Eh–I’ll say this: Rowling’s writing is fairly mundane, but her story is fantastic.
I think I may have heard of that Stratford guy…ya think Hal has, too?
[QUOTE=eleanorigby]
I really don’t know how many kids are actually reading Thru the Looking Glass. It seems to be a book one is familiar with, but perhaps has not read–like Treasure Island or* Ivanhoe*. I just took a KidLit course for library school–the older folks in the program (40 and up) had mostly read all of these (whether voluntarily or for homework was not made clear), but those under had not. Can’t really extrapolate to everyone with this, but it does give one food for thought.
<other parts snipped>
[/QUOTE]
What I find is that a lot of people think they have read books like Robinson Crusoe, when what they have really read are shortened children’s versions or even comic book versions of the classics. For example, ask someone who says that they read Robinson Crusoe if they remember the chapter when he is fighting the wolves in the snow in the mountains between Spain and France – most people will just look at you and say “Huh?”.
I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with shortening the classics for children to get them interested, but it’s nice to revisit them as a teen or adult, and find out all the things you missed.
I agree that anything like HP that gets kids reading is a good idea, whether it’s a classic or not.
Just a suggestion for a possible alternate definition of “Subliterate”
You can read, but you only read books about submarines. 20,000 Leagues Beneath The Sea, Hunt For Red October, etc.
[QUOTE=MisterThyristor]
What I find is that a lot of people think they have read books like Robinson Crusoe, when what they have really read are shortened children’s versions or even comic book versions of the classics. For example, ask someone who says that they read Robinson Crusoe if they remember the chapter when he is fighting the wolves in the snow in the mountains between Spain and France – most people will just look at you and say “Huh?”.
I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with shortening the classics for children to get them interested, but it’s nice to revisit them as a teen or adult, and find out all the things you missed.
I agree that anything like HP that gets kids reading is a good idea, whether it’s a classic or not.
[/QUOTE]
Yup. That’s what I meant. Although I must say that I had to read Pilgrim’s Progress last fall for class, and I could have skipped it altogether. (oddly enough, I also had to read* Treasure Island* and Robinson Crusoe, as well!)
And I had to read Little Lord Fauntleroy. Blech. (that has been counted a classic, but for no good reason, IMO).
Raguleader --I suggest we propose that to Hal; see what he has to say. I will add The Little Mermaid to the list.
[QUOTE=lissener]
I personally think HP is pretty badly written, too. But if it gets kids reading–if it’s a gateway drug, in other words–it has huge value. I doubt Bloom read *Finnegans Wake * in rompers.
[/QUOTE]
Did you? 
Sorry dear, I couldn’t resist.