| Author | |
Rebecca
Forum All-Star
Joined: Dec 30 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1898
|
| Posted: March 09 2006 at 7:51pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
abcmommy wrote:
Kelly wrote:
My kids are always shocked how I can pull out a seemingly unoffensive book and find totally objectionable passages within about two minutes. Sigh. Unfortunately, practice makes, well, better, anyway!
Kelly in FL |
|
|
As for the last bit in the post I quoted: I dont want to find myself in a position where I am picking apart seemingly good books in search of offensive material. |
|
|
I may be wrong but I understood Kelly to mean that she is suprised by how easy it is to find offensive material in books because it is so prevalent, not because she is actively searching for it.
abcmommy wrote:
I want to make sure what my kids read is largely good and rich, but I want them to enjoy finding and selecting books too. So while I might steer them or select books to have at home (and certainly as a HSer I will make sure I give them a rich curriculum of wonderful lit) I do want them to feel free to read 99% of what one might find in a children's dept of a public library.
|
|
|
This is my dilemna also. I want them to learn how to choose good books from a shelf. However, I find myself wanting to protect them from impurity, evil or adult themes. I think if our family lived in a very small town, I might be able to let them choose from much of what is in the library. Unfortunately, a large portion of what is in our big city library is politically correct, irreverent twaddle. Maybe just by their exposure to the well chosen books that we read in our home, they eventually will know what is good and noble. Here's hoping.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kelly
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 21 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1211
|
| Posted: March 09 2006 at 8:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
It's definitely a fine line to tread, choosing literature. I know *I* loved roving the stacks as a kid, and I want my children to enjoy that freedom, too. However, IMO there is so much more junk in libraries now than when I was a young Irish (library) rover  that I can't just give them carte blanche, for all the reasons already discussed. I agree with ABC that one certainly doesn't enjoy being perceived as the Great Censorship Queen, picking apart a seemingly good book, but I think the key word, there, is "seemingly"! Sometimes---often--- those pages are symptomatic of the entire book. I guess we have to weigh how much negative stuff in a book makes it book we may want to avoid! And each person no doubt has their own level of tolerance in books. EG some of my friends don't like their children reading "To Kill A Mockingbird" because of its serious theme, angry racism and the alleged rape. I, personally, think this is a fabulous book and do let my children read this around 7th grade---with lots of discussion, of course, but read it they do. But it's not within the comfort level of some, and that's fine, too. Like I say, it's a tenuous line we tread!
At risk of sounding gross (and I apologize for my implied expletive above, I get overly passionate about books because they are so powerful!), my brother once told me a story about judging films for children that is somewhat applicable to books, as well. In the story, a bunch of kids asked their father if they could watch a certain film. The father said no, because of a few brief but explicit scenes in the movie. The kids said those scenes were only a LITTLE part of the movie, that the rest of the movie was so great. The father agreed, but still said no to the movie.
The next day he came home with a pyrex dish of delicious looking brownies. Offering the kids a brownie, he informed them that they were 99.99 percent yummy chocolate, but the cook had also added a LITTLE dog-do to the recipe. No one would be able to taste it, because it was mostly delicious ingredients, but there was that little bit of dog-do. Needless to say, the kids took a pass on the brownies...and got the message!
OK, OK, so it' s one of those old Southern tales that border on disgusting  , BUT I guess, when it comes to books, I can't help but think of how much, er, "dog do" it takes to make a book unpalatable, too. I don't want to be a Library Stalin, either, but I do want to stay a step ahead of my voracious readers, know what they're reading, and steer them away from junk and toward the great lit. In the process, I try to show my dc how to choose a good book---it's not just Mom in the Library Forum, arbitrarily thumbs-upping or thumbs-downing a book  ---and obviously, as they get older, they branch out into more mature themes. But just as I wouldn't want my children to carry a suitcase that's too heavy for them, neither would I want them to inadvertantly delve into books that are too heavy, either. When they're bigger and stronger, then they get the heavier suitcases!
Ooh boy, enough Deep Thoughts from this Grit Girl. I just got out of the car after driving 350 miles, so if this is incoherent, chalk it up to Highway Hypnosis 
Kelly, the sometimes Library Hun of the South
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Jen L.
Forum All-Star
Joined: Oct 18 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2148
|
| Posted: March 09 2006 at 9:53pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kelly,
Not only are is your post NOT incoherent, it is eloquent. Exactly how I think but can't seem to put into my own words half as well. (I do need to improve on teaching my children to discern.)
Thanks!
__________________
Jen
dh Klete,ds (8/95),dd (12/97), dd (11/00), and ^2^ in heaven
"...the best state in which to glorify God is our actual state; the best grace is that of the moment..." St. Peter Eymard
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
teachingmom
Forum All-Star
Virginia Bluebells
Joined: Feb 16 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
|
| Posted: March 09 2006 at 10:49pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kelly wrote:
| But just as I wouldn't want my children to carry a suitcase that's too heavy for them, neither would I want them to inadvertantly delve into books that are too heavy, either. When they're bigger and stronger, then they get the heavier suitcases! |
|
|
Great analogy, Kelly! I agree completely.
__________________
~Irene (Mom to 6 girls, ages 7-19)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
saintanneshs
Forum All-Star
Joined: April 15 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 591
|
| Posted: March 09 2006 at 11:25pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Great discussion, ladies! I've been following it intently, soaking up every word in preparation for the years that lie ahead! (or is it "lay" ahead? )
Anyway, here's something that's been bugging me and is, in a way, relevant to the topic...I'd like to throw one more twist into this great discussion about literature. I would have to say that while I am unhappy with some of what is out there (that we have to protect our children from), I am hugely unhappy about WHERE it is placed in the library. For example, in the children's room of our local branch there is only one room for both picture books and young adult literature. Right next to where my children play with puzzles and choose their beautiful, wonderful picture books is a huge rounder of pre-teen chapter books the likes of Goosebumps and such. Last week my 3yo brought me one of these books with an illustration of a kid on it whose eyes were falling out of his head, asking, "Mommy, can you read this one to us?"  He has no idea what kind of junk that horror book is and how offensive it is to those of us trying to protect our kids' innocence, but I do. I wouldn't ever let my kids watch anything with an image like this on tv and yet we're confronted with it at the public library! I know why they can't move the rounder (the library is too small and the hard-backed chapter books all have to be shelved) but it doesn't stop me from wishing they would. Maybe I'll mention it next time we go in there. I hate it when my kids bring those books to me, not knowing that they are not the equivalent of the chapter books I've been reading to them. And the sad part is, my mom used to just turn us kids loose in the library where we'd spend hours each summer just reading and looking for books to take home. It used to be like ABC mentioned where we could read 99% of what we found (and if there was anything objectionable or of a serious nature, she'd discuss it with us), but I'm finding that I can't even turn my very little kids loose to pick and choose for themselves in the children's room without physically blocking them from these kinds of books! 
I just hope that I can surround them with enough of the good stuff that when they are old enough to discern for themselves what to pick (even when they need guidance or a reading list for reference), they'll just naturally gravitate to worthy literature.
I don't know where the line between good parenting and over-zealous censorship lies, but I'm not looking forward to my one-day-will-be-teens facing that rounder (and other such books) with the idea of "free choice" hanging in the air. For now I'm glad that it's enough that I can physically stand between the good, pure & innocent and the bad, impure and corrupt.
__________________
Kristine
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Erin
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5814
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 4:31am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Wow I'm really enjoying listening to everyone's thoughts on this.
I've been pondering many things that you said ABC and would certainly agree with you in realtion to taking a date 1960 era and assuming you're safe. Stereotype, racism really is not what I wish to expose my children too either and is definetly on my alert list.
As to allowing my children to roam in our library I do but pre-check before we go home, discussing with them as to why books will be discarded. But to tell the truth our library is VERY disappointing, only modern literature of a twaddle level, I am not against modern lit. per see, there are some great books out there; but I dislike immersion in twaddle.
saintanneshs wrote:
| I just hope that I can surround them with enough of the good stuff that when they are old enough to discern for themselves what to pick (even when they need guidance or a reading list for reference), they'll just naturally gravitate to worthy literature.. |
|
|
I really believe this is the answer. At this age, remember my oldest is only 12, we feel we need to immerse them in good literature, that takes care of alot. This is the same really with many issues today, music, movies etc. We have to deal with it, therefore we need to equip our children with the tools for discernement. If they have a steady diet of great literature they will see the other as dross.
[QUOTE=saintanneshs]I don't know where the line between good parenting and over-zealous censorship lies,../QUOTE]
This is a hard one I struggle with it too, particularly as we often swim against the tide of current trend.
__________________
Erin
Faith Filled Days
Seven Little Australians
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lissa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 748
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 9:30am | IP Logged
|
|
|
abcmommy wrote:
I want to make sure what my kids read is largely good and rich, but I want them to enjoy finding and selecting books too. So while I might steer them or select books to have at home (and certainly as a HSer I will make sure I give them a rich curriculum of wonderful lit) I do want them to feel free to read 99% of what one might find in a children's dept of a public library.
|
|
|
This is a fascinating discussion. (And my goodness, thanks so much to all of you who said such kind things about my books.) 
I wanted to chime in with a view from the other side of the shelves, so to speak. While I'm a big proponent of the "let's read it and TALK about it" school of choosing children's books, my husband and I also feel a strong need to monitor our kids' reading choices and there are many kinds of books we don't allow at this point. (Our oldest is not quite 11 and reads well above her age level.) There is a vast deal of stuff on the library shelves that doesn't pass our screening criteria.
And one reason for that is the way things have changed in the world of children's book publishing over the past 15 years. When I was on staff in the editorial depts of Random House Children's and Harper Children's, there was a great deal of talk among the editors about how the tide was turning. Once upon a time, Editorial was the driving force in publishing. An editor would find a beautiful book in a mountain of submissions and say, "This deserves to be in print." It was the Sales & Marketing depts' job to sell the book.
Nowadays, it is more often Marketing who runs the show. The marketing exec will say "THIS is what kind of book we can sell--get us that." And then Editorial will have brainstorming meetings to come up with "that kind of book" (or series), and after certain details have been nailed down (often including plot and characters), a hunt will commence for a writer.
For example, this was the case with some Carmen Sandiego mysteries I wrote. I was asked to submit sample plotlines, but the characters had already been created by the in-house editorial staff.
(My Little House books are a different and fairly unique situation. Harper did come to me to ask me to write books about Laura's grandmother and great-grandmother, but once I accepted the offer, they turned over all the family archives to me and left it to me to develop plots, etc, on my own. I had much greater freedom and latitude than is typical for a series fostered in-house.) (There is more to this story, but I can't tell it now. Soon, though.)
Back to books created in-house. I'm afraid that most of what is produced (and I use that word deliberately, because I think you wind up with PRODUCT, not literature, in many cases) does not make the cut for my kids. Sturgeon's Law comes to mind. ("90% of everything is crap.")
I don't mind my kids reading a *little* junk, just as I don't mind them eating a little junk. But not much. And I fear much of what is out there is not just junk food, it's toxic.
The editors don't MEAN to fill the shelves with toxic or junky books, honestly they don't. They want to bring fun, engaging books to kids. They are working with limited power (because the marketing dept is by definition more interested in what will make money than in what will be quality literature), and also--this really does contribute to the disconnect--most children's book editors are not parents themselves. I am cringing as I write this and wondering if I should delete it; I have dear editor friends who would be hurt by this statement. But I know that *my* understanding changed radically once I had children of my own, and I've known this to be true for several others in the business.
One of the first picture books I worked on as an editorial assistant was a sweet story about a puppy dog. I thought it was a gem, with nearly perfect writing, a joy to read. Until, two years later, I found myself having to read it over and over and over to a toddler who did indeed adore the book. I discovered that what I had thought was perfect prose was actually a ponderous, excruciating read-aloud. See, none of us who worked on the book had ever read it aloud ten times in a row. You learn a lot about good writing by reading to a toddler's specifications (which is to say, reading a book a dozen times a day for a week).
Now, in that case, there was nothing objectionable about the content--this example speaks only to the merits of the writing. But there were other books that I worked on (pre-kids, pre-Charlotte Mason!!) that all of us involved genuinely thought were fun and entertaining. I thought Junie B. Jones was hilarious until I had a child, and then I couldn't stand the thought of having my kid imitate that fresh, bratty tone. I'm afraid Junie isn't invited to our house.
It can be hard to wade through the 90% of junk to find the gems that ARE definitely out there. All the harder since I think we all draw our lines in slightly different places. I know families who avoid Little House on the Prairie because of the overtly anti-Indian statements. And I understand their reasoning! Those passages require discussion between parent and child, as do parts of many, many other wonderful books. SECRET GARDEN comes to mind. Such discussions are beneficial; they help a child develop powers of discernment. (Alice's story about her daughter hesitating over the offending line in LS is an excellent example.)
I have to say that, knowing what I know about how books are made, I couldn't be comfortable turning my kids loose to roam the library the way I did as a child. I have this favorite quote by Dylan Thomas—"My education was the liberty I had to read indiscriminately and al the time, with my eyes hanging out."—and yet I know it's a bit inconsistent of me to proclaim that, since I *don't* allow my children to read indiscriminately. Until their eyes are hanging out, yes!
Having said all that—I don't want anyone to give up on post-1960 books! Heavens no!! As others have pointed out, there's a lot that was written pre-1960 that contains objectionable or questionable material as well. And even in the last marketing-driven decade, tenacious editors are managing to bring excellent books to print. Books by Kate DiCamillo, Gail Carson Levine, Louis Sachar (HOLES), Jeanne Birdsall, & Patricia MacLachlan, Paul* Fleischman (BY THE GREAT HORN SPOON) come to mind. I look first for books wholly created by the author (similar to the CMish practice of avoiding committee-written textbooks and looking for living history & science, etc, books instead) rather than "product" that got its start in a marketing meeting. I read lots and lots of reviews, and in many cases even a good review will suggest to me that this isn't a book I want to turn my child loose with at this time—since my criteria don't always match the reviewer's. Sometimes what a book is praised for is as illuminating as what it is criticized for.
In the end, I find I have to rely on my own (& my husband's) judgment. As our children get older, we are more comfortable giving them access to books with content we know we'll need to talk about. Those discussions can be the best part of our day. 
*See my correction below--I meant SID Fleischman. Doh.
__________________
Lissa
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MichelleM
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 12 2006
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 113
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 11:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Lissa wrote:
| And one reason for that is the way things have changed in the world of children's book publishing over the past 15 years. When I was on staff in the editorial depts of Random House Children's and Harper Children's, there was a great deal of talk among the editors about how the tide was turning. Once upon a time, Editorial was the driving force in publishing. An editor would find a beautiful book in a mountain of submissions and say, "This deserves to be in print." It was the Sales & Marketing depts' job to sell the book. |
|
|
Lissa,
How eye opening your post was! Thank you for sharing your insights!
Lissa wrote:
| The editors don't MEAN to fill the shelves with toxic or junky books, honestly they don't. They want to bring fun, engaging books to kids. They are working with limited power (because the marketing dept is by definition more interested in what will make money than in what will be quality literature), and also--this really does contribute to the disconnect--most children's book editors are not parents themselves. I am cringing as I write this and wondering if I should delete it; I have dear editor friends who would be hurt by this statement. But I know that *my* understanding changed radically once I had children of my own, and I've known this to be true for several others in the business. |
|
|
My opinions certainly have changed as well since becoming a mother. Pre-baby days, I was an Early Childhood Educator. In addition, I worked coordinating Before and After School Programs for the public schools. While doing this I had a supervisor (who was a new mother) who had all these strange ideas about education that I, in my 20 years of life experience, adamantly opposed. She would do the unimaginable; read Dickens to Kindergartners on an old couch that she had placed in the classroom, take the children on walks around the school grounds for no other reason than to be in nature. And even worse, she would do this in the winter! She would plan field trips to open space areas w/o any agenda or curriculum. She would make the poor children visit living history museums during summer camps! But worse than all of that, the poor children were made to listen to classical music rather the Raffi! I thought this was all so absurd! Too bad I didn't take the time to see that her students were actually enjoying all these things! Now of course these are all the things I aspire to give my children!
lissa wrote:
| Having said all that—I don't want anyone to give up on post-1960 books! Heavens no!! As others have pointed out, there's a lot that was written pre-1960 that contains objectionable or questionable material as well. And even in the last marketing-driven decade, tenacious editors are managing to bring excellent books to print. Books by Kate DiCamillo, Gail Carson Levine, Louis Sachar (HOLES), Jeanne Birdsall, & Patricia MacLachlan, Paul Fleischman (BY THE GREAT HORN SPOON) come to mind. I look first for books wholly created by the author (similar to the CMish practice of avoiding committee-written textbooks and looking for living history & science, etc, books instead) rather than "product" that got its start in a marketing meeting. |
|
|
Thank you for these recommendations. I’ll be doing a search for their books at our library. Do you know of any good reading lists or resources with recommendations for wholesome, modern Children's Lit?
Blessings,
__________________
~Michelle
Mommy to 5 Blessings
Visit my blog: House of Grace
Our nature blog: All of Creation
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lissa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 748
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 12:13pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Quote:
| Paul Fleischman (BY THE GREAT HORN SPOON) |
|
|
SID! Sid Fleischman wrote BY THE GREAT HORN SPOON. I swear, I do that every time I mention the book.
__________________
Lissa
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
teachingmom
Forum All-Star
Virginia Bluebells
Joined: Feb 16 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 2:48pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I've really been enjoying this thread. A moment ago I began a websearch for modern classics in children's literature because Michelle's question made me curious. We've enjoyed some that Lissa mentioned along with a few others, including some books by Julie Andrews Edwards. During my search I found a children's literature course description that fits with this thread very well. It's from Hollins University -- Eng 550: The Rise (and Fall) of the Family Story. (I'd really love to audit this class!)
"Before the advent of YA problem novels and the resurgence of fantasy, the dominant mode of writing for children was arguably the family story: a low-key, often humorous depiction of a group of middle-class children within (or adventuring out of) a realistic family setting. In the U.S., the family story starts with Louisa May Alcott, but reaches its peak in the 1940’s and 50’s with the work of Elizabeth Enright and Beverly Cleary. In Britain, the primary models include Edith Nesbit’s The Treasure Seekers and The Railway Children and Arthur Ransome’s Swallows and Amazons series. In this course, we will look at the ways family stories reinforce or challenge ideas about childhood, education, family structure, gender, and ethnicity (as in Sydney Taylor’s All-of-a-Kind Family series). We will see what kinds of narrative possibilities might be offered within an essentially undramatic situation. We will look at reasons for the decline of the form and at its influence on other forms such as the problem story, mystery, fantasy, and historical fiction. Readings will include critical studies by Eleanor Cameron and Marcus Crouch as well as a range of classic family fiction."
As I read this description, I realized that family stories (and family stories in an historical setting) are our favorite books around here. It is upsetting that there seem to be fewer and fewer really good family stories in modern times. Maybe that's why The Penderwicks is so successful? I am not familiar with the last two names mentioned. Are any of you?
__________________
~Irene (Mom to 6 girls, ages 7-19)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
abcmommy
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 09 2006
Location: Indiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 3:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Lissa, this is a leeetle OT...
Is marketing of books also being driven by what else the book can sell? for example, Harry Potter books are successful and have launched a product line including everything from furry toys to chess sets.
you have lit a fire under my inner cynic. your post was illuminating.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bookswithtea
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 07 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 4:59pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kelly wrote:
For example, can you IMAGINE putting Sylvia Plath's "The Bell Jar" on a teen reading list????? I've seen it there, and others that are even more disturbing. |
|
|
This was on my 10th grade "options" booklist for honors English, and I chose it for a book report read because it was written by a female, and because it sounded weird. Let me tell you, I did *NOT* understand what I was reading in the least. I still can't believe how I bluffed my way through that paper (and got an A). Just goes to show you that even 'honors' classes aren't all they're cracked up to be.
~Books
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lissa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 748
|
| Posted: March 10 2006 at 7:07pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
abcmommy wrote:
Lissa, this is a leeetle OT...
Is marketing of books also being driven by what else the book can sell? for example, Harry Potter books are successful and have launched a product line including everything from furry toys to chess sets. |
|
|
I think in most cases the "merch" possibilities, as they're called, are an afterthought to a successful book, not a forethought. Certainly not in ALL cases, and most of the major kidlit publishers have a merch division now where there are people whose job it is to come up with tie-in ideas.
When a book or series is a hit, then people start talking about licensing and tie-ins. Most of the more serious literary fiction is kept away from that sort of thing, because there is some sense that it cheapens the work, but that's not a hard and fast rule either. Narnia is a case in point. Anytime a movie comes out, the merch options are tremendous and a bottom-line driven corporation would be unlikely to pass up those opportunities. Many of the smaller, more literary imprints have been bought by the giant corporations now, so there is more pressure on those imprints to join in the merch game.
There can be a lot of tension between Editorial and Marketing, or between an author and the corporation, when a book or series is strong seller and the money folks want to take advantage of that momentum to commercialize the "property." The poor author will protest that it isn't a "property," it's a work of literature!
For now there still exists a pretty strong distinction between "trade" books (literary works like, say, The Penderwicks or Because of Winn-Dixie--trade books are usually published in hardcover first) and "mass market" books, which includes the whole gamut of licensed-character spinoffs, contemporary series generated in-house, 8x8 picture books, paperback originals, etc. A trade book is unlikely to be part of a big merch plan--unless, as I said, it is made into a movie--or if it's a classic that has now entered the public domain--or a classic whose copyright is now owned by second- or third-generation heirs of the estate who are more interested in keeping the royalties rolling in than in protecting the integrity of grandpa's work.
This is why I always encourage people to buy hardcover copies (new, not used) of books they like, if they can possibly afford them, to prove to the publishers that people still value quality literary fiction.
__________________
Lissa
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Erin
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5814
|
| Posted: March 11 2006 at 3:08am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Lissa,
I am fascinated by what you have to say. Learning so much.
Thought some of you may be interested in this article I came across while googling.Corruption in Children's Literature
Actually I was searching Michelle for a modern lit. list, instead I came up with this list which is a mix and I still thought very good.Classical Christian Education 1000 Books List
I've been thinking about all this, another thought sometimes you can't trust an authour all the time. Jackie French, a modern Australian author comes to mind, some of her books are great and others I wouldn't recommend. This of course is with pre 1960s books too. Gene Stratton Porter for example's writing is lovely yet recently I discovered Her Father's Daughter and was appalled at the racism to Japanese.
__________________
Erin
Faith Filled Days
Seven Little Australians
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
abcmommy
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 09 2006
Location: Indiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: March 11 2006 at 10:39am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Quote:
| Students selecting books from school or public libraries run the risk of encountering gender feminism or even the notion that the biological differences between the two sexes are meaningless. In a very popular book by Patricia C. Wrede, Dealing with Dragons, baby dragons are able to choose whether they will be male or female — exactly what many modern activists advocate, since they conceive of gender as a social concept to be deconstructed and reinvented. In Dealing with Dragons, moreover, male dragons have two horns while females have three. Ironically, feminism rejects the feminine and seeks an exaggerated masculine ideal |
|
|
frankly, stuff like this makes me less likely to give credence to the rest of her article, tho I think she does make some good points. We just took this audio book from our library and I think its a real stretch to equate some silly imaginary tidbits about dragons choosing their gender to society at large and gender feminism. We didnt get to hear the entire tape bc it broke (which is an issue with books on tape from or library that bothers me way more than the content of most of what i see.)
Quote:
However, even the black Protestant home is not always a safe bastion for Christianity. In Come a Stranger by Cynthia Voight, Mina, the daughter of a minister, finds a romantic interest near the end of the book, and the young man brings up the subject of religion:
"I'm an atheist," Dexter told her. "Do you mind?"
"It's up to God to mind about that," Mina said. "It's none of my business."
Thus young people are presented an image of a girl from a committed Christian family treating faith as unimportant and subjectivizing religious belief.
|
|
|
I am not sure that the quote from Come a Stranger (by an author whom I personally enjoy) does what the article says it does. I am not sure that it is accurate to say that the novel/ quote is portraying christianity/ faith as unimportant. I am not sure how we are called to respond to people who claim they are atheists (shun them? Or be an example of strong faith?) but I am certain we are right to leave judging them up to God.;)
I see I am lucky so far in that my oldest are boys and their interest in anything with romantic themes is nil. I can see where we need to be very discriminating with teen fiction. The author of this article makes that point very well.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Jen L.
Forum All-Star
Joined: Oct 18 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2148
|
| Posted: March 11 2006 at 1:00pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
teachingmom wrote:
It's from Hollins University -- Eng 550: The Rise (and Fall) of the Family Story. (I'd really love to audit this class!)
"Before the advent of YA problem novels and the resurgence of fantasy, the dominant mode of writing for children was arguably the family story: a low-key, often humorous depiction of a group of middle-class children within (or adventuring out of) a realistic family setting. In the U.S., the family story starts with Louisa May Alcott, but reaches its peak in the 1940’s and 50’s with the work of Elizabeth Enright and Beverly Cleary. .............Readings will include critical studies by Eleanor Cameron and Marcus Crouch as well as a range of classic family fiction."
As I read this description, I realized that family stories (and family stories in an historical setting) are our favorite books around here. It is upsetting that there seem to be fewer and fewer really good family stories in modern times. Maybe that's why The Penderwicks is so successful? I am not familiar with the last two names mentioned. Are any of you? |
|
|
I want to audit with you Irene!!!
Family stories are also our favorites such as: The Moffats (Eleanor Estes), Little House series (old and new - Wilder, Wiley, etc.), The Melendy's (Elizabeth Enright), all the Klickitat Street books and more by Beverly Cleary.
I am not familiar with either Eleanor Cameron or Marcus Crouch, but I did find this link on Eleanor Cameron.
__________________
Jen
dh Klete,ds (8/95),dd (12/97), dd (11/00), and ^2^ in heaven
"...the best state in which to glorify God is our actual state; the best grace is that of the moment..." St. Peter Eymard
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
teachingmom
Forum All-Star
Virginia Bluebells
Joined: Feb 16 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
|
| Posted: March 11 2006 at 3:41pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
This list looks great. It's nice to have a Christian list to refer to. I like the way the books are divided by age. I may have a child who can handle a book written at a college level, but the theme or subject matter may not be appropriate for her age. This helps me to get an idea of when a book may be appropriate. Thanks, Erin!
__________________
~Irene (Mom to 6 girls, ages 7-19)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: March 11 2006 at 7:18pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Lissa wrote:
| This is why I always encourage people to buy hardcover copies (new, not used) of books they like, if they can possibly afford them, to prove to the publishers that people still value quality literary fiction. |
|
|
Ahhh!!! I always love buying the hardcover...now I have a good reason for it. Thanks, Lissa!
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to  & ds1  '03 & ds2  '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Living Literature
Topic: Choosing appropriate literature
