阅读教给我的人生

来源 :阅读与作文(英语高中版) | 被引量 : 0次 | 上传用户:freebits
下载到本地 , 更方便阅读
声明 : 本文档内容版权归属内容提供方 , 如果您对本文有版权争议 , 可与客服联系进行内容授权或下架
论文部分内容阅读
   Nature. Nurture. Novels. If you grew up preinternet—we’re talking the 70s and 80s (“the olden days”, as my daughter calls it) —books brought you up, exerting as much influence on who you were and who you became as anything, or anyone. My school friends and I, some bookish, others not, all read ourselves into being and navigated our way through the wilds of childhood and adolescence with dog-eared novels as maps. There wasn’t much else to do. And you had to get your information from somewhere.
   Parents—laissez-faire baby boomers(helicopter parenting hadn’t been invented)—weren’t particularly interested and, if asked, would usually send you off in the wrong direction, to the wrong bookshelf, to something dusty—“Oh, I loved Vanity Fair at your age!” —not understanding our craving for fat books with silver-embossed covers, smelling of hormones and airports and America, page corners sticky from rereading, books that showed us dazzling new worlds—outside the suburb, beneath our skirts—and had all the best lines.
   At a time when TV was rubbish, the local library was a refuge and a computer game meant Pac Man, we read ferociously, without cynicism or snobbery, inhabiting every page, dream readers—first as kids, then under the duvet with a camping torch, then as young teens—and it influenced who we were, who we became.
   It’s all still there: we are what we read. The current teen generation will leave behind a huge digital footprint—endless mortifying photos, videos, texts—but we left little, a few red-eyed snaps, some scratched vinyl records and a long, beloved reading list spanning Malory Towers to Sweet Valley High, Adrian Mole to Anne of Green Gables.
   At a time when talking to children about emotions was seen as largely unnecessary—“Nope, life’s not fair,”distracted parents would shrug—books filled in childhood’s lonelier gaps, made us feel better, a little more understood.
   For sweet, brutal justice there was Roald Dahl—Veruca Salt had it coming. The sisterless had Little Women(“What would Jo do?”). For the fantasy of hearty sibling adventure on boats while we squabbled in the landlocked shires, The Famous Five—although the best thing about Enid Blyton was that she was so prolific, it meant you’d almost never run out of books. And if you were a latchkey kid, there was the happy possibility of stumbling into your very own secret garden, a patch of the rec behind the broken swing that could be yours, somewhere you could read undisturbed without being called a swot. When things got really bad—bullied at school, forced to share the dampest, smallest bedroom with your most annoying brother—well, at least you weren’t at Gateshead Hall with poor Jane Eyre.    When puberty hit, books could save your life, certainly save face. School sex education merged with worrying diagrams, forcing us to retreat to the warm bath of Judy Blume’s novels—Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret and Forever in particular. If Blume knew what crushes and periods and being 13 felt like, Jilly Cooper knew all about the dizzying possibilities of a riding crop and studded our dreams with Rupert Campbell-Black. In a paragraph, Jackie Collins could transport us from a grubby bunk bed to a Hollywood fourposter. While Shirley Conran, author of the unsurpassable Lace, introduced us to kick-ass career women.
   Word of mouth was everything. If your best mate didn’t rate it, it probably wasn’t worth reading. It was always about the story and characters, never the author, who usually looked as dreary as any other grownup in the jacket photo and who, like your parents, somehow got in the way of the experience. Cult books were heatedly passed from one girl to another, dissected late into a sleepover, held above our heads as we sunbathed covered in baby-oil in parks, borrowed, “lost”, reluctantly returned. Infinitely precious, they would tell you things that even your ballsiest big sister didn’t know, that your mother didn’t think you should know. So subversive, they were thrillingly never stocked in the school library. Virginia Andrews’Flowers in the Attic was one, a brilliantly implausible saga of an evil grandmother. Better still, it was part of a series, like all the best books. You could create collections. Nothing beat the sight of my sacred Andrews books—all bought with hard-earned newspaper round money—lined up on my bookshelf, in order.
   We read “proper” literature too, not giving a hoot about genres or critical acclaim, only about the book. It rocked or it didn’t. It was silent, or it spoke to us—still the best test I think. I read Jeanette Winterson’s Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit over and over, feeling forever changed by it. The Catcher in the Rye whispered in our ear, disruptively, like our cleverest, most cynical friend during assembly, crossing decades and continents: we knew all about phonies after all. Anne Frank was a heroine: her voice leapt off the page. And who didn’t want to deliver a lemony one liner like Elizabeth Bennet? Or wander the midsummer meadows in Dodie Smith’s I Capture the Castle?
   Of course, books enthrall and influence us all our lives but there is a rawness to reading when young, a blissfully entitled sense that the stories we read are ours, a world grownups, least of all parents, can’t enter. And still can’t: when I earnestly asked my 12-year-old son, a prolific reader and fan of the kind of quasi-violent teenage fiction I don’t really approve of, which books had inspired him (I was digging for R.J.Palacio’s Wonder or John Green’s The Fault in Our Stars), he looked away, shrugged,“Hmm, dunno really,” as if he’d never picked up a Kindle in his life.
其他文献
Believe it or not, your smart phone may be making you physically sick.   Scientists have found a condition called“cybersickness”, which they say is the digital[数字的]version of motion sickness[晕动病].  
Connie stared out the window, oblivious to the instructor.   I was her birth partner, and we were in the first of several birthing classes required by the hospital. Everyone except the earth mother-t
我不愿意睡在看不到星星的屋子里,我这辈子是伴着星星度过黑夜的。如果午夜梦醒时我望见的是漆黑的屋顶,我的眼睛会瞎的;我的驯鹿没有犯罪,我也不想看到它们蹲进“监狱”,听不到流水一样的鹿铃声,我一定会耳聋的;我一直呼吸着山野清新的空气,如果让我去闻汽车放出的那些“臭屁”,我一定就不会喘气了。  ——迟子建  被切成两半其实是件好事,如此才会理解世界上的一切人事物都不完整,才会知道这种不完整会带来悲伤。 
衣、食、住、行是人们基本的生活需求。“衣”位列四项基本需求之首,可见“衣着”对人们生活的重要性。由于“衣着”与人们的日常生活息息相关,与“衣着”有关的英语习语也就相伴而生。本期就让我们一起来了解一些有关“衣着”的习语吧!   1. throw down the gauntlet/glove挑战。在中世纪的欧洲,gauntlet是骑士戴的用皮革和金属片制作的铁手套。骑士向别人挑战时就摘下手套仍在地
【2016年高考作文备考热题】  阅读下面的材料,根据要求写一篇不少于800字的文章。  2015年高考分数线公布后,马云在微博写下一封信,信中表达了这样的意思:如果你考进了名牌大学,请用欣赏的眼光看看别人!如果你考不进名牌大学,请用欣赏的眼光看看自己!事实上,世上的很多事都是这样,我们不仅需要学会“欣赏他人”,也需要学会“欣赏自己”。  要求综合材料内容及含意,选好角度,确定立意,完成作文。。 
金立群,一个很多人可能还没听过的人,凭什么在波诡云谲的场面里,成为备受瞩目的亚投行首任行长?  他一头白发,这在盛行染发的国内政坛,显得有些特别。他和国内的许多官员不同,他是一个喝咖啡而不喝白酒的人。  翻阅金立群的简历,从任职世界银行中国董事办公室,中国财政部副部长,到亚洲开发银行副行长,中金公司董事长,可谓厚重。他懂得如何和西方人打交道,他的经历锻造了他的世界视野。  英国《金融时报》这样评价
工匠,两个简简单单的字,并不是我们所认为的那种机械重复的工作者。  许多人都喜欢瑞士的手表,这让许多人很不解。其实原因很简单,瑞士的制表匠有着“工匠精神”,他们对每一块手表都精心打磨,专心雕琢,他们并不仅仅是为了自身的利益而去制做手表,他们从内心由衷地喜欢这项工作,追求精致。制表的时候,专注、严谨,一丝不苟,充满耐心,这种精神代代传承,也就把这门技术传到了今天,这也是瑞士表历史悠久的原因。  说到
珍妮和爷爷在巴黎街头闲逛。突然,他们听到有人大喊大叫,走近一看,原来是一位顾客在对鞋匠发牢骚,说鞋子哪里哪里不合脚不好看。鞋匠平静地听着顾客的抱怨,等顾客停了下来,对她表达了深深的歉意,并答应一定把问题解决好。  前面有家咖啡店,爷爷和珍妮走进去,准备喝杯咖啡。一位招待向他们走来,经过另一位男顾客时,跟他说请他把椅子向里挪点儿,好让他走。男顾客莫名其妙地对着招待大发脾气,就是不挪一挪他的椅子。  
NASA will unveil a potentially exciting discovery on Thursday (July 23) regarding the search for alien planets. In a teleconference at 12 p.m. EDT (1600 GMT) tomorrow, the space agency will announce n
与学生探讨该以怎样的认知方式去面对可能越来越多的公共事件,  学生们该如何审视自己的思考视角  2015年12月8日7时至10日12时,北京启动了史上首个空气重污染红色预警,中小学停课。停课的前一晚,有学生说,“我今天比过年都高兴。”“北京的学生们今天仿佛接到了牛×的录取通知书。”还有毗邻北京的学生抱怨“明天雾霾红色预警,北京学生放假3天,然而我们……呵呵”。然而,“这是一次不得已的停课。短暂的欢