The Mensa Reading List for Grades 9-12
Mensa’s “Excellence in Reading” list for grades 9–12 prompts debate over whether prescriptive canon-style lists cultivate intellectual humility and cultural literacy or instead turn reading into a joyless box‑ticking exercise. Commenters critique the list’s heavy Western, older, and “middlebrow” focus, the inclusion of controversial or emotionally intense works, and the requirement to read every title with adult sign-off. Others argue that exposure to demanding classics, paired with freedom to follow personal interests (often via science fiction or genre fiction), is more important than the specific list itself for developing critical thinking and a lasting love of reading.
Purpose and Value of Reading Lists
- Some see the Mensa list as akin to “Great Books” programs: a way to encounter older, challenging works that can humble smart teens and expand perspective.
- Others argue lists should be prompts, not regimens; the minute it becomes a checklist, it turns reading into a mechanical task and drains joy.
- A minority defends the prescriptive nature as “literature education,” meant to train the mind, not entertain, especially for high-ability students.
Critiques of the Mensa List Itself
- Strong pushback on the checklist format: rating each book, adult sign‑offs, and a final attestation of having read all titles is seen as infantilizing for teens and likely to kill motivation.
- The content is called “middlebrow” and dated: largely Western, heavily Anglo/Euro-American, with many classics that feel more like a 1970s canon than a contemporary, diverse list.
- Several complain about lack of non-Anglosphere authors and global perspectives; others note that an English-language list will naturally skew that way.
- Specific choices draw fire: inclusion of The Fountainhead is widely criticized; Shakespeare sonnets and some dense works are seen as mismatched for most 9–12th graders.
Reading for Joy vs. Duty
- Many participants say being forced through “slog” classics in school (e.g., Anna Karenina, Dickens, Austen) made them dislike reading.
- Others report life-changing encounters with difficult books, arguing that impact may only be recognizable years later and that cultural literacy and exposure to canonical texts matter.
- There’s broad agreement that letting kids choose a lot of their own reading—often SF/fantasy or genre fiction—builds love of reading; classics can be suggested, not mandated.
Debate Around Specific Works and Age Appropriateness
- Night is described as both profoundly important and potentially devastating for emotionally vulnerable teens; one commenter raises controversies about its factual status and worries about using it to teach the Holocaust.
- Some worry about themes of sex, sexuality, and heavy adult issues across the list for younger teens, arguing suitability depends heavily on the individual child.
Broader Reflections and Tangents
- Discussion touches on volume vs. depth (100 books/year vs. slower, deeper reading), the role of AI tools in learning vs. reading, and suggestions for math‑gifted children (problem books, puzzle-based resources).
- A few suggest that, for teenagers, science fiction and contemporary genre fiction might be a better hook into serious thinking than an imposed “Great Works” canon.