Gone Girl
discussion
Is this appropriate for a 13-year-old advanced reader?
R raided would not have a 13yr old read this I could't even finished it.
Lobstergirl- Thanks for the voice of sanity.
You're welcome!I will add that I grew up in a very, VERY sheltered home. My mother stayed at home. Our days were monitored down to the minute, usually. We went to church every Sunday. We were almost never allowed to watch TV; maybe an hour or two a week. But my mother knew I was a voracious reader, and encouraged it, and she never once advised me not to read a particular book. She never read the book first to see what it was about. I have no idea if she knew I was reading The Exorcist or similar books. If she knew she probably wouldn't have approved, but at the same time I don't think she would have tried to take the book away. (Yes, she would have when I was 10, but not when I was 13.)
A lot of the descriptions I read for NA books are way more disturbing than anything in Gone Girl - relationships where a boy or young man mistreats or abuses a girl or young woman yet she goes back to him, can't get him off her mind, has to be with him - and the books seem to write approvingly of this situation, and the readers seem to like it and expect it.Frankly a 13 year old would be better off reading Gone Girl than any of that crap I just mentioned, because in Gone Girl the married couple is in their 20s or 30s, and a 13 year old wouldn't be able to relate to them, whereas they could probably imagine themselves in an abusive relationship with some young hot guy.
You can always see if there is info on commonsensemedia.org. They break down all the "controversy."
commonsensemedia.org doesn't have anything for 'Gone Girl.'I've already looked for it.
It's actually been around two years since this thread was first posted by me. The person I'm thinking about getting this book for is now 15 years old, so this thread can probably be closed now.But I actually want it to stay open. There were some very good comments on it, and more opinions will be appreciated.
Kate wrote: "A few titles I might recommend to a 13yo advanced reader would include: -Fallen Series by Lauren Kate
-The Fault in Our Stars
-Aurora Sky series by Nikki Jefford (mature YA)
-Splintered Series by..."
But those aren't REALLY advanced I mean they're advanced for like an 11 year old but not for an 8 the grader. Also aren't they a little mainstream. I mean isn't part of the fun reading and having your own secret world. That's why I like to read. Not a lot of people had read TFIOS until the movie. Which ended some peoples secret world.
No, no 13 year old should read a book about a crazy borderline personality disorder woman.
I don't think any of Gillian Flynns books would be appropiate for a 13 yr old. And Gone Girl is the tamest!
NO! I'm 20 years old, and some of the material was too much for me.
Breanna wrote: "NO! I'm 20 years old, and some of the material was too much for me."Exactly. I don't know what to make of some people here who think otherwise. Yes, it's their choice what to let their children read. But some here make it sound like parents don't have the right to censor a 13 or even a 16 year old's reading material, movies, etc.
I think they not only have that right, it is their responsibility. Otherwise why would the teens even need parents, if they could "raise" themselves?
No. Absolutely not. There is a lot of violence, discussions of sex and adultery, and tons of swearing. It is very adult. As has been said before, if it were a movie (which it will be soon), I'd expect it to be "R".
Oh, but these people think R rated movies are A-ok for 13 year olds!! Seriously?
No sex, adultery, or swearing in books for 13 year olds? That rules out much of Shakespeare and mythology - including the Bible. Not to mention a pile of other classics that they'll come across in English class. At that age I read "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Dracula" at school. My irresponsible atheist parents insisted that I read through the Bible when I was around ten as part of my education. My kids aren't old enough for that yet, but I have started reading Greek mythology with the six year old.
I guess it's only a matter of time before she ends up as a drug addicted prostitute mumbling about Persephone.
It boggles my mind that there are people out there attempting to control what their 16 year olds are reading.
It boggles my mind that some parents DON'T control what their 16 year olds are reading. Do you think 50 Shades of Grey would be appropriate for a 16 year old to read?
You probably do - and that's your choice. It's an irresponsible choice - made probably because you don't want to be percieved by your 16 year old child (and I emphasize CHILD - because that's what a 16 year old still IS) as being a non-cool parent.
And do you really not see the difference between Gone Girl and To Kill a Mockingbird or The Bible? Seriously? Or are you just trying to be confrontational here? Because if you think they are the same as far as objectionable material, I think you are delusional.
My feeling on 50 shades is that it's supposed to be a crappy book, and it doesn't interest me. However, I would not forbid my 16 year old to read it. I would hope that my kids would have better things to read, but I am not my kids, and their tastes may differ from my own. Nor, in the end, could I stop my 16 year old from reading 50 shades if they wanted to do so. As it is a book available in the public library for anyone to read, and I do not think it is reasonable to supervise 16 year olds in the public library.
Your insistence that those that disagree with you are simply trying to be "cool" is incredibly dismissive. This has nothing to do with trying to be "cool". I believe that children should be encouraged to read widely. I believe that books don't hurt people. I believe in discussing issues rather than banning content. And, as far as I know, there is no evidence that allowing children to choose their own reading material causes them any harm whatsoever. Your assertion that my choices are "irresponsible" has no backing except for your own opinion.
Of course I see a difference between Gone Girl and To Kill a Mockingbird and the other books I mentioned. But the difference between Gone Girl and those other books has to do with the quality of literature not the number of swear words or the amount or the nature of the sexual activity described therein. And while I hope that my children read and enjoy literature, I hope that they will read and enjoy some less literary novels as well. Just as I do.
Fustian - not trying to be rude or dismissive. It just floors me what people let their children do. Children grow up so fast anyway, I just would rather them come in contact with rough sex, F-bombs and other "adult" things later rather than sooner.
I know I can't stop them if they decide to read things like this - I would just not encourage it.
I also would hope that the family values we have instilled in them since birth would come into play and since we have taught them that adultery and gruesome murder are not things we condone maybe they will not choose to read about them.
If we as parents have taught them well, then there is no need to supervise a 16 year old in a public library. They will make appropriate choices on their own without your constant supervision.
The being cool part - I guess what I mean is - maybe non-confrontational. I know as parents we have to choose our battles. But I think that children need limits to be set based on their age and maturity level, and who else to do the dreaded job but us parents?
Children should definitely read widely - fun, brainless books and literary classics. Just supervised by their parents while doing it.
Books can hurt people if the person reading those books do not fully understand how to interpret the material.
You're assuming a lot here. I'm a lot of things, but non-confrontational is not one of them. I have no problems setting limits for my kids. (Ask my kids about my zero screen-time policy!) However, I don't believe that this limit *should* be set, so I don't set it. Do you see the difference? Just because I disagree with you about the necessity of this particular rule does not mean that I am unable to set rules in general.I have no interest in pushing my kids to read books that are beyond their maturity level, and - indeed - would discourage (but not forbid) them from reading books that I thought were beyond them when they are very young. Not that I foresee this being a problem - kids tend to want to read kids books.
But a teenager? A teenager can read whatever they want.
We also are not teaching our children that adultery and gruesome murder are acceptable behaviour in our household. Surprisingly, I am able to hold the opinion that these things are wrong while also reading books about these subjects (as are, apparently, you). My kids seem to already be able to make these sorts of distinctions. I have read them many gruesome fairytales and children's books containing some pretty evil characters and yet neither of them has yet committed any violent crimes.
You say that books can hurt people, but you have given no evidence that backs up this assertion, you are just stating it as fact. Without any evidence, this is just your opinion. Personally, I'm more of an evidence-based gal. If you're privy to some research that I am unaware of, please feel free to share it.
Absolutely not! The content and nuances in this book are for adults only.
Fustian - I think we are more alike than not - just have different opinions on some things. Let's just agree to disagree and move on.
Maria wrote: "Breanna wrote: "NO! I'm 20 years old, and some of the material was too much for me."Exactly. I don't know what to make of some people here who think otherwise. Yes, it's their choice what to le..."
Yes the parents ca tell the kid not to red it but when it come to it parents don't have total control over the kid. If you take a kid to the library usually the kids pick to whatever they want to read. Or they won't be able to atually read good books.
Maybe Caroline should pick up some spelling and grammar books on her next trip to the library.
No I don't think a Kid of 13 years old. should be reading a Adult book. I think it would be to darker for their age and as an adult I found it hard to take in some of the things in the book.
Maria wrote: "I also would hope that the family values we have instilled in them since birth would come into play and since we have taught them that adultery and gruesome murder are not things we condone maybe they will not choose to read about them."Probably no one had more values instilled in them than I did - our family went to church three times a week. TV time was severely limited, almost nonexistent, in my pre-teen years. Yet it is impossible to be a teenager reading the classics of literature and not read about adultery or gruesome murder. Even if we didn't have dirty books at home, and we didn't, I could get them from the library. Or, when I babysat, I could go through the parents' shelves and see what dirty stuff they had. Joy of Sex? Yes, read that when I was somewhere around 14-15-16, while babysitting. (That book is probably the source of my revulsion for beards on men.) Read "Helter Skelter" when I was a teenager and developed a fascination for true crime books like it. It didn't cause me to become a mass murderer. My reading of "Madame Bovary" at age 17 didn't cause me to be tempted towards thoughts of adultery.
I get it, Lobstergirl. Same here with the very restrictive parents. If parents make a huge deal out of the "forbidden", of course kids are going to be curious and want to see why it's so bad. The sure way to get a kid to do something is to forbid them to do it.
I'm a mature 17 year old girl, a book enthusiast and have read this book more than once. I absolutely loved the psychological side of it and believe it is one of my favourite books I have ever read. However, I think that this book is not suitable for 13 year olds to read as it does contain a lot of mature content. Also I think that even if they read it, they would not be able to appreciate how cleverly written it is and it may disinterest them in these types of books when they get older. :)
I say no. I'm a 45 year old man and I was blushing at some parts. No, not at all. On top of that, this IS an adult book.
The language in this novel is not so advanced, but the subject matter is. I would say the book is not at all appropriate for a thirteen year old.
I loved this book (HATED the ending!) and I vote no as material for 13 year old. It's a gruesome story about very disturbed people. For me it was as repellant as it was fascinating and the quality of the writing tipped the scales and kept me reading. I think a youngster might be very upset by it.
I say no and I read a lot by the time I was 13...
What if the person in question is now 15?
I was 13 reading stuff like Stephen King, vc Andrews, love story, diary of Anne frank. Some dark heavy themes in these books...
No, definitely not appropriate for 13 year old.
Peggy wrote: "No, no, no. Too many cuss words, including the C one, and just weird sex descriptions and violent thoughts of bashing in heads. As a parent of 5, I would not even want my 23-year-old to read this"Carrie wrote: "I was 13 reading stuff like Stephen King, vc Andrews, love story, diary of Anne frank. Some dark heavy themes in these books..."
burn any books lately, Peggy?
What a rude comment! To each his/her own, Diane. If you want your kid to read a sexually explicit book with murderous violence, that's your decision.
If Peggy disagrees with you and doesn't want her kids to read it, that is her parenting style, not to be judged by anyone here.
It is a question for discussion, not a place to insult people when they give their answer.
Geez!
23 year olds do not need motherly guidance on reading choices. this is tantamount to censorship which I freely condemn. That is my contribution to the discussion, which I will note, has been going on for more than 2 years. please note I was NOT condemning her parenting style, simply her approach to reading. Geez, yourself.
This comment would have been a very nice contribution to the discussion - great expression of your view, which I happen to agree with.But saying to someone "Burn any books lately?" is rude and sarcastic, which I freely condemn. Sorry, not sorry.
and apparently you feel quite comfortable judging me. and you do not get to be the arbiter judging my comments. this forum does not belong to you.
Diane wrote: "and apparently you feel quite comfortable judging me. and you do not get to be the arbiter judging my comments. this forum does not belong to you."Not judging - giving you my opinion on a comment that you made. Never did I say anything "belonged to me".
If your intent was to participate in an adult discussion then you failed. If it was to start an argument with Peggy, then you nailed it. It's called being a troll - purposely instigating an argument on the internet by making antagonistic comments.
I'm done here. Maybe that's your normal way of communication - who knows, and frankly, who cares?!
I listened to the book on tape in anticipation of it coming out as a movie. As a book it was so-so though I think the movie (with Ben Affleck) will be better. I'm exhausted with this modern stalker/abduction theme. So, for me, NO, not the right book for a 13 year old - advanced reader or not. It's not a smart book, let's put it that way.
I agree - 13 is still relatively young - I don't believe in too much parental control, but kids are going to be exposed to this type of material eventually, we all know that - but to put our ok on it at that early age - I think it's too young.
But what about by a 15-year-old?Sorry for keeping this thread going for so long. Really, a great deal of it is pretty much just archival, but feel free to answer if you want.
I don't think this book is suitable for a 13 year old or even a 15 year old. The psychological complexities are beyond what I would have understood at ages 13 or 15. For one thing, one of the characters seems to be a sociopath. A 13 or 15 year old could certainly read the words, but I think you need to be somewhat older to understand the social and psychological nuances.
As a parent of teenagers and teacher of 7th graders, I would say absolutely not.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
The Hunger Games Trilogy Boxset (other topics)
The Perks of Being a Wallflower (other topics)
Memoirs of an Imaginary Friend (other topics)
The Fault in Our Stars (other topics)
More...
John Green (other topics)
Wendy Wunder (other topics)
Karen Thompson Walker (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Queen Mother (other topics)The Hunger Games Trilogy Boxset (other topics)
The Perks of Being a Wallflower (other topics)
Memoirs of an Imaginary Friend (other topics)
The Fault in Our Stars (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Matthew Dicks (other topics)John Green (other topics)
Wendy Wunder (other topics)
Karen Thompson Walker (other topics)
There's nothing wrong with a 13 year old reading dark and spooky books. There's nothing wrong with a 13 year old reading about a dysfunctional marriage. Some of it will go over their heads anyway - no harm done.
Yes the book is a bit junky. It ain't great literature. Neither were The Exorcist or Rosemary's Baby. I survived. I was reading Eudora Welty and Kurt Vonnegut at the same age and most of that was going over my head too.