Books Are Dangerous By Frank Furedi Critical Analysis

1055 Words5 Pages
There is no single version of the truth. This statement holds, whether discussing history or statistics. Notably, in business analytics, professions acknowledge that data can be interpreted in many different ways. Naturally, this principle can be applied to literature. Not only can one piece of writing be understood differently by its audience, but an author can interpret a certain topic in a completely unique way from another writer. This phenomenon can be seen in the two distinct pieces Superman and Me from The Most Wonderful Books: Writers on Discovering the Pleasures of Reading by Sherman Alexie and “Books are Dangerous” by Frank Furedi. Although Alexie’s short story is a personal narrative and Furedi’s article is essentially the opposite:…show more content…
Much like most logical arguments and narratives, Alexie guides the audience in a structured manner through his life, showcasing only the memorable moments. In fact, he introduces his entire narrative with an anecdote about the time he “learned to read with a Superman comic book” (Alexie 175). However, there was some aspect of conflict in the story. Alexie laments about how “a smart Indian [was] a dangerous person, widely feared and ridiculed by Indians and non-Indians alike” (Alexie 177). Although, instead of developing this idea, Alexie fought it, and showed how he was able to overcome this ideological barrier by harnessing the power of reading. On the other hand, Furedi decided to provide evidence towards the fact that reading was a health hazard for the majority of the article. He explored the evolving, negative mindset towards reading throughout history, before eventually making his point that reading is “good” because of its unparalleled power. However, Furedi consistently included evidence and counterarguments, including how reading was represented as an “‘insidious contagion’ [and] was often coupled with sightings of irrational destructive behavior” (Furedi 3). Furedi constructed his argument in a manner in which he scrutinized the opposing argument in order to provide evidence for his inevitable conclusion on the subject. He used the so-called “dangers of reading” to show how powerful and insightful books can be. The two diverse structures within both of the texts represent how the same message can be propagated in different
Open Document