Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

I think they are doing a big disservice to school kids by forcing them to read all these classics. Kids should read stuff more focused on entertainment so that they'd get hooked up on reading.

Indeed.

ORIGINAL: fodder

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Warspite1

Good book isn't it?

Yeah it is. Not that far into it yet. The war has just begun. Learned a few interesting things already. Like the admiralty did not want to send the Prince of Wales to the far east. They wanted to send the R-class battleships. It was Churchill who insisted on sending POW. Can't figure out why they didn't attach Hermes to force G after Indomitable ran aground. It wasn't doing anything of importance and the two forces passed close enought to wave at one another. Other little tid bits like the Japanese shooting down a British hudson recon plane a full day before the war began or the invasion at Kota Bharu began 70 minutes before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Currently a number of reinforcements are heading toward Singapore. If Phillips only had waited two
days, he would have had a much larger and effective fighting force.

Singapore has just been bombed!!!!

Warspite1

I have to say I agree with Perturabo on this. When I was a child I hated reading (unless it was about football or looking at my dad's WWII encyclopedias - but even that was for the pictures). As I grew older so I began to read a little more - but it was literally one book a year or something like that. When I had to read Pride and Prejudice and A Tale of Two Cities at school it was like torture.

I now read all the time - in fact the trouble is not enough time, and I have a big stack of books lined up waiting to be read as time is in such short supply. Having got to my age I now feel that I should read at least one Shakespeare and one Dickens before I drop off this mortal coil. But that is because I want to and feel equipped to give them a go; as a teenager? No way.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: fodder

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Warspite1

Good book isn't it?

Yeah it is. Not that far into it yet. The war has just begun. Learned a few interesting things already. Like the admiralty did not want to send the Prince of Wales to the far east. They wanted to send the R-class battleships. It was Churchill who insisted on sending POW. Can't figure out why they didn't attach Hermes to force G after Indomitable ran aground. It wasn't doing anything of importance and the two forces passed close enought to wave at one another. Other little tid bits like the Japanese shooting down a British hudson recon plane a full day before the war began or the invasion at Kota Bharu began 70 minutes before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Currently a number of reinforcements are heading toward Singapore. If Phillips only had waited two
days, he would have had a much larger and effective fighting force.

Singapore has just been bombed!!!!

Warspite1

If Phillips had waited then the danger was that POW and Repulse would have been sitting ducks in harbour to Japanese bombers anyway. Besides, the point of Force Z being there was to halt any invasion (or deter the Japanese from even trying!!!). During WWII, the RN consistently and bravely put themselves in harm's way - as Tennant (captain of Repulse) said; "we are going looking for trouble - I expect we'll find it".

Using Hermes - as with the old D-class cruisers that were available - was not an option.
She was too slow to be of any use and would have been more of a liability.

The whole episode was very sad and not exactly our finest hour [:(]

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

I think they are doing a big disservice to school kids by forcing them to read all these classics. Kids should read stuff more focused on entertainment so that they'd get hooked up on reading.

I disagree. I'm very thankful that my teachers stimulated my thinking by having me read the classics. At the time I wish I could have completed my assignments in class by reading comic books but as I've grown older I've come to appreciate what I was "force fed" as a child.

In most of cases, forcing classics on kids doesn't result in stimulating their thinking but in making them hate reading books.
Also those classics that were written with teenagers in mind can be introduced in high school.
Notice, that since you'd prefer reading comic books, it means that you were already reading for enjoyment, so classics couldn't spoil reading for you. I also started reading from comics. Then I was reading adventure novels, western novels and war books, all before the school started to torture me with its mandatory readings.

Just because a book is classic doesn't make it readable.

ORIGINAL: parusski

Just because a book is classic doesn't make it readable.

Which begs the question that if a book is unreadable should it be a classic?

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: parusski

Just because a book is classic doesn't make it readable.

Which begs the question that if a book is unreadable should it be a classic?

Warspite1

....whih begs the question - who decides? It's like art - who the hell thought Picasso was a great artist?

ORIGINAL: parusski

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: parusski



Which begs the question that if a book is unreadable should it be a classic?

Warspite1

....whih begs the question - who decides? It's like art - who the hell thought Picasso was a great artist?

Warspite, I think Picasso made that decision. But yes, it's like art.

ORIGINAL: parusski

Just because a book is classic doesn't make it readable.

Which begs the question that if a book is unreadable should it be a classic?

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

ORIGINAL: parusski

Just because a book is classic doesn't make it readable.

Which begs the question that if a book is unreadable should it be a classic?

Per definition a "classic" cannot be "unreadable". What's a classic in the first place? A book which has survived through centuries (or millenium/s)... Can you trick a generation, x population? Maybe... But many different generations? NO. And this is the ultimate proof you are looking for. Just like the old wine gets better... [;)]

Non classics inevitably turn into vinegar though [8D]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
So out of curiosity, when did Charles Dickens work first get recognised as "classics"? And the question remains - who decides?

ORIGINAL: warspite1
And the question remains - who decides?

ORIGINAL: shunwick

Guys,

Everyone's taste is different. Good job too - it makes the world go round.

Best wishes,
Steve

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

ORIGINAL: warspite1
So out of curiosity, when did Charles Dickens work first get recognised as "classics"? And the question remains - who decides?

Maybe when the generation after Dicken's generation realized his books were still alive? Still true in 2012. The books have survived the years, decades and centuries. The readers still see *something*

Maybe you are making the wrong question. Why did many other writers disappear and no one is paying attention to what they wrote (nowadays)? And I am thinking about Dicken's contemporaries? [;)] That's the the whole thing, mate [8D]

Classics are immortals. Literally. All the many others (overwhelming majority): dust to dust. RIP [8D]

ORIGINAL: shunwick

Guys,

Everyone's taste is different. Good job too - it makes the world go round.

Best wishes,
Steve

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

ORIGINAL: warspite1
So out of curiosity, when did Charles Dickens work first get recognised as "classics"? And the question remains - who decides?

Maybe when the generation after Dicken's generation realized his books were still alive? Still true in 2012. The books have survived the years, decades and centuries. The readers still see *something*

Maybe you are making the wrong question. Why did many other writers disappear and no one is paying attention to what they wrote (nowadays)? And I am thinking about Dicken's contemporaries? [;)] That's the the whole thing, mate [8D]

Classics are immortals. Literally. All the many others (overwhelming majority): dust to dust. RIP [8D]

Warspite1

So take Flaubert's Madame Bovary - never read it myself, but two - presumably educated people here - have given it a huge thumbs down in terms of readability. But it is considered a masterpiece. By who?

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

ORIGINAL: warspite1
So out of curiosity, when did Charles Dickens work first get recognised as "classics"? And the question remains - who decides?

Maybe when the generation after Dicken's generation realized his books were still alive? Still true in 2012. The books have survived the years, decades and centuries. The readers still see *something*

Maybe you are making the wrong question. Why did many other writers disappear and no one is paying attention to what they wrote (nowadays)? And I am thinking about Dicken's contemporaries? [;)] That's the the whole thing, mate [8D]

Classics are immortals. Literally. All the many others (overwhelming majority): dust to dust. RIP [8D]

Warspite1

So take Flaubert's Madame Bovary - never read it myself, but two - presumably educated people here - have given it a huge thumbs down in terms of readability. But it is considered a masterpiece. By who?