Does my choice to read Star Wars novels make me better than my son who plays x-box in his free time? According to Cristina Nehring’s essay “Books make you a boring person” (New York Times, June 2004); no.
Cristina Nehring has identified a perceived superior nature among people who love to read and has chosen to address the situation by employing the skills she is known for; and while she wrote a charming essay, ultimately the article fails to effect the change she was urging.
As I read her essay, I got the impression that Nehring found the need to write this piece at the book fair she mentions in her opening. She mentions the use of manipulative pathos by proponents of reading, claims that “Books make you a better person” and “Read a book, save a life”. Using her own over-exaggerated pathos she expounds on these claims, saying “books keep kids off drugs” and “keep terrorists … at the gate.” Logical thinking brushes such claims aside as irrational, given the amount of reading involved in our everyday lives. While such exaggeration makes Nehring’s essay fun to read, ultimately it does nothing to help …show more content…
She urges us to challenge or investigate each idea rather than roll over and say “I read it so it must be true.” Readers who already think for themselves agree with Nehring’s stance; that leaves readers who don’t already think for themselves to convince. Some will find her position offensive and dismiss her essay out of hand. Others will read her views and adopt them as their own, contrary to the point Nehring is trying to make.
{Nehring ineffectively sites some flaw she perceives in the documentary Stone Reader. Does she recall the storylines of every book she has ever read? Nehring’s reference to Stone Reader says more about her view of the documentary than it does to help illustrate her point of the “fetishization” of books. } is this needed? I like the use of
Cristina Nehring has identified a perceived superior nature among people who love to read and has chosen to address the situation by employing the skills she is known for; and while she wrote a charming essay, ultimately the article fails to effect the change she was urging.
As I read her essay, I got the impression that Nehring found the need to write this piece at the book fair she mentions in her opening. She mentions the use of manipulative pathos by proponents of reading, claims that “Books make you a better person” and “Read a book, save a life”. Using her own over-exaggerated pathos she expounds on these claims, saying “books keep kids off drugs” and “keep terrorists … at the gate.” Logical thinking brushes such claims aside as irrational, given the amount of reading involved in our everyday lives. While such exaggeration makes Nehring’s essay fun to read, ultimately it does nothing to help …show more content…
She urges us to challenge or investigate each idea rather than roll over and say “I read it so it must be true.” Readers who already think for themselves agree with Nehring’s stance; that leaves readers who don’t already think for themselves to convince. Some will find her position offensive and dismiss her essay out of hand. Others will read her views and adopt them as their own, contrary to the point Nehring is trying to make.
{Nehring ineffectively sites some flaw she perceives in the documentary Stone Reader. Does she recall the storylines of every book she has ever read? Nehring’s reference to Stone Reader says more about her view of the documentary than it does to help illustrate her point of the “fetishization” of books. } is this needed? I like the use of