The value of children's fiction

[french frank]

Which contexts do you mean here?

All over the popular press - in the same way that they pick out the 'lighter' Proms to chatter about as soon as the programme is published.

(I often think of the famous EM Forster quote: "only connect"..... for me, Art matters most intensely if I can find that connection, from The Life to The Art, somewhere...
...with the GoT dragons, I think it goes back to a protective love of, & connection with, animals... )

Oh, yes, I can't deny the importance of such things to people. But for me, I resist - and resent it - if I feel my emotions are being manipulated inappropriately (getting back to The Archers, I couldn't get so involved with characters who don't really exist). It's a case of maintaining objectivity. And possibly a tendency towards 'literalness'. No such thing as schools for wizards. Or dragons. Or magic rings. I don't 'connect' with the basics, you could say!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Oh, sorry, the Merton Professor of English Language and Literature, John Ronald Reuel Tolkien.

I thought you meant him, but I was puzled by his watching the film you mentioned. (I can't find any film adaptations of JRRT before his death.)

All very unlike Terry Pratchett who took child readers seriously. He demanded his child readers to think hard and when they did, offered them new ways of looking at things.

[jayne lee wilson]

You can’t be serious. This is pop stuff. Spice Girls could have done better than this. Surely you know that one of the values of literature is to make you see something you have not seen before. Not to read what you know and feel good about it.

Very disappointing DS....have you seen any of the Lord of the Rings films I mention..? It is a prime principle of critique to have experienced a work of art before you comment upon it... and if you do, and it does nothing for you ,and in the face of it doing a great deal for many others...?
Well, evidently you haven't seen them, or you wouldn't compare the series to the Spice Girls, hopelessly confusing both artistic categories and quality-level...(musically, dramatically, textually... on every artistic level...)

So as Wittgenstein said, "whereof you do not know, thereof be silent..."

The scene I quote from is the last battle with the Orcs... it looks hopeless until Gandalf's Eagles soar into view, offering strength, power and above all - hope...
The last film has a long, slow, quietly reflective coda, which resonates in the memory long after you've seen it (for the 3rd or 4th or many more times...!).

Like all great artworks it resonates far beyond its original context. You either have the (possibly childlike, rather than child-ish)) imagination to get that, or you don't....

Pop Culture is often misunderstood. In the last Jurassic World film, as the arc-like vessel is leaving the volcanic island with the rescued Dinos (but only rescued by the profiteers for use on the mainland) one is left behind.... it is the Brachiosaur, groaning and roaring helplessly as the Volcanic flame and ash consume it. The humans look on, aghast and tearful, from the vessel. And so do we - why?
Because it was that very first realistic CGI creature that strode into view (to its own wonderful John Williams theme) in the very first Jurassic Park film, so many years before....it really is in our hearts. (I have a large model of it, with other Dinos, on a shelf...)

These things mean a great deal to many people, including me. Like a series of novels or TV dramas.
I have no problem with them co-existing alongside my love of - Beethoven, Mahler, Polish Contemporary Concertos, Haydn, and so on....
I simply try to articulate and communicate that love, and hopefully a little insightful knowledge of them too.

[doversoul1]

The serious/escapist distinction is often not easily made of course.... one escapes into the Fantasy World of Game of Thrones, but those who follow it usually have an intense emotional investment in its outcomes, and can be upset for days after a major event in the storyline, as I was when one of the Dragons was killed and then raised from the dead to fight for the dark side....how could they! I thought, how COULD they! ...

Rundell says:
"“I think there is a risk, in adulthood, through the compromises we make and the busyness of our lives, that we cease to cherish the imagination in the way we should. Because the imagination is absolutely essential for seeing the world truly.”

That appeal and archetypal power of myth and fantasy is evidently something she sees (and thinks others may find beneficial) in fiction supposedly written for children, and links with those various film fantasy franchises I mentioned above...
I'm not in the least surprised their popularity grows in our difficult world, the seemingly, endlessly complex and unfinished business of our lives. I need them more and more myself...

There is nothing wrong with reading escapist fiction but escapist is not a synonym of fantasy. Try these. There are many more if you are interested in understanding the difference rather than just thinking about it.

Fantasy: The literature of subversion by Rosemary Jackson
In Defence of Fantasy: A study of the genre in English and American literature by Ann Swinfen
The Fictive and the Imaginary by Wolfgang Iser

What books have you in mind (the second point)?

Re: your post #33
I am referring to the dialogue you quoted.

There is nothing wrong with being moved by pop culture/films but it is irrelevant when the discussion is about literature, since they work by different mechanism: pop culture works directly on emotions as you describe in your post.

[jayne lee wilson]

There is nothing wrong with reading escapist fiction but escapist is not a synonym of fantasy. Try these. There are many more if you are interested in understanding the difference rather than just thinking about it.

Fantasy: The literature of subversion by Rosemary Jackson
In Defence of Fantasy: A study of the genre in English and American literature by Ann Swinfen
The Fictive and the Imaginary by Wolfgang Iser

What books have you in mind (the second point)?

The Narnia books (which I actually read on a girlfriend's recommendation when I was 25) would be a good example but - I'm done wth Lit Crit, sorry! I'll just have to wait for the next Big Film...)

Anyway I was only trying to draw some wider parallels .... I really have said just about all I can to what appears to be a bunch of unimaginative, un-empathetic teachers....
So that's it, I'm done, I'm outta here.... happy reading (and I fervently hope) happy adventurous viewing....(go on, curious cats, you know you want to...)

[doversoul1]

Whether or not, I wasn't meaning that escapism itself was sad but that things that would be a 'happy' reality are contemplated as hoped for, but not reality. The full context is:

'She thinks children’s books remind adults what it’s like “to long for impossible and perhaps-not-impossible things” like justice, love, adventure and happiness, and to feel a sense of hope, however childish'. In other words, it's sad if hoping for justice, love, adventure and happiness are escapist fantasy, rather reality to celebrate.

But, yes, I imagine a lot of TV drama is escapism, harmlessly focusing on unreality where one has no stake in the outcome, rather than worrying about how things really are.

Going back to the point about adults reading children’s books/literature:

There really is no point in adults reading books written for children unless they have a specific reason to do so because children’s fiction is written for the readers who can imagine what they might be like when they grow up. This is something adults can never do no matter how much they believe they have ‘inner child’ in themselves. Adults can remember what they thought but that’s a completely different thing. Adults can read and enjoy children’s books for various reasons but not as an addition to the literature they read.

[doversoul1]

The Narnia books (which I actually read on a girlfriend's recommendation when I was 25) would be a good example but - I'm done wth Lit Crit, sorry! I'll just have to wait for the next Big Film...)

Anyway I was only trying to draw some wider parallels .... I really have said just about all I can to what appears to be a bunch of unimaginative, un-empathetic teachers....
So that's it, I'm done, I'm outta here.... happy reading (and I fervently hope) happy adventurous viewing....(go on, curious cats, you know you want to...)

Narnia books were written for children. Enjoy your next great escape.

[MrGongGong]

Going back to the point about adults reading children’s books/literature:

There really is no point in adults reading books written for children unless they have a specific reason to do so because children’s fiction is written for the readers who can imagine what they might be like when they grow up. This is something adults can never do no matter how much they believe they have ‘inner child’ in themselves. Adults can remember what they thought but that’s a completely different thing. Adults can read and enjoy children’s books for various reasons but not as an addition to the literature they read.

That's very absolutist.
Who made these rules?

I think you might be also making an assumption about the intentions of those who write books.

I wouldn't assume that because something is marketed in a particular way that it means that the thing itself is intrinsically designed for the demographic that it is marketed at. We have talked about this before in relation to music. If I listen to the Kurtags playing Játékok as an adult am I hearing something different to if I was a child?

[MrGongGong]

Narnia books were written for children. Enjoy your next great escape.

I think they were mainly written to "sell" Christianity

[doversoul1]

That's very absolutist.
Who made these rules?

My comment is the response to the article in the opening post. There are plenty of points if you have your own reasons to read them.

I think you might be also making an assumption about the intentions of those who write books.

The article is concerned with literature for children and not the books written for or marketed by those who have an eye for a wider market.

I wouldn't assume that because something is marketed in a particular way that it means that the thing itself is intrinsically designed for the demographic that it is marketed at. We have talked about this before in relation to music. If I listen to the Kurtags playing Játékok as an adult am I hearing something different to if I was a child?

Children’s clothes or children’s bikes are made for that particular demographic, as are children’s books or they aren’t children’s anything. If someone has reasons to use or read something made for children, that’s fine but that does not mean things that are made for children are generally useful for adults.

I think they were mainly written to "sell" Christianity

You have been sold the popular literary criticism.

[agingjb]

As Tolkien, or was it Lewis, said, the people most opposed to escape are not prisoners but jailers.

[DracoM]

At base line, good YA / children's fiction faces many of the same issues that so-called 'adult' fiction tackles. Relationships, potentialities, deficiencies,. traps and solutions.

The LANGUAGE and CHARACTER COMPLEXITY may be different, but the underlying issues are mostly the same.

Much YA etc fiction also depends on being rattling good narratives that grab and retain the attention.

[doversoul1]

At base line, good YA / children's fiction faces many of the same issues that so-called 'adult' fiction tackles. Relationships, potentialities, deficiencies,. traps and solutions.

The LANGUAGE and CHARACTER COMPLEXITY may be different, but the underlying issues are mostly the same.

Much YA etc fiction also depends on being rattling good narratives that grab and retain the attention.

You still don't answer my question; would you read them if these books were published as novels for adult/general readers?

My guess is you wouldn’t. Young adults are after all still ‘children’ and books written for them do not make the readers confront with the ‘real’ stark, naked truths about the issues they are telling as we expect general novels do. This means that we, adults can enjoy all the excitement, knowing that we are safe from the final realisations and hopelessness. There are plenty of DARK bits in the narratives but they can all be sorted in the end.

This is why young adult novel market has exploded: adults can enjoy all the issues human beings are facing in our modern world but with the knowledge that they/we are sitting comfortably in safe seats. Again, there is nothing wrong with reading these books but I guess you wouldn’t count it as valuable in the way the article in ff’s opening post insists.

[french frank]

At base line, good YA / children's fiction faces many of the same issues that so-called 'adult' fiction tackles. Relationships, potentialities, deficiencies,. traps and solutions.

The LANGUAGE and CHARACTER COMPLEXITY may be different, but the underlying issues are mostly the same.

Much YA etc fiction also depends on being rattling good narratives that grab and retain the attention.

True, but that doesn't touch upon the premise of the book which was the subject of the review mentioned in the OP: that somehow, in some general way, adults would benefit from reading children's books (book title Why You Should Read Children’s Books, Even Though You Are So Old and Wise). Why 'should'? Why the sneer at adults who really feel they'd prefer to leave children's/young adults' books behind? The 'So' in the title is tantamount to saying: 'You Who Think You're So Much Wiser Than Children'. The author has an agenda: I didn't feel persuaded, that's all. It isn't about the qualities of modern children's/youth fiction but why adults should read them. Her argument didn't persuade me that next time I should pick up some good children's fiction rather than a new … or old … novel.

[Stanfordian]

My son has never read a novel and neither has my friend who has retired from writing concert reviews in newspapers. We regularly read to our son at home but I wonder what literature both of them encountered at school. Strange / Curious!