telespallabob

Recommended, I find the judgment on the review quite simple. I’ve read the first two volumes; I’ll wait a bit for the third. I don’t make definitive judgments, but I must say that moving from this one to the next has been an increase in intensity. P.S. You did well to take a break from Kierkegaard, not because he doesn’t deserve it. Quite the opposite. I greatly appreciate his thought and I’m convinced it should be read in its own way and at an extremely slow pace. With calm and patience. Perhaps more than once.

@Fedeee, "Anyway, if teachers make students read Jack F at school, it's because they think students can't afford anything else," your exact words. Based on what principle do you say something like that? It's not true that the blame lies with the teachers, and it's not true that they only force students to read certain books. I remember my high school Physics teacher who, at the end of the year, would give us a list of optional books to read. I wonder why everyone showed up with at least two books read (one year I read five). You see, a teacher is not obliged to make their students read. The love for reading can be cultivated without being forced; if you don't understand these things, the fault isn't mine. And then don't come telling me that teenagers have a sense of responsibility: they’re confused, disoriented, routinely left to fend for themselves; it’s no surprise they idolize incompetent teachers and send mommy and daddy to whine to professors with their marble balls instead of having the guts! And I could see the confirmation of this in the student representative elections. I saw a guy who made a list, him and an attractive girl, for the Provincial Student Council. He said only, "It's pointless for me to make a program. There's no sense in making promises," and she was completely mute. They got voted by three-quarters of the school; I was the only one to publicly raise my voice against this disgrace. @Bartleboom. "The Bible says it too, damn it!", I didn't expect such a phrase from someone of your cultural stature. I find it simply disgraceful. So, since the Bible says so, let’s stone women and conduct human sacrifices. Don’t be trivial and refrain from such quotes that don’t cast you in a good light, believe me. The idea that reading Moccia at 12 leads to Céline at 18 is practically impossible; I believe it’s downright impossible for that to happen to anyone decent. I remind you that if you walk down the street many will add "Dion" to the name Céline, mostly this will happen, and it’s degrading for a “civilization” that considers itself so superior as to “export democracy” as if it were a box of diapers. A person becomes an adult when they think like an adult; the first time I was called that, I was 11. Let me clarify what I meant by “the DUTY of a healthy society to remove childish theories and ways to already make him an adult”: my thought does not involve indoctrinating the person. An ideology shouldn’t need to be explained; one simply needs to guide them to think consciously and intelligently in the society they live in. I believe it is the teacher’s duty to shake the kid just out of middle school and teach him what a pile of crap this planet and the people who live on it are. Does it cause trauma? I believe that’s the minimum; in fact, I think if such a thing happens, the intellect and the new spirit of the young person will allow them to absorb it without great psychoanalytic support for the theories of today’s phony genius, namely Sigmund Freud.

I don't give you 5 for that "The Mean Machine," gorgeous record.

A decent review. Personally, I hate them; I know someone who went there. Of course, they came back home satisfied.

Better that you did it, damn it! Good record, just a moment under the second.

Doesn't it end well? Good to know. So, from your analysis, which I consider extremely accurate, a question arises: if it has all these insights that you mention and presents itself as an educational work, why is it categorized as a story for "children" and almost denied to an adult audience, except for that specific group of educators and psychologists? Should I think that it hasn't been understood and is being used in a distorted way (just like what happens with Matt Groening's creations, often offered and presented in a children's and youth category when they have cultural, political, social, and mental content that deserves prime-time recognition, as FOX does in the U.S.)?

With "This book is offered up as fodder for fourteen-year-olds," I was referring to the one in the review.

@CPT, "The Little Prince" shouldn't be read at the age considered "appropriate," and you've highlighted this (I hate this concept: an appropriate age. There are no books suitable for specific ages. There exists a capacity for understanding that is always valid; even the notion that children should read stories with happy endings is something I dislike. I prefer "Marcovaldo" to "The Little Prince": something more immersed in reality, immediate, with smooth language and fully steeped in the drama and perversion of life. This book is offered up to fourteen-year-olds with no culture and logic, precisely for the level of superficiality (and I will respond to Fedeee about this later). Amici and Moccia are two versions of the same coin: that sick and incapable outlook of my peers, and unfortunately, there are many adults leading by this example and social decline. @Fedeee, is Jack Frusciante still good for a casual read at 14? That's a flawed and very dangerous line of reasoning. Here, you start from an assumption: is it good for the new high school student to have casual readings? That's something criminal, believe me. At that moment of shock and physical upheaval, it is the DUTY of a healthy society to remove childish theories and ways to make them already adults, capable of critical analysis and aware of reality. Otherwise, what happens is that students find themselves at the mercy of newspapers, given that they shove them in your face until you read them, and the famous "student representatives." I've seen people offering populist programs or empty thoughts to their voters, yet they managed to do so with a mesmerizing ability (the same as the books by Moccia, Brizzi, and the like) that people voted for them, leading to the downfall of their school and, with it, their generation. It’s easy to manipulate others’ minds at that age, and it happens precisely because we are convinced they should remain "anchored to their age." They should have intelligence and critical spirit, but instead, they are definitively condemned after the burden of elementary and middle school.

Dear Feedee, you don't grasp the problem. Let me explain it to you: this book is made precisely for those raised on "mocciate" and their teachers, who do not impart a real love for literature. They recommend this stuff to their students, convinced it is of superior quality and allows them to reach higher standards. It’s not true. There is no literary culture; unfortunately, we are a generation that must be provided with standard books and programs to adapt and massify them. There is a belief that one must read only for certain age groups based on the absurd theories of childhood experts, like "Il Piccolo Principe", a book I have never read in my life and for which I am tremendously proud! Fortunately, at my home, instead, they put "A Farewell to Arms" and Emily Dickinson in my hands.

The high school student does not consider himself the master of the world and will never be: he is a silly being manipulated by social standing and the wallet; he has not experienced the horror of life and cannot intellectually handle a discourse. He revels in his own thought and claims the right to have learned something in fifth grade, while in truth, he is left to his own idiotic mentality, which has stagnated at 11 years old. He adapts to crap at 25, and it will be too late. Now condemned to ruin and precarity. We are a sick society, a child of illusions, thanks to the type of books that the great Italian teaching forces us to read, like this one.

R.I.P.