The Dumbing Down of Nancy Drew

[Jay_Raymer]

I tend to agree with you, Jamie. I’ve noticed as we enter into a world of hi speed connections, foreshortened speech and instant gratification, that attention spans do seem to be decreasing and it seems that the world wants to change the person. My child’s attention can’t be held long enough on his own to read a book when there are video games with fast action and bright colors. This leads to a teacher that tries to label him as ADD (and incidentally trying to get him put on drugs) instead of taking the time to get him more interested in the things that she wants him to do. I spend hours with him reading together and he has no problem whatsoever. (he reads at the 4th grade level at age 6 but she wouldn’t know because she doesn’t care) <br><br>The true problem here, in my humble opinion, is the lack of teacher’s willingness to put any sort of effort into actually doing the job that they are paid to do. I’m not saying that there are NO good teachers out there. On the contrary, many really care about their students and give it their all to give each the attention that they deserve and to give them every chance they can get. However, they are becoming harder and harder to find in our government school system as the teachers gain tenure and cannot be fired for their incompetence. <br><br>It seems to me that the only way that we can get our children properly educated anymore is to pull them out of the government schools, where the goal seems to be to churn out dumb kids that are going to be dependent on the government dollar for the rest of their lives. The only proper choices seem to be to either teach them ourselves at home, or pay the money to have them attend private school. <br><br>I personally have decided to teach my son at home where he can learn the truth about evolution instead of having those idiots in Cobb county put post-it notes in his book saying that “Evolution is just a theory and has not been proven to be fact”.<br><br>Sorry about my first post being such a rant, but Jamie hit one of my favorite buttons.<br><br>Thanks for your patience,<br><br>Jay<br>

[Robert_Moriyama]

Well, I always found the reason to study was to be able to trump the arguments of fundamentalist morons who could not apply logic and facts to any situation...

<br><br>Heh.  Reminds me of the early (probably first season) episode of The West Wing where President Bartlett is trying to deal with a Bible-thumping columnist who is a guest at a White House reception.  He does a lovely reductio-ad-absurdum argument where he asks if she insists on literal interpretation of the Bible as a guide to a particular issue, whether she supports various ridiculous positions that also follow from literal interpretation of Bible passages. (The one that springs to mind is banning football because it involves handling the skin of a pig, but there were others).  Then he turns to Leo (or Toby) who had asked how he had defeated a Bible-brandishing opponent in an election early in his career, and says, "That's how."<br><br>Of course, Robert Heinlein once pointed out that literal interpretation of the Bible as a whole requires that you accept being devoured by bears as a suitable punishment for children who mock a saint ...<br><br>(And yes, I know every religion has its share of 'things that make you go "hmmmm"' -- it's just that I'm most familiar with Judeo-Christian traditions.)<br><br>Robert "How did religion enter this discussion?" M.<br><br>(Actually, come to think of it, fundamentalism, by insisting that many things be accepted on faith, is intrinsically anti-scientific ... Even the great Christian logicians (St. Thomas Aquinas et al.) and philosophers took as axiomatic that God must exist in more or less the form (and with more or less the intentions) described in the Bible and the Torah.)<br>

[Robert_Moriyama]

Going back to an earlier post, Jamie wrote:

"And as the reading level of the population degrades further, I, as a writer, have two options: 1) dumb down my work and place myself in perpetual “abridged” mode or 2) stay true to myself and watch as my potential audience shrink. "

I've been pondering for a while of "Twin Versions" of books - coded colors, etc. (Why not use the Ski industry label system? Green Circle, Blue Square, Black Diamond")

With a little bit of creative software, a writer can tag sentences per grade level, and "poof", Joseph H. Schmoe, Jr. can have his Green version of War and Peace. His studious father can then Ramp it up up full strength.

This might also be an interesting study technique for well meaning readers taking a chance on a "tougher than normal" work. It's not enough to bemoan attention spans the size of a gnat. If the book is too hard... it ... just ... won't .. be .. read.

Stuff to ponder.

--TaoPhoenix

<br><br>We already see multiple versions of movie-tie-in books -- the nearly-word-free picture books, the kids' version, the young adult version, and the (purportedly) adult version. If we had the "lit'rary version", it would presumably be written in the style of James Joyce's 'Ulysses' ... or Umberto Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum" (where the prose and structure are not overly complex, but there are passages in half a dozen foreign languages).<br><br>Robert M.