Has a Negative Review Ever Convinced You to Read A Book?

I have begun to notice that pretty much EVERYTHING is subjective. Almost everything is affected by a person's own opinions, moods, beliefs, background and what have you. (I totally just had to look up the phrase "what have you" to make sure I wasn't making it up and to figure out if it was one word or not).

For example, here is a conversation I had my with my friend Monday night. We were talking about making muffins together:

Strawberry muffins... tell me they do not look yummy!

Friend: What kind of muffins should we make?
Me: strawberry!!!
Friend: EWW
Me: What? Why! My mom said her friend made them once and they were really good!
Friend: That sounds... EEW!
Me: Why? Don't you like strawberries?
Friend: yahh

I still think my friend is not justified in thinking strawberry muffins are gross (I mean, she's never even tried them...), but this kind of shows how affected we are by our own ideas and opinions and just basically who we are.

So. This also applies to books. (HA you never guessed that I would say that, right?? Haha.) I have figured out that I like certain types of characters way more than other types of characters. I really don't like dependent, scared, hesitant characters that don't really know much. I absolutely fall in love with really clever, independent characters. For example, in the book Inkheart by Cornelia Funke (amazing book, by the way) my favourite character, hands down, is Dustfinger. I adore him. He's one of those clever, sort of goes-by-his-own-terms type of character that I like. I think this is also the reason that I liked the character Katniss in The Hunger Games, and the character Eugenides in The Thief, Queen of Attolia and King of Attolia by Megan Whalen Turner.

To be honest, until recently, I had no idea that it was me. I just thought lots of writers wrote really bland, annoying characters but as it turns out, I just wasn't interested in the characters because of me - who I am and what I like as a person.

That being said, different things will attract a person into reading a book. When I'm wandering through the library, my eyes usually go to the covers (and spines) that are unique, bright, and different. I tend not to be attracted to the darker, spooky covers or the covers with girls' faces on the front. It also depends on what I'm in the mood for. If I feel like reading romance, I look for titles and covers that hint that the book is a romance.

Whoops... kind of getting off track. Back to... different things attract a person into reading a book. That is why I think when reading a book review, different things will stick out to different people. Just like while I'm in the library, certain covers or titles attract me, certain things said in a review will attract me to a book.

SO that brings me to my final point... because of all this, has a negative book review ever convinced you to read a book? I can see it happening if, I don't know, the reviewer says something like "The character was just way too clever for me, I didn't understand them" (this would only be for me, obviously) and then I would be like... well, I like clever characters... maybe I should read that book.

So? Has a negative book review ever convinced you to read a book? If not, do you think it's possible that one could? What do you think?

Also go here for information on the 21 Minus Blogfest and Contest that I'm participating in... it starts tomorrow!

Banned Books Week: Spot The Pattern

It's banned book week this week, and here at I Am Writer Hear Me Roar, we are going to play a game called "spot the pattern". I'm sure you have played a version of this in your grade school math classes. You know, you're given the numbers 2 4 6 8 and you have to figure out the pattern (it goes up by multiples of [so a friend pointed this out to me: the numbers actually don't go up by mutliples of two... I just said the wrong word, but you probably got what I meant... and believe me, I actually can do math! I got like, a 90 in math last year!] two! What!?).

Except instead of numbers, we'll use books (because numbers scare us writerly people, right?)

Book #1: To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee

Source

Harper Lee grew up in a society where black men were thought of as predators; where the only men in the jury were white men so black men had no chance of being acquitted; where things happened like nine teenage boys being accused of rape.

To Kill A Mockingbird is about a mishievous tomboy Scout and her adventures until her and her friends watch a black men getting tried in a court case after being accused, wrongly, of raping a white woman.

To Kill A Mockingbird brings to light the very large issue of racism against black people that was present in the 1930s (both the time Harper Lee grew up in and the time the book is set in) and the 1960s (the time when the book was published).

To Kill A Mockingbird has been banned or challenged at various schools for using swear words, racial slurs, and for general racism. (Just an interesting sidenote, though: it's been said that To Kill A Mockingbird is the one book other than the Bible that has changed people the most... hm....)

Book #2: Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain

Source

Huck Finn was first published in England in 1884, then in the U.S. in 1885. The book itself takes place sometime between 1835 and 1845. The book follows Huck as he goes on a journey with a black slave Jim, and realizes that Jim is a genuinely nice guy and not like society makes out black people to be.

Twain uses this book to criticize and challenge the racist American society of the time and the perception of black people, specifically the view that black people weren't human and didn't have feelings.

Source

Huck Finn has also been challenged and banned, for word choice (swears and racial slurs) and the line "he not only itched but scratched." It is

one of the most challenged/banned books of all time.

Book #3: The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton

S.E. Hinton wrote The Outsiders when she was 16, inspired and irked by the gang rivalry at her own school. The book itself follows two groups who are separated by their social status in high school. It was published in 1967.

The Outsiders has been banned/challenged for gang violence, drug and alcohol abuse, slang language, and family dysfunction.

Book #4: The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins

Source

Our society today is obsessed with entertainment and reality TV. There are also wars, all over the world, all the time. The Hunger Games is about a dystopian society where a reality show-like event is held each year, where children enter an arena and kill each other while the rest of the world watches on live TV for their own entertainment.

When talking about where the idea came from for The Hunger Games, Suzanne Collins says "one night, I was lying in bed, and I was channel surfing between reality TV programs and actual war coverage. On one channel, there's a group of young people competing for I don't even know; and on the next, there's a group of young people fighting in an actual war. I was really tired, and the lines between these stories started to blur in a very unsettling way."

The Hunger Games has been challenged/banned, mostly for violence.

Do you see the pattern?

I hope you do. If you don't, I want you to take a second look at all those books - all those books that deal with and bring to light issues of their day, critiquing everything that is wrong with that -our- society. I do not understand why people are banning these books when they have such, such important things to say.

I understand that some books aren't for everyone, I really do. But the thing that bugs me is that these people who are challenging these books, they are challenging them for little things. They are not looking at the big picture, of what the message of these books is, of what they are supposed to mean! These book-challengers are missing the big picture, are missing the fact that these books take all that crazy stuff from reality.

So. What do you think? Should books be banned? Do you agree with me - are these book-banners missing the big picture? Can you think of any other banned books that might deal with society's issues? (Oh, I already thought of another one... The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian by Sherman Alexie...) What are your thoughts on banned books?

SOURCES (brace yourself):

(all other sources are linked to in the text/caption)

To Kill A Mockingbird:

ttp://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=bbwlinks&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=136590

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_kill_a_mockingbird

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harper_Lee

Huck Finn:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huckleberry_Finn

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1842832_1842838_1844945,00.html  (ok so this article says that there's a movie version of Huck Finn where the black slave is played by an actor who is not black to avoid controversy...!?!?!?)

The Outsiders:

http://world.edu/worldedu_posts/banned-books-awareness-outsiders/

www.sehinton.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.E._Hinton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Outsiders_(novel)

The Hunger Games:

http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6590063.html (where I got the quote from)

http://swardkehoe.blogspot.com/2011/09/banned-books-week-has-begun.html (what an intelligent reader has to say about The Hunger Games)

http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/bannedbooksweek/ideasandresources/free_downloads/2011banned.pdf

Be AWARE!!

So, Happy May everyone! Here in Canada, I woke up to this on the glorious first day of May:

April showers bring May... snowstorms??

Thankfully a lot of it has melted already... I'm hoping it'll all be gone soon!

So, now that I have made you aware of the weather on my corner of the earth... I will now proceed to make you aware of some other things, while straying away from the writerly/readerly stuff for once. (I think I may do this more often, it's fun sharing different things I find out!)

Anyway, before we get any deeper, watch this video, and PAY ATTENTION. I'd say I have a prize for you if you pay attention, but I don't. Unless you want a virtual pat on the back.

So. How'd you do? And I'm not talking about getting the number of passes right. Yeah, you didn't see the bear, did you? Neither did I when I tried this.

It's amazing how much of the world we don't pay attention to, isn't it? If you think about all the stimuli and information that could be entering our brain at one time, well, it's overwhelming. We HAVE to ignore stuff or we'd explode. The problem with that is we might miss really important stuff because we aren't paying attention to the right things (like... a moon walking bear, maybe?)

This was a big part of a discussion that was going on in one of my classes at school. Afterward, though, I was thinking about the book The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime and how the character in that book mentioned that he has to take everything in. That's why he hates going to new places: he has to notice every little thing that's different. No wonder these kinds of people don't like change and are adamant about routine. My mom later told me that this would count as autism.

See, the thing is, people who have I guess "normal" brains, see the big picture. Instead of seeing a whiteboard with "Practise flute" and a whole bunch of specific stuff written on it, and going throughout the room and taking in every detail, we see just a room. Maybe details here and there, if our brain decides it needs to take into account that information.

But people with autism see the details, instead of the big picture. My dad told me about this radio host who had a girl with a high level of autism on his show to interview her. Apparently she talked about the experience of walking through a field, and how just all the different colours of green would overwhelm her. Pretty crazy, isn't it? I mean, if we wanted to we could seperate colours of green, but why would we want to pay attention to that?

Isn't thinking about how people think fascinating?

What kinds of things are worthy of your attention? Certain details? Just the big picture?