A Brazilian called Paulo Freire came up with a method which consists of coming up with a short list of words related to the pupils' day-to-day. These words have to cover all the phonemes in Portuguese and the pupils would discuss them.
He managed to teach adults to read very quickly. But, as talking about your reality was integral to the method, he got into trouble with the then military regime.
They threw him into a military jail.
One fine day an officer asked for his help because many of the recruits couldn't read.
But that was precisely why he had been thrown into jail!
Paulo Freire plagiarized the Laubach method, created by the protestant missionary Frank Charles Laubach. The method was copied by marxists ideologists in Brazil's Pernambuco, emphasizing the class struggle. The author of these other primers was Paulo Freire, who lent his name to the "new methodology" as if it were his own.
It is important to notice that this claim is highly disputed. Paulo Freire and his methods are frequently attacked by far-right politicians and activists in Brazil, and this information is definitely politically biased.
Maybe it was deliberate word play, but 'their' here refers to the prisoners, not the books, in case anyone else misinterpreted this headline to imply they were actually editing the books.
If anyone is interested in the wider topic, this subject is called bibliotherapy, and has a long history. This specific program was popularized in the early 1990s at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth as an alternative probation sentencing program, and it was so successful it later branched out around the world. Key advocates include Robert Waxler, Jean Trounstine, and Mary Stephenson, and researchers Roger Jarjoura and Susan T. Krumholz.
I am aware of that meta study, it's from 2017 though. I also didn't dig enough to get the list of books used in the various studies (I am interested self-help vs fiction/non-fiction).
I think a major takeaway from reading is to see inside the mind of another person. That's something that I suspect most criminals do badly, since crime, especially violent crime, requires the person to NOT understand the impact of their actions on others. Sociopaths don't care, but they commit the vast minority of crime. Getting the other criminals to appreciate more perspectives than just their own might be very helpful to diminish their willingness to harm others.
At school we had a teacher who tried to make us read 10 books a year.
You could choose whatever book you wanted, and you had to write a small summary.
So every one headed to the school library and looked for the smallest books available.
The most popular book that every one read was called something like: "Collection of letters from from my Grandfather" and had around 50 to 70 pages and was very boring.
Many also cheated by watching movie adaptations of books.
Edit: This was back in the time when you could not go online and find dozens of book summaries within minutes.
This exact phenomenon is discussed in "Punished by Rewards." It's probably one of the best possible ways to train kids that reading is no fun, of no benefit to them, and should only be done if promised some kind of prize.
In elementary school we had something like this - we had to read a book from a different genre every month in order to earn a food item for the end of year picnic. I was constantly reading just science fiction, and ended up with only pickle relish, despite reading more than most of the other students. I don’t think the exercise convinced anyone who wasn’t already into it that reading is good and fun.
The correct approach would have been to either leave a student reading a lot alone, or to steer him toward other genres that are similar to Sci-Fi ("Hey gbrown, this other author has a similar style to X I see you enjoy, but it's not true sci-fi... you'll see").
I read a lot of novels in school and not many after. Reading is a vital skill but reading novels is not; a separation that was never conveyed to me to in school. For every great novel I have read, I've read countless more terrible novels and there is no greater waste of time than reading something terrible. Not reading artfully constructed prose has definitely taken a toll on my own writing though, as evidenced by this comment!
The emphasis on literature is definitely part of the problem. I was lucky enough to take an AP English Language class my senior year of high school, where the focus was on short essays and other nonfiction. That's what really ignited my love of reading. Before that I did enjoy my sci-fi novels, but I was much more of a TV/movies/video games person.
Don't read books you hate, just like you shouldn't converse with people that frustrate and anger you.
That being said, a novel is one of the most intimate conversations you can have, so don't give up on them because you have had bad experiences in the past, find a new partner to talk to!
I find that pretty interesting. I've read a decent number of books of being lengths in my life; I'm no great reader, but I'm not a particular slouch either. And almost every book I've read I found very enjoyable; if I didn't, I usually put it down and not pick it up again.
But then, I tend to read stories by authors I already know I like, or those that are recommended or otherwise considered to be worthwhile reads.
When I was in high school in the early 2000s Wikipedia was entirely off limits and “unreliable”. When we had to read a book that had been translated the teacher quickly caught half the class cheating because the Wikipedia article spelled the main character’s name slightly differently than the translation we had been assigned to read.
I remember sitting in the library later that day telling a friend what had happened in class. I pulled up the Wikipedia article only to see it had been updated to say something along the lines of “John Doe (or Joe Doe in some translations)” and I knew immediately it must have been someone from my class who’d made the edit in an effort to save other kids from the same fate they had suffered.
Same deal with me, starting from my second year (8yo): write a short summary of a book of your choice every school month. On my third year however they tweaked the rules slightly, so the books must be from different series.
More than a decade later, chatting with one of my former teachers, I discovered why they tweaked the rules: because some lazy jerkass would pick a book from The Bored Witch illustrated series, read it in five minutes, write down the summary, then spend the rest of the day reading stuff he wasn't "supposed" to read on his own, like Heart of a Dog and The Metamorphosis. Because he knew that he wouldn't be able to summary those books.
...in my own defence I really enjoyed The Bored Witch.
This could be a bit discriminatory, Brazil has a high analphabetism rate, it will be worst in prison, I suppose.
The ones who can't read should be offered courses and maybe start with easy comics.
Me too - which is ironic in this discussion. Not sure I am too convinced by it, it seems to derive from unfamiliarity with the alphabet. In small children at least familiarity with the alphabet is not the same as being able to read.
I was trained to understand that illiteracy in English means someone that cant read or write, but if it was translated as-is, illiteracy means "iletrado" -> someone "without letters" which in my mother language doesn't mean that someone cant read, but a broader category of people who cant read together with people who have very a poor language understanding and communication skills.
Some illiterate 'iletrado'(for us) in some cases can read, but might not understand it very well.
That might explain why the OP used the given word because in some languages its the definition that defines people who cant read.
It's more commonly used in rummage languages, illiteracy is not really used (in the same way that analfabetismo is not used in English)(my swipe keyboard even used the Portuguese version!).
If you are interested in the Brazilian prison system you should take a look into this:
[1] - Retratos do Cárcere: https://vimeo.com/383384532, https://www.pandafilmes.com.br/portfolio/retratos-do-carcere
This is a series about inmates life's. It start giving a brief overview of the current state of Brazilian prison system, including some history to explain why it is this way. Then it go on to show what really means to be an inmate in Brazil. It shows the conditions inmates have to endure, the treatment inmate's family receives, the role religion has inside Brazilian prisons, etc.
I read "The 48 Laws of Power", after reading that its very popular in prisons. I liked the book, can recommend. Would be interesting to know what else they're reading. I imagine prisoners are much more well read then the average population, and live with violence. Would be interesting to know their taste in books.
I am very confused at how it is expected that books are likely to reduce crime – we have a very well-read set of criminals operating in our world today; they are called white-collar criminals, they have gone to the top institutions, they have read plenty of books and it does not seemed to have improved the virtue of their moral character beyond making their plots more audacious.
Books are not likely to reduce crime. In this instance, they are highly likely to reduce recidivism. See my post elsewhere in this thread for the list of advocates and researchers who give well thought out, evidence-based arguments as to how this works. For most participants, it involves cultivating compassion, empathy, and understanding through storytelling and narratology that acts as a kind of simulation.
You counterexample would invalidate the idea that there is a direct causal mechanism between reading and pro-social behavior, but I don't think anyone is arguing that. Some anti-social behavior is a consequence of not being able to understand and to feel understood by other people. When you give people the tools to express themselves (and to understand others), it may make it easier for them to get what they want and need by talking instead of resorting to violence etc. The key here is that this obviously only works for SOME people. Not ALL crime can be explained by this idea, obviously.
Why it might not prevent white collar crimes, I have personally seen first hand that people from the lowest classes can easily break out of the mold and make a good living if they communicate and behave well (at least in my country in Eastern Europe).
People are much more likely to trust you with any kind of work.
In India, there is a prison that has somewhat of a tradition of experimenting with unusual methods of behavioural change.
Last time in 2015 it was Yoga:
French philosopher Bernard Stiegler "an important thinker on the effects of digital technology" became a philosopher while studying in prison (for robbery):
Back in my day, we read books for free pizza. I don't know if they accomplished what they wanted or exactly what it was that they were trying to accomplish. I read quite a bit of non-fiction but very little fiction, with the exception of when I am traveling.
Learning whether it's done through hands on experience, reading or watching/listening is a good thing.
It’s not even attempting to describe why crimes happen. It’s just offering people an incentive to read because literacy is strongly correlated with job prospects. I can’t see a downside to this pilot program. I hope they expand it to include technical/practical training.
The program is called "Redemption through Reading” and the officials statements are in similar vain. The implications are pretty clear.
It's only made worse by how only select people can participate. That is on top of Brazil's history of using literacy tests for racial discriminatation. As well as their current, ineffective mass-incarceration policy (now 3rd largest in the world), which as in the US hits indigenous and black south americans harder. I don't expect they'll have a rich corpus of indigenous literature either.
This is why I am very critical, despite reading a book generally hurting nobody. If they truly wanted to keep people out of prison they should end their mass incarceration and improve inequality, not allow select people (who will be almost definitely be disproportionately white) to get out easier.
But then again the head of state is an outspoken fan of the military dictatorship so that does not seem likely.
Look, this is what bothers me with current “wokeism” trends. With this reasoning, literally any test/course/initiative/whatever will statistically have a slight racial/cultural/religious bias because the world and its population have such biases. So any positive initiative (like this one) which aims at improving lives of everyone (including people of color) will be taken down by a community or another because it’s statistical implication, interpreted in a certain way, will mean it will have a bias.
But the measure itself is NOT racist! It’s discrimination based on literacy, not based on race! I understand race and literacy have some amount of correlation, but unless this correlation is 100%, it means that there are people of color which are literate, and white people which are illiterate. This measure will benefit people of color in a massive way, so why oppose it ?? This makes no sense.
These policies were introduced precisely so that people like you could defend them as "not racist" while still having the same net effect. We have more than ample documentation of it to the point that the only reason to disagree is deliberate ignorance or historical denialism.
Ok so you’re saying: « Making prisoners read books is racist ».
Don’t you realize that this statement is either completely delusional or some form of woke nonsensical Newspeak?
Let me recap: This initiative only has upsides, no downsides. And it has no race distinction. And it benefits people across the board, from people of color to white people. And in absolute terms it will benefit to more people of color than white people (due to the demographics of Brazilian prisons). But you think that statistically it might benefit proportionally slightly more to white people than to people of color, so we should stop this initiative (which again, has no downside for anyone)?
Man I still think of myself as left wing and progressist, but this recent trend of the left, away from universalism, and deep into communautarism makes me feel more and more estranged...
I don’t disagree with your point that reducing mass incarceration should also be pursued though, and is more impactful.
This guy got out of Austrian prison because he could write readably, up to the point of being published and gaining a lot of support from the usual literary luvvies. (I read the book, it was way too self-pitying. Written well, but the stench of "everyone was so mean to me and I am such a victim" was unbearable.)
Situation is different here. We talk about reading books not writing them. And of a maximum of reducing by 48days per year, so a 13% reduction of the sentence of people read books continuously, not about releasing people that wouldn’t have been released anyway.
> Situation is different here. We talk about reading books not writing them.
I'm struggling to see why you think that makes a difference.
The only obvious difference is that reading a book is much easier than writing one, which would tend to aggravate the problem of letting people out of jail when they should be in it.
They can only gain 48 days per year, so a 13% reduction in their sentence if they chain-read books. It might release someone slightly earlier, not release someone which wouldn’t have been released anyway.
It is large and ineffective but it is not the 3rd largest in the world if you look at the incarceration rate per 100k, which is a more reasonable metric. It is the 19th largest [1].
It bugs me somewhat how people often overlook that Brazil is the world's 6th most populous country. Most of Brazil's demographics, no matter what they refer to, will rank near the top when it comes to absolute numbers.
> hits indigenous and black south americans harder. I don't expect they'll have a rich corpus of indigenous literature either
66.7% of the Brazilian prison population are black (includes pardos / mixed race), while 32.3% are white. 54% of the Brazilian population are black, so the incarceration rate is disproportionate for the black population. That is, of course, very unfortunate. However, I don't think the indigenous are particularly affected - only 1390 indigenous Brazilians are in prison in the entire country [4].
A lot of people seem to assume that a significant proportion of the Brazilian population is indigenous. That is not the case. The number of indigenous Brazilians is very small, around 0.47% of the total population. [5]
That is part of the solution, two solutions can co-exist that take different angles. A quick Google search showed that Brazil's literacy rate is roughly 92% and I would like to believe it's something similar in the prison. This program sounds like it can help people make good use of their time while serving their sentence. They should expand this sort of incentive to other forms of education and technical programs.
Don’t be fooled into believing the literacy rate statistics provided by the Brazilian government. For more than a decade there’s has been a program of food vouchers for the poor based on school attendance and improving literacy rates.
Guess what happens? No one is failed, everyone is fed.
I imagine the rate is completely different on prison populations. But there are literacy programs aimed at them in Brazil, those aren't on the news because they aren't new. I'm not sure where the GP's revolt comes from.
By the way, there exist technical programs for prison populations in Brazil too, again those aren't in the news because they aren't new.
I'd strongly dispute that this is "part of the solution" because the forces increasing prison population (Bolsenaro ran under "tough on crime" policies) and the ones instituting this program are one and the same. That is the context this has to be seen in, massive expansion of incarceration while making sure a select few get out more easily.
I think it came across wrong, I have lived in LATAM (not the safe tourism trips, lived and engaged in society).
The reasons for the crimes are economic desperation for the most part. Wasn't discriminating, just saying that prisoners are more likely to be analphabetic.
My lower middle class condo has electrified fences, armed guards, CCTV, patrols, bullet proof glasses it is like a prison.
The higher classes have more features.
People with good meaning soul and big heart cannot comprehend that some people for whatever reasons feel pleasure in being evil and don't care about others life. Then they project their good meaning in laws and thus give more power to evil people do more evil until they die.
Welcome to "modern laws" for just evolved homo sapiens.
Could've been phrased better but there's so much truth in this. Murder solving rate is actually more like 6%. And indeed sentences are normally reduced to 1/6, but not because of good behavior, but "regime progression" which technically allows you to work outside prison during the day but there's not ever enough room in prison for spending the night so you just become free.
Take a relatively harsh 12-year sentence for murder. Multiply by 6% for the chance you get caught and divide by 6 for regime progression. You spend 43.8 days in prison in average. The 6% figure includes people who murder in public and don't even try to run away. Be a little smarter about it and your sentence is effectively zero.
It's pure impunity for criminals. And a harsh life for honest people. Not hard to predict the outcome.
It's unbelievable that to some, the solution to the high crime rate in Brazil is putting more people in jail when a significant part of our prison population hasn't even been tried for their crimes yet. It's always shocking to read such a take, but I am then immediately reminded of the fact that we tend to gravitate towards easy answers to complicated problems. Hopefully one day you can move past that.
As a brazilian I can say that you must keep thinking about those things and someday you'll understand why your arguments are full of prejudice and ignorance.
Would you mind to make a clear counter-argument, so it informs all of us what "arguments are full of prejudice and ignorance" and why?
I found the arguments very well rounded, with good references, sound math, and a window to personal experience that reflects the lives of many back in Brazil.
I am not going to pour more anecdotal evidences to reinforce the original argument, but there is a widespread problem of impunity in Brazil: the low-hanging fruits (known “chicken burglars”) are severely punished, in my opinion, while the extreme cases (both assassins and politicians) are “roaming free”.
As many things in Brazil, I have the impression that justice is only “para inglês ver” (just for the show).
At last, I suspect you might be biased by your own prejudices when reading and reasoning on the arguments of superflit.
Thus, I think it is important to neutrally reason and point out the flaws of the argumentation, as well as show new perspectives, instead of an empty, straw-man attack, full of personal sentiment behind it.
A Brazilian called Paulo Freire came up with a method which consists of coming up with a short list of words related to the pupils' day-to-day. These words have to cover all the phonemes in Portuguese and the pupils would discuss them.
He managed to teach adults to read very quickly. But, as talking about your reality was integral to the method, he got into trouble with the then military regime.
They threw him into a military jail.
One fine day an officer asked for his help because many of the recruits couldn't read.
But that was precisely why he had been thrown into jail!