professornana (professornana) wrote,
professornana
professornana

  • Location:
  • Mood:

things that make you go hmmm...

There was tweet this morning in response to one of my postings that I had read 63+ books so far this year. Basically, the sentiment was that reading this much so quickly was not necessarily good as kids need to read slowly and savor books and words. Well, yes and no.

There are books to be savored. I do a great deal of that when I read a book a second or third or fourth time. I did read quite a few books this way last year when I served on the Printz. However, often the first reading was fast paced. And for some, maybe even most books, that is sufficient for a couple of reasons. First, there are some books that should just be consumed: they are books that do not require much reflection on my part. I enjoy them as I am reading, but there is not much there that I want to revisit. And second, just because I read quickly does not mean I do not savor the book even at a word level. I flag (I keep post-it flags near me at all times when reading) or write in the margin or highlight or make notes in my steno books about words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs. I can still read a book quickly and savor it, too. Finally, I read faster than kids. I have been doing this for a long time; I think the practice has paid off.

Does speed = lack of appreciation? No, I do not think that is the case. And I think we need to allow our kids the right to breeze through books if they want to do so. I also think we need to show them how we savor a book. I suspect how I savor and how someone else does might be different. Vive le difference!

And in a few months many of us who devour books will gather for ALA's celebration:


Tags: speed does not kill
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 3 comments