Prompted by the advent of WBD, and in keeping with the aim of the festival to sponsor a love of reading in the young, what book would you recommend to a hitherto non-reader of, say, 12 years of age which you would hope might captivate the young person and consign him or her to a lifetime of literary consumption?

I've been thinking about this today and it's quite difficult, I think, to settle on one. However I'm opting for "To Kill A Mockingbird", purely because it was the one which opened my own twelve year old eyes to the sheer power a well wrought story can have.

H G Wells' "War of the Worlds". It's a very easy book to read,can be done in an afternoon,and kids like something a bit scary.

Trike.

I'd hope that the love of reading had already been instilled in a child before twelve years, but then reading wasn't something that was encouraged where I grew up and I discovered it myself at about 15.

All I can use as a yardstick is what my kids were into at that age, I remember my daughter was plowing her way through all the Agatha Christie novels as we'd have to trawl all the second hand books shops whenever we were in Athens. But can't remember what my son was reading then, I'm sure the Biggles and Just William type phase was well and truely over. I have a sneeking suspicion he was already reading Wilbur Smith by then possibly. Mmm I'll have to ask him.

In my experience kids who don't read by the time they are 12 but do later are likely to be boys whose reading then is more likely to be focussed on non-fiction.

I think To Kill a Mockingbird is as good as any since its subject matter is likely to seem relevant and important to kids now and it has a very strong emotional pull.

I am reading (and again loving) Wind in the Willows and while its style is not difficult I think such kids might think the anthropomorphising and ruralness was below them. When I was a child I remember our teacher reading Treasure Island and we were all mesmerized (he was a great reader though). I don't remember enough about the style to know whether it would seem old-fashioned to youngsters now or not.

I have only read it once and it left me fairly lukewarm but others really rate Goodnight Mr Tom as appealing to young people.

So, if you can only recommend one to a twelve year old which one would it be? That's the challenge here - and it's a tough one.

I thought you might say that. A generic child is difficult to think about - girls and boys do tend to like different books. My son was difficult to enthuse about reading really and I recall him really liking one of Richard Branson's autobiographical things. But that's not the sort of book I would want to recommend.

I was looking at some more modern books and wondered about The Book Thief but I think a reluctant 12-year-old reader might struggle with that. But I was in a queue reading The Boy in Striped Pyjamas a couple of years ago and kids came up and said how good that was. It's easy, on a subject still relevant and talked about in schools, and has characters with some depth but easy enough for kids to love and hate. So I will choose that today. (I am just a bit uncertain of whether Treasure Island's language would be accessible to modern kids, otherwise I would have chosen that.)

You have a point about language, and in fact that's an aspect to literature where translation often means that non-English speakers have an advantage over English ones. Here in Norway, for example, it is not uncommon for relatively young readers to immerse themselves in Stevenson, Dickens and even Shakespeare, and derive great enjoyment from them. The reason is that these works when translated into Norwegian, even donkey's years ago, employed a language which has not been adapted in the meantime quite so much as English has been, and is therefore eminently accessible. I've even found my own taste in reading since I acquired a proficency in Norwegian extending to works which I probably would have dismissed as "too difficult to bother with" language-wise in the past. There is an inevitable trade-off with regard to certain subtleties and nuances which defy translation (though contrary to a popular belief amongst English speakers restricted to one tongue the reverse is also true). However this is an acceptable trade-off if it means that good literature which might have evaded one's engagement comes back into scope again.

nordmann wrote:

So, if you can only recommend one to a twelve year old which one would it be? That's the challenge here - and it's a tough one.

I'll say - very tough. But the first part of "Jane Eyre" grips most kids - even boys! The response is usually immediate and intense - to John Reed's bullying, to horror of the Red Room punishment, to Aunt Reed's vicious, unfair dislike, and then, of course, to the Rev. Brocklehurst. This exchange usually hooks 'em:

" 'And what is hell? Can you tell me that?'

'A pit full of fire.'

'And should you like to fall into that pit, and to be burning there for ever?'

'No, sir.'

'And what must you do to avoid it?'

I deliberated a moment; my answer when it did come, was objectionable.

'I must keep in good health, and not die.' "



Jane - by the end of chapter four - is thus established as cool. She's a fighter - and a survivor - in the crazy world run by adults. She's *interesting*.

I suppose C.S. Lewis was right when he famously said, "We read to know we are not alone."

It's when kids realise the truth of that statement that they become addicted to books.

PS I had no idea until recently that Dill in "Mockingbird" was based on Truman Capote - Harper Lee's real childhood friend. Brilliant book.

If we are talking about getting a 12yr old child interested in reading for the first time then Harry Potter would be difficult to dismiss also. Appeals to both girls or boys with lots of action, humour, suspense and gory bits and pieces that always go down well with young readers.

I think I'm tending towards ID's suggestion If a 12 year old (boy, or girl, pre/post pubescent, what interests, do they real at all? These would all matter) hasn't acquired the habit of reading, a badly chosen classic might be the very thing to put them off for life! The most important thing is that they enjoy it and want more. On the other hand I've a big problem with the notion, much touted by schools these days, that young people's reading should be 'relevant', usually meaning contemporary social problems. I certainly didn't want that, the more different and exotic the better.
If they have enjoyed an adaptation of a book, then that or a sequel or something by the same author, might be a good starting point and perhaps would show just how much more depth there is in the original format.
It's particularly difficult to suggest anything as, as far back as I can remember, I devoured everything and anything; I'd pretty much exhausted the local library and a small private one nearby.

I would tend to agree with you too, ferval. Like you, we as kids quickly exhausted the local library - both children's and adults' sections - and by 12 were bussing it every week to the next available one. Having read practically everything on offer we really hadn't a clue about the term "classics" at all - "Jane Eyre", "Great Expectations", even "The Idiot" I recall - all went the same way as "Biggles Defies the Swastika", "Just William" and "Green Eggs and Ham". Absolutely no critical distinction applied apart possibly from the amount of "boring bits" encountered or the technical accuracy of Captain W.E. Johns versus William Golding when describing retractable undercarriages.

It was a huge surprise in secondary school when several of the books we had already read were now described as "classics" and served up with a compunction to read them for exams - an experience which turned me off Austen for many years. I can't even begin to describe the bad odour in which poor Shakespeare was held by me, and I suspect hundreds of thousands of others over the years as a result of the same silly approach to education - selecting a literary marvel and then forcing with menaces a teenager (of all people!) to read it.

However this is also something the organisers of WBD wish to remedy so, be it Harry Potter or Aeschylus, the important thing is that your enthusiastic recommendation to the 12 year old peaks his or her curiosity to the point that they take a look for themselves and hopefully find in it that which made you so enthusiastic in the first place. In which case - given that you only had one opportunity to do so, what book would you recommend?

Caro you said,

Quote :

In my experience kids who don't read by the time they are 12 but do later are likely to be boys whose reading then is more likely to be focussed on non-fiction.

Yup that sounds exactly like me and although I now read a lot, both fiction and non-fiction, I have to admit rather shamefacedly that I have not read several of the books people are recommending for twelve year olds. So thanks one and all for suggesting some good reads for me too!

But having said I wasn't a great reader of fiction I do recall reading and thoroughly enjoying 'Lord of the Flies' when I was probably about twelve. So I'd recommend that ... for a boy.

Sorry but that's impossible without knowing something about the kid, how good a reader are they and how much reading experience have they for a start.
At that age I had a fondness for Jules Verne I think - it was a long time ago - and read 20000 Leagues more than once but then I was also interested in natural history so I enjoyed the bits about the under water life and that might have been a real turn off for someone else. (just made a good Freudian typo, 'a long tome'!) I enjoyed poetry as well.
Heavens I can't even remember what were the set prose texts at school, only that I was inclined to read then in one sitting and then had to drag through them in the class infuriatingly slowly. I loved the Shakespeare tragedies but never 'got' the comedies.
On reflection, my daughter enjoyed Animal Farm around that age but couldn't get into Treasure Island even though she was a voracious reader as well.
MM, I hated Lord of the Flies but more because I was really upset by it. In that adventurous vein with young characters, what about A High Wind in Jamaica or Walkabout or The Silver Sword?

ferval wrote:

If a 12 year old ... hasn't acquired the habit of reading, a badly chosen classic might be the very thing to put them off for life!

But a classic, *well* chosen and presented with enthusiasm by a committed teacher, can have even a difficult class mesmerized, ferval. They're usually "classics" because they're good stories! It's a bit like teaching Shakespeare, though - I agree dreary "reading round the class" without real understanding, appreciation or engagement is absolutely deadly. And yes - you do need a fair degree of low cunning to get the little blighters hooked. But it can be done, and bright kids - even if reluctant at first - often admit they like the challenge of difficult texts - the "shock of the new", you might say. Decent film adaptations can help too, but should not replace reading.

But this isn't really what Nordmann is asking for - the task he's set is actually impossible. To choose a suitable text for an *individual* child we need more information about that child. And is the book to read alone, silently - or read aloud, with a tutor?



PS Caro's mention of "Wind in the Willows" reminded me of a story told by a lovely old head teacher I once knew "up north" in Bolton (or Notlob, as the Monty Python team once called that town). He took on a little group of extremely naughty eleven-year-old boys whom nobody else could manage - they were, even at that young age, completely out of control - the sort who in the bad old days were labelled "remedials". He had them tamed within a couple of weeks. He used to read "Toad of Toad Hall" with them, and they loved it so much that as soon as he entered the room they would chorus (try and imagine it with a Bolton accent), "Toad, sir! *Toad*!"

Several messages sent while I've been typing. Will send anyway!

Ferval, I think their point at the WBD is that if you can imagine your enthusiasm for the material being infectious enough to surmount these obvious obstacles then which book do you think you would recommend?

In other words it's really not about the kid here - it's a question designed to elicit from you a book which you think has the power to enrapture a hypothetical young reader to the point that he or she might even overcome lethargy, comparitively poor reading ability etc etc in order to get to the end of the story.

When you think about it, it's actually quite a personal question. When restricted to one book then the choice reveals much about oneself and one's own history.

Temp, I would hope they mean a book read privately. How on earth it could be anything else and still engender a life-long love for books is beyond me.

Deleted.

Why did you delete it? I reckoned it was fair comment - and liked the bit about Napoleon.

nordmann wrote:

In other words it's really not about the kid here - it's a question designed to elicit from you a book which you think has the power to enrapture a hypothetical young reader...

Oh - OK, I'll put it back. What did I say?

Not about the kid? Well, you shouldn't be asking old teachers for comments, then.

I don't do "hypothetical young readers"!

Can I do a Cass here and tell a tale from the classroom*? It involves a group of lethargic, bottom set, reluctant readers - rough as they come, English bog standard comprehensive - and George Orwell. Bless the man. This mad lot *loved* "Animal Farm". When we got to the bit where Napoleon has Boxer sent to the knackers' yard, one boy lost it completely and shouted out, "I f*cking hate that pig!"

I hadn't the heart to tell him off for swearing - I was actually rather pleased by his anger.

* Deleted post because I felt it was off topic.

It seems that this question is even more pertinent than I realised, I've just quite coincidentally come across this. http://thereaderonline.co.uk/2011/12/06/1-in-3-uk-children-dont-own-a-book-what-can-we-do/

Wow, 1 in 3 homes not having a book is rather shocking ferval. But if the schools are pushing "relevant" reading material at the young, it shouldn't be a surprise, I suppose. Children want to be entertained not thumped over the head with reality, particularly for those whose reality is already pretty grim.

Whilst I agree with Temp that classics are called so for a reason, I'd personally steer clear of most if introducing a child (at that age) to reading for the first time. Today, a book has to compete with all sorts of electronic gadgetry designed purely for instant gratification and introducing something that may take some patience to understand fully is not going to go down well.

Initially, a first time young reader has to grasp that what is between the covers of a book, although it takes time to consume, can transport them to worlds previously unimagined and will be more rewarding for the effort. Once that concept is understood, a child will have all the time and patience (if needed) in the world for the classics.

In these sort of studies, though it may not be clearly stated, the concern is usually about reading fiction and hence trying to introduce children to, hopefully, a lfetime of enjoyable reading... and so boost literacy levels. But as Caro stated above, and I would most definitely agreee from my own experience, boys often prefer non-fiction to fiction, coming rather later to enjoy a good fictional story.

Is that such a terrible thing? Reading non-fiction, reading anything frankly, still improves general reading skills. Why try to force a boy to read "a classic", even if it is done with the best of intentions, when all he wants to do is devour anything about volcanos, dinosaurs, cars, space etc.? An interest in, say dinosaurs may well in due course lead to reading 'Jurassic Park' (good luck!) or 'The Lost World' - an interest in warships to the stories of Hornblower and Cornwall, even, heaven forbid, a proper history book! Furthermore reading non-fiction can often expose children to the techniques of good, concise prose, logical progression of ideas, and a well-crafted essay... to say nothing about extending their vocabulary. And frankly these days why does it have to be in the form of a book? I would probably have spent many hours reading about dinosaurs on Wiki etc... it is after all still reading.

But finally I am extremely wary of these oft-quoted statistics.... 38 million children do not possess a book of their own, suddenly equates to 1 in 3 families do not possess a single book! I don't quite follow the maths there. I don't think I owned a book until I was about eight (and I could read before I first went to primary school) and then it would have been non-fiction. I was however brought up in a house stuffed full of books, one just read whatever you wanted from the household library, so 'Coral Island', 'Lord of the Flies', 'The Hobbit' etc were copies I just picked up that had once been my sister's or my parents' books. We all had library cards too which we all used.

Yes, people always talk about all these households without books. I worked for about 10 years in early childhood education, mostly in the homes of people who weren't well off. In that time, I saw only one household where there were no books. (There was hardly anything else there either.) They might not have had many and they might have been all children's books or all adult trivial fiction ones, but almost everyone had some books in their homes.

Times have changed though.

Several times just in the last few years I have heard of children who do not own books or have access to them at home. In many cases, rather horifically, it is down to the decor and the parents' priorities in that regard. Books come in to the house sporadically but are not allowed to reside on bookshelves as they don't "fit the theme" of said abode. Nor are they stowed accessibly (I remember well my comic collection in an apple box under my bed, next to my annual collection in my grandgather's suitcase). Even more worrying is that this often means they just get thrown in the bin - good as new - not even donated to booksellers, charities or other kids.

At one point my house was used as a library (and a salvage point) for just such children's literature and its consumers. Many of our "clients" came from these households, and many of these came to read what once had been their own books.

Made it - and just had to make comment here. This subject is my age group and ever an educationlist's dilemmna. There is no such book Nordmann. It's like your asking what food would best tempt an anorexic child. Above somewhere someone is remarked for starting with the child. There is no other starting place.

So how do you do it. It takes time, interest, perception - and knowledge of books available...... I read every children's book that ever went into any of my libraries. Talk to the child about what he/she would read if they had to... and what TV and films they enjoy most. Children are swamped with nonstop escapist material to indulge themselves with lazy prog flicking ease and in a way that is difficult for us to really comprehend as it came to us much later in life. Reading schemes provide endles storylines - which on the whole are average and not mind gripping.

My advice then is select three books that might be of interest and ask them to read three chapters of each - sometimes it works. In truth the greatest incentive was to read to reluctant readers and offer to lend the copy to any who wanted to read on. So, Nordmann, better to ask what would you read aloud to reluctant readers? If you are good at it then you can get takers for just about anything, in truth. And I must be honest and say that because I said they were not ready to read yet were read in secret..... and that includes the Bible. A young Yugoslav boy son of a diplomat once made off with a copy to read under the covers after I had said maybe his parents would not approve. Yes, it's a minefield and probably the most satisfying challenge a teacher can face. And no, I can't recommend a book - but I could send a list of about 300 to use as bait if that helps.

Written as ever straight from the cuff and no notebook or edit. From me in my small corner to you in yours.

Regards, P. All right, all right so I'm recovering from last night's Jazz night.... at my age too.

As said before, I think what Julia Donaldson et al were trying to elicit was a recommendation from everyone anyway, even if narrowing it down to one book flies in the face of educational logic.

Think about it. If you do recommend a book despite your misgivings, and others like you do the same, you end up with your 300 books and more anyway.

It is really a question designed to identify books which have captivated the imagination of the persons being asked the question. But phrased in a way which forces them down to one specific answer (or else you get a litany of subjectively appreciated books from everyone). It requires a modicum of imagination, a modicum of relaxation of logic, a modicum of openness and a modicum of spontanaeity to answer it. Not easy to get that mix right, it would appear, for everyone.

I stand by my response. Modicums not withstanding, make that 500 - and counting. Give me the child and I will find the book. As I I could never find the right food for any anorexic child, neither could I for an unknown book-shy 12 year old. ... aside form keeping it locked in a library for three days and nights without ipad, TV or electronic game, radio or whatever fascinates at that moment. May the gods be praised that I am not a twelve year old in this day and age.

The modicums are essential and must remain withstanding!

It is funny how the WBD website managed to get a considerable number of responses (even from educationalists) who could take the modicums on board for the day. But then, they wouldn't have published responses from the modicumally challenged anyway, I suppose ...

There are educationlists and educationlists - I shall not compromise my modicums which stand unchallenged in my sight. I will not chose books. Better yet to ask what influences a child's potentil interest in taking a book in hand. By that I mean films, Tv, ipad, stuff, electronic games - pop music, personal problems and emotional stress from family, peers society.

Of course many replied to the site because most have experience of the book that reached them, or found one that reached some. People love to recommend. In this context, I don't and wouldn't when in education. Just give me the child.... and even with all of ones best efforts you cannot lure a child into fiction who is hellbent of nonfictional rubbish. I know of one who only read car catalogues. He is manager of a soft drinks plant now - and rather dull.

As a child I always reckoned managers of soft drinks plants must be bubbly people.

There are also educalionalists and mostly people who can spell better than I can - but with a modicum of tolerance I can be read with a modicum of understandng even without a modicum of agreement.

Soft drinks plants are actually where I pour my drinks at T-total parties. However, let us not digress otherwise the dictator will whinge.

Dictators don't whinge. They dictate.

Only if everyone can do shorthand though, very difficult to take dictation without it.

Stop whinging.

Australians never whinge!

Besides, I know the very best Pitman shorthand.

Back in the 1940's, Albert Kanter was worried that children were not reading books, they were reading comics. So he came up with the bright idea of producing classic books in a comic format. The result was Classic Comics, which later became Classics Illustrated they are still in print today.

http://www.classicsillustrated.co.uk

worked for me, it was CI that first introduced me to Zola's "The Debacle"

The Sydney Morning Herald Australian Whinger of the year award 2011:

To those who put a whine in our strine

Trike, do you remember Look & Learn? They used to do a similar treatment of historical themes.



(edit: just noticed the Scots who seem to have snuck in for the photo-shoot in that one)

I do indeed Nordmann,in fact I've being trying to post an image of the War of the Worlds that appeared in L&L

Trike.

This one?

That's the one, scared the bejeezus out of me the first time I saw it.

Trike

Issue number 27 of L&L, it stuck in my mind for years and thanks to the wonders of the internet I managed to get a copy.

nordmann wrote:

The Sydney Morning Herald Australian Whinger of the year award 2011:)

Mmm went to Tony Abbott, politician, leader of the opposition, conservative. Stands to reason.

Islanddawn wrote:

Australians never whinge!

Aussies are the undisputed World Champions at whingeing.

The book we had to read for our "O" grade exams was John Buchan's "Thirty Nine Steps". The must read books at the time, which we actually read,were Lord Russell's "Scourge of the Swastika" and "Knights of Bushido"

T.

One of my tasks as a Teaching Assistant is to hear some of the less able readers. They are a year or two younger than your target 12-y-o, but I think my observations about them might be useful.



Forget immediately the idea that there is any one ideal book. There isn't. What will enthuse one child will turn the next one off. Study the child, and address their interests. If they like pseudo-magic, than a book of little literary merit such as Hairy Potter might work for them. If they like animals, try something like My Family etc (but for goodness sake NOT the bowdlerised version - Widdle and Puke in their full glory, please!), but always address their interests. The most reluctant reader (not the worst, that's a different matter entirely) I encountered turned out to have an interest in space travel, and would happily tackle non-fiction on the subject which was about 3 - 4 years beyond his "reading age".

Gil,

I can add nothing more to that... I agree entirely... as you say let them tackle what interests them most... and then all one can do is try to feed the desire, whatever it is... even, heaven-forbid, non-fiction.

Just what I was going on about several posts up - only I was nearly modded by the top mod for lack of modicum.

I was influenced by Radio and stories read on radio - apart from a morbid interest in Foxes Book of saints (fully illustrated) that our sensible teacher kept on the nature table. Boy, but it was a great school that one. He also left Ruskin and Proffesor Brainstorm and the Children's Newspaper lying about for when we got bored or when it was too awful to go outside. Our class for some reason was never sent out in it. So we read and laughed and did the C Newspaper crossword....and when we all went secondary, in the V1th form tried to beat the staff at the Times crossword and refused tuition until it was done - with staff if necesssary. This of course was Essex where anything goes.

Children can be so diverse in their interests - a 9yr old who read and reread Vanity Fair until she could write in the ssame style - she went on to be an art expert at the Tate Modern. The 10 year old who pushed me into recommending him Children of the New Forest because he became enthralled by the struggle between Crown and Parliament. He was 10 then and went on to be a Financial Ed of The Times for a while. Then there was Richie who became interested in old copies of Nat Geog - but that was more to do with uncovered native ladies. He became a Hairdresser in NZ. They were all in the same class.

So no I still won't name a book, Nordmann though I would suggest that a reluctant readers be given an audio book with the first chapters of something they might like and the actual book with it to read on for the rest. I was always replacing books that I had read to a class which were then nicked by whoever.

Essay over. Me done finished out and over. P.

Priscilla : We have a range of books which are on CD and in text form, so that our worst readers (as I said before, they aren't always the most reluctant ones) can listen and "read" at the same time. They enjoy them - but the text is so restricted that I wonder if they are getting much out of them. However, does that really matter, if they discover that interesting things can be found in books?

The problem with you old fogies is that you lack the imagination in your dotage to understand just what the question demands of you. Fortunately for you however your country is led by a young and dynamic renaissance man, he who has put the poly back into politician. Dave has had no hesitation in nominating Dr Seuss's "The Lorax" as the one for him. He is now sending out 14 million copies to schools around the yuckie (so it sounded on the radio). Thank Grinch for the younger generation!

Well, at least Dr Seuss prompted me to look up the dictionary to find out what a credenza was.
Which thought has led me to suggest that the best book to promote is - a dictionary. The medical dictionary in our local library certainly kept me enthralled and I learned a lot.

http://www.authorama.com/three-men-in-a-boat-1.html

This should convince you of the profound unwisdom of reading any sort of medical dictionary.