The Phantom Tollbooth
Mistress Masham's Repose
A Wrinkle in Time (series)
The Call of the Wild (why doesn't anyone read Jack London anymore?)
The Wolves of Willoughby Chase
A Separate Peace
Johnny Tremaine
The Witch of Blackbird Pond
Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of Nimh
Watership Down
Caddie Woodlawn
Baby
Sarah, Plain and Tall
Because of Wynn Dixie
The Courage of Sarah Noble
Anne of Green Gables (series)
Island of the Blue Dolphins
Wonder
Where the Red Fern Grows
Bridge to Terabithia
Blackberries for Sal
The Sword and the Stone
The Once and Future King
Fever 1793
Walkabout
Treasure Island
The Tale of Despereaux

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Moby Dick, but I didn't read it when I was 10.

And, really -- Of Mice and Men and Cannery Row for 10-year-olds?! My personal opinion is that there is no right age for reading Steinbeck, but if you must read Steinbeck, at least wait until high school.

I read these when I was just 11 and I loved them. And I was in public school (!)

Well, that gets us back to the unanswerable question, which comes up every single time on these threads -- is it a good thing if a kid reads a book and loves it, even though the kid really doesn't understand the first thing about the book?

Our whole class read Cannary Row and Of Mice and Men. We understood these books, we studied them. Maybe you didn't experience good teachers and a rigorous education, but I am one of the lucky ones, who did.

Your whole class read Cannery Row and Of Mice and Men in fifth grade? And that whole class of fifth-graders understood all about the multiple adult themes in both books? I wasn't there, so I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I don't think that you were a very typical group of twenty-five or so 11-year-olds.

+1 how did she explain that Curley’s wife essentially comes across as a prostitute? Or hoe about when the ranch hands visit a bordello? There are also numerous curse words in the book that I don't think many parents would be okay with their 5th graders reading in school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What an ignorant statement. Its never a waste to read classic literature when you're in school.

One does not read "classic literature" in school (or out of school). One reads specific books, short stories, etc. And yes, I actually think it is a waste of time to assign a book that students are going to get very little out of, when one could instead assign a book that students will get much more out of. For example, my kid, at age 11, was assigned My Brother Sam Is Dead. (That was a Newbery Honor book, not to mention a very good book in my opinion, but maybe you don't consider it "classic literature".) Still plenty to think about and be challenged by -- but much more at an 11-year-old's level.

I think its sad how dumbed-down the educational system in this country has become. I don't know if its related to the "leave no child behind" policy or what, but 20-30 years ago public schools were so much more rigorous and a parent making a statement like that above, would just be laughed at.

Please explain which parts of the statement are laughable.

Also, 30 years ago (more or less) at least two things happened:

-I read Cannery Row, as a junior in a public high school.
-the report "A Nation At Risk" came out. Here is how it describes the rigorousness of public-school education at that time: "If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves. We have even squandered the gains in student achievement made in the wake of the Sputnik challenge. Moreover, we have dismantled essential support systems which helped make those gains possible. We have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament. Our society and its educational institutions seem to have lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectations and disciplined effort needed to attain them."

https://www2.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/risk.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What an ignorant statement. Its never a waste to read classic literature when you're in school.

One does not read "classic literature" in school (or out of school). One reads specific books, short stories, etc. And yes, I actually think it is a waste of time to assign a book that students are going to get very little out of, when one could instead assign a book that students will get much more out of. For example, my kid, at age 11, was assigned My Brother Sam Is Dead. (That was a Newbery Honor book, not to mention a very good book in my opinion, but maybe you don't consider it "classic literature".) Still plenty to think about and be challenged by -- but much more at an 11-year-old's level.

I think its sad how dumbed-down the educational system in this country has become. I don't know if its related to the "leave no child behind" policy or what, but 20-30 years ago public schools were so much more rigorous and a parent making a statement like that above, would just be laughed at.

Anonymous wrote:What's the issue with Heidi? Religious issues? Then don't read it.

The issue with Heidi is that it's wordy and dull, at least in the unabridged version. Maybe there is an abridged version that is about 20% as long and only includes the action parts of the plot.

Anonymous wrote:What's the issue with Heidi? Religious issues? Then don't read it.

I assumed the issue was with the old-fashioned language. Maybe it's the religious language? It seemed fine to me, either way.

What's the issue with Heidi? Religious issues? Then don't read it.

Anonymous wrote:

What an ignorant statement. Its never a waste to read classic literature when you're in school.

One does not read "classic literature" in school (or out of school). One reads specific books, short stories, etc. And yes, I actually think it is a waste of time to assign a book that students are going to get very little out of, when one could instead assign a book that students will get much more out of. For example, my kid, at age 11, was assigned My Brother Sam Is Dead. (That was a Newbery Honor book, not to mention a very good book in my opinion, but maybe you don't consider it "classic literature".) Still plenty to think about and be challenged by -- but much more at an 11-year-old's level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Moby Dick, but I didn't read it when I was 10.

And, really -- Of Mice and Men and Cannery Row for 10-year-olds?! My personal opinion is that there is no right age for reading Steinbeck, but if you must read Steinbeck, at least wait until high school.

I read these when I was just 11 and I loved them. And I was in public school (!)

Well, that gets us back to the unanswerable question, which comes up every single time on these threads -- is it a good thing if a kid reads a book and loves it, even though the kid really doesn't understand the first thing about the book?

Our whole class read Cannary Row and Of Mice and Men. We understood these books, we studied them. Maybe you didn't experience good teachers and a rigorous education, but I am one of the lucky ones, who did.

Your whole class read Cannery Row and Of Mice and Men in fifth grade? And that whole class of fifth-graders understood all about the multiple adult themes in both books? I wasn't there, so I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I don't think that you were a very typical group of twenty-five or so 11-year-olds.

I find it hard to believe as well. Cannery Row is described by Steinbeck as a place with drunks, whores, and pimps. I didn't even know what a pimp was in elementary school and I am not sure I realized what one was in middle school. I think it went way over the head of most of the fifth graders who could decode the book but didn't understand everything that was going on like the man with two wives who committing suicide after settling his debts by selling his warehouse. There are so many great classic books that can be read at that age that it is a waste for a teacher to have the students read Cannery Row as well as Mice and Men.

What an ignorant statement. Its never a waste to read classic literature when you're in school.

Steinbeck's the Pearl is okay--greed is perhaps the worst sin it deals with-- but kind of a downer. So is The Good Earth, which I read at that age as well. Red Pony is probably age appropriate.

Jules Verne is excellent for that age, as is Robert Louis Stevenson. Robin Crusoe and Swiss Family Robinson are two others. H,G Wells might work. The Prince and the Pauper and Tom Sawyer would be good choices as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Moby Dick, but I didn't read it when I was 10.

And, really -- Of Mice and Men and Cannery Row for 10-year-olds?! My personal opinion is that there is no right age for reading Steinbeck, but if you must read Steinbeck, at least wait until high school.

I read these when I was just 11 and I loved them. And I was in public school (!)

Well, that gets us back to the unanswerable question, which comes up every single time on these threads -- is it a good thing if a kid reads a book and loves it, even though the kid really doesn't understand the first thing about the book?

Our whole class read Cannary Row and Of Mice and Men. We understood these books, we studied them. Maybe you didn't experience good teachers and a rigorous education, but I am one of the lucky ones, who did.

Your whole class read Cannery Row and Of Mice and Men in fifth grade? And that whole class of fifth-graders understood all about the multiple adult themes in both books? I wasn't there, so I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I don't think that you were a very typical group of twenty-five or so 11-year-olds.

I find it hard to believe as well. Cannery Row is described by Steinbeck as a place with drunks, whores, and pimps. I didn't even know what a pimp was in elementary school and I am not sure I realized what one was in middle school. I think it went way over the head of most of the fifth graders who could decode the book but didn't understand everything that was going on like the man with two wives who committing suicide after settling his debts by selling his warehouse. There are so many great classic books that can be read at that age that it is a waste for a teacher to have the students read Cannery Row as well as Mice and Men.

Anonymous wrote:My 5th grade DD just read Moby Dick, and before that The Grapes of Wrath. Also..the Mutiny on the Bounty trilogy.

a nice one is The Secret Garden.

Time to move on to War and Peace.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Moby Dick, but I didn't read it when I was 10.

And, really -- Of Mice and Men and Cannery Row for 10-year-olds?! My personal opinion is that there is no right age for reading Steinbeck, but if you must read Steinbeck, at least wait until high school.

I read these when I was just 11 and I loved them. And I was in public school (!)

Well, that gets us back to the unanswerable question, which comes up every single time on these threads -- is it a good thing if a kid reads a book and loves it, even though the kid really doesn't understand the first thing about the book?

Our whole class read Cannary Row and Of Mice and Men. We understood these books, we studied them. Maybe you didn't experience good teachers and a rigorous education, but I am one of the lucky ones, who did.

Your whole class read Cannery Row and Of Mice and Men in fifth grade? And that whole class of fifth-graders understood all about the multiple adult themes in both books? I wasn't there, so I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I don't think that you were a very typical group of twenty-five or so 11-year-olds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Moby Dick, but I didn't read it when I was 10.

And, really -- Of Mice and Men and Cannery Row for 10-year-olds?! My personal opinion is that there is no right age for reading Steinbeck, but if you must read Steinbeck, at least wait until high school.

I read these when I was just 11 and I loved them. And I was in public school (!)

Well, that gets us back to the unanswerable question, which comes up every single time on these threads -- is it a good thing if a kid reads a book and loves it, even though the kid really doesn't understand the first thing about the book?

Our whole class read Cannary Row and Of Mice and Men. We understood these books, we studied them. Maybe you didn't experience good teachers and a rigorous education, but I am one of the lucky ones, who did.

Anonymous wrote:Narnia
Hobbit / Lord of the Rings
Little Women
Heidi
Of Mice and Men
Cannery Row

Have you actually read -- the unabridged version, I mean? Here's a typical bit of it (in translation, of course):

Early the next morning the doctor climbed up the mountain in company with Peter and his goats. The friendly gentleman made several attempts to start a conversation with the boy, but as answer to his questions he got nothing more than monosyllables. When they arrived on top, they found Heidi already waiting, fresh and rosy as the early dawn.

"Are you coming?" asked Peter as usual.

"Of course I shall, if the doctor comes with us," replied the child.

The grandfather, coming out of the hut, greeted the newcomer with great respect. Then he went up to Peter, and hung on his shoulder the sack, which seemed to contain more than usual that day.

When they had started on their way, Heidi kept urging forward the goats, which were crowding about her. When at last she was walking peacefully by the doctor's side, she began to relate to him many things about the goats and all their strange pranks, and about the flowers, rocks and birds they saw. When they arrived at their destination, time seemed to have flown. Peter all the time was sending many an angry glance at the unconscious doctor, who never even noticed it.

Heidi now took the doctor to her favorite spot. From there they could hear the peaceful-sounding bells of the grazing cattle below. The sky was deep blue, and above their heads the eagle was circling with outstretched wings. Everything was luminous and bright about them, but the doctor had been silent. Suddenly looking up, he beheld Heidi's radiant eyes.

"Heidi, it is beautiful up here," he said. "But how can anybody with a heavy heart enjoy the beauty? Tell me!"

"Oh," exclaimed Heidi, "one never has a sad heart here. One only gets unhappy in Frankfurt."

A faint smile passed over the doctor's face. Then he began: "But if somebody has brought his sorrow away with him, how would you comfort him?"

"God in Heaven alone can help him."

"That is true, child," remarked the doctor. "But what can we do when God Himself has sent us the affliction?"

After meditating a moment, Heidi replied: "One must wait patiently, for God knows how to turn the saddest things to something happy in the end. God will show us what He has meant to do for us. But He will only do so if we pray to Him patiently."

"I hope you will always keep this beautiful belief, Heidi," said the doctor. Then looking up at the mighty cliffs above, he continued: "Think how sad it would make us not to be able to see all these beautiful things. Wouldn't that make us doubly sad? Can you understand me, child?"

A great pain shot through Heidi's breast. She had to think of the poor grandmother. Her blindness was always a great sorrow to the child, and she had been struck with it anew. Seriously she replied:

"Oh yes, I can understand it. But then we can read grandmother's songs; they make us happy and bright again."

"Which songs, Heidi?"

"Oh, those of the sun, and of the beautiful garden, and then the last verses of the long one. Grandmother loves them so that I always have to read them over three times," said Heidi.