Comparing Authors During the Education Process

An interesting thought. Recommending someone read two books: A well written, fully factual book, written by a highly recommended author and a shoddy, fluffy book with lousy history (if any) and condescension by a questionable author.

Now, the question is asked by someone, should they recommend a BEGINNER read the shoddy book AND the good book. In all honesty, I don't think a beginner should read the shoddy book BEFORE the good book, because they won't be able to discern why it's a bad book, and might inadvertently start liking the book (especially if it's a teenager, reading one of $RW's books).

While I think it's actually important to read shoddy books as well as the good books, I think one should read the good, highly recommended books FIRST.

I didn't read Silver Ravenwolf until within the last couple of years (and I'll have been a Pagan for 15 years this February). I'm glad I didn't or else I might have to unlearn all I'd had learned from her books. I'm perhaps a quarter of the way through the book I have (I think it's "to stir a magic cauldron" or some other such nonsense), and it's very marked up. It's a PDF, so it has a number of yellow marks, citing notes I've written, correcting the mounds of incorrect information and misconceptions.

But I digress. Should a beginner read a crappy book AND a good one. No. I think this kind of...assignment should wait until after the year and a day process. I think in the beginning one should focus on learning what whatever craft or religion they're interested in is first before delving into differentiating crap and nonsense. Focus is best spent elsewhere in the beginning, though I do think it's a good idea, later on to read the crappy books, just to understand why they're crappy (and if you're lucky enough to have one on PDF, you can mark the hell out of it to prove to yourself you've been well educated).