The value of children's fiction

[DracoM]

All I can say to both FF and Dovers is read Patrick Ness's 'Chaos Walking' trilogy and you may want to re-consider.

[greenilex]

It does come down to “sense of audience”, which my guru and Michael Rosen’s father specialised in teaching...in Victorian times a novelist knew he/she was writing for anyone capable of reading English.

Now a much more numerous band of writers is/are expected to aim their work at a more specific audience worldwide. This is partly publishing and marketing convention, but makes sense language-wise. They are all novelists/fiction writers.

[doversoul1]

I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised to find that this article was written with an aim to widen the market for the author’s book(s). Her point is, adults should read children’s books because:

“Go to children’s fiction to see the world with double eyes: your own, and those of your childhood self,” she urges.

This is not only a sentimental illusion but a false statement. By reading children’s fiction, adults may be able to see how a child might see the world but they cannot see the world with an eye of a child.

If you are interested in understanding what the world looks like to children, yes, reading children’s books can be very useful. If you want to see the world why bother with children’s books?

[french frank]

All I can say to both FF and Dovers is read Patrick Ness's 'Chaos Walking' trilogy and you may want to re-consider.

No, you explain to me why, as an example of a 'children's book' (albeit in this case young adult), it would be worth my time to read it. This is what I feel the author failed to do persuasively and was the reason I started the thread. See if you can argue the case better than she did. All you've done is implied that you read it and were impressed by something. (I've checked the Wikipedia article on it and it revealed nothing of the remotest interest to me, whoever it was aimed at).

[oddoneout]

I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised to find that this article was written with an aim to widen the market for the author’s book(s). Her point is, adults should read children’s books because:

“Go to children’s fiction to see the world with double eyes: your own, and those of your childhood self,” she urges.

This is not only a sentimental illusion but a false statement. By reading children’s fiction, adults may be able to see how a child might see the world but they cannot see the world with an eye of a child.

If you are interested in understanding what the world looks like to children, yes, reading children’s books can be very useful. If you want to see the world why bother with children’s books?

And neither can the adult who writes the book. There are authors who are good at writing in a way that resonates with children or that engages their particular view of the world, or think in what is perceived as a child-like fashion, but that isn't the same. In the past I think the approach was more along the lines of material and language suitable (as judged by the adult) for the age in question, or to achieve a particular purpose - language skills, desirable moral values, knowledge, etc.
In the course of keeping an eye out in charity shops for books that my granddaughter might like I have been struck by the way that certain books that either I liked as a child or that I read to my children still have a certain appeal to me as an adult - and not entirely for 'sentimental' reasons.

[teamsaint]

No, you explain to me why, as an example of a 'children's book' (albeit in this case young adult), it would be worth my time to read it. This is what I feel the author failed to do persuasively and was the reason I started the thread. See if you can argue the case better than she did. All you've done is implied that you read it and were impressed by something. (I've checked the Wikipedia article on it and it revealed nothing of the remotest interest to me, whoever it was aimed at).

Before I( or somebidy else, as I have a ,ot of work reading to do this evening !) try to meet your challenge FF, have you read “ Holes” by Louis Sachar?

[french frank]

Before I( or somebidy else, as I have a ,ot of work reading to do this evening !) try to meet your challenge FF, have you read “ Holes” by Louis Sachar?

No, I've never heard of 'Holes' or Louis Sachar.

[Later] Ever the seeker after knowledge I have now found out what you are talking about. But the answer to your question is still No, I haven't read it.

My current reading is Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy (yes, translated into English). I am finding it very difficult to follow the logic of Dame Philosophy's argument or understand why on earth the work is considered to have been so influential. When I've decided that I've tried hard enough with it for little profit, I intend to read Dean Swift's A Tale of a Tub which looks pompously amusing.

[doversoul1]

And neither can the adult who writes the book. There are authors who are good at writing in a way that resonates with children or that engages their particular view of the world, or think in what is perceived as a child-like fashion, but that isn't the same. In the past I think the approach was more along the lines of material and language suitable (as judged by the adult) for the age in question, or to achieve a particular purpose - language skills, desirable moral values, knowledge, etc.
In the course of keeping an eye out in charity shops for books that my granddaughter might like I have been struck by the way that certain books that either I liked as a child or that I read to my children still have a certain appeal to me as an adult - and not entirely for 'sentimental' reasons.

Children’s fiction is usually narrated by an adult (forget young adult fiction for now. It works by different mechanism). The author’s skill is to create a narrator who articulate the child protagonist’s thoughts without imposing an adult’s view points and experience but at the same time, offer the child readers new perspectives and ‘experience’ that they may not have had without reading the book. Rosemary Sutcliffe, the author of The Lantern Bearers once wrote ‘writing for children is like writing with one hand tied at the back. I try to tell the same story as I would tell adults but by leaving out many things I would include if the book were for adults’. Or something to the effect. This is not the same thing as writing in a childlike fashion.

My guess is that you find certain books from your childhood still have a certain appeal because you have interest in children’s reading through your granddaughter. Besides, there is nothing sentimental about reading your old favourite books. Sentimental comes into it if you convince yourself that you have an ‘inner child’ who can connect you to your own child-self.

[ardcarp]

Holes is a fantastic book. Briefly summarised, a kid is sent to boot camp (where the punishment is digging holes) having been falsely accused of stealing a sneaker (trainer). It all gets rather dark, as the camp is clearly run in a corrupt way...but of course there's a happy ending...but not before a donkey, onions and a mountain get involved. It's aimed at a young teenage reader, I guess, but doesn't pander or talk down...and it's written with terrific skill. IMHO, of course.

[doversoul1]

Holes is a fantastic book. Briefly summarised, a kid is sent to boot camp (where the punishment is digging holes) having been falsely accused of stealing a sneaker (trainer). It all gets rather dark, as the camp is clearly run in a corrupt way...but of course there's a happy ending...but not before a donkey, onions and a mountain get involved. It's aimed at a young teenage reader, I guess, but doesn't pander or talk down...and it's written with terrific skill. IMHO, of course.

Try imagine the novel without the ‘of course there's a happy ending’. How fantastic would it be? And would you expect a novel for adults/general readers dealing with the same situation/setting to have a happy ending?

[french frank]

would you expect a novel for adults/general readers dealing with the same situation/setting to have a happy ending?

That's an interesting question. I'm pretty sure that novels with happy endings are more popular with publishers - because they're more popular with readers, and so easier to market. Reader I married him. Justice is served. Good triumphs over evil. Virtue is rewarded.

[Richard Tarleton]

I haven't read any recent/current young people's novels but was a character in one - Our Wild Weekend, by Co Down author Martin Waddell. whom I knew slightly. I worked on a nature reserve with a field studies centre on site, where we held so-called "Wild [as in natural history wild] Weekends", and I had a dog. The novel concerned a group of young people spending a weekend in a thinly disguised version of the place and having adventures, the "warden" whom they outwitted at every turn was recognisably me, his dog's name was almost identical to my dog's name, etc. . I only knew of this when it was reviewed in the local press, and naturally discussed it with him the next time I saw him - but as my character didn't actually do anything unpleasant or illegal in the novel didn't pursue the matter further, I just thought he might have mentioned it .

The novel is not listed on his Wiki page, which seems rather out of date.

[doversoul1]

I haven't read any recent/current young people's novels but was a character in one - Our Wild Weekend, by Co Down author Martin Waddell. whom I knew slightly. I worked on a nature reserve with a field studies centre on site, where we held so-called "Wild [as in natural history wild] Weekends", and I had a dog. The novel concerned a group of young people spending a weekend in a thinly disguised version of the place and having adventures, the "warden" whom they outwitted at every turn was recognisably me, his dog's name was almost identical to my dog's name, etc. . I only knew of this when it was reviewed in the local press, and naturally discussed it with him the next time I saw him - but as my character didn't actually do anything unpleasant or illegal in the novel didn't pursue the matter further, I just thought he might have mentioned it .

The novel is not listed on his Wiki page, which seems rather out of date.

Yes, it was very discourteous of the author but you were lucky that it was someone like Martin Waddell who belonged to the previous generation of authors and the book was for older children and not for young adults. If it were the latter, you certainly wouldn’t be sitting there saying the same thing.

[DracoM]

I'm afraid that a number of the assertions made above about how YA novels etc develop and conclude are based on a priori assumptions that are not necessarily lived out by the actual novels themselves.

And once more, can it be made clear that YA writing is not at all likely to be 'children's fiction' with all that that might imply. It is a much more nuanced genre.

[Pulcinella]

Holes is a fantastic book. Briefly summarised, a kid is sent to boot camp (where the punishment is digging holes) having been falsely accused of stealing a sneaker (trainer). It all gets rather dark, as the camp is clearly run in a corrupt way...but of course there's a happy ending...but not before a donkey, onions and a mountain get involved. It's aimed at a young teenage reader, I guess, but doesn't pander or talk down...and it's written with terrific skill. IMHO, of course.

Recommended to (and bought by) a visitor from Canada for her grandchildren on her recent visit here.