Touching Woodward and Bernstein

                                            

Top 5 Presentation

Book Reviews

Reviews

New York Times Best Sellers List: http://www.nytimes.com/best-sellers-books/overview.html

Washington Post's Book World: http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books

Barnes and Noble Review: http://bnreview.barnesandnoble.com/

npr Book Reviews: http://www.npr.org/series/book-reviews/

Chicago Tribune Book Reviews: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/books/

The Shining Book Trailer

When Ben met "M"

In All the President’s Men, Ben Bradlee is the executive editor of the Washington Post, the paper which becomes the main outlet to uncover the Watergate scandal involving President Nixon and his administration. “M” is one of the main coordinators/leaders of the British Secret Service in the James Bond Series. Throughout the years “M” has taken the roles of both genders but overall, the character plays out the same no matter what version of Bond you are talking about. “M,” much like Bradlee, is a confident no nonsense leader who does whatever they have to get the job done, and more importantly, get that job done the right way. Bradlee is a very cocky and outspoken person who has an ego bigger than the Post’s newsroom. “M” is almost the same way but in a different role, a more welcomed role. You could see why a leader of in a security organization, especially a high class organization like the fictional British Secret Service the movies, would act the way he/she does but for an editor of a newspaper, it seems almost out of place. A cocky, almost obnoxious character, just doesn’t fit that role of a “journalist,” but Bradlee embraced the role and has become one of the most famous of his kind. These two characters come from completely different backgrounds but they hold that “swagger” that makes them perfect for their role in the movie/book, but also as characters in the real world. Bradlee, who is a non-fictional character, and “M,” who is fictional, are two small pieces of the puzzles for both wonderful stories, even if it is hard to see it on the outside.

Non-Fiction

If a book is going to be dubbed non-fiction then I believe it should be 100% accurate and without fabrication. “Literature or cinema that is not fictional,” is the working definition by Merriam Webster and “the branch of literature comprising works of narrative prose dealing with or offering opinions or conjectures upon facts and reality, including biography, history, and the essay,” is how dictionary.com classifies what the genre of non-fiction is. In both definitions I don’t see anything about “5%” fabrication and only a few pages that are fictional. If it is going to take the foundation of non-fiction (definitions above) then it should hold the integrity of what it represents. More importantly, it is the author who needs to hold the integrity. Sure Mortenson didn’t do anything illegal with his actions in regard to fictionalizing the truth, but sometimes it is reputation that is most affected and sometimes it is worse than doing something illegal. That’s why writers, no matter what platform they are performing on, must keep their integrity with their writing. Now obviously, that has a lot to do with non-fiction, memoirs, and other fact-based novels but even in fiction the story and the author has to stay true to the writing. Like we talked about in class, it is hard to believe the rest of a story which had “5%” of fabrication, even if it is that small.

Genre Fiction

I think any person in the school would agree to read genre fiction, the freedom to read what you want, over literary fiction any day of the week because it would engage more students into reading. That’s what genre fiction is, it’s the freedom to read what intrigues you. But I do get why we still have curriculums where classic literary novels are taught because it helps restore the organization of what these English classes are looking to accomplish. From a school stand point it is obvious that the curriculum of the major subjects is based upon standardized testing and check points, rather than the value of learning for relevant knowledge. If teachers taught genre fiction, and in turn allowed students to read novels that they are interested in with more freedom, then there would be no order in their objective. Now I’m not bashing all teachers and our school because a majority of the teachers understand their role in teaching us young adults the value of learning and do a good job at it, but of course there’s always going to be the teachers that do the complete opposite of that. I don’t believe the curriculum will ever change in terms of what books are being taught, I personally wish they would, but it probably would never happen because it would be too hard to contain the school’s mission of learning. I do respect why we read Great Gatsby, To Kill a Mocking Bird and Catcher in the Rye, because they are classic novels that provide great human value/ historical value. Those were the only three books that I enjoyed, so it is a little curved, but you get my point. “Tomorrow you will be able to choose any novel that has come out in 2011 and read through it with no note taking and no quizzes. Just enjoy the book, dive into the book and take as long as you want to read it. Enjoy it to the greatest extent.” We all wish our teachers would blurt that out one day in class but due to our school, that probably won’t happen.