Hi, Everyman--
I think B&N is attempting to get the word out more quickly about future titles for the clubs, so I'm glad you're glad! I was given the go-ahead to put the heads up here on the classics editions board for these 2 books.
I agree that Little Women is on the longish side. (I assume the B&N Classics edition has all of it, but I actually haven't seen a copy of that edition yet). However, we've had some readers over the years in the clubs who are teachers and students, etc. and they might enjoy rereading it with a group when they have more time.
I sense that you're not crazy about children's titles, in general? 
There is a whole world of scholarship out there about them, you know. Anyway, if not, never fear. The classics club will continue to cover a mix of titles. Perhaps a fall choice might be more to your liking. Our plug for Hardy's Tess was well-received, so we might see that one in the line-up before too long!
There is a whole world of scholarship out there about them, you know. Anyway, if not, never fear. The classics club will continue to cover a mix of titles. Perhaps a fall choice might be more to your liking. Our plug for Hardy's Tess was well-received, so we might see that one in the line-up before too long!~ConnieK
Everyman wrote:
Thanks for posting those early!
Secret Garden is certainly a wonderful book, though it will be interesting to see how deep a discussion it will engender. But I see you do have a B&N Classics edition of it, so presumably there's at least some introductory material, and perhaps some notes, that might add substance to the story. Plus, I see that there is an Annotated Secret Garden. What on earth is there worth annotating about it?? Well, looking further, I see that there's a whole book study on TSG by Phyllis Bixler, which contends that "Its rich characterization and mythic imagery and themes have allowed it to transcend its own era; it has been described as ahead of its time for the accuracy with which it reflects our contemporary understanding of child psychology." So we'll have to see.
And I'm astonished to find that there are more than 25 separate editions of TSG offered by the BN website. Egad!
Little Women -- well, yes, I know it's a classic, and I read it when I was young, but have you actually tried reading it as an adult? It was suggested for another club a while back and I took it down to read a few pages and it was so turgid and sappy that I simply couldn't read more than a page. I know it's beloved of girls, and maybe of women, but egad, it acts on the brain like bacon on the arteries. I was interested to read this excerpt from the introduction: "After determining that her inclusion of too many controversial ideas about marriage had hurt sales of Moods, Alcott decided to make her girls' book idea-free: 'My next book shall have no ideas in it, only facts, and the people shall be as ordinary as possible.'" No ideas, eh??
And particularly if you're planning to read the whole book, part 2 as well as part 1, it's a LONG book. Do you know whether the B&N Classics edition is both parts? The website isn't clear. Part 1, at least according to the Library of America edition, has 23 chapters ending with "Aunt March settles the Question." Part 2 has 24 chapters starting with "Gossip" and ending with "Harvest Time."
Message Edited by ConnieK on 06-11-2008 10:46 AM
ConnieK wrote: Hi, Everyman--... sense that you're not crazy about children's titles, in general?
Not at all! I love good children's books.
The operative word is good.
I absolutely love Arthur Ransome, for example. I have read his books probably dozens of times, and got my own children addicted to him (as I intend shortly to get my grandchildren addicted to him). He writes beautifully, and his stories are the kind of thing that fire the imagination with the sense that I could do those things, too!
I re-read (for the fourth or so time) Kim last summer. I left most of my children's books in the house they're now living in when I moved down to our new house (right next door, actually on the same property), but in the past few months when I have had the chance while up there babysitting I have been re-reading the classic (original) Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys books. I still enjoy much of Enid Blyton, and am waiting impatiently for the time when the grandchildren will enjoy having me read her to them. Within the past year or two I have re-read Prester John, Kidnapped, the Railroad Children, Five Children and It, several of the original Dr. Dolittle books (yes, the ones which are now politically incorrect), Robinson Crusoe (though that's really not a children's book, is it?), many stories from the Colored Fairy Tale books and other fairy tale books, several of the Noel Streatfield Shoes books, and many others. I enjoy wallowing in nostalgia as breaks from my more serious reading, and often take a book I loved as a child up for my bedside reading. We have more children's books in our house than most people have total books in theirs. Not even counting the books we left at the other house, one full wall of the upper floor of my library here is covered in younger children's books, and another with what are today called juvenile books, and I have read most of them.
But I do have my prejudices when it comes to children's books just as I do with adult books. I detest writers who "write down" to children, or who write with most of their minds devoted to "political correctness." I am incensed by the re-writing of classics (Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, Dr. Dolittle, as prime examples) to simplify them, take out all the richness of the language, and make them palatable to modern sensibilities, turning them into intellectual pablum. And I dislike the sort of sappy writing I see in, for one example, the opening of Little Women, which is the literary equivalent of sugar frosted cocoa puffs.
My comment here was mostly because while I love children's books, I don't see them as opportunities for rich discussions. Maybe that's a wrongheaded prejudice, and the discussion here will persuade me that there is much not only to enjoy but also to discuss in these books. time will tell!
But never accuse me of not being crazy about good children's books!
Not at all! I love good children's books.
The operative word is good.
I absolutely love Arthur Ransome, for example. I have read his books probably dozens of times, and got my own children addicted to him (as I intend shortly to get my grandchildren addicted to him). He writes beautifully, and his stories are the kind of thing that fire the imagination with the sense that I could do those things, too!
I re-read (for the fourth or so time) Kim last summer. I left most of my children's books in the house they're now living in when I moved down to our new house (right next door, actually on the same property), but in the past few months when I have had the chance while up there babysitting I have been re-reading the classic (original) Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys books. I still enjoy much of Enid Blyton, and am waiting impatiently for the time when the grandchildren will enjoy having me read her to them. Within the past year or two I have re-read Prester John, Kidnapped, the Railroad Children, Five Children and It, several of the original Dr. Dolittle books (yes, the ones which are now politically incorrect), Robinson Crusoe (though that's really not a children's book, is it?), many stories from the Colored Fairy Tale books and other fairy tale books, several of the Noel Streatfield Shoes books, and many others. I enjoy wallowing in nostalgia as breaks from my more serious reading, and often take a book I loved as a child up for my bedside reading. We have more children's books in our house than most people have total books in theirs. Not even counting the books we left at the other house, one full wall of the upper floor of my library here is covered in younger children's books, and another with what are today called juvenile books, and I have read most of them.
But I do have my prejudices when it comes to children's books just as I do with adult books. I detest writers who "write down" to children, or who write with most of their minds devoted to "political correctness." I am incensed by the re-writing of classics (Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, Dr. Dolittle, as prime examples) to simplify them, take out all the richness of the language, and make them palatable to modern sensibilities, turning them into intellectual pablum. And I dislike the sort of sappy writing I see in, for one example, the opening of Little Women, which is the literary equivalent of sugar frosted cocoa puffs.
My comment here was mostly because while I love children's books, I don't see them as opportunities for rich discussions. Maybe that's a wrongheaded prejudice, and the discussion here will persuade me that there is much not only to enjoy but also to discuss in these books. time will tell!
But never accuse me of not being crazy about good children's books!
I want to go on record saying that, though I have some nostalgia for Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys in the original versions, I think that Little Women and The Secret Garden are of much higher literary value and interest than the multi-authored books of the teen-aged sleuths. I think it will be refreshing to have a conversation across generations about Jo and Mistress Mary. My favorite children's books are probably the Pooh books, The Wind in the Willows, and the Narnia books. And I almost forgot, The Hobbit and the two Alice books.
Message Edited by Laurel on 06-11-2008 09:01 AM
Everyman wrote:
ConnieK wrote: Hi, Everyman--... sense that you're not crazy about children's titles, in general?
Not at all! I love good children's books.
The operative word is good.
I absolutely love Arthur Ransome, for example. I have read his books probably dozens of times, and got my own children addicted to him (as I intend shortly to get my grandchildren addicted to him). He writes beautifully, and his stories are the kind of thing that fire the imagination with the sense that I could do those things, too!
I re-read (for the fourth or so time) Kim last summer. I left most of my children's books in the house they're now living in when I moved down to our new house (right next door, actually on the same property), but in the past few months when I have had the chance while up there babysitting I have been re-reading the classic (original) Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys books. I still enjoy much of Enid Blyton, and am waiting impatiently for the time when the grandchildren will enjoy having me read her to them. Within the past year or two I have re-read Prester John, Kidnapped, the Railroad Children, Five Children and It, several of the original Dr. Dolittle books (yes, the ones which are now politically incorrect), Robinson Crusoe (though that's really not a children's book, is it?), many stories from the Colored Fairy Tale books and other fairy tale books, several of the Noel Streatfield Shoes books, and many others. I enjoy wallowing in nostalgia as breaks from my more serious reading, and often take a book I loved as a child up for my bedside reading. We have more children's books in our house than most people have total books in theirs. Not even counting the books we left at the other house, one full wall of the upper floor of my library here is covered in younger children's books, and another with what are today called juvenile books, and I have read most of them.
But I do have my prejudices when it comes to children's books just as I do with adult books. I detest writers who "write down" to children, or who write with most of their minds devoted to "political correctness." I am incensed by the re-writing of classics (Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, Dr. Dolittle, as prime examples) to simplify them, take out all the richness of the language, and make them palatable to modern sensibilities, turning them into intellectual pablum. And I dislike the sort of sappy writing I see in, for one example, the opening of Little Women, which is the literary equivalent of sugar frosted cocoa puffs.
My comment here was mostly because while I love children's books, I don't see them as opportunities for rich discussions. Maybe that's a wrongheaded prejudice, and the discussion here will persuade me that there is much not only to enjoy but also to discuss in these books. time will tell!
But never accuse me of not being crazy about good children's books!
Message Edited by Laurel on 06-11-2008 09:01 AM
