CCBC-Net Archives
controversy
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: drabkin <arcanis>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:11:08 -0700
Maia wrote:
This is quite true. But I think it is avoiding an even more obvious truth: We are talking about BOOKS.
Unless we are so foolish as to believe that a child will only read one book
(or series) in his/her entire lifetime, and that that one book will influence a child's entire life and cause it to change direction, and that no outside agency other than that book will have any influence whatsoever on that child's way or thinking, opinions, self-concept, whatever -- unless you are prepared to assert that all these things are true, then you are
(IMHO) being carried away by the strength of your emotions.
Children do not learn their basic attitudes to the world around them from books. I know, we book-people would like to think so, but it just isn't so. Children learn their attitudes from their parents -- from their peers -from their teachers occasionally. Children learn by watching, by listening, by example.
Books can enlarge a child's world, they don't create it. They may modify what a child has learned from parents, but they don't change the basic attitudes taught by the parents and the culture in which the child is living. They provide escapes from unpleasant reality, but they don't change or lie about that reality. And so forth.
I am Jewish, and old enough to remember World War II, and when I was growing up most of the books I had were highly uncomplimentary of Jews (if we existed in those books at all -- usually we didn't). It never bothered me, because I had figured that this was "only a book", skipped those parts and read the story. The "spare the children" philosophy so eloquently stated here would have "spared" me from Shakespeare, from most Victorian literature (which I loved), from much of Kipling (whom I adored). Like most children -- if not all -- I never lost sight of the fact that I was reading a book, that was written by a person, and that that person had their own opinions which might or might not be mine. Like most children -if not all
-- I read books for the story. It's very easy for adults to forget that children are not blank-minded little puppets who have ideas shoved into their heads through their eyes -- but that kind of forgetfulness has no place on a list of adults who work with actual children rather than theoretical ones.
And lest we all forget, censorship in the name of "good" is still censorship.
Marian Drabkin Children's Librarian Richmond Public Library Richmond, CA
Received on Mon 18 Oct 1999 10:11:08 PM CDT
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 20:11:08 -0700
Maia wrote:
This is quite true. But I think it is avoiding an even more obvious truth: We are talking about BOOKS.
Unless we are so foolish as to believe that a child will only read one book
(or series) in his/her entire lifetime, and that that one book will influence a child's entire life and cause it to change direction, and that no outside agency other than that book will have any influence whatsoever on that child's way or thinking, opinions, self-concept, whatever -- unless you are prepared to assert that all these things are true, then you are
(IMHO) being carried away by the strength of your emotions.
Children do not learn their basic attitudes to the world around them from books. I know, we book-people would like to think so, but it just isn't so. Children learn their attitudes from their parents -- from their peers -from their teachers occasionally. Children learn by watching, by listening, by example.
Books can enlarge a child's world, they don't create it. They may modify what a child has learned from parents, but they don't change the basic attitudes taught by the parents and the culture in which the child is living. They provide escapes from unpleasant reality, but they don't change or lie about that reality. And so forth.
I am Jewish, and old enough to remember World War II, and when I was growing up most of the books I had were highly uncomplimentary of Jews (if we existed in those books at all -- usually we didn't). It never bothered me, because I had figured that this was "only a book", skipped those parts and read the story. The "spare the children" philosophy so eloquently stated here would have "spared" me from Shakespeare, from most Victorian literature (which I loved), from much of Kipling (whom I adored). Like most children -- if not all -- I never lost sight of the fact that I was reading a book, that was written by a person, and that that person had their own opinions which might or might not be mine. Like most children -if not all
-- I read books for the story. It's very easy for adults to forget that children are not blank-minded little puppets who have ideas shoved into their heads through their eyes -- but that kind of forgetfulness has no place on a list of adults who work with actual children rather than theoretical ones.
And lest we all forget, censorship in the name of "good" is still censorship.
Marian Drabkin Children's Librarian Richmond Public Library Richmond, CA
Received on Mon 18 Oct 1999 10:11:08 PM CDT
