They didn't actually understand what happened in the story, or what was implied. And this is disheartening for me, because I really want them to be engaged and curious and reading something that's manageable, that's going to get them thinking and turning over the pages and wanting to talk about it. I guess that this Pokemon-level interest in HP isn't a bad thing, as such. I just find it depressing.

Fay! There are kids, right there on your lawn! You should do something about that.

'Scuse the jumping in suddenly; I don't usually post here, but I wanted to comment on Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle. It's worth the effort to get through, as it's a rather remarkable detailing of the rise of modern society - currency systems and trading, the adoption of scientific method, European introductions to the rest of the world, and of course the amazingly complex set of wars that engulfed Europe in one way or another through the second half of the 17th century and the opening of the 18th.

Another excellent book of this sort is "A Pirate of Exquisite Mind [et cetera]" by Diana and Michael Preston. It details the life of William Dampier, who is a name sadly overlooked in most scientific histories; he was the first Englishman to circumnavigate the globe 3x, and more, and his story is engaging.

And now back to lurkage.

Cindy, that link is great - thank you so much!

Fay! There are kids, right there on your lawn! You should do something about that.

gets gun

I read Connecticut Yankee In King Arthur's Court at that age along with Heartbreak House.

Great. Was this because everyone else was reading these books and it got you extra cool points to be able to say you'd read them, and you'd feel left out and uncool if you hadn't? Or was it because you were interested and engaged with the books, even if you didn't quite get everything that was going on?

(And I should perhaps add that I am more likely to let a kid take a book that I think is too hard for him or her than not, on the basis that if they really are excited about the book, then that's way better than taking a book they don't want to read. As a result I'm forever getting parents complaining about the fact that their kid has taken home a book that's too hard for them, to which I generally reply that [especially with nonfiction, which I'm more liable to let them take when it's way too hard, if they're interested] they don't have to read the whole book, and if the parent will read with them, listen to them read, ask questions and engage with them then they're still going to be getting something out of the book, and it's cool that they're interested. But with HP - most of the kids in my class don't have a clue what happened in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, never mind the other books, and yet they consider themselves fans because they're into the phenomenon, and they believe that they've read the book because they turned over the pages and understood a lot of the words. Which is all well and good, but it doesn't mean they actually engaged with the book.)

...er. And in conclusion, I am a crotchety old bitch. See tagline.

I get you, Fay. If they're "reading" the books but not getting a damn thing out of them, and getting their plot knowledge from the movies, then it doesn't necessarily follow that they're becoming interested and invested in reading, which is what you want. Also, given your timestamp, I'm assuming today's bombings weren't too near you.

Matt H, I believe you and all, but having really fought my way to the end of the first novel I'm not sure I can do it again, worthwhile or not.

it doesn't necessarily follow that they're becoming interested and invested in reading, which is what you want.

Yes! This!

Re: bombings - happily I have been Hermit!Girl and stayed in my house a lot over the past few weeks, rather than taking the opportunity to go and do tourist things.

I'm just hoping and praying that none of my Egyptian friends, and none of my kids and their families, were hurt. Because it's a very popular resort with Egyptians, is Sharm, and most of my kids go there in the holidays.

Great. Was this because everyone else was reading these books and it got you extra cool points to be able to say you'd read them, and you'd feel left out and uncool if you hadn't? Or was it because you were interested and engaged with the books, even if you didn't quite get everything that was going on?

For me, definitely the second. I guess - I'm not really getting the problem here. If all a kid is getting out of it is the most surface level of plot, but it's still engaging them enough that they're still reading, what's the problem? Sure, they might get more out of it reading it at a later time, but there's nothing to say they won't do that anyway. Assigining or pushing kids to read something beyond their level is a different question, of course. But if they're interested, and they're picking it up on their own, they're getting something out of it.

Assigining or pushing kids to read something beyond their level is a different question, of course.

But it isn't. Because that's what's happening - it's just that it's peer pressure that's getting them to pick up the book and turn over the pages and say that they've read it, rather than the teacher telling them they have to read it. Which strikes me as a bit of a waste of time, when they could have been reading something they got, and where they laughed at the jokes and noticed the mounting tension.

But, whatever. I'm not a book nazi, I'm not going around taking books off kids.

But it isn't. Because that's what's happening - it's just that it's peer pressure that's getting them to pick up the book and turn over the pages and say that they've read it

Ah. I forgot we got onto this via HP or LOTR, which do have an element that I think in general isn't a factor. That's a tougher question, for sure. I still think that for some kids, the challenge and the discovery that you have to work for some things is a good thing. The hook of the movie and the leg-up in comprehension from having an existing familiarity with the plot and characters can work for some kids. But in the general run of things, or when the material is too far ahead, I agree it could be counterproductive.

I read a lot of books when I was too young for them, not out of the fandom thing, but because something attracted me to them. In third grade (so age 8/9) I read Gone With the Wind. I read other books like that while quite young, and fell in love with them. Now, when I re-read them as an adult or older child, I got a lot more out of them, stuff I didn't come close to getting when I was young. So it was like I got the treat, twice. To some extent the Narnia Chronicles were like that for me as well. I think I started them even younger--maybe around age 6.

Anyhow, don't look at it as a waste, Fay. Look at it as sort of pre-reading. If they get joy from the experience, even if they miss a good bit of the experience and are more getting the joy from the shared-fandom-aspect, it's one more check in the positive-reading-experience column.