There was much to admire about this book, but enough to leave a distaste in my mouth for the overall reading experience. I had trouble reading names in this book, first and foremost. I found myself flipping pages trying to remember who was who, and reading words two times, trying to pronounce them correctly. I am kind of OCD about that. Even Lyra was killing me not knowing how to say her name. I went with "Leera" over "Lie-ra" but don't think I wasn't second guessing myself for most of the book. Some children might have enjoyed the mystic names and intrinsic peoples of the book but I surely didn't. Plus, the whole anti-establishment movement (kind of reminds me of the go-green cult in present day society) really doesn't sit well with me. I would rather read a Christian Allegory than a fantasy reality (good oxymoron). Nonetheless, here are some further thoughts about the book:
The Daemon in the book is what I (I don't want to say enjoyed) the most but what had me nodding my head in agreement. I do believe in soul. In a spirit. Outside the novel I do believe that's true. So to have a part of my reality come into play with this fantasy fiction, there was a connection that could be appreciated. The whole intercision of the Daemon and person was a scary thought. Even the absoluteness of the Daemon after puberty is something which almost deals with death. In this real world the only thing that is absolute is death (and taxes we know..) So to have something be permanent and unchanged is as serious as death in that you can not fix what is done. It can not be undone. However the person themselves can be undone and the whole plurality of person vs daemon takes stage. Going back to pronunciation did anyone else pronounce Daemon like "Matt Damon"? Terrible. I was reading this hanging out with my Daemon, and thinking how absurd spelling is in The Golden Compass. The biggest problem I had with this book was staying interested and finishing. I wonder if anyone in the class enjoyed this book thoroughly and look forward to hearing from you. Maybe some of you can respond with your favorite moments in the book?
Monday, November 26, 2012
Monday, November 19, 2012
Christianity, Redux
Redux? I didn't want to visit it for a first time. If there's one thing you never discuss with a man it's religion and politics, because you will never swing him and he/she can never swing you away from your beliefs. I fail to understand why people can not fathom the simple reason why we are the way we are. If I show you a shirt and say is this shirt nice, you are likely to respond based on your beliefs. I can tell you this is the top of the line cotton with the newest fashion cuts, but if you don't like it, you just don't like it. Why people force their religion or beliefs on others is bewildering. It's not a belief anymore if you make someone 'believe' it. That's just me. Let's get into the reading:
I was content with reading The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I was never into fantasies as a child, and looking ahead I can see we will be talking about Dystopias. I'm not talking about The Golden Compass, just my normal ordinary life when religion comes up in class on Monday (*Zing). As far as The Lion goes, I think it's great, imaginative and a must read for children. Alternate universes engulf the imagination of young ones and can help build reading skills. The adjectives used in the book help describe what is not there and allows for readers to build vocabulary and reading skills. For example Lewis could have said "Her face was white" and stopped. Children would have maybe imagined their grandmothers or maybe a teacher with too much makeup.. anyone could have fit the mold of this white face, but by describing it as, "Not merely pale, but white like snow or paper or icing-sugar" Lewis allows for a child to then explore their imagination and press their minds to discover what this face looks like. The child could then jump to a polar bear or something else with a white, snow covered face. The word merely adds flavor to the sentencing, and with the context clues the child learns a new word which is how you build vocabulary as a young reader. He uses describing words (or adjectives as adults should say) which connect the child to the story. Children know what snow and paper look like, but surely can connect with icing sugar. Lewis didn't choose to say white like a 65' Thunderbird or white like Freddie Mercury's pants in 1985 at Wembley Stadium (mainly because the book was written in 1950) but you see how he picks his spots. I would love to analyze his writing more than make the comparison or argument as I am sure we will have in class over whether Aslan was Jesus or the Witch was Satan. But I understand we have units to cover so I will gladly try and add any input I have to the conversation :)
I was content with reading The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. I was never into fantasies as a child, and looking ahead I can see we will be talking about Dystopias. I'm not talking about The Golden Compass, just my normal ordinary life when religion comes up in class on Monday (*Zing). As far as The Lion goes, I think it's great, imaginative and a must read for children. Alternate universes engulf the imagination of young ones and can help build reading skills. The adjectives used in the book help describe what is not there and allows for readers to build vocabulary and reading skills. For example Lewis could have said "Her face was white" and stopped. Children would have maybe imagined their grandmothers or maybe a teacher with too much makeup.. anyone could have fit the mold of this white face, but by describing it as, "Not merely pale, but white like snow or paper or icing-sugar" Lewis allows for a child to then explore their imagination and press their minds to discover what this face looks like. The child could then jump to a polar bear or something else with a white, snow covered face. The word merely adds flavor to the sentencing, and with the context clues the child learns a new word which is how you build vocabulary as a young reader. He uses describing words (or adjectives as adults should say) which connect the child to the story. Children know what snow and paper look like, but surely can connect with icing sugar. Lewis didn't choose to say white like a 65' Thunderbird or white like Freddie Mercury's pants in 1985 at Wembley Stadium (mainly because the book was written in 1950) but you see how he picks his spots. I would love to analyze his writing more than make the comparison or argument as I am sure we will have in class over whether Aslan was Jesus or the Witch was Satan. But I understand we have units to cover so I will gladly try and add any input I have to the conversation :)
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Children Favorites
As a child I read both The Cat in the Hat and Where the Wild Things Are. As I scrolled through YouTube not longer than 3 weeks ago I came across a Cat in the Hat DVD Trailer >>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IL-NdQXyeE&feature=related
First let me begin with my dislike for any movie adaptation of these classic books. When you watch the movie you get the sense that something is left out and you feel empty when watching them. However, upon further analysis you may want to consider the opposite. It isn't that the film leaves out certain qualities or traits that leave us feeling empty. It's that they add certain features an effects that fill up our appetite for imagination. As a child, you are left free to "fill in the blanks" with your own imagination. Outside of what is concrete and written, you can imagine 'Things 1 & 2' and monsters any way you choose. It is this aspect of the books that trump any film adaptation. A great story is only half written. The other half needs to be imagined and connected with the reader. Looking back and re-reading these books I felt that the books were simple and not as complex or rich as I once believed them to be. I realized that the books never changed in X amount of years. I changed. I stopped filling in voids and could not make connections. Whereas I would before admire the Cat in the Hat's ability to fix any situation, I stray from that and ponder the unreasonable ability to clean a house with such grandeur. It never once occurred to me as a child that this was a talking cat roaming the world with gay abandon. My imagination let me fill in whatever voids this story had, and the empty crevasses were filled with my own plot "richeners", which led to a complete reading of these children books.
In a similar note, it wasn't too long ago, shortly after the film adaptation came out, but long enough for it to find it's way to Netflix, I watched Where the Wild Things Are. I was disappointed. I remember the transition from Max making his way to the Island took years in my head as a child. In the movie the plot moves so quick and it just didn't feel as special. These books were not meant to be recreated or fabricated in different ways. They are books. They are meant to be read and admired as such. I plan on bringing in one of my favorite books to class, one which connects adulthood with childhood, and is another favorite for children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IL-NdQXyeE&feature=related
First let me begin with my dislike for any movie adaptation of these classic books. When you watch the movie you get the sense that something is left out and you feel empty when watching them. However, upon further analysis you may want to consider the opposite. It isn't that the film leaves out certain qualities or traits that leave us feeling empty. It's that they add certain features an effects that fill up our appetite for imagination. As a child, you are left free to "fill in the blanks" with your own imagination. Outside of what is concrete and written, you can imagine 'Things 1 & 2' and monsters any way you choose. It is this aspect of the books that trump any film adaptation. A great story is only half written. The other half needs to be imagined and connected with the reader. Looking back and re-reading these books I felt that the books were simple and not as complex or rich as I once believed them to be. I realized that the books never changed in X amount of years. I changed. I stopped filling in voids and could not make connections. Whereas I would before admire the Cat in the Hat's ability to fix any situation, I stray from that and ponder the unreasonable ability to clean a house with such grandeur. It never once occurred to me as a child that this was a talking cat roaming the world with gay abandon. My imagination let me fill in whatever voids this story had, and the empty crevasses were filled with my own plot "richeners", which led to a complete reading of these children books.
In a similar note, it wasn't too long ago, shortly after the film adaptation came out, but long enough for it to find it's way to Netflix, I watched Where the Wild Things Are. I was disappointed. I remember the transition from Max making his way to the Island took years in my head as a child. In the movie the plot moves so quick and it just didn't feel as special. These books were not meant to be recreated or fabricated in different ways. They are books. They are meant to be read and admired as such. I plan on bringing in one of my favorite books to class, one which connects adulthood with childhood, and is another favorite for children.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Harriet the Spy
In a breath of fresh, fishy air, we move away from historical works of fiction to a more centered, plot derived work with Harriet the Spy. This cunning display of children's honesty, shows how a simple journal, and better yet children can be mean. They define the saying "The truth hurts". When reading this red flags hit when I realized that the protagonist in the story is actually someone I wouldn't want my children to be necessarily. Whereas the other female protagonists have had a curiosity Harriet has a strange one. It's unusual for a child to want to be a spy, yet I can only imagine what this novel would have done to children years ago. When I was younger and read "Holes" I told my friends to call me zero and was biting into (unsweetened) onions for show.
I think Children have the ability to follow what they read more so than any reading group. Whereas an adult might read a book like "Blink" and try to meta-cognitively adjust their life, children are more likely to copy and mimic actions that amuse them. I wouldn't be surprised to see my child carrying a notebook analyzing my ugly face wondering why my mother would or would not hate me. Harriet is a great role model to children, not of what to do necessarily, but what to expect if you are honest, yet hurtful to your friends, family and neighbors. Parents could use this book maybe and turn her role model into an example model of what not to do. But on the flip side, kids will be kids and the best lessons are learned through experience. Harriet learned many lessons when she loses the journal. She learns to keep her valuables. She learns not to put all her eggs of information and "spy secrets" in one spot. She learns what can happen if you lose a friend, and how friends quickly become enemies.
I did like this book, but I wasn't into the spy or investigator scene. I remember my principal reading Nate The Great to us when I was in 3rd grade thinking this is lame as heck. But I wasn't an ordinary 3rd grader. I was like Harriet now that I think about it, always aware of my surroundings trying to dissect everything. Maybe I'm much more analytical now of the work because I am trying to view it from a different perspective? Not too sure, I might have like or even loved this book when I was younger but I'll never know. Regardless, interesting read and a good change of pace for the upcoming works I think!
I think Children have the ability to follow what they read more so than any reading group. Whereas an adult might read a book like "Blink" and try to meta-cognitively adjust their life, children are more likely to copy and mimic actions that amuse them. I wouldn't be surprised to see my child carrying a notebook analyzing my ugly face wondering why my mother would or would not hate me. Harriet is a great role model to children, not of what to do necessarily, but what to expect if you are honest, yet hurtful to your friends, family and neighbors. Parents could use this book maybe and turn her role model into an example model of what not to do. But on the flip side, kids will be kids and the best lessons are learned through experience. Harriet learned many lessons when she loses the journal. She learns to keep her valuables. She learns not to put all her eggs of information and "spy secrets" in one spot. She learns what can happen if you lose a friend, and how friends quickly become enemies.
I did like this book, but I wasn't into the spy or investigator scene. I remember my principal reading Nate The Great to us when I was in 3rd grade thinking this is lame as heck. But I wasn't an ordinary 3rd grader. I was like Harriet now that I think about it, always aware of my surroundings trying to dissect everything. Maybe I'm much more analytical now of the work because I am trying to view it from a different perspective? Not too sure, I might have like or even loved this book when I was younger but I'll never know. Regardless, interesting read and a good change of pace for the upcoming works I think!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)