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.

Fay posted this link over in LJ.

A bit spoilery for HP6.

With many books, I had the exact experience as Cindy--read them, got something out of them, realized when re-reading as a teen or adult that I'd missed half the story.

Oddly enough, the book I completely didn't get and thought was both baffling and boring when I read it around age 13 or 14 was Pride and Prejudice. I'm pretty sure I'd already read some Regency romances and a few Heyers by then, and I'd certainly read slightly later 19th century fiction--that was right around the time I was obsessed with Jane Eyre. But I just couldn't keep track of the characters in P&P or understand the rules and nuances involved, so I abandoned it a chapter or two in.

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?

Umm because they were in my parents house, and I'd read all kids books and comics books in the house, and the backs of all the serial boxes and these were the next things I could find with funny parts. (What Shaw and Twain have in common is that they use a lot burlesque and humor that a seven year old can get.)

OK - I get your part about the peer pressure. But ya know what - I don't think it matters. For the most part a kid who reads Harry Potter solely due to peer pressure is not someone who would be reading anything otherwise. If you like to read in general you also know what you like and don't like. Also there is a whole different vibe in doing something from peer pressure because it is "cool" than in doing it because teacher makes you. A lot less likely to end up hating it later. My feeling is than anything that makes reading "cool" to kids is of teh foamy.

Also there is a whole different vibe in doing something from peer pressure because it is "cool" than in doing it because teacher makes you. A lot less likely to end up hating it later. My feeling is than anything that makes reading "cool" to kids is of teh foamy.

My thoughts exactly.

My only peer pressure reading experience was continuing to read the Xanth novels long after the shark had been jumped, though, so take that as you will.

Really, I should have quit after Night Mare. Or, you know, never started reading Anthony. But, in my defense, I did quit by the time I was twelve. (And then we get into my PJF period. The less said, the better.)

Ha! Beliefnet has a pastor writing a column to counsel people who might be upset by the ending of HBP after reading HBP. It's very darling. Spoilery too, but darling. [link]

Three-quarters of the way through HBP. Boy, Harry really is a mean git, isn't he. I'm with Hermione on her annoyance with his depending on the Prince's help in Potions.

It's a very political book, isn't it, with all the references to the new Minister being so anxious to look like he's doing something about Voldemort that's he's throwing anyone in Azkaban on flimsy excuses, just so long as he appears strong. But it's not like JKR can't say, "Look, I've been setting this up for years, it's not like Voldemort and his reign of terror is a new development." Kind of like Lucas being twitted for interpretations of Ep III when we've all known the Empire was bad news for nearly thirty years.

Must read quicker, Hubby's waiting for his turn.