Reading An Abridged Book Is Cheating?
Nobody likes to be called a cheater. Even cheaters will deny that they’re cheating. It doesn’t matter if they were caught cheating on a test or cheating on a significant other, they rarely admit it.
I don’t consider myself a cheater. I always completed my own tests (when I lived through that period when I had to take tests), and I’ve always been faithful in my relationships.
I admit to reading a few abridged versions of books in my time, though. I admit that I’m an abridger. But I was once told that reading an abridged book is cheating. That means I have to admit to being a cheater.
Or I have to justify reading an abridged book.
It’s too long, and most people don’t know how to pronounce it.
The problem with long books is that they take a long time to read. Most people, if given a choice, would rather read a short novel than a long one. At least, that’s what I think. I’ve never seen a stat for it, but I bet it’s true. It’s not necessarily a matter of laziness. With so much other stuff to do, it’s kind of inconvenient to read a book that’s too long, even if you like reading long books.
A few days ago I found an old copy of an abridged Les Miserables that I had read in junior high. This reminded me that even before the internet and cable television, I had other things to do besides reading long classics. Now that I think about it though, I didn’t have all that much to do, so I…
View original post 477 more words
Dysfunctional Literacy 
I have been meaning to read Les Miserables since I was 10 – never got round to it, it made me too miserables xD on a brighter note, now that I know there is an abridged version I may just read it! I used to look down on abridged versions but honestly, who has the time in this modern society? Back then they had hours to kill and no smartphones. I might just hunt for James Joyce’s Ulysses in an abridged version too, that’s been on my bedside table for three years, I dust under it regularly and always tell myself I will read it and don’t.