UKC

What texts (books, essays, whatever) would you like to give to every 16 year old in the land? Forget for the moment the obvious issue of whether they'll read them or not but do try to suggest things that would be accessible to an average 16 year old.

This is prompted by reading that there were plans to distribute We Should All Be Feminists by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie to every 16 year old in Sweden.

I'm not suggesting this is a great idea, just really curious to hear people's suggestions.

Ta.

In reply to DaveHK:

If this is a man/The truce. Primo Levi.

In reply to DaveHK:

Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut.

In reply to DaveHK:

The grapes of wrath. Read it as a 15 year old and it made a lifelong impression on me.

In reply to DaveHK:

Dune triology by Frank Herbert
The Art of War by Sun Tzu
How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie
Becoming a Supple Leopard by Kelly Starett
To Look Windward by by Iain M Banks

In reply to DaveHK:

Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Not quite sure whether it's recommendable for 16 year-olds, but certainly 17.

In reply to DaveHK:

The Communist Manifesto - Marx.

In reply to DaveHK:

"How To Avoid Being Indoctrinated"

In reply to DaveHK:
The Tao Of Pooh & The Te Of Piglet. It might be interesting if people say way they've chosen a book. I'd find it interesting to know why others have. It's less profound than some of the other suggestions perhaps, but as a teenager one can feel that 'life has to be figured out', and it might be a helpful reminder earlier on that life also can need to be left to unfold too, in the sense of one being on a journey. This book talks about needing to let things unfold, as well as other things to do with finding meaning in life.

In reply to Big Ger:


Is that a text or were you trying to make a wee joke?

In reply to DaveHK:
The Art of Always Being Right - Arthur Schopenhauer (Should be compulsory reading for UKC Forum users also)
A Tale of Two Cities - Dickens
1984 - Orwell
Catch 22 - Heller
Philosophy: The Basics - Nigel Warburton
Thinking, Fast And Slow - Daniel Kahneman
The Selfish Gene - Dawkins

There's an obvious bias here towards books which I think encourage rational thought and critical thinking (Apart from Tale of Two Cities, which I just put in because it's my favourite novel - and it has some great themes of love, redemption and self-sacrifice)

In reply to DaveHK:

Animal Farm.

In reply to DaveHK:

Extreme Alpinism

In reply to DaveHK:
The Human Situation, Aldous Huxley.

In reply to DaveHK:

Stoner by John Williams.

Showing the lives of ordinary individuals is worth telling. A brilliant moving book.

Cannery Row by John Steinbeck. Another book that humanises you.

In reply to DaveHK:

Orwell's "Animal Farm" to every would-be SJW/left-wing activist.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


I know lots of people who really rate that but it just didn't grab me.

In reply to DaveHK:

His Dark Materials. Has the advantage that a 16 year old might actually read it.

In reply to guy127917:


We could just cut out the middle man and give them some Nietzsche.

In reply to DaveHK:
Hiroshima - John Hersey and to look at misogyny / male centric society in a more interesting way, Memoirs of a dutiful daughter - Simone de Beauvoir

Whether you would get 16 year olds to read these or any of your list may be a problem for a significant number. Perhaps we need a game for the phone/tablet etc

In reply to DaveHK:

Goldacre's Bad Science - An accessible introduction to the value of a rational scientific approach to the world and the real world difficulties in achieving it.
jk

In reply to DaveHK:

IF by Rudyard Kipling

In reply to planetmarshall:


Too late I'm afraid.

In reply to XXXX:


Yes, GCSE English managed to really suck the joy out of reading at that age. I only started reading more widely for enjoyment at University.

In reply to David Martin: Orwell's "Animal Farm" to every would-be right wing populist, speaker of 'common sense'

In reply to wbo:


You do a great disservice to a man who put his life on the line for his socialist ideals, gave up comfort and privilege, was shot through the neck and had his beliefs modified by bitter experience and cynical betrayal.

Orwell earned his viewpoint, however much you may disagree with it.

In reply to DaveHK:

Yorkshire Gritstone vol 1 & 2.

In reply to DaveHK:

One of the major challenges we as a society face is that young people are not watching enough science fiction as a result we are losing interest and confidence in science and engineering.

For my own kids I insisted that they watch Star Trek (original series, next generation, voyager and enterprise NOT the movies or discovery) and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I feel this gives an excellent grounding in all the major moral, philosophical and supernatural conundrums they may face in life as well as a basic confidence in the ability of science, engineering and appropriately directed superior weaponry to solve them.

In reply to pebbles:

Yes, I read that at age 20 and was riveted.

In reply to DaveHK:

To kill a Mockingbird. Atticus Finch standing up for what is right, despite the risks it involved.

In reply to Tom Valentine:


And 1984.

In reply to DaveHK:

On a vaguely related note, there's a campaign to get this into every primary school in Scotland. Start 'em young. https://www.johnmuirtrust.org/initiatives/the-lost-words

In reply to Stichtplate: I really doubt that Orwell wrote his novel as a critique of political correctness and 'snowflakes' rather than a damnation of totalitarianism.

In reply to wbo:


There is a certain irony about your post about people misunderstanding and misrepresenting Orwell and been misunderstood and misrepresented.

In reply to DaveHK:

Can I suggest the following for your list:

The Truth, by Terry Pratchett
and
The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, by Robert Tressell

Thanks

In reply to wbo:


A child could see what he was critiquing, Orwell himself was quite specific about it. It wasn't totalitarianism.

In reply to David Martin:

"Mein Kampf" to every Tory/ Conservative apologist.


Edit:
The importance of George Orwell as a writer lies in his questioning of institutions, power structures and political statements. The state, law, religion, charity, public schools, political parties and the media all came under his scrutiny. The morals behind individual beliefs were questioned in essays such as Raffles and Miss Blandish:

“People worship power in the form in which they are able to understand it. A twelve-year-old boy worships Jack Dempsey. An adolescent in a Glasgow slum worships Al Capone. An aspiring pupil at a business college worships Lord Nuffield. A New Statesman reader worships Stalin. There is a difference in intellectual maturity, but none in moral outlook” (1944).

In reply to Stichtplate:

Theron lies a debate and no doubt many a PhD.

In reply to David Martin:

No, to absolutely every school child.

In reply to RX-78:



+1 for this! I'd also add City of Thieves by David Benioff to your list.

In reply to neilh:


Is there a debate ? Wasn't Orwell quite clear that it was a satirical take on the Russian revolution and the rise of Stalin, which he saw as detrimental to the wider Socialist cause he was sympathetic to ?

In reply to krikoman:


You'd have to be quite politically blinkered to believe that guff.

In reply to Stichtplate:

I always took Animal Farm to be a critique of human nature. He might have said things about it being about the rise of Stalin and the Russian revolution, but if one looks at other revolutions and movements which start off with high ideals, human selfishness seems to spoil many of them in the end. A cheery thought.

Edit: If Animal Farm is worth reading when young, in my opinion it's as reminder to watch out for the darker parts of human nature when trying to change things. A reminder to hold those in power to account too, corruption and selfishness seem to be found in movements of every political hue.

In reply to Stichtplate:
I thought you said earlier it was nothing to do with totalitarianism....... so which one was it socialism or totalitarianism ..or both.

Laurie Lees trilogy ending in the Spanish civil war is more readable and in a way thought provoking on the same lines. But each to their own.

In reply to krikoman:



Jesus wept. You really havent a clue have you?

Animal Farm and 1984 for every socialist and socialist apologist.

In reply to Postmanpat:



Maybe they will gain a better understand of it than you obviously did.

In reply to DaveHK:

1984
The Road to Wigan Pier

(Am I alone in thinking 'Animal Farm' was dull, dreary and ham-fisted?)

PG Wodehouse - Jeeves and Wooster series

Graham Greene - Brighton Rock

In reply to DaveHK:

I'd like to add Alone in Berlin to the list.

Also not joking, the Harry Potter series addresses many of the issues discussed in more adult books in this thread.

In reply to Andy Hardy:


I thought about that for the social justice element but I'm afraid to say I think it's an unsubtle sledgehammer of a book. The message is important but the delivery poor.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


I've long maintained that Star Trek TNG provides a solid grounding in many philosophical issues.

In reply to Neil Henson:


I think that is likely to prove the least controversial and most widely acceptable suggestion.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:


In that case I nominate Excession by Iain M Banks. It is the future.....

In reply to Phil1919:

Combined rage, compassion and poetry

In reply to The New NickB:


Unlikely, but neither, it would appear, have you.

In reply to DaveHK:

Roger's profanisaurus

In reply to Postmanpat, krikoman, wbo, Stichtplate, The New NickB:

Enough of this tiresome historical factionalism, lads - it's ridiculous. But at least it demonstrates that overtly political books are not obviously destined to build a better society, and in any case if getting all 16 year olds to read Animal Farm were the way to build such a society then the UK should be paradise already.

To the OP - no single text can reach everyone: to suppose it can elevates the author to the status of god. Perhaps it's best to let teenagers find their own way.

In reply to DaveHK:

1984, possibly. But for me, as cringeworthy as it sounds, i personally find Alan Watts profound, his writings and lectures.

Nietzsche, Russell, Emmerson again, profound.

But to be fair, not really suited to a 16 year old, the Steinbeck novels are a good call, i remember reading of mice and men in school, i still remember it now.

Anything by Cormac Mccarthy, Mans search for meaning, Viktor Frankl, The railway man Eric Lomax- could make them see what life could be like at the extreme?! Pretty bleak but all brilliant.

In reply to DaveHK:

Calvin and Hobbes cover most essentials

In reply to Wicamoi:

I never thought it could. That would be ridiculously simplistic. Teenagers will always find their own way, that's what being a teenager is all about but that isn't to say it's a waste of time to offer guidance and suggestions.

In reply to GoneFishing111:



Man's Search for Meaning, Frankl +1

Nietzsche ... possibly best approached through Kaufmann's classic Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist.

In reply to DaveHK:

I didn't mean to suggest that this hadn't already occurred to you - if I remember correctly you are a teacher, so it would have been surprising if it had not. However, having trampled on someone else's suggestion, it was merely intended to be a polite way of declining to offer what you had asked for. I agree with you on Pirsig and Tressell too.

In reply to Wicamoi:


I only come here for the tiresome historical factionalism.

In reply to Wicamoi:
I take your point, but I am not making a political point. I’m questioning someone’s highly politicised take on books he appears not to have read.

I wouldn’t recommend Orwell at all for helping to build a better society, too politicised as you say. My favourite would be Homage to Catalonia, but as a perspective on history.

What book would I choose, I really don’t know, I suspect the world would be a better place if people just read more generally.

In reply to DaveHK:



No, it's White Saviour stuff now, Obama dropped a bomb with it in his Farewell Address.

In reply to DaveHK:

Birdsong - Sebastian Faulks (I read this at 16 and my life got flipped, turned upside down...)
The Earthsea Cycle - Ursula le Guin
The Player of Games - Iain M. Banks
The Regeneration Trilogy - Pat Barker
Underground Airlines - Ben Winters

In reply to DaveHK:

Beside the Ocean of Time by George Mackay Brown, lots of which basically centres around daydreaming in school and is just an absolutely wonderful book.

Also, Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy, which really has it all.

In reply to DaveHK:

Love All The People - Collected scripts of Bill Hicks

Demonstrates the power and weaponry of humour.

In reply to Tom Last:

Lovely writer, George Mackay Brown.

 

In reply to winhill:

There's always someone that comes along and spoils the party.

In reply to MG:

I was going to say that would be uncontroversial too but I'm going to wait to see what Obama has to say about it.

In reply to DaveHK:

Was on the GCSE reading list when I did mine. Made me hate the book more than you can imagine. Have found re-reading it in my 20s to be far more enjoyable,

In reply to bouldery bits:

The only book listed here to which I have contributed.

In reply to winhill:

Is it? Obama quoted Atticus Finch in his Farewell Address, but that seems to be where our realities diverge.

In reply to DaveHK:

'Europe: A History'

Just a reminder that Europe is an interesting, fluid and complicated place and we are somewhat on the edge of it.

In reply to DaveHK:

The discworld series by Terry Pratchet.

Religion: small gods

Finance: Making money.

Etc.

In reply to Postmanpat:

Ha ha, I was taking the piss FFS!

But such wide sweeping statements as Sticht's are as accurate / relevant as mine.

It the same old shite trundled out about JC taking us back to the days of Uncle Joe.

we've moved on may be your attitude should too.

In reply to DaveHK:

Thanks

In reply to Neil Henson:

More than that, it tells you that there a two sides to every story and you'll only get to truth if you listen to both

Quite agree it about it being essential reading

 

In reply to DaveHK:

Viz and Fat Freddys Cat

In reply to haworthjim:

For any budding grade-creep apologist

Seriously Calvin and Hobbes only suggestion here that a lot of 16yr olds would put down their phone and read. Those that do read grown-up books for leisure are going to be alright

 

In reply to Stichtplate:

If that was the case the book would have little long lasting impact. What does a fourteen year old care about a revolution from way back. It's powerful because its message applies to Mussolini as much as Stalin.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:
> If that was the case the book would have little long lasting impact. What does a fourteen year old care about a revolution from way back. It's powerful because its message applies to Mussolini as much as Stalin.

This book can be applied to any number of situations or contexts, but that is rather different than claiming it was written as a satire on any other events than those the author himself has stated.

In reply to Stichtplate:

Orwell claimed that , although it was primarily a satire on the Russian revolution, he did intend it to have a much wider application, presumably referring to the politics of revolution in general.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

True, but most satires from MASH to Catch 22 easily lend themselves to wider application. Animal farm contains characters depicting Trotsky and Stalin specifically. The time it was written, the author's past history and Orwell's own letters and interviews all make clear what his main target was.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

And that heroes can be found in unexpected places

In reply to Stichtplate:

True but you equated it with "the left" so for all the nuances in left wing politics you chose to paint the whole left wing, socialist, communists, marxist, etcist, with the same brush.

It was denigrating and you knew it. It also implies that we haven't learnt anything from the mistakes of the past or that we should never change our minds about anything.

Not so very long ago Aung San Suu Kyi was near enough a saint who was being prevented from saving all the persecuted souls in Burma, thing are a bit different now though.

In reply to krikoman:

Whoa there hoss....

I'm afraid you've grabbed tightly onto completely the wrong end of the stick. If you read through my posts on this thread you'll see that I've taken the position that Animal Farm was directly aimed at the corruption of the Russian revolution and the rise of Stalin. As far as I'm aware Orwell remained a staunch socialist until his last, wheezing breath. 

For what it's worth my own sympathies lie to the left of centre, while I remain dubious about much in British politics.

In reply to DaveHK:

Pilgrims Progress was a good read at 14 and I’m not a Christian. 

In reply to DaveHK:

Not for me; though as mentioned when discussing a different book on a different thread, having had to study it for O level English Literature might play a part here.

I found the themes of standing up for what is right despite what others do, say and think, and of people being of equal value no matter what the colour of their skin fairly obvious even as a 15-year old.  I agree that it was an important book when released and for years beyond in an America where racial prejudice was a way of life for far too many people, and even in a Britain where the tedious abuse-dressed-up-as-humour of Love Thy Neighbour was watched by a large audience; but surely there's another text more accessible and relevant to today's adolescents that explores the same themes?

Or perhaps it's like my grandparent's dining table that has been with me for twenty five years and is too modern to be antique but old to be worth anything and which I keep, repair and maintain for sentimental attachment (and because it's a good table); and so TKAM may be too modern to be classic literature, too old to speak to a new, young audience.

Or, and I'm prepared to accept this, it may just be me.

T.

In reply to Stichtplate:

You're right, I do apologise it was to Mr. Martin's comment "Orwell's "Animal Farm" to every would-be SJW/left-wing activist.".

The above should have been directed. Please accept my bumhole apologies.

 

In reply to krikoman:

No problem kriks.

In reply to krikoman:

I think it is well-established that Orwell was specifically referring to the extremes of left-wing politics.  His view that the lesson could be applicable wider than merely Stalinism really just makes the case that it isn't confined to events in Russia from 1917, and could be seen as a general theme of left-wing extremism.  Doesn't preclude application to right-wing politics, but it's pretty clear Animal Farm's subtext (claims to speak for and serve the masses, to remove hierarchy and power structures, to take from the elite masters and redistribute to the poor, and eventually the oppressed becoming the oppressors) is a far more salient lesson to the left than the right. 

That's not painting all lefties with the same brush.  Just asking for a bit of acknowledgement from the left that its own particular brand of thinking has a track record of leading off in a well-established direction.    

I think anyone who claims to be left-of-centre should be willing to own and accept that, rather than take offense to it.  It is the left that points the finger at, for example, white-privilege or that people today owe debts to groups who were discriminated against by previous generations.  If they want to push such concepts of collective historic guilt they should also accept that left-thinking carries a guilt of millions of dead too - and that this trajectory is an intrinsic part of where left-thinking can lead.  Denial, perceiving left-oppression as a bastardisation of left thinking or a result of the right-wing corruption, shows that lessons haven't been learnt and the likes of Animal Farm are still required reading.  The slide from idealism to genocide is so insidious even the perpetrators can be unable to acknowledge it.  The potential for it should be foremost in any activist's mind, and not taken offense to.

In reply to DaveHK:

It's OK for kids though, right?

In reply to David Martin:

It's true that Orwell was referring to the extremes, however your post wasn't "Orwell's "Animal Farm" to every would-be SJW/left-wing activist." It was vague and all encompassing,  "left wing activist" what does that mean? Anyone in Labour is surely a left wing activist by definition. As for SJW do you include environmentalists, feminist and civil rights groups in the broad brush painting?

I think I understand your sentiment (a warning), possibly though I'm only guessing, but the same could be said of right wing activist, capitalist or just about any other group you might care to mention, it works equally well.

In reply to Postmanpat:

You do realise that 1984 is a rather contested work don’t you? Orwell objected to its interpretation by the right, and it can be argued that it’s both a critique of fascism and of managerialism capitalism. 

Have a look at this - https://www.bl.uk/20th-century-literature/articles/nineteen-eighty-four-and...

In reply to krikoman:

Which I think is fair enough.  People do tend to stay quieter about the indiscretions of those marginally further to their side of the political spectrum than those marginally further in the opposite direction.  Probably because each political side views itself as being under attack, the vanguard movement of their own more extreme allies are more tolerated. 

This is exactly the sort of thing that allows people on both sides of the political fence to remain silent as extremes get more traction.  The lessons aren't just there to be learnt by someone else, or that those of us who consider ourselves moderate can safely say we aren't part of the extreme problem.  Hence why I feel all on the left, and even those who are simply progressively-socially active, should give it a read. 

The right would benefit from it too.  But the lessons, or scenarios portrayed, in Animal Farm are so clearly mirroring the results of left-wing extremism that it seems to be a text far more appropriate to the left.

In reply to Natalie Berry - UKC:

Hmm Kingfisher, Otter and Dandelion. Are any of these words lost?