What it boils down to, is that I really hate rules.

It may surprise those of you who still respect my integrity (which is likely not many of you) to find out that I sparknotes’d my way through a lot of high school.

“But Grace! You love books! You read so quickly!”

Don’t worry, I’ve heard that one a lot. (Also don’t worry, I have also already apologized to most of my high school teachers for being such a nightmare.) I do love books, I am a voracious reader, and I do tend to consume them the way my little brother consumes pizza rolls - the entire jumbo bag at one time. (Except I don’t leave the empty bag in the freezer. Anymore.) Here’s the other thing though, more than I love reading, I hate being told what to read. (Corollary, I hate being told what to do in general.) It ruins the experience and I end up missing most of any historical or literary value because I am in such a rush to get it read in order to tell people I read it. Which entirely defeats the purpose of reading and creates a self fulfilling prophecy - I don’t want to read it because I’ve decided I won’t like it, I read it to appease someone else and it's a miserable experience and therefore I don’t like the book.

I can’t really think of a lot of people who will tell you they enjoyed all their required reading in high school, and I can think of a whole lot of people who have really hated reading for school because they don’t really enjoy reading outside of school.I blame required reading lists for a lot of that. I am all for reading in schools, at home, on the bus, in the park, at the doctor, with fox, in a box, to a hen, in a pen...everywhere. There is no wrong place to read - just the wrong books to be reading. When I taught, the one time during the day that I could count on my class to keep fidgeting and talking to a reasonable minimum without any kind of behavior reinforcement or reminder was story time. Ask them to read a one page story in the required reader? It was pretty much like I asked them to walk across broken glass barefoot.

As I recently mentioned I didn’t read To Kill A Mockingbird until late in college and I loved it when I finally got around to it. I didn’t read Jane Eyre, and had no plans to until someone I really respected put it in front of me and told me to read it. It took me a year to get through it, but I enjoyed it and now its one I go back to frequently. Huck Finn though? Pretty much turned me off Mark Twain. Jane Austen? Please ask me to walk across broken glass instead of reading that (loving the BBC miniseries is not the same as loving the books so just don’t go there with me.) East of Eden makes my top 10 book list, but Of Mice and Men? Just take me out to a nice spot in the woods and shoot me.

Ultimately what has distinguished the classics that I really do respect, admire, and love and the books that make me roll my eyes and pretend to throw up are whether I met them on my own terms on under someone elses'. So here’s my crazy idea, let’s stop telling kids what to read. Let’s stop telling them what is valuable in literature and what is not. Let’s give them books lists, and extra hours in the library. Let’s share with them podcasts, YouTubers, and author interviews. Let’s stop telling them what’s above and beyond their ability and support them as they can while they find that out for themselves Read short stories, poems, non-fiction, childrens books, no matter how old they are. Let’s find out what they want to read about, and value the new literature they bring us, and jump at the chance to talk about any book they’re reading - even if it is Twilight or Captain Underpants.

Boots also objects to reading lists. And rules. And work. Pretty much anything that does not revolve around him.

PS - I don't hate all books lists in general, they can be super useful but lets not confuse a curated list of books that have a similar theme, or thing in common with required school reading lists.

Like all of the internet, I too have feelings about a sequel for To Kill a Mockingbird

Confession, I didn't read "To Kill a Mockingbird" until I was 20. I distinctly remember the disbelief that the main campus library didn’t have a copy available, and the amusement that the one copy available on campus was in the law library. It must have been early in the fall because I know I sat in the open, sunny, and peeling windowsill of my dorm room to read most of it. I loved every page, and I know that’s due in large part to  reading it under my terms, as opposed to those of a high school reading list.

I remember watching Gregory Peck live up to every expectation I had of Atticus Finch later that year. On the long Amtrak trip from Salem to San Francisco I was anything but disappointed with the film adaptation, and I immediately went back for a second reread of the book right away. It was just as good the second time.

I don’t know what else there is out there to say about "To Kill a Mockingbird." For over 50 years it has been reviewed, beloved, compared, analyzed, critically examined and dissected, and passed on to readers of all ages. It’s book that has the magic of reaching out and grabbing readers of all ages - and I don’t feel the need to review it for you all here, other than to say go read it. Don’t be intimidated by its literary legacy, or status as a modern classic. At the end of the day it’s a book. A lovely one, one that indulges in the simple pleasure of a well written story. I had plenty of reservations, haughty uninformed opinions, and plenty of contrarianism about the book before I read it; which is how I ended up reading it at 20, rather than earlier on. There are few books out there that match the enjoyment and satisfaction of reading To Kill a Mockingbird.

This is why I can’t get excited about the announcement that Harper Lee is writing a follow up. Bear with me - this may be more of those reservations, haughty opinions, and contrarianism - but I’m worried and disappointed. Worried because "To Kill a Mockingbird" has long been set in literary canon and  standing up to is no small feat, let alone standing up to it as something that continues in the same  narrative. Think about the last chapter of "The Deathly Hallows" - where JK Rowling  attempts to wrap up the narrative 20 years in the future. It was terrible. Most fans will tell you they pretend that chapter was never written because it diminished and dulls the trials and triumphs that came before it.  Rowling’s second wind of success came from a pseudonym and a genre vastly departed from her first go at writing, an endeavor that was totally divorced from the JK Rowling name.  

I’m disappointed because I so love the fact that "To Kill a Mockingbird" is such a beautiful moment of writing. It has a clear and powerful message without getting mired in self righteousness, or lecturing condescendingly. Nor does it sacrifice any literary value to be moralistic and preachy. My instinct is that a continuation will diminish the impact and meaning of one of my favorite novels, in the same way that Rowling’s last chapter tarnished the whole Harry Potter series.  I can’t help but wonder why Lee would choose a sequel and not a separate book altogether to say what more she has to say.

Perhaps I’m not giving Harper Lee enough credit - perhaps “Go Set a Watchman” will soar above expectations and set itself as a second piece of modern literary canon. *Perhaps my concern isn't Lee's writing at all, but the pedestal that has been built for "To Kill A Mockingbird." Whether it's the one I've built myself, or one constructed by the media and readers at large, Lee's first book looms like a titan on it, and it would be a far fall. Regardless of authorial intent, these constructions outside of it put future books in a precarious place of bringing down a beloved classic thereby tarnishing the whole story. I don't intend to blame Lee for this, as it is hardly her fault that people love her writing, but it is likely the root of my worry in seeing a sequel published.* I hope I’m wrong, I sincerely hope that like my first reading of “To Kill a Mockingbird” Lee’s words manage to dissuade me of all reservations a second time.

* Portion between *'s added in at a later time than original posting.

Welcome!

Hello new friends and old!

Mr. Boots Willoughby and I have decided its high time we publish our thoughts on books online. (I say "decided" with the lightest touch - it is not without the encouragement of many other that we forge on in this adventure).

Boots is an almost 5 month old tuxedo kitten who could give Dennis a run for his money in holding the title "The Menace." He prefers chewing on, and napping on, books to reading them. His favorite places are on my lap, in the clean towels corner of the linen closet, and the top of his kitty castle. He will try any and all people food at least once, including salsa and corn chips although his favorite is Lucky Charms.

I am 24, living in Saint Louis, and basically living every single dramedy that has come out in the last 2 years about aimless millennial 20 somethings trying to navigate the difficulties of adulthood. So obviously I'm starting a literary blog with my cat, because can't you see that happening on Girls or New Girl? I've always been an avid, and opinionated reader. I'm loud, slightly (if not totally) obnoxious, I can be pretty vulgar, and when I'm not reading, I'm probably hate tweeting a Netflix binge or world politics.

If you don't like spoilers, Harry Potter, inappropriate stories, bad jokes, YA fiction references, and scathing criticism I advise you read with caution - cause that's basically a summation of what we plan to do around here. We're calling it the "not so classics" because I make no promises on the quality of literature - there will be much bodice ripping, and absurd mystery novels interspersed (hopefully) with a few classics.