The "Why Am I Still Reading This?" Moment

I've been reading Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, during the magical amount of time I've been bestowed at the end of the school year. I have to say, though, that while I've meticulously read 190 pages of this book, I'm beginning to have that "Why Am I Still Reading This?" moment. I'm not sure who Dawkins intended to have read his book. Was it the small audience of religious scientists? Was it athiests who wanted some substance to support their lack of belief? Was it religious people ready to open their minds or simply...curious? The two latter audiences will struggle to get through the chapters. Dawkins loves quoting everyone. EVERYONE! And everything has some weird analogy that bleeds into other chapters...an analogy you'll forget after blubbering through another 20 pages. For example, "skyhook," and a "PAP" agnostic...huh?!

The book reads more like a well-crafted research paper that goes on for 300 pages and has some entertaining moments. But I don't think it's meant for the average person. It's for the science community, religious or atheistic. For the average person, get the Cliffsnotes version by watch Richard Dawkins talk about his book on YouTube. It's a lot less painful and a lot more entertaining.

When I first started reading this book, there was a small section that really, really drew me in. Dawkins was talking about how religious groups get undeserved respect and are even consulted in political policy. I was excited. But that was 160 pages ago. There has been no "OMG! REALLY? I MUST READ ON!" moments since then and yet I keep reading. Maybe it's because I'm already this far in that I feel like if I give up now, it'll be a cop out. The titles of the upcoming chapters sound interesting, but then again, the chapter I'm on now "The Origin of Religion," sounded interesting and yet, has turned out to be nothing like what I expected. It's about memes...great. I was hoping for something more anthropological, but no, Dawkins only wants to focus on what he thinks will be DARWIN'S idea of how religion functions. I would like a count on how many times the name Darwin appears in this book, kind of like the count of the word "fuck" in The Big Lebowski. Darwin, Darwin, Darwin....

Way to teach kids INTOLERANCE

I had to read the book Crash by Jerry Spinelli to teach the book to a small group of 7th grade students. Jerry Spinelli is a Newbery Award winner for Maniac Magee, a book I'm sure you've heard of. But this book, Crash, which won a few respectable book awards is just awful!

The book is about a boy named Crash, a nickname he received after he "crashed tackled" into his cousin when he received a new football helmet for Christmas. Crash torments his neighbor, Penn Ward - a nerdy vegetarian Quaker who doesn't believe in violence, gets his clothes from a thirft shop, and has a pet turtle who rides around in Penn's only toy, a wooden train or something. Throughout most of the book, Crash is boasting about his football abilities and when he's not doing that, he ridicules Penn Ward while feeling entitled to dance/befriend the prettiest girl in school to the point at which he resorts to force to get her attention. UGH!

The supposed "redeeming" point for Crash is when he makes a connection between his ailing grandfather and Penn's great-grandfather who wants nothing more than to see Penn run at the Penn Relays. Crash, who is faster than Penn, purposely loses a qualifying race to Penn so that Penn can go to the Penn Relays. Great, so for 120 pages, Crash is a huge, egotistical, ignorant ***hole and the reader is supposed to feel happy that he's changed for the remaining 30 pages. NO. I hate this character with a passion. I hate what he stands for and I hate how I'm supposed to believe this character has really changed! Please...it was nice that he lost the race, but there's no way in hell that these guys are going to be friends. Crash will continue to harass Penn for being a Quaker and a vegetarian. And if he is nice to Penn, it's only for the sake of keeping the prettiest girl in school as his girlfriend. How shallow.

I felt this book almost taught intolerance and selfishness to my young reader's minds. For example, Crash criticizes Penn for being Quaker and not believing in violence of any sort. He takes advantage of the poor guy, soaking him with a watergun and Penn just stands there and takes it. During the literature circle discussions that occurred after reading the first 8 chapters, one of my students exclaimed, "Penn deserved it. We live in a violent world! Learn to live with it!" What a good way to teach kids religious tolerance let alone peace!

I give this book a 3/10. It's a complex story and a fast read, but it has a lot of bad blood that's hard to overlook.

A Niche of Time To Read

It's been a while since I've posted here, mainly because I haven't been reading anything substantial. I got a new job in January and poof, my free time to read disappeared. But I have finished one book in the past 2 days due to having to teach it to a couple of 6th grade students:

Holes by Louis Sachar is a great read! It reminded me of a more reader-friendly Lord of the Flies, except there's adults involved and upheld rules. The reason why it reminds me of Lord of the Flies is because it's about a group of boys removed from civilization. There's many books out there that examine a microcosm of the greater world, removing people from civilization and watching what they do. It certainly makes it an easier book to write! The 6th grade class that read it seemed to enjoy it, except for a few students. Well, you can't please everyone!

I'll give it a 9/10. I'm deducting a point because the whole great-great-great grandfather and great-great grandfather and all the lineage was too hard for me to follow. I couldn't figure out who was who without having to flip back and so, of course, the ending for me required even more research. Which Stanley Yelnats does the suitcase belong to? How is he related to the little boy, also named Stanley Yelnats?

My current read, a book I can only read at home, is The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Dawkins is articulate, bold, and reasonable in his arguments against a supernatural god. I was not impressed with his beginning chapter on Einstein's religious beliefs. Okay, so people misconstrued Einstein's religious beliefs - who cares? Perhaps that chapter is more for the religious scientist reader. For someone like me, it's out of place. One of my favorite sections so far is "Undeserved Respect."

Unfortunately, I have some things I need to get done so I'll have to write about it later.