I hate reading lists like this, it is so prescriptive it will take the pleasure away. Even worse asking for an adult sign off and making it part of an "excellence program".
Read what you like, not what is on a list. There is room to guide and suggest, but fixed lists to tick off are absolutely horrible.
I think it's useful for young people to be exposed to what's widely regarded as some of the best-written books out there, so that they might get an idea of what a really well-written book looks like.
What good pacing, characterization, plotting looks like, how to convey a great idea to the reader, without sounding preachy or bore him to tears. And most importantly, how to weave all these elements together into a cohesive whole, as most masterpieces do.
This way they can have a somewhat more critical eye of the more mainstream fiction they'll likely consume in much greater quantity.
I find that most mainstream SF or fantasy books consist of the same foundational elements - but add fantastic concepts or spectacle to the mix, which might grab a certain amount of interest, but must get these foundations right in order for the novel to remain compelling
I think the act of writing is a lossy transformation - someone raised on a steady diet of only sci-fi novels is bound to be only be capable of writing a lesser sci-fi novel.
In order for a writer to reach at least the level of mainstream fiction, the writer must bring some extra from his own - either coming from non-fiction literature, life experience, the rare spark of original genius, or well-executed fundamentals in books like the ones mentioned on the reading list.
I find that most mainstream SF or fantasy books consist of the same foundational elements - but add fantastic concepts or spectacle to the mix
I think they also broaden the mind, because they make people imagine how other societies could function, how technology could change things, what could exist in the universe we do not know etc.
Historical fiction, and even more actual old writing, has some of the same impact, but is limited to what has happened, rather than what could happen.
I think it's useful for young people to be exposed to what's widely regarded as some of the best-written books out there, so that they might get an idea of what a really well-written book looks like.
I agree entirely, but a list you have to complete is not the wat to do it.
Apologies.. I kinda had trouble communicating the idea I had in mind - when I was bashing SF, I wasn't rallying against novels of Hugo and Nebula quality. The word I was looking for is genre fiction.
Lately I've been consuming more of it than I would admit in polite company - LitRPG, Military SF, YA stuff,. - and quite a bit of it is aimed at a younger audience.
A lot of this stuff is well written and engaging, but highly derivative, and is patterned on classics.
I completely agree. The joy of reading comes from discovering stories that you truly connect with—not from checking off titles on a set list. While some reading lists can be helpful for inspiration, I find the “100 books you must read” type a bit off-putting. They can unintentionally suggest there’s only one right way to be a “good reader,” which just isn’t true.
Reading lists really give people the idea that reading is some mechanical task that has to be done in fixed time and has a potential to be optimized. This is how speed reading classes were invented.
The ability to read fast is not a bad thing. The compulsion to is harmful. Ideally you read at the pace you enjoy or at which you best absorb what you need. Being able to read fast and slow down for the important or relevant (to you) bits can be very useful for learning.
Making a mistake in a large easy hardly makes someone semi-literate. Almost every book you've read has gone through extensive editing to find such mistakes, even the most skilled authors make them.
The author claims they normally dislike must-read lists. I call their bluff: they seem a bit preoccupied with finding virtue, given their blog history. I doubt they will find it if they're surrendering judgment to the IQ club. Maybe its better than "10 hot summer reads", but its still an exercise regimen. Christopher Nguyen's "Value Capture" is a good rebuttal to this way of thinking.
I can see how my exploration of the Mensa list might come across differently than intended. My aim wasn't necessarily to endorse this specific list or the 'IQ club,' but rather to explore the experience, the friction and challenge, that comes from engaging with demanding texts, wherever they are found. For me, it was less about surrendering judgment and more about using the list as a specific, challenging prompt to sharpen critical thinking against difficult material. Perhaps 'exercise regimen' isn't far off, but ideally one that builds perspective rather than just ticking boxes.
Thanks for the recommendation on Christopher Nguyen's "Value Capture".
It's supposed to be prescriptive because its a literature education list.
Where we may agree is that Mensa isn't in the business of measuring education, but instead of horsepower.
And the reading way toward maximizing a developing child's base ability to think is to read as much as possible, which will necessarily be what piques their fancy much of the time.
But literature education and recreational reading shouldn't mean one doesn't engage in the other. Every high performing child does both, at least to meet the the standards with which I'm familiar.
Still I'm unsure as to why Mensa feels the need to cobble together a basic prep school reading list, if wildly uncurated.
To your point, something more in line with their rasion d'etre might be to provide short best of lists for recreational, slightly advanced reading in age appropriate genres.
It would be not as bad if it was intended for schools, but even then its still too prescriptive to require kids to read everything. The list PDF ends with this above the space for signatures:
By signing below, we attest that _____________________________________ has read a complete and unabridged version of all the books as recorded on the Excellence in Reading 9-12 grade list above, and that this record is true.
If it was a list of "good books you might enjoy reading", I would have no problem with it. it is the idea you must read them all, even ones you dislike, that I think is wrong.
In the case of the plays it is preferable to see them than to read them.
I agree, and I encouraged my kids to read the classics, but I did not give them a list of stuff they must read. I suggested things I thought they would enjoy.
Around 30yo, I got Gulliver's Travels as a gift. Wow. I loved it. Provided context for so many common clichés.
Another writer whose works are just a bunch of clichés. I was disappointed to find Shakespeare was the same. (that is supposed to be a joke, BTW).
I do not think it such a disaster to read those at 30. better to read them a bit later and enjoy them, than to read them earlier and not. What you enjoy does change over time.
I think the most important thing is to get kids to read, then to read anything reasonably good.
You do have some different definitions attitudes to mine which may account for part of it. For example:
It took me a while to realize the point of the whole exercise of the Mensa list. It’s not to become well-read. That’s a side effect. The point is to lose your smugness. To get knocked off balance by something older, stranger, smarter than you. To stop assuming you know it all.
I would say those are not two different things. If you have not been affected by things that are "older, stranger, smarter than you" you are not well read!
That is true... I certainly did not have that awareness when I was that age. I had a period locked in my room between 17 and 19 reading anything I could Bram Stoker, Dickens, 1st World war history and so on... but did for the joy and was not fully aware of the impact until much later.
I would say most people would find the same about what they have read when young, and maybe even later. The impact is often pretty subtle and pervasive and you may never know.
Yes, but the purpose of reading those books is not for fun; just like going through a textbook will not be fun all the time. You are supposed to read them in order to train your mind, at least I think so. Especially if you're in Mensa.
I was never entirely sure what the purpose of Mensa is other than maybe as a sorof social club. I have been a member on and off - more off than on though.
You're fixated on the prescription and ignoring what it aims to treat. I think OP is onto something with their Good Will Hunting interpretation, the list is meant to humble as much as educate. And its not at all a bad list either.
Comments
I hate reading lists like this, it is so prescriptive it will take the pleasure away. Even worse asking for an adult sign off and making it part of an "excellence program".
Read what you like, not what is on a list. There is room to guide and suggest, but fixed lists to tick off are absolutely horrible.
I think it's useful for young people to be exposed to what's widely regarded as some of the best-written books out there, so that they might get an idea of what a really well-written book looks like.
What good pacing, characterization, plotting looks like, how to convey a great idea to the reader, without sounding preachy or bore him to tears. And most importantly, how to weave all these elements together into a cohesive whole, as most masterpieces do.
This way they can have a somewhat more critical eye of the more mainstream fiction they'll likely consume in much greater quantity.
I find that most mainstream SF or fantasy books consist of the same foundational elements - but add fantastic concepts or spectacle to the mix, which might grab a certain amount of interest, but must get these foundations right in order for the novel to remain compelling
I think the act of writing is a lossy transformation - someone raised on a steady diet of only sci-fi novels is bound to be only be capable of writing a lesser sci-fi novel.
In order for a writer to reach at least the level of mainstream fiction, the writer must bring some extra from his own - either coming from non-fiction literature, life experience, the rare spark of original genius, or well-executed fundamentals in books like the ones mentioned on the reading list.
I think they also broaden the mind, because they make people imagine how other societies could function, how technology could change things, what could exist in the universe we do not know etc.
Historical fiction, and even more actual old writing, has some of the same impact, but is limited to what has happened, rather than what could happen.
I agree entirely, but a list you have to complete is not the wat to do it.
Apologies.. I kinda had trouble communicating the idea I had in mind - when I was bashing SF, I wasn't rallying against novels of Hugo and Nebula quality. The word I was looking for is genre fiction.
Lately I've been consuming more of it than I would admit in polite company - LitRPG, Military SF, YA stuff,. - and quite a bit of it is aimed at a younger audience.
A lot of this stuff is well written and engaging, but highly derivative, and is patterned on classics.
I completely agree. The joy of reading comes from discovering stories that you truly connect with—not from checking off titles on a set list. While some reading lists can be helpful for inspiration, I find the “100 books you must read” type a bit off-putting. They can unintentionally suggest there’s only one right way to be a “good reader,” which just isn’t true.
Reading lists really give people the idea that reading is some mechanical task that has to be done in fixed time and has a potential to be optimized. This is how speed reading classes were invented.
The ability to read fast is not a bad thing. The compulsion to is harmful. Ideally you read at the pace you enjoy or at which you best absorb what you need. Being able to read fast and slow down for the important or relevant (to you) bits can be very useful for learning.
Also, don't take reading advice from semi-literates. FTA:
"Coddle" is a verb. Minds do not "become" a verb. The sentence needs a rewrite.
Making a mistake in a large easy hardly makes someone semi-literate. Almost every book you've read has gone through extensive editing to find such mistakes, even the most skilled authors make them.
I thought it was a very well-written article.
The author claims they normally dislike must-read lists. I call their bluff: they seem a bit preoccupied with finding virtue, given their blog history. I doubt they will find it if they're surrendering judgment to the IQ club. Maybe its better than "10 hot summer reads", but its still an exercise regimen. Christopher Nguyen's "Value Capture" is a good rebuttal to this way of thinking.
I can see how my exploration of the Mensa list might come across differently than intended. My aim wasn't necessarily to endorse this specific list or the 'IQ club,' but rather to explore the experience, the friction and challenge, that comes from engaging with demanding texts, wherever they are found. For me, it was less about surrendering judgment and more about using the list as a specific, challenging prompt to sharpen critical thinking against difficult material. Perhaps 'exercise regimen' isn't far off, but ideally one that builds perspective rather than just ticking boxes.
Thanks for the recommendation on Christopher Nguyen's "Value Capture".
Fair enough! Ain't nothing wrong with a regimen - I just think reflecting and choosing is part of the challenge.
It's supposed to be prescriptive because its a literature education list.
Where we may agree is that Mensa isn't in the business of measuring education, but instead of horsepower.
And the reading way toward maximizing a developing child's base ability to think is to read as much as possible, which will necessarily be what piques their fancy much of the time.
But literature education and recreational reading shouldn't mean one doesn't engage in the other. Every high performing child does both, at least to meet the the standards with which I'm familiar.
Still I'm unsure as to why Mensa feels the need to cobble together a basic prep school reading list, if wildly uncurated.
To your point, something more in line with their rasion d'etre might be to provide short best of lists for recreational, slightly advanced reading in age appropriate genres.
It would be not as bad if it was intended for schools, but even then its still too prescriptive to require kids to read everything. The list PDF ends with this above the space for signatures:
If it was a list of "good books you might enjoy reading", I would have no problem with it. it is the idea you must read them all, even ones you dislike, that I think is wrong.
In the case of the plays it is preferable to see them than to read them.
Older me thinks cultural literacy is important. Like the origin of idioms, catch phrases, parables, tropes, identity, etc.
Although I read A LOT as a kid, I skipped most of the classics. (Meaning: anything not sci-fi, fantasy, or non-fiction.)
Around 30yo, I got Gulliver's Travels as a gift. Wow. I loved it. Provided context for so many common clichés.
So I started to check other classics off the list (as able). I wish I'd started earlier. Face palm slap.
Good, bad, or indifferent, being exposed to the origins of ideas expanded my worldview and gave me appreciation for what followed.
I agree, and I encouraged my kids to read the classics, but I did not give them a list of stuff they must read. I suggested things I thought they would enjoy.
Another writer whose works are just a bunch of clichés. I was disappointed to find Shakespeare was the same. (that is supposed to be a joke, BTW).
I do not think it such a disaster to read those at 30. better to read them a bit later and enjoy them, than to read them earlier and not. What you enjoy does change over time.
I think the most important thing is to get kids to read, then to read anything reasonably good.
Exactly the point I made in the essay.
You are more positive than me about it.
You do have some different definitions attitudes to mine which may account for part of it. For example:
I would say those are not two different things. If you have not been affected by things that are "older, stranger, smarter than you" you are not well read!
That is true... I certainly did not have that awareness when I was that age. I had a period locked in my room between 17 and 19 reading anything I could Bram Stoker, Dickens, 1st World war history and so on... but did for the joy and was not fully aware of the impact until much later.
I would say most people would find the same about what they have read when young, and maybe even later. The impact is often pretty subtle and pervasive and you may never know.
Yes, but the purpose of reading those books is not for fun; just like going through a textbook will not be fun all the time. You are supposed to read them in order to train your mind, at least I think so. Especially if you're in Mensa.
I was never entirely sure what the purpose of Mensa is other than maybe as a sorof social club. I have been a member on and off - more off than on though.
I guess as you say, it's a social club of sorts. I imagine that they could instill some good values in younger children/teenagers, and so on.
But this is all guessing.
I agree. Though a lot of those books are great and something a person would probably want to have on their reading list.
You're fixated on the prescription and ignoring what it aims to treat. I think OP is onto something with their Good Will Hunting interpretation, the list is meant to humble as much as educate. And its not at all a bad list either.
I like reading what’s on the list. Otherwise I wouldn’t have heard of 90% of these books!