want to help them with grammar and vocabulary, but they also need to be "taught" how to think, and how to think better as they grow. What helps this process is books that are more than stories, books that compel one to think about everything to do with being human, e.g., the classics. Your book may well do that, but I cannot tell from the plot you provide. Please don't think me ungrateful for the time you took to post it, however you did give me the impetus to write down more of why this subject is important to me.

Perdita

p.s. I almost never read sci-fi, in fact cannot think of the last time I did .

 

[JamesSD]

p.s. I almost never read sci-fi, in fact cannot think of the last time I did .

Technically isn't Brave New World sci-fi?

 

[Belegon]

I was about to start a list, but most things I would say have been covered...I will point out that I had an advantage in my reading in that I consistently was lucky enough to run into teachers with a genuine love for what they were teaching and the ability to present it so that we loved it too...and parents who thought if they liked a book it was ok to hand it down to me even if others thought I was too young for it.

'Dita, Science fiction and fantasy hooked me...if not for Asimov and Tolkien I might never have made it to Shakespeare and Marlowe.

For US History I would add "The Killer Angels", Michael Shaara's excellent recounting of the Battle of Gettysburg. It has value for non-americans too, as a great tale of the human toll and just a good story. But I think it is especially valuable for those who have to study the Civil War anyway.

 

[Belegon]

Technically isn't Brave New World sci-fi?

absolutely. science fiction should not be limited in scope to just "space opera", although it often is thought of in that manner..."1984" is also...

 

[Norajane]

Les Miserables and The Hunchback of Notre Dame made a strong impression on me, as did Hamlet and Macbeth.

Edith Wharton's Greek Mythology was wonderful, and probably gave me my broadest understanding of the gods and goddesses than anything else I've read.

And for some reason, The Good Earth, by Pearl S. Buck has also stayed with me.

Mutiny on the Bounty led to some rousing discussions during class, and it was fun reading full of delicious moral and ethical dilemmas.

Walden, definitely Walden.

And Jonathon Livingston Seagull - that's a keeper too. As is The Woman Warrior, by Maxine Hong Kingston.

The Diary of Samuel Pepys cracked me up, though...

I'm on the fence about Of Mice and Men, The Grapes of Wrath, The Ox-Bow Incident, and Flowers for Algernon - they depressed the hell out of me.

 

[Guest]

Technically isn't Brave New World sci-fi?

I read it in h. school I think, so it's been a very long time. Honestly, I'm not putting down sci-fi, it just never appealed (along with 'fantasy'). In the genre, as with any other though, there are certainly levels of excellence. Huxley I presume would be rated more highly than Star Trek 'novels', eh?

Perdita


Edited to add: Just read your posts, Bel. I like your term 'space opera', that's what I meant by the books not in the same league as Huxley's or Orwell's. Ta.

 

[Belegon]

I read it in h. school I think, so it's been a very long time. Honestly, I'm not putting down sci-fi, it just never appealed (along with 'fantasy'). In the genre, as with any other though, there are certainly levels of excellence. Huxley I presume would be rated more highly than Star Trek 'novels', eh?

Perdita

we can certainly hope so...

I still have great fondness for the two genre's. Definitely more into writers like Greg Bear and David Brin right now then I am into the Space Opera or Wizards and Warriors stuff I once focused on, but George R.R. Martin rocks.

Anyway, that's a different thread. To try and bring it back on track, I can think of some books in the genre's I'd like to see more widely read. For example, Asimov's Caves Of Steel addresses racism in a way that is valuable.

 

[Weird Harold]

In the genre, as with any other though, there are certainly levels of excellence. Huxley I presume would be rated more highly than Star Trek 'novels', eh?

That depends on the "rating" criteria.

I don't enjoy Huxley's blatant "preaching," nor do I particularly enjoy "star trek novels." However, if I wanted to make a point about society, I think I'd have a better chance of making the point with a "Star Trek Novel" where the contrast between the Federation's standards of behavior and an alien society's standards of behavior makes a point without being "preachy" about it -- and in a conext that is lesslikely to be seen as a "chore" to read..

"Space Opera" -- and "Horse Operas" (aka Westerns) and "Soap Operas" (aka Romance Novels) -- often make a point about equality, social dynamics, and other real-life issues "in the backgroud" by the structure and assumptions of the "universe" they take place in. The shared Star Trek Universe of the novels provides a utopian background and the aliens provide a wealth of alterntives to contrast with "Utopia."

Many of the suggestions made so far are Science Fiction and Fantasy -- including much of Shakespeare's works -- precisely because those genres allow, or even demand, the author create a world that has different rules than the real world; flaws in the real world can be exagerated or minimized to spotlight those flaws.

 

[angela146]

"The Scarlet Letter" Nathaniel Hawthorne
"The Chosen" Chaim Potok

As for Shakespeare, I am a firm believer in the notion that his plays are meant to be seen and heard. Before leaving school, every child in every English-speaking country should have seen at least two of the following performed as God intended (i.e. live, by professional actors, in an outdoor theater -- orange wenches optional):

Hamlet
Merchant of Venice
Tempest
MacBeth
Richard III
Henry V

 

[R. Richard]

That depends on the "rating" criteria.

I don't enjoy Huxley's blatant "preaching," nor do I particularly enjoy "star trek novels." However, if I wanted to make a point about society, I think I'd have a better chance of making the point with a "Star Trek Novel" where the contrast between the Federation's standards of behavior and an alien society's standards of behavior makes a point without being "preachy" about it -- and in a conext that is lesslikely to be seen as a "chore" to read..

Precisely my point! The SciFi ability to create new societies with points of view that differ widely from our own allow exploration of interpersonal dynamics not usually achieved in the more traditional novel.

 

[Guest]

That depends on the "rating" criteria. ...

I knew I'd touch some nerves, so I want to emphasize that I am not anti-S/F, or westerns or romance, etc. However, I am against educators, particularly English teachers, who want to "make a point" politically to children without an emphasis on what constitutes extraordinary literature. As I said earlier, in other words, a lit. curriculum should constribute to forming a child's mind with language, thereby teaching a child how to better speak, write and think, or even recognize the poetics of language (as with Huxley vs. ST books).

The works of Sh're that might be deemed 'fantasy' are still read not because of their inherent special effects possibilities, but because of his use of language to examine humanity. I also agree that along with studying Sh're in the classroom children should attend a production of a play (or 2 or 3).

Now to risk sounding like an utter snob (which does not bother me at all), I daresay Huxley or Wells would agree with me.

Perdita

 

[Guest]

Precisely my point! The SciFi ability to create new societies with points of view that differ widely from our own allow exploration of interpersonal dynamics not usually achieved in the more traditional novel.

Though my riposte to WH covers this, I want to emphasize the 'point' of teaching English literature to children. What you state here might prove useful in a middle-school civics or government class, but if it's not extraordinarily fine writing I would not recommend it for a lit. curriculum.

Perdita

 

[LuciousBi-Writes4U]

Wuthering Heights - Emily Brontë (and don't for get Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austin these two writer's diffiant styles for their time were awesome! Wonderful books...Sense and Sensibilities, Emma...and no movie no matter how well done can replace first reading the real book!)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Roald Dahl
Robinson Crusoe - Daniel Defoe
David Copperfield - Charles Dickens
Hamlet - William Shakespeare
To Kill a Mockingbird - Harper Lee
Animal Farm - George Orwell
The Tale of Two Bad Mice - Beatrix Potter
The Catcher in the Rye - JD Salinger
Catch-22 - Joseph Heller​

 

[cloudy]

Cannery Row, by Steinbeck.

Enough of a story to keep it interesting to me in junior high and teach me about literature at the same time.

 

[TheEarl]

I'd recommend 'The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night Time' and 'Flowers for Algernon', but not on English Literature grounds. I'd say they both should be read for English Language (the two are separate subjects in England) and discussed to show children just how effective character building is and why those two authors helped you understand very unfamiliar situations.

FYI: Curious Incident...'s main character is autistic and shows the world through his eyes. Flowers for Algernon's main character starts off with a sub-70 IQ, which is increased throughout the book. His changes of understanding as he gets more intelligent make the entire story.

The Earl

 

[cloudy]

I'd recommend 'Flowers for Algernon'

Good call. I'd forgotten that one.

 

[Guest]

I'd recommend 'The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night Time' and 'Flowers for Algernon', but not on English Literature grounds. I'd say they both should be read for English Language (the two are separate subjects in England) and discussed to show children just how effective character building is and why those two authors helped you understand very unfamiliar situations.

That's interesting. I like the idea of the separate subjects, though I'd hope the curricula makers would be in communication.

Now I miss you more cos I recall you asking about the book at the stall in the marketplace .

Pear

 

[Weird Harold]

However, I am against educators, particularly English teachers, who want to "make a point" politically to children without an emphasis on what constitutes extraordinary literature.

I read Lord of the Flies and One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest as part of the "English Lit" curiculim when I was in high school -- there was at that time a big debate over the value of "contemporary fiction" in "English Lit;" Lord of the Flies was considered "contemporary fiction" rather than "Science Fiction" because the latter term wasn't really considered a separate genre at the time.

In the 37 years since and a LOT of Science Fiction and Fantasy later, I consider the LotF more notable for it's political statement than for any literary value it might have. Likewise, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Brave New World, 1984, and H.G Wells' Time Machine and 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea are all more notable for their social statements than they are for the quality of the writing.

That is not to say that they are poorly written, but only that more contemporary authors -- in many genres, not just F&SF, are better examples of "Extraordinary Literature" in the quallity of the writing.

It seems to me that in academic terms, "Extraordinary Literature" means a) something that makes a social staement in the bluntest and preachiest fashion possible, B) is over fifty years old, and C) makes use of a formal and archaic style of writing.

I don't really have a problem with requiring works that fit those three criteria, but I think there is a lot of contemporary fiction that also has a lot of "literary merit" and whether it's tagged as "Science Fiction" or "Fantasy," the best examples are often "speculative" and/or "predictive" in content and by definition F&SF.

Jurassic Park isn't published as "SF" but that's what it is.
The Hunt For Red October isn't published as "SF" but that's what it is.

The whole "techno-thriller" genre isn't published as "SF" but that's what it is and there are numerous examples of that genre that have a lot of Literary Merit.

Huxely, Kesey, Wells, Dickens, et al, have "stood the test of time" so that they are considered "Extraordinary Literature" but Lord of the Flies and One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest were still New York Times Best Sellers when they went on the reading list at my high-school and hadn't met that test of time yet.

I personally don't think that the majority of Star Trek Novels meet the standard of "Extraordinary Literaure," but a couple of works by authors who write Star Trek Novels DO meet that test IMO and some of the Star Trek Novels do as well.

Anne McCaffrey's Harper Hall trilogy -- part of the extensive Pern series -- is on the reading list of many elementary and middle schools and her Pern Short Story, "The Littlest Dragon Rider," is included in elementary level reading textbooks (fifth grade level, IIRC.)

Andre Norton's Witch World series is included in some reading textbooks in extract form and the entire series is on the recommended reading list in many schools.

Some Science Fiction and Fantasy is already on required and recommended reading lists -- both the classic foundations of the genre like Wells, Orwell, and Huxley and contemporary authors (Anne McCaffrey is still alive and Andre Norton only recently passed on.)

I don't think you're consciously anti-F&SF, but you do seem to have a bias against "contemporary" works and "genre fiction." I can think of two recently released books I'd recommend for the "literary merit" -- one Epic Fantasy and one "Space Opera" -- if it weren't for the fact that they are both book Eleven of long series.

The WOT series by Robert Jordan has a lot to offer students in the way of social statement, "literary" relevance (lots of highly technical writer's tricks,) and a commentary on the world's myths and legends -- it is however far too long to be appropriate in an educational setting.

The Honor Harrington series by David Weber offers much the same sort of literary merit as the WOT -- it's essentially a retelling of the Horatio Hornblower saga in a far future, inter-stellar warfare setting. The main series itself is likewise far too long for an educational reading list, but the "franchise" does include four short-story collections that not only maintain the high literary merit of the main series, but also include stories in the "Honorverse" by authors other than David Weber. The Short Story collections do well as stand-alone stories that would do well on a recommended/required reading list.

"Golden Age" science fiction authors, like Robert A. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Elison, Clifford D. Simak, Ray Bradbury, Arthur C.Clarke and many others, produced a lot of works that IMO rise to the level of "Extraordinary Literature" at every reading level from Third or Fourth grade through College post-graduate. They've mostly been ignored by educators because they're "just Science Fiction."

If Gone with the Wind were published today, it would undoubtedly be marketed in the "Romance" genre and dismissed as unworthy of being considered "Extraordinary Literature."

It's not just Science Fiction and Fantasy that are generally ignored in considerations of "what everyone should read" but all sorts of "genre fiction." IMHO, that's a big mistake on the part of "educators" because "Literature" is constantly evolving and moving on beyond the "Time Tested" standard of old.

The original post asked for recommendations for "schoolchildren" and to me, the top criteria for that kind of recommendation is readability -- which includes entertainment value as well as good writing. Social relevance is nice, but a broad spectrum of genres and styles is probably more important.

If the list is for a "Literature" course, then the old and influential works gain a higher priority -- but even then, Fantasy and Science Fiction are an integral part of the influences that shaped "Literature" as we know it. Wells, Huxely, Orwell and even Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote "Science Fiction" before there was such a genre.

The very roots of "Literature" in sagas and folk-tales are Fantasy and Science Fiction. "Realism" and "Social Satire" are relative late-comers in the history of Literature, but it those genres which seem to dominate the "Extraordinary Literature" beloved by academics. I really don't understand why modern F&SF is considered lacking in the very qualities that "Literature" is derived from -- especially by those who claim they don't read those genres.

 

[JamesSD]

"The Scarlet Letter" Nathaniel Hawthorne

Highly overrated. Another book I was forced to read in high school but couldn't stand.

 

[Guest]

Thank you for the thoughtful post, Harold.

Perdita

 

[Guest]

Highly overrated. Another book I was forced to read in high school but couldn't stand.

That is your opinion of course, but in the context of this thread would you be willing to give a thoughtful explanation why it is highly overrated, or why it might not belong on an English lit. curriculum?

Thanks, Perdita

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I liked teachers who gave us choices... we didn't have "required reading" we had a HUGE list of classics we could choose from to read. That way, if Wuthering Heights didn't appeal to the guys, and Lord of the Flies didn't appeal to the girls, we didn't *have* to read them... and we didn't skip them because we were bored, we read the books we WERE interested in... and got to the others later, when our interests changed, because reading the classics that you DO like tends to give you a taste for them in general...

another thing about "teaching children to think." I don't think so. My belief is that we encourage children to unfold... if you give a flower enough water, air and sunlight, it will do what it does... children are the same... try to FORCE a rose to bloom open, give it a schedule and force-feed it, and see how fast it withers and dies. :x

And, to contribute to the list, it's not a novel, but the short story "The Yellow Wallpaper" made an impression on me forever... what a horror story...

and speaking of horror, anything by Poe.

 

[Guest]

another thing about "teaching children to think." I don't think so. My belief is that we encourage children to unfold... if you give a flower enough water, air and sunlight, it will do what it does... children are the same... try to FORCE a rose to bloom open, give it a schedule and force-feed it, and see how fast it withers and dies.

Selena, I wonder if you misunderstand me. It isn't that an educator (or parent) needs have a plan or syllabus on how to teach a child to think. It's been my experience that I've learned to think better through the use of language, whether through reading, writing, listening, talking in conversation, and so I would hope the 'best' (extraordinary, whatever) language is used in a school's curricula. No matter though, I would not try to force a child to do anything unless it was a matter of life or death. Still, I also wouldn't naively leave a child to unfold at will. But perhaps that's a bigger subject than this thread's.

Perdita

 

[NoJo]

I'd recommend 'The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night Time'
The Earl

Excellent suggestion -- I bought it for my 13 y/o nephew, and he loved it. Funnily enough, he's now reading it again, for School English (he's American).

As a young teenager, reading "difficult" books was something I took pride in. I read a lot of books I didn't really "get" until I re-read them as an adult. But JD Salinger's "9 Stories" was influential, as well as John Barth's "Funland".

 

[cloudy]

Something Wicked This Way Comes, by Bradbury.

Excellent coming of age tale, excellently written, and just scary enough to appeal to most teenagers.