The value of children's fiction

[Pulcinella]

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?

Perhaps 'happy ending' is too generic a description for the outcome in Holes; as I recall, everything gets resolved satisfactorily, which does include a happy ending for some of the characters, and just desserts for others. This would seem appropriate to the story, whoever it was written for.

[french frank]

I mentioned this discussion to my brother (the Tolkien fan) yesterday, à propos the question of whether LotR was for children/young adults. I suggested that he probably wrote it in the first place for himself, for his own amusement, and he agreed. He reminded me that The Inklings (Tolkien, CS Lewis and his elder brother, Charles Williams, Neville Coghill et al) met regularly in the Eagle and Child to read their stories to each other. Like Farmer Giles of Ham, medievalism and the academic aspects of LotR would have been an attraction for the Inklings, especially Coghill and Williams.

A major difference with Lord of the Rings (compared with the Narnia stories) is that it's not about children. Dr Rundell (who argued that adults should read children's books) said that she identified with Harry Potter because he was 12 and she was 12. Children can imagine that they could be part of the story. [On which subject my brother's eldest son once wrote to the BBC saying that he thought that Doctor Who should have a 'friend' who was a 10-year-old boy, adding, "I am a 10-year-old boy … " (I think hoping he might be offered the part). ]

[french frank]

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.

They may well be different - more 'grown-up' - but the very fact that you can classify it as 'YA writing' suggests it's not the same as books that are for adults (many of which will, in literary terms, be very bad). The age-group 30-50 (approximately) seems to me to be appropriately designated 'middle youth'. But in any case the original discussion was about 'children's books': you are the one who keeps emphasising the books for young adults.

[DracoM]

Right, then I'll shut up. Which should please many.

[Pulcinella]

Right, then I'll shut up. Which should please many.

Well at least you've got me interested enough to see if the local primary school where I do some volunteer work has copies of the Chaos Walking trilogy. If so, I might borrow them and read them; if not, I might buy them, read them, and donate them. But that might depend on if they're written for children or YAs.


The book scheduled for next half-term for the Year 6 group I work with is Wonder, by RJ Palacio.

[french frank]

Right, then I'll shut up.

I don't think there's any need for you to 'shut up' at all. On the contrary, you seemed to be correcting someone about something without specifying who, what or in what way it was incorrect.

[ardcarp]

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?

Maybe young readers need 'a happy ending' more than we do. Holes is in fact a deeply moral book...but only as seen in retrospect, and it certainly doesn't ram 'right-and-wrong' down anyone's throat.

Incidentally, if you're looking for a truly anarchic book for even younger children, try this:

http://www.walker.co.uk/How-Tom-Beat-Captain-Najork-and-His-Hired-Sportsmen-9781406343830.aspx

It's brilliant!

[doversoul1]

Maybe young readers need 'a happy ending' more than we do. Holes is in fact a deeply moral book...but only as seen in retrospect,

Exactly. That is the point of this discussion: novels for children and young adults are for children and young adults. So why this article’s author telling the world (well, The Guardian readers) that adults should read children’s books? They can be fun to read and be useful for reasons but essential read for grown-ups? As ff has already mentioned, it looks as if the term 'grown-ups' for her generation can merely mean their age and not their perceptions.

and it certainly doesn't ram 'right-and-wrong' down anyone's throat.

Nothing as old fashion as that ever comes into YA novels. Far too dull.

Incidentally, if you're looking for a truly anarchic book for even younger children, try this:

http://www.walker.co.uk/How-Tom-Beat-Captain-Najork-and-His-Hired-Sportsmen-9781406343830.aspx

It's brilliant

Thank you for the recommendation but the series wasn't one of the favourites in our household and not quite either with the current generation.

[ed.] deleted the last bit which is irrelevant to this discussion.

[agingjb]

If Middlemarch is “One of the few English novels written for grown-up people” (Virginia Woolf), then we will soon exhaust those few novels, and must make do with children's books.

[vinteuil]

If Middlemarch is “One of the few English novels written for grown-up people” (Virginia Woolf), then we will soon exhaust those few novels, and must make do with children's books.

... fortunately there were some Russians, French, and Germans who wrote novels for grown-ups. (Other nationalities are available... )


.

[Sir Velo]

If Middlemarch is “One of the few English novels written for grown-up people” (Virginia Woolf), then we will soon exhaust those few novels, and must make do with children's books.

Why make do with "let's pretend" anyway? Plenty of books of history, economics, philosophy etc. with a far greater educative value.

[doversoul1]

... fortunately there were some Russians, French, and Germans who wrote novels for grown-ups. (Other nationalities are available... )


.

...and translation is flourishing.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/apr/06/its-a-silent-conversation-authors-and-translators-on-their-unique-relationship

[french frank]

If the author thinks s/he can’t tell what the truth really is like, why write the story in the first place? Answer: It (YA Lit.) sells. And it has.

It prompts the enquiry as to why any particular individual reads fiction anyway. When my brother is not writing about philosophy or theology (just to fill out the picture!), he reads Trollope, Jane Austen, Galsworthy, Alexander McCall Smith, Harry Potter … I know (because he's said so) that he enjoys lighter, happier stories because he regards Life as being about the sadness, injustice, wickedness &c and he wants time away from it. And he likes popular, entertaining television. My tastes are not entirely the reverse, but apart from a very occasional Trollope or Jane, I read none of his other choices. I have largely given up on modern fiction though I once had the habit of buying the Booker prize-winner but finally concluded I wouldn't bother with that. I don't think I ever read books for distraction or entertainment: there's usually some other reason so, theoretically, I might pick up a modern children's/youth book - but the reason would be to assess what Dr K. Rundell meant by suggesting adults should read children's books. I would probably take notes as I read

... fortunately there were some Russians, French, and Germans who wrote novels for grown-ups. (Other nationalities are available... ).

[doversoul1]

It prompts the enquiry as to why any particular individual reads fiction anyway. When my brother is not writing about philosophy or theology (just to fill out the picture!), he reads Trollope, Jane Austen, Galsworthy, Alexander McCall Smith, Harry Potter … I know (because he's said so) that he enjoys lighter, happier stories because he regards Life as being about the sadness, injustice, wickedness &c and he wants time away from it. And he likes popular, entertaining television. My tastes are not entirely the reverse, but apart from a very occasional Trollope or Jane, I read none of his other choices. I have largely given up on modern fiction though I once had the habit of buying the Booker prize-winner but finally concluded I wouldn't bother with that. I don't think I ever read books for distraction or entertainment: there's usually some other reason so, theoretically, I might pick up a modern children's/youth book - but the reason would be to assess what Dr K. Rundell meant by suggesting adults should read children's books. I would probably take notes as I read

Bother. Too late (deleting the bit). Does this answer your question at least partly in regard to this thread?

Mark Haddon, the author of The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time said/wrote once that children’s books had a kind of ring that keeps the readers safe. He didn’t think The Curious Incident had this ring.

[french frank]

Does this answer your question at least partly in regard to this thread?

Mark Haddon, the author of The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time said/wrote once that children’s books had a kind of ring that keeps the readers safe. He didn’t think The Curious Incident had this ring.

It is a book I've felt more than half inclined to read. (Which reminds me: there's an African language which has a special tense to express: 'I had the intention of doing, but didn't'). That aside

Quickly took a look at the synopsis: that is something that I do find intriguing. One of the things which, for me, are the threads I want to follow are ideas that are developing, if you like 'ideas as narrative' rather than the usual fictional plotting and stories. I might have said, à propos this discussion, that I'm not much interested in stories about children (or Young Adults), but this seems to me not to be about a Young Adult - or it is an atypical young adult functioning (or not) in an adult world which is quite different from the adventures of a gang of pre-adults having adventures. It is, literally, 'novel'. I can understand its interest and appeal for a wide range of readers. [On the basis of having read the Wikipaedia article! ]