My friends and I were having a discussion about our favourite books and we talked about “being too late” to appreciate a book. I kind of get the sentiment and was wondering if others agree. So one of my favourite books of all time is Perks of Being a Wallflower and read it when I was 17 and I remember just thinking about it for a long time and always going back to it. It just cut so deep unlike anything else. I wondered if I had read it now at 29 if it would have nearly the same impact.
Also, I read Looking For Alaska for the first time this year and while I enjoyed it, I found myself wondering how blown away I would have been reading it as a teenager. I just know I would have appreciated it so much more and while I still love John Green I don’t know if his books will ever hit me the same again.
On the other hand, I’m sure there are books that I didn’t appreciate before that I certainly would now!
I’d argue, at least in my opinion, that if a book you read years ago didn’t hold up as an adult, then it probably wasn’t that good to begin with.
With that being said, I’m in my early 30’s, and I’d read a good handful of Goosebumps books for the first time last year on Halloween. I found myself really enjoying them, and realized just how dark they were for children’s literature (especially The Haunted Mask). They gave me that nostalgic feeling of being a kid again, and reminded me of the times when I was afraid of everything. They did make me wish I’d read them as a kid, but I appreciated them all the more for pushing the envelope on the horror elements (especially for a younger audience).
Even if I’m not in the “target audience” (for lack of a better term), do I at least gain some sort of perspective or insight from the main characters? And are the stories themselves well written? If both answers are “yes”, then they’re worth reading no matter how old I am. That’s how I view it anyway.