Studying began, and with it - reading books, and often - on a voluntary-compulsory basis. Is it correct?
The mother who wrote to us believes that parents, trying to captivate the child with books, achieve the completely opposite result.
My children love to read, they can stay up late with an interesting book. I am glad, but I do not make of this an object of pride or cult. Moreover, I do not know any special secrets that help instill a love for literature, and I am not even sure that they exist. But I know for sure what can turn away from books once and for all.
First, parents teach their children to read - almost at the age of three, not for school, just so that they can. Then the terror begins with books: read one page, and then - a cartoon. One chapter - and then go for a walk.
Books become an unpleasant obligation, a tasteless soup before ice cream: a computer game, a cartoon, a walk. There can be no question of any pleasure; I would rather finish it without delving into the meaning, retell it, if required, and leave.
There is a chance that the book will be so suitable and so interesting that the child will love to read in spite of everything, but it is extremely small.
Lack of personal example
My friend after school hardly read a single book. And at school I was not a fan of literature. There is a plus in this - she watched Anna Karenina with curiosity, terribly worried about how it would end there.
But in general, she is unbearably bored of spending time with a book.
At the same time, she seeks to impose this form of leisure on her daughter.
Just for the sake of some unknown tick: here, all cultured people have books at home and you, daughter, read it. It’s more honest and correct, it seems to me, to try to understand book magic on my own, albeit at the same time as a child. Read aloud, read together, worry, laugh and understand at least a little why we generally need to let fictional stories from the lives of fictional people pass through ourselves.
Imposing favorite children's books
Mothers who read voraciously are also not a guarantee of hereditary love. Especially if they have a strong belief that the grass used to be greener and the books are better. They buy "Jen Eyre" for their daughters, and for the sons of "The Three Musketeers" they don't want to hear about some Harry Potter or Percy Jackson.
One day I came across an emotional discussion of books in a parent group.
One of the mother said that she gave the child her adored in childhood "Robinson Crusoe", and he returned it with the words that it was boring. The indignant mother undertook to reread it - and agreed.
What started here! What fervent indignation the others erupted. Classics are inviolable, eternal and not subject to criticism. Let him read, work. Yes, not drunkenly, not under a blanket with a flashlight - but good books.
This prejudice does not work for love, but it appears only when you enthusiastically dive headlong into the book world, and do not swim from side to side on the whistle.
Gaidar, Mine Reed, Nikolay Nosov and Daniel Defoe are good, but they are not the only books in the world.
And it is better to give them together, and not instead of modern literature. After all, the love of books is a very personal path, and it is better to start it with your child.