Reading Rainbow's Kickstarter campaign is close to having raised $5,000,000.
Can we acknowledge what an absurd waste of money, resources, and energy, in the name of misplaced nostalgia, this is? Can we say that this money should have been better spent paying actual teachers, not nostaglia-based celebrities, a respectable, living wage?
Where is the evidence that portraying reading as a fun, colorful, rainbow-filled arena of lighthearted happiness and catchy tunes increased intellectual functions? That is after all what is important about reading--as a means of sharpening one's intellect.
Reading and books themselves are useless except as vessels through which an intellect can reach out to another one in a sustained, composed way that face-to-face interaction can't accomplish in quite the same way.
To me it's just the most glaring example of this trend of intellectual capabilities being so poorly understood and underutilized in the public sphere that they have to be packaged as shiny and fun.
Reading is not fun, science is not fun, literature is not fun--they are serious methods of inquiry. Not everything has to be fun and 'engaging,' and the fact that this Reading Rainbow redux money-grab has gotten such universal commendation is a sad testament to the decaying life of the mind. An intellectually vigorous country would not need this, and would recognize it for the claptrap that it is.
Of course, people will say that Reading Rainbow and things of its disreputable ilk are necessary introductions to the world of adult thought for children. This is wrong--there's no reason not to speak as logically and clearly and sensibly about intellectual matters to children as possible. Introducing songs and rainbows and whatever assorted ephemera Levar Burton feels necessary to promote 'love' of books distract children from the point, which is to create serious, thoughtful, articulate adults and citizens. John Stuart Mill learned Latin and Greek grammar at age four--that might be a bit excessive, but it shows how far we've fallen.
Not everything has to be, or should be, fun, or a source of love, creativity, inspiration, and, that most dreaded and vile of non-words, passion. Let's do a better job of showing children examples of what seriousness is, and what role literacy has in promoting a less insane future.
Can we acknowledge what an absurd waste of money, resources, and energy, in the name of misplaced nostalgia, this is? Can we say that this money should have been better spent paying actual teachers, not nostaglia-based celebrities, a respectable, living wage?
Where is the evidence that portraying reading as a fun, colorful, rainbow-filled arena of lighthearted happiness and catchy tunes increased intellectual functions? That is after all what is important about reading--as a means of sharpening one's intellect.
Reading and books themselves are useless except as vessels through which an intellect can reach out to another one in a sustained, composed way that face-to-face interaction can't accomplish in quite the same way.
To me it's just the most glaring example of this trend of intellectual capabilities being so poorly understood and underutilized in the public sphere that they have to be packaged as shiny and fun.
Reading is not fun, science is not fun, literature is not fun--they are serious methods of inquiry. Not everything has to be fun and 'engaging,' and the fact that this Reading Rainbow redux money-grab has gotten such universal commendation is a sad testament to the decaying life of the mind. An intellectually vigorous country would not need this, and would recognize it for the claptrap that it is.
Of course, people will say that Reading Rainbow and things of its disreputable ilk are necessary introductions to the world of adult thought for children. This is wrong--there's no reason not to speak as logically and clearly and sensibly about intellectual matters to children as possible. Introducing songs and rainbows and whatever assorted ephemera Levar Burton feels necessary to promote 'love' of books distract children from the point, which is to create serious, thoughtful, articulate adults and citizens. John Stuart Mill learned Latin and Greek grammar at age four--that might be a bit excessive, but it shows how far we've fallen.
Not everything has to be, or should be, fun, or a source of love, creativity, inspiration, and, that most dreaded and vile of non-words, passion. Let's do a better job of showing children examples of what seriousness is, and what role literacy has in promoting a less insane future.
