Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazrin
The background on what adoption was like is an area where I have been intentionally ignorant. The hints about what could have been, and what had been for Anne with her foster parent's/guardians, were bad enough. I'm sure it would be interesting in a morbid and educational way but when reading an old favorite like this, I don't really want to delve too deep into parts of it. This re-read and discussion has already taken more of the luster off the book than I expected going into it.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4691mls
Yeah, I know what you mean. I don't normally participate in the book clubs but came into this thread because of my memories of reading the Anne series. I probably should have stayed out of here and just continued to remember it fondly.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
These comments illustrate why I would never nominate a book that I loved unreservedly as a child. I can and do reread childhood favorites, and I can see flaws in them with adult eyes, but I love them anyway and don't want to lay them open to criticism or have to defend them.
|
I have to admit that I’m good either way. If an old favorite doesn’t live up to my memory but there are interesting things to discuss about it, it’s a different kind of fun. Some old favorites are impermeable to criticism; I think I even said something upthread about reading them with dual eyes, which is double the fun. Love does not alter.
The Scarlet Pimpernel was an example of the second.
I’ll tell a story about myself. I have a nephew in his mid-20s with whom I read the Harry Potter books as they came out; we enjoyed them mightily and discussed them at length. But he told me that he was rereading them with his friends and he was pointing out all the flaws, inconsistencies, discontinuities and so forth that he and I delighted in identifying back when he was a kid and his friends were furious with him.