Re: Salinger
Emily Friedman (bananafish_9@yahoo.com)
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 12:57:41 -0800 (PST)
---helena kim <helena@apollo.netsoc.tcd.ie> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Nov 1998, Pasha Paterson wrote:
>
> > treating it as a work of literature and not grouping it with
so-called
> > "young-adult novels" as some [bad] classes seem to treat it.
>
> my local library sticks little red dots on the spines of all the
'teen'
> books. most of them are babysitters club, sweet valley high, judy
> blume, and those epic boys football (i mean soccer) books.
>
> i believe this is a way to get young teenagers to read more, by
letting
> them think 'hey, i'm not in the kids section anymore!', but avoiding
them
> coming home with dostoyevsky (sp?) or something that will bore them
and
> put them off books.
>
> interestingly, catcher has a red dot on its spine.
>
>
> :helena kim
>
> helena at netsoc dot tcd dot ie
> 'the church is near, but the road is icy.
> the bar is far, but i will walk carefully.'
> - russian proverb
>
First of all I find it very sad that CITR would be categorized in the
same section as The Babysitter's Club. Your post reminds me of a
teacher I had in 6 grade who would become very angry at a student if
they read a book that was not a young adult book. I read Lord of the
Flies and she became furious, a fellow student of mine read a John
Grisham book and she yelled at him because he was too young to read a
book with sex in it. I have a lot of anger towards young adult books
because that was what I was forced to read in middle school when I
really wanted to read great literature. That is why I am angered when
I hear that CITR is categorized as a young adult book.
-Liz Friedman
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com