UKRM Book Club

Get 'em out of the shed, bloke.

 

nowt wrong with that, as such

and nowt wrong with that either, if it's admitted (I do it all the
time)

but that's inexcusable.

 

I had some brass band music on CD, 'cos I rather like the blare and
enthusiasm, apart from the tune itself. But the ex-wiff kept all of
them. However, we now have "Brassed Off" on DVD, because I really
like the film and Elly had never seen it, neither did she really
appreciate the social implications of the pit closures.

I've also been to the big competition that travels around the
villages, depicted in "Brassed Off" and it truly is an experience.
Now I have to take Elly, which will be another experience altogether.

 

You inserted "not" into the question thus altering its meaning.

 

Hmm. Janet and John books are designed as starters, to get people reading
and then move on to harder things.

The Sun is designed to suck you in and keep you there. Though if moving
on means picking up the Express or Mail, then the Sun may be a better
option!

 

thought you might like to know that theres an announcement on
uk.local.herts about a brass concert in Hitchin.

--
Adie
(replace spam with nickname to reply)

UKRM FAQ: http://www.ukrm.net/faq/

Triumph 955iSS / GSF600 bandit
MRO#11 BOTAFOF#7 BOTAFOT#130 DIAABTCOD#17 MIB#24 YTC#16 BOB#15 ex-UKRMMA#22

 

Ben Blaney says...

Hardly jumping up and down, I saw an obvious mistake from someone who
claims to be on a higher level, I brought him back down to earth with my
comment.

I honestly don't believe Simon is presenting a good argument. It is full
of pretentious 'I'm intellectually superior because I read better books
than you' willy-waggling. There is nothing in what he says that will
convince me to change my views on what books I should, or should not
read. You're doing nothing to help me change my mind either, merely
enforcing my opinions of Simon's and your own literary snobbery.

I read for pleasure, therefore I choose books I can lose myself in and
smile about, rather then having to think too hard. I have other things
in my life to stimulate my, admittedly limited, intellect.

 

Champ says...

If you can call being vastly outnumbered and failing as "holding off the
HP fans with one arm behind your back". Get real.

 

Well, going forward, I'll literally be watching it each thursday.

 

Ah. Not intentionally. I mis-read your post.

So:

Because someone interested in literature and not concerned with
English teaching might be interested in thinking and ideas. And if
they were, they would quickly come across Richard Hoggart.

 

But you didn't present any criticism apart from pointing out a typo.
Which rather undermines your case.

It's not, actually.

And for what it's worth, I'd rather read that kind of willy-waggling
that willy-waggling willy-waggling, iyswim.

 

True. And in Potter, the plot, concepts and characterizations are all
amazingly, pathetically simple. So much so that I would have thought
that they would have bored most people to death - whether they're
reading out of laziness or whatever.

The truth is the Potter-fans fell for the hype, can't admit it, and
are frantically trying to justify their own positions.

 

Both enjoyable, imo.

 

Being resistant to work is more than just not working. Being disposed
to idleness is more than simply being idle.

These are not subtle distinctions, so I am confident of you grasping
them eventually.

 

Ben Blaney says...

Where isn't it? Every word I've seen written points towards some kind of
superiority trip. Every post you, darsy and Simon have made just tries
to reinforce the whole myth that you are better people because you don't
read books that are easy to read, which is of course total bollocks.

 

.....an English teacher....

 

So there's a continuum - being easy on oneself, being a bit lazy and
being lazy. I accept the first, take issue with the third. Simple
semantics.

FWIW, I wouldn't just draw the line at HP. I don't accept that any
adult who occasionally dips into Peter Pan, Wind in the Willows or
Winnie the Pooh is necessarily either stupid or being lazy. They could
just be taking it easy.

 

well, no - society needs stupid people - to work in Starbucks, for
example.

me too (I enjoy Ian Rankin, for example) - the problem with the
Potteristi, is that they won't admit that they're reading shite, and
think what they're reading is actually "good".

*ding*

 

Every post that darsy, Simon and I have made just tries to support our
argument that Harry Potter books are shit reading for adults. If you
read other meaning in them, that's down to you.

 

what nonsense - all I've said is that Harry Potter is a kid's book,
and adults reading it is stupid or lazy. If you just admitted that it
was a kids book and that you can't be bothered reading anything more
grown up, then that'd be an end to it.

If person A reads better books than person B, it doesn't make person A
"better people"; it merely makes them better read.