#62669
03/31/2002 6:39 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I read Burma Days in just the last year or two. Highly acerbic. Really depressing. And brilliant.
k
|
|
|
#62670
03/31/2002 6:54 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I don't know. It could be. I think it's a lot to do with genre. I like a lot of hardcore sf. I really don't look at the author, unless she was recommended to me. I go by the blurb on the book jacket, mostly. Sometimes I'm lead astray.
I tried to read some women, just to try to read the stuff. So I've sampled Virginia Woolf and Sylvia Plath (Bell Jar). And I don't like either one. (Well, actually, I do like some of Woolf's essays. Amazingly well-written, but To the Lighthouse bored me to tears. It could be that your putative reason applies to why I don't like the female writing I've tried more than to why I don't seek it out. OTOH, I like Mary Stewart a lot (maybe 5 books), and George Eliot (only Silas Marner).
I like the Bolo series that Keith Laumer started (it's pulp, I don't recommend them, but I do love the stories) and I think some of the stories were written by women (I don't remember any of the authors' names). I also like James Tiptree junior and had no idea it was some old woman writing under a pseudonym. Again, I mainly go by how interesting it seems.
I don't like fantasy mixing with my sf - just one or the other. But Macaffrey's Pern stuff was pretty fun, though I only read 3 of them. That was enough. Still, I might try to get my kids into them.
I'm not sure it's that I have an aversion to emotional stuff, so much as an affinity for other things.
k
|
|
|
#62671
03/31/2002 6:57 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
|
|
|
#62672
03/31/2002 7:27 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Absolutely, I agree.
There is so much great stuff out there that the chances a kid is going to find *something* interesting is much improved.
One of my best experiences in high school was my very last English class, which I took as an elective. Usually I just hated anything that wasn't science or math. But this was very different. First day of class we were given six pages, comprised of three lists of book titles of two pages each. Books from the second list were somehow (subjectively) classified as harder books than those in the first list. The third harder than the first two. Our assignment was to read two books from each list. You could start at the second or third list, but you couldn't go back to an easier list if you did that. If you wanted to read a book that wasn't on any of the lists, you could bring it in and the teacher told you on which list you could substitute it.
Most classes that didn't have to do with math or science just plain sucked. Since we moved around a bit (dad was in the army), I ended up reading Romeo and Juliet and Julius Caesar three times each. This class was different. It was called Honors Reading and I've always wondered why it wasn't available to nearly everyone. At the very least, things should be turned around. If we force people to read things, it should be in, say, the last two years. In, say, the K-10 years, there should be a lot of choice.
BTW, one of my picks was The Hobbit (forget which list it was on). A guy I really respected recommended it to me back in the 8th grade up in AK. I had tried to read it a few times and just couldn't get into it. Finally, with this course, I read the whole thing and loved it. After school, I immediately read LOTR and The Similarillion, which were the last books I read before leaving home. (I also read Catch 22 and Hiroshima in that class. And maybe White Lotus. I don't recall exactly. It was a long time ago.)
Anyway, it's true there will be some parents who will be pissed off at everything. But if we open things up, I think we'll find that kids are much more interested in reading than even they believe themselves to be. I didn't get near as much of the classics as I now wish I should have as a kid, but this one course (and another fortuitous event) made them seem much more accessible to me.
Soon after this course, I went to live with my teacher aunt for a few months. And that's where I completely changed my mind about the classics. (I recently wrote a letter to her friend to read at my aunt's 70th birthday party, thanking her for the experiences she gave me more than two decades ago. I think I was supposed to roast her, but I just couldn't do it.)
k
|
|
|
#62673
03/31/2002 7:45 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: What are your thoughts about teen-age peer pressure when it comes to choices of both music movies, and reading? I don't remember any significant amount of peer pressure in my teens. I see more harm than good in it at present. Too many kids admire the wrong things.
|
|
|
#62674
03/31/2002 10:08 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Things seem to be accelerating, so what my kids face may be a little different than what I faced. In some ways better for them, in some ways worse.
Peer pressure can be good or bad. If one's kids are in with a group of kids with good values (i.e. values *I* agree with), then things can work to one's advantage. Unfortunately, television portrays parents manipulate children's friendships as terrible, judgemental, racist, harmful, irrelevant, etc. A main mission for now is to get my kids ready to deal with peer pressure. This is why I teach them about this junk and introduce them to things like sex, raunchy movies, etc, myself.
A woman I know insists that my kids know way too much about sex and far too soon. I don't think so. When my oldest was 6, she was propositioned for sex by two slightly older boys. She knew how to handle it. Being perfectly innocent, she didn't hesitate to tell me about it. Even my wife says my kids show me no respect. Ever since we watched Austin Powers, they've taken to calling me "fat bastard" in private. This *really* irritates my wife who insists my kids shouldn't get away with being disrespectful to me. Contrary to what she thinks, they idolize me. To be sure, they think I'm a wimp (which is true enough). But, really, they just plain idolize me - and they know very well how far they can push it.
I think one very important thing I do with the kids is watch this stuff with them and we talk about it. I give them my opinion of things. Kids give me theirs. Early on they just repeated whatever I said, but over time they've come to diverge, the oldest moreso, of course. I'm vaguely aware of some study done that shows kids who watch violent video games are much more likely to think violence is okay, but that when an adult talks to them about the violence they are no more likely to be violent than kid's who haven't played the games. I wasn't aware of this when I started out, and came to the conclusion intuitively. I don't claim this is what everyone should do. I don't believe in one-size-fits-all solutions. Parents need to be proactive, understand things, make an active decision one way or the other, pay attention, follow through.
Sad thing. I went to a parent-teacher night with my oldest's teacher. The kids had a test for us. They asked us questions about themselves on a sheet of paper and we answered and graded ourselves. I got the highest "grade" in the class. It was a C. No kidding. We live in a not-too-bad, multicultural, middle class, suburban neighborhood with a few boneheads, but mainly people who have a strong interest in their kids' educations. It seems obvious to me, though, that we have a few things that could use a little work.
In general, though, I think peer pressure is pretty strong for kids. Pressure to have sex. Pressure to slough off in school. Pressure not to perform. Pressure, pressure, pressure. I tutored for several years in a local (pretty famous) high school - little physics, little algebra, mostly geometry. Wasn't able to reach every kid, but a few I think I really touched. One kid in particular started thinking he could go on to college. "Do I need geometry to major in electrical engineering?" (Even worse - you need trig. ouch!) He was asking me questions, getting involved, inching his grades up. Another kid started in on him, "Estupido, blah, blah, blah." Only partly in English, but it was pretty clear his buddy didn't think too much of his intellectual pretensions.
The most obvious problem that every single kid I tutored had was lack of parental oversight. These kids were going out to parties several nights a week, or working at jobs, or playing baseball, or watcing tv. All of this took priority over doing homework. It's not clear exactly how much of the problem was peer pressure, per se, and how much was the natural tendency of anyone to avoid doing hard work. Maybe it was peer pressure reinforcing the natural tendency.
On the good side, I had the same situation over and over. I'd come in. Kids would be kicked back, staring off into space, not paying attention to any word I said. I'd ask them questions. They'd ignore. I'd persist. I'd keep explaining and asking, re-explaining and asking, etc. After maybe 10 mins they'd sorta discreetly look at what I was doing. After 20 they'd be actively involved. By the end of class, everyone or nearly everyone would be paying attention, joking about problems, actively involved. Fortunately, I got to work with small groups (5 max, usually around 3).
One kid was a muslim girl from whom I had to coax and cajole any participation at all. She just wouldn't try. Eventually, after maybe 2nd or 3rd meeting, she came out of the shell, gradually. At a later meeting, she voiced a startling discovery to me, "This is very easy!" No kidding? I think the pressure she got may not have been peer pressure exactly. But still it was pressure. She worked from a D to a B, btw.
All of this is anecdotal, of course. I don't claim to prove anything. I don't claim that my opinions are scientific, only that they seem reasonable based on my own experiences. I think peer pressure, like any other pressure, can be a powerful force, but that it's not insurmountable. I also think the subtle, pervasive pressure is often stronger than blatant pressure.
It just seems a lot easier to me for parents to teach kids how to handle pressure than it is to try to mask the pressure from them. Nevertheless, I support any active decision a parent makes and won't try to circumvent their wishes. This is just what I think. If someone else's kid asks me about sex (which they have), I gently redirect them to their parents. If they ask about god (which they have), I send them to their parents. If they curse in my house, I ask them "Do your parents allow that?" I don't watch rated R movies when other kids are at the house. I don't let my kids curse when other's kids are at the house. (I did offer to let a group of kids watch Shrek in my house recently, not having any idea that some parents don't want their kids watching it. It just didn't occur to me. Fortunately, a little girl spoke up. I wasn't being manipulative, though, just thoughtless.)
k
|
|
|
#62675
03/31/2002 11:09 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: I like your attitude. It used to be that kids got almost equal amounts of character formation at home and in religious school. Now too many parents leave everything to the public schools. A partial vacuum gets filled by peer pressure. How stupid it is for highschool kids to be so concerned about what their peers think of them, since they will have an entirely new set of peers after leaving high school.
The opinion of teachers will be important to potential employers.
We have people who know a lot about how to sell things. Why don't we have people who know how to sell the value of education and character to kids?
|
|
|
#62676
04/01/2002 3:47 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,289 |
St. John's College in Annapolis, Maryland, is, I believe, unique in the academic world. They operate on what they call the "Great Books" method. The students spend 4 years reading 100 books, which the College thinks are the indispensible books for an educated person. (The list is revised periodically -- it's not always the same 100). It covers such diverse writers as Euclid, Freud, Isaac Newton, and, of course, "literary" authors. Science and math[s] are learned from original writers. Also, there are no professors, no lectures and no exams. The students are taught by tutors, as at Oxford & Cambridge. [Actually they teach themselves, guided by tutors.] Strange as this may sound, it actually produces graduates who are in great demand by corporations and other employers. I imagine they have a website where you can learn more about this program and the reading list. It's not a real old idea; although St. Johns is an old institution, it used traditional methods until the 1930's, when it was on the verge of going out of business and the Great Books program was invented to keep it going.
|
|
|
#62677
04/01/2002 11:02 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>I did offer to let a group of kids watch Shrek in my house recently, not having any idea that some parents don't want their kids watching it. It just didn't occur to me. Fortunately, a little girl spoke up. I wasn't being manipulative, though, just thoughtless.
I've only seen this film whilst half asleep over Christmas. Did I miss something? What is there to object to?
We've become regular cinema goers in the last year and our newly teenage children have become used to the flexible age game. We took them to see Billy Elliot, Bridget Jones, Oceans Elven and several other "15" films in the last year. I'd rather make my own decisions about what is suitable. They are pretty broad minded and since TV seem to think it is OK to show lesbian weddings (in Friends) at 6pm and they are allowed to stay up past the nine pm watershed there is little that hasn't been discussed at home or at school (these days complete with graphic illustrations and free samples). Most of the teen fiction that they read seems to cover the same ground although I'd love them to get onto soemthing a little more meaty. I was reading Solzenitzen at their age and I still have bad dreams from seeing "Midnight Express". Gratuitous violence isn't to my taste, so our DVD collection stops short there. Last night I hade the misfortune to see the last half hour of "Scream" on TV. I know that it is a spoof but I'm still not wild about it.
|
|
|
#62678
04/01/2002 1:15 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
I've heard of The Great Books, but I wasn't aware it was used as a curriculum. I used to have a friend who started reading them for the heck of it. Was it Adler who was one of the moving forces for it? The same guy who headed the Paedeia committee?
Sounds like a great idea for kids who are into it, though I don't think it's something that should be coerced. Sounds like a very highly enriching experience.
k
|
|
|
#62679
04/01/2002 1:33 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
What is there to object to?
Several things. There's Shrek farting in the mud hole, there's magic (this particular family is very conservatively religious), there are mythical creatures, there's torture (of the gingerbread man). Sure, it seems silly to me, but I don't want to argue with another parent about it, especially when they've been nice enough to let their kid come to my kids' birthday party.
I read Gulag I when I was about 12 or 13. I was just starting high school when I read III - gave me nightmares, but I don't think nightmares are necessarily bad things to have on occasion.
I waffle on the violence, depending on the movie. I liked The Quick and The Dead, for example, and The Man who Shot Liberty Valence, but I generally hate westerns. I liked Bridge on the River Kwai, and Stalag 17, and Starship Troopers (can't say it had very good acting), but generally hate war movies. Apocolypse Now was disturbing, but I had no trouble with the blood bath in the opening scene of Blade. It just depends.
k
|
|
|
#62680
04/01/2002 2:17 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Several things. There's Shrek farting in the mud hole, there's magic (this particular family is very conservatively religious), there are mythical creatures, there's torture (of the gingerbread man). Sure, it seems silly to me, but I don't want to argue with another parent about it, especially when they've been nice enough to let their kid come to my kids' birthday party.
There must lie a great UK/US divide. I can't think of a single person that I have ever known who would object to any of those things. Farting, for example, is an essential (some would say the main) part of British humour.
I'd heard that some people objected to Harry Potter but at first I thought that it must be a joke. We just don't have a vocal conservative Christian right wing. I think that the only issue that I am really aware of is abortion. There has been quite a stink recently about a school which was caught teaching creationism and most of the newspapers ran articles trying to explain what creationism is (I've had to explain it to several people). The head of the school was on the radio this morning explaining that it was included as part of a religion course where several different religious views were discussed and no, it wasn't taught as part of the science curriculum as had been suggested, a teacher merely discussed it in class when he was asked a direct question. The coverage has been interesting. It seems to be a widely held view in the press that anyone who doesn't believe in Darwinism should be locked up and the key thrown away - a different kind of religious intolerance, I suppose.
|
|
|
#62681
04/01/2002 3:17 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
(I'm one of the multitude of You-Essicans to whom British humor proves too often elusive.)
I *have* met a (presumably) former Brit who was a conservative religious type, so maybe their non-presence over there is due to yall's shippin' the odd bird over here. CUTITOUT!
Being raised around conservative religious types, I feel pretty comfortable with them most of the time. I may or may not agree with the reaction of the media over there to the "teaching of creationism," though I can sympathize with their apprehensions.
I'm a little disturbed by the attitude some people have towards conservative religionists. OTOH, it's very difficult to maintain your composure and be civil when the religionists are themselves very often insulting, coercive, etc.
In fairness, I usually am not part of these arguments and I only overhear snippets. It's very hard to tell who started what and why. I'm sure there's plenty of blame to go around for the nastiness. In those few brawls to which I have contributed, most of the time I don't even know how things went awry - even when I was there the whole time - though I'm sure I was partly at fault.
k
|
|
|
#62682
04/01/2002 8:45 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Mad Cows Dissected
You sound like the kind of person we need around here. Humour can be taught for a small fee.
|
|
|
#62683
04/01/2002 9:00 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
"Humour can be taught for a small fee." Dear jmh: I am a bit sceptical of that assertion. To be sure, humour is learned, but there are many who seem incapable of learning it. I never did learn to enjoy seeing Red Skelton or John Cleese fall down.
|
|
|
#62684
04/01/2002 10:20 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Well thank you. That's a very kind thing to say. And you and Dr. Bill are exactly the kind of highly cultured people I want to read my postings.
The criticisms I commonly get are that I write too informally, my references are too obscure, my sentences are too complex and often incoherent, and my diction is too pompous. Also the opinions I express are insipid, parochial, immature, and uninspired. Other than that, comments are generally favorable.
OTOH, a friend of mine was explaining to me over lunch that I could benefit from a few lessons in British humor. "Oh, God," she said, "that's just what you need."
k
|
|
|
#62685
04/02/2002 3:59 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618 |
What is there to object to?
Well, I thought "Lord Farquaad" was pushing the limits just a little. And then there's...
about Snow White
Magic Mirror: She lives with seven men, but she's not easy.
(re: the very tall castle.)
Shrek: Do you think he's compensating for something?
(the singing welcome to Duloc)
Please....Keep off the grass, shine your shoes, wash your.....face!
In the scene when Lord Farquaad is watching the "video" of Fiona on the magic mirror while sitting in bed, if you look closely (just before he smiles and looks at the camera) you can see the blanket covering his lap rise up slightly.
And I'm sure there's something rude about the dragon and the donkey.
|
|
|
#62686
04/02/2002 5:02 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
Humour can be taught for a small fee.
The word small being humorous?
[In the jargon of us lawyers, small fee is oxymoronic:
Their's not to reason why,
O the wild charge they made!
All the world wondered.
Honor the charge they made]
|
|
|
#62687
04/02/2002 8:10 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>Well, I thought "Lord Farquaad" was pushing the limits just a little. The "problem" might relate to the much-misunderstood British pantomime (we've discussed it before, you know where the principal boy is a girl, the dame is a man and risque humour is interspersed with the stuff for the tinies [not tinnies]). Pantomime has always worked on several levels, pretty costumes, slapstick and down in the gutter (in the nicest possible way). The gutter stuff goes well over the head of the little ones but makes it work as family entertainment. Shrek works because it plays by the same rules. [But you knew that  ] I heard a radio review of "Ice Age" the other day. It was felt that like all children's tales it is a therapy piece. In this case "be a team player" but the message didn’t work because it only attempted to appeal to the children and left the parents looking at their watches.
|
|
|
#62688
04/02/2002 8:48 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
>about Snow White
Magic Mirror: She lives with seven men, but she's not easy
I think that they are onto something there. I've always been a little concerned about her. Do you thing she'll need long-term therapy when she gets older? Perhaps we should suggest that if she does have any children with the handsome prince, we should put them on the "children at risk" register, just to be on the safe side.
While we're at it, I hope that Hansel and Gretal are getting similar treatment. I think that prophylactic Prozac for all fairy tale characters would be a good idea.
|
|
|
#62689
04/02/2002 9:44 AM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
there's magic (this particular family is very conservatively religious), there are mythical creatures
Er, helloooooooo!!! It's a fairytale!!! What did you expect?
Do those same people have the same problem with Lord of the Rings? It also has magic and mythical creatures and a lot of sanitised violence to boot.
there's torture (of the gingerbread man)
Now, come on! [Jeremy Paxman emoticon] This is a mite ludicrous. I think that kids these days know the difference between a gingerbread man and an animate being. As for animated violence I don't think that it has adverse effects on children. Plenty of people grew up with the likes of Tom and Jerry without acquiring violent tendencies.
As for me I loved Shrek so much I bought the DVD. Okay, it's not as funny as Toy Story 2 (The Star Wars revelation in that had me in tears) but Eddie Murphy and Mike Myers playing off each other were priceless. The Monsieur Hood scene was the best, though, but sadly too short and I'd have loved to see it last at least five minutes longer.
|
|
|
#62690
04/02/2002 10:02 AM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
Well, I thought "Lord Farquaad" was pushing the limits just a little. And then there's...
He was the baddie. If he was the nice guy then we wouldn't have a story. Even I understood that one.
about Snow White
Magic Mirror: She lives with seven men, but she's not easy.
Nothing you don't hear on daytime television either side of the pond. Indeed you hear worse things on kid's soaps.
(re: the very tall castle.)
Shrek: Do you think he's compensating for something?
(the singing welcome to Duloc)
Please....Keep off the grass, shine your shoes, wash your.....face!
There's a story behind this. The producer of Shrek used to work for Disney until he walked out after a heated argument. The film is full of jibes at the Disney empire - including the Magic Kingdom castle and 'It's a small world'. Note also the name of the 'car park' in the grounds of Duloc and the guy wearing the large head at the entrance - all Disney references. Duloc is also an acronym. Can you guess what it stands for?
In the scene when Lord Farquaad is watching the "video" of Fiona on the magic mirror while sitting in bed, if you look closely (just before he smiles and looks at the camera) you can see the blanket covering his lap rise up slightly.
After five viewings I can't say that I noticed (although maybe I just wasn't looking). Farquaad was a little guy. Perhaps it was his knee? I'm sure that the animators wouldn't be that crass.
And I'm sure there's something rude about the dragon and the donkey.
Your imagination runneth riot. It was meant to symbolise love crossing many boundaries - just like Shrek and Fiona. Are you deliberately looking for faults where there aren't any to be found?
|
|
|
#62691
04/02/2002 10:24 AM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
St. John's College in Annapolis, Maryland, is, I believe, unique in the academic world. They operate on what
they call the "Great Books" method. The students spend 4 years reading 100 books, which the College thinks
are the indispensible books for an educated person. (The list is revised periodically -- it's not always the same
100). It covers such diverse writers as Euclid, Freud, Isaac Newton, and, of course, "literary" authors. Science
and math[s] are learned from original writers. Also, there are no professors, no lectures and no exams. The
students are taught by tutors, as at Oxford & Cambridge. [Actually they teach themselves, guided by tutors.]
Strange as this may sound, it actually produces graduates who are in great demand by corporations and other
employers. I imagine they have a website where you can learn more about this program and the reading list.
It's not a real old idea; although St. Johns is an old institution, it used traditional methods until the 1930's,
when it was on the verge of going out of business and the Great Books program was invented to keep it going.
Wow, Bob. That is so unorthodox but a brilliant idea. I'll check it out sometime. Two things. How do they know that a)All of the students have read the books? and b)How do they know that, having read the books, the students have digested the full meaning of the books? Do the tutors keep records of continous assessment?
I can only presume that the entrance exam to St. John's is based upon an already established passion for reading on the part of the student.
|
|
|
#62692
04/02/2002 12:53 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Well, I didn't discuss the issue with these parents, as I felt somewhat embarrassed that I had nearly shown the show to the kid in the first place and I didn't know how to broach the subject without sounding condescending.
However, I've heard what other conservative religious types have said about it and they have mentioned a few of these things.
There is a difference between LOTR (and chronicles of Narnia) and HP, Shrek. LOTR and Narnia were both written by christians (Tolkien actually helped convert Lewis) and Narnia is christian allegory. This, I have maintained for some time, is the real difference.
OTOH, I read an article somewhere the other day where a conservative religious type was going into some detail about his perceptions of the differences. In Narnia and LOTR magic are treated reverentially, and with some caution. HP and Shrek promote occultism by not engendering a reverence for magic. It sounds like cavilling to me, and many of these guys are trying to get HP out of the classroom and school (and public) libraries. In that situation, I wouldn't hesitate to debate the subject, but as I said, I thought it would be unpleasant to do it at a birthday party for my girls.
k
|
|
|
#62693
04/02/2002 12:55 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
There's a story behind this
I'm going to watch it again this weekend with this thought in mind!
k
|
|
|
#62694
04/02/2002 12:57 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
Rubrick, I can only assume that our US'n and Strine friends are not entirely speaking about their own views but interpreting the views of others. I think that their tongues are firmly in their er cheeks.
[to protect the little ones]I have a strong aversion to Disney and regard time spent in their theme parks as tantamount to torture. I thought that they deserved all they got when someone sued them for one of the Mickey Mouse characters removing his head in public.
By the way Whatdaya think of this. My daughter came home from school in a bad mood at having to watch some awful Disney thing for the nth time. She said that the teacher had been away and they could have watched the Simpsons but one of the children's parents had said that they weren't allowed to watch it. I blame Marge's liking for the odd six-pack, unless there are fairy stories buried subliminally in the story.
Perhaps that is why (apart from Salman Rushdie) no-one is too bothered about banning books any more, they are too het up about the misbehaviour of cartoon characters.
[/rant]
|
|
|
#62695
04/02/2002 1:16 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
i am with Jo-- i hate Disney-- its all so falsely sweet. god knows i had a terrible childhood.. but fairy tales were wonderful... at least my mother wasn't about to lead me off into a forest and abandon me, and witches weren't going to try to eat me.. and hansel and gretel were good kids, in no way did they deserve maltreatment. maybe that, more than anything else is a nice part of fairytales. bambi's mother dies. but bambi keeps on living. live isn't all fun, sweetness and pleasure. bad things happen, and yet we can go on. the old Disney had some of that.. but can you image Old Yeller being made today? now days everything has a happy ending.
well guess what? kids know its not true. kids from slightly disfucntional families can feel normal (oh household is just like the simpsons!) and yet recognize things should be better, but its not their fault. Bart doesn't feel guilt or think its his fault that homer drinks. bart is a nice strong character.
and fiona, is embarassed to be an ogre.. why? cause society values superficial beauty over personality, intelect, character. Sheik loves fiona, not the beautiful woman, but the personality, intelect and character. he too, feels unworthy of such beauty. but when fiona becomes a ogre, he sees her as even more beautiful
guess i saw different things in the film!
|
|
|
#62696
04/02/2002 1:30 PM
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 679 |
There is a difference between LOTR (and chronicles of Narnia) and HP, Shrek. LOTR and Narnia were both written by christians (Tolkien actually helped convert Lewis) and Narnia is christian allegory. This, I have maintained for some time, is the real difference.
Okay, I'll admit that I didn't know that Tolkien and Lewis were reverential christians BUT I do think that Tolkiens work was inspired more by his in-depth knowledge of Norse and Germanic folklore more than his religious beliefs. The characters are trolls, dwarves, goblins and elves and the language is runic - nothing to even suggest Christian or any other major relgion. Okay, there is the symbolism of good versus evil and you could say that the fellowship was a sort of crusade but these are pretty borderline comparisons.
Chronicles of Narnia is christian allegory? I was a young devout Catholic when I read the series a good twenty years ago and I never made that connection. Where do the lion, the witch and the wardrobe fit into that comment?
OTOH, I read an article somewhere the other day where a conservative religious type was going into some detail about his perceptions of the differences. In Narnia and LOTR magic are treated reverentially, and with some caution. HP and Shrek promote occultism by not engendering a reverence for magic. It sounds like cavilling to me, and many of these guys are trying to get HP out of the classroom and school (and public) libraries. In that situation, I wouldn't hesitate to debate the subject, but as I said, I thought it would be unpleasant to do it at a birthday party for my girls.
Point taken about Tolkien and Lewis's treatment of magic but they both took their writing seriously and thus wrote from a more realistic point of view. Shrek and Harry Potter (I have neither read the books nor seen the movie so I am no authority) are whimsical stories for children and adults alike referencing earlier influences from which their authors most probably drew.
I can't speak for HP but Shrek never made me think of going out and ritually slaughtering a goat in front of a pentacle or sacrificing a virgin. Nothing occultish about it, I thought. But, to quote Shrek, 'an ogre will boil your eyeballs for jelly. Actually, it's quite nice on toast'.
It's only a bit of fun.
|
|
|
#62697
04/02/2002 1:46 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
hansel and gretel were good kids, in no way did they deserve maltreatment
Good kids? They murdered that poor forest woman for no better reason than their father thought she was an infidel. She saved them from starving or freezing to death out in the woods. All she asked in return was a little help in chopping some wood and fixing some dinner, and those "good kids" killed her for her troubles.
|
|
|
#62698
04/02/2002 2:29 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 771 |
OK, FF ~ I'll play out the Harry Potter issue with you. I'd argue that Rowling does portray a reverence for magic throughout the books. Everything that falls out of Dumbledore's mouth is warning the kids to be careful with the power they're learning. It seems to me that just because the protagonists use magic a little clumsily to attain their goals, that doesn't mean that it's treated irreverently. Harry, Hermione, and Ron aren't angels like Frodo (who bears the burden silently), but I felt the message in the HP books was pretty clear - use your power wisely. Shrek is more like the Terry Pratchett Discworld series, where magic is played for laughs. I don't particularly think there's anything wrong with that either. But that's why I'd never make it as a conservative Christian. Well, that's not the only reason...
|
|
|
#62699
04/02/2002 2:57 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Tolkiens work was inspired more by his in-depth knowledge of Norse and Germanic folklore more than his religious beliefs.
I'm not sure. These things are not mutually exclusive. I think his allegory is just not as transparent as Lewis'. It's not Christian allegory, per se, but more an allegory of the continuing battle of good vs evil, making sacrifices, is it moral to fight evil with evil (i.e. use the ring). I hadn't thought of the Norse and Germanic origins, but it seems obvious now that you point it out.
Chronicles of Narnia is christian allegory? I was a young devout Catholic when I read the series a good twenty years ago and I never made that connection. Where do the lion, the witch and the wardrobe fit into that comment?
To answer your question, the lion is Jesus Christ, the witch is Lucifer, and the wardrobe is the plain (or plane) on which the battle for the soul transpires. If I recall the Lion dies and is resurrected in the very first book. And in the last book they all go to heaven. If you were to read them again now, I'm sure it would be very obvious to you.
Even though I see it as Christian propaganda, I still highly recommend the entire series to young and old alike. I've read the first five books to my kids and they enjoyed them quite a bit. And I read the whole series to myself when I was maybe 20 or 22.
whimsical stories for children and adults alike referencing earlier influences from which their authors most probably drew.
Well, yea. It causes me some mental duress to try to see things from their perspective, because for the life of me it seems utterly ludicrous.
I mentioned that I grew up in a pretty conservative environment myself, so I'm kinda used to being around people whose views may seem skewed to the great bulk of humanity. And I doubt not a whit that some of my own opinions would be similarly assessed and dismissed. But I was at a brat meeting a few years back. (Brats are the children of military personnel.) I was at a table with some other former brats - I'm used to the nationalistic comments and the occasional intolerant remark - but I was really floored when one of the group began talking about HP and how Rowling had not really written the works herself. Not at all. It was actually the Devil hisself that wrote those books through her hand, via a process called automatic writing. I thought he was kidding at first, but he never dropped the pretense. And what was worse is that the others at the table were each nodding their heads in a vigorous up and down motion.
Being the unprincipled person that I am, I held my tongue and listened to him continue this rant for some time, with vocal and animated gestural encouragement from the assembled company. See, it's a clever ploy by the devil to make children think that magic is not dangerous, so they'll be tempted to try it themselves. It's all part of the same insidious plot that brought us Dungeons and Dragons. FOR GOD'S SAKE, the spells in that evil HP series are *REAL* spells! Don't you understand that? It's all real! That bastard is teaching *REAL* spells to *OUR* children! How can I make you understand this simple fact? The consequences of failing to recognize and thwart this diabolical plan will be terrible and irreparable. If you don't go back to your home right now and send out letters to prominent authorities protesting these books and demanding that they be expunged from our shelves of our public school libraries, you will be playing right into the hands of Satan himself! This fellow actually has pamphlets back home that explain all this to you and he'd be happy to mail them to you.
I wish this were satire, but I couldn't make anything like this up. I don't think there's enough fertilizer on the planet to inspire this. I suspect it's not the fertilizer so much as a particular kind of mushroom that gets mixed in with it that fosters this sort of imagination.
k
|
|
|
#62700
04/02/2002 3:04 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Regarding Shrek:
It's only a bit of fun.
I absolutely agree.
k
|
|
|
#62701
04/02/2002 4:19 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear FF: Belief in magic by adults would be laughable, if it were not for the fact that groups of them can be dangerous. The terrorists willing to commit suicide in the belief that they will be rewarded with 72 virgins in the hereafter exemplify this.
|
|
|
#62702
04/02/2002 6:01 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467 |
FF:
I too have run into people like that; south of here we had a fundy preacher burning the HP books page by page in front of a group of six- to twelve-year-olds, all chanting in unison, "Burn in hell, burn in hell, burn in hell" as the pages were fed into the barbecue.
On the other hand, we have a prominent leader who is truly protecting the morality of our fellow citizens by draping statues in the great hall at the Department of Justice to prevent the viewing of naked b----ts. This is the same person who says of the eventual trials of the "detainees" at Camp X-Ray, "Even if they are found not guilty, I have no intention of releasing them." Of course that's not really going to become an issue because conviction is pretty much a foregone conclusion.
Wee, I must run to an organizational meeting of MMM, Make Mastectomy Mandatory. We just got a large donation from Enfamil, and we're going to start pushing for laws to lop off the breasts of all females at puberty. Just think, we'll cut down on the energy wasted in adolescent masturbation, women can save money by not having to buy brasseires, and no more concerns about breat cancer.
TEd
TEd
|
|
|
#62703
04/02/2002 7:55 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,981 |
It brings out the worst in me. I can tolerate anything (well almost) except intolerance. I've seen JK Rowling speak several times now. One point that she made quite strongly is that she gets letters from time to time from people who assume that:
a) she believes in magic - she doesn't (every now and then she comes across someone who gives her a knowing look and asks about ingredients for spells - she tells them very clearly that IT IS ALL MADE UP)
b) she thinks that boarding schools are a good thing - she doesn't, it is just that children are not allowed to have adventures in the real world (I've mentioned this before). They are barely allowed to cross the street without an adult.
By the way Helen, if you find Hermione at all unsympathetic it may be because she is based on the author, who describes herself as a bookworm at school. Hermione may have her head in a book but she is not a sneak and she does get better as the books go on, honest!
|
|
|
#62704
04/02/2002 10:42 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
Chronicles of Narnia is christian allegory? I never made that connection.
If you were to read them again now, I'm sure it would be very obvious to you.
Very much so.
When my children were small, I made a practice of reading all the books that they were reading. Intending to given them those Chronicles, had the foresight to read the entire seven volumes first. The parable doesn't become evident until the final volume, but there it is striking.
Expressing no objection to proselytizing literature, I did and do think it quite a bit forward to proselytize to children in a form disguised from their parents.
|
|
|
#62705
04/02/2002 11:19 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear Keiva: I am sure that in your place I would have been seriously annoyed to find a proselyting message in a book meant for children, where no warning had been given. Particularly if it were spelled out clearly enough that my children were likely to be influenced by it. But that would make it propaganda, and unlikely to sell at all well, and likely to provoke widespread condemnation.
|
|
|
#62706
04/02/2002 11:30 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 477
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 477 |
Chronicles, had the foresight to read the entire seven volumes first. The parable doesn't become evident until the final volume, but there it is striking.
Guess it depends on your background, Keiva. For me, the parable was *quite* apparent, right from the first book, but then ... that was the world I grew up in. FWIW, I loved escaping into the wardrobe with the kids, in my imagination. (I even got to be one of the animal characters in a puppet show of TLW&W.. such fun!) I think the fact that the Narnia series - like HP - appeals to both children and adolts (sic) alike, is the genius of it. IMHO.
Hev
post-edit: I think I made it sound like I lived in Narnia. Only in my dreams ...
|
|
|
#62707
04/03/2002 12:21 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605 |
Dear Hev, In the words of FF, "Usually I'm pretty dense about noticing things that are very obvious to most everyone else." [  at self -e]
|
|
|
#62708
04/03/2002 1:44 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Tolkiens work was inspired more by his in-depth knowledge of Norse and Germanic folklore more than his religious beliefs.
Though Tolkein was certainly a religious person, he said himself that his religion had no impact whatsoever on his writing. He said he wanted to create a new mythology for the British Isles, based, I suppose, loosely on the pre-existing legends. The main backbone of his stories was the languages that he created. He was a lingusitics professor, ya know. He also just wanted to create his own little (read vast and complex) world. Don't we all?
|
|
|
|
|
