From: Nancegar_at_aol.com <Nancegar>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 21:56:58 EDT

Re Emmattic's post the other day, and especially to the p.s.: <<How are poops and farts ever "tastefully done." >>

I admit that the volume of poops and farts and similar bodily functions have become overwhelming in children's books -- but I'm not sure I accept that all authors and publishers who include them are simply seeking big bucks. Since mention of these bodily functions always elicit guilty mirth on the part of kids, as sexual references elicit guilty mirth on the part of slightly older kids, could it be that at least some authors and publishers include these references because they are part of daily life and because adults who tend to be prudish about them simply feed into the childish notion that they are somehow BAD? Years ago Judy Blume did great service by demystifying sexual references by treating them as commonplace; could it be that some responsible authors and publishers are trying to do the same for younger age groups? When these references are gratuitous, I agree that they're tasteless, but let's not get bent out of shape about them when they're included in a natural way as part of a story or when they're treated in nonfiction books that are intended to explain their functions.

Nancy Garden

____________________________________________ Please visit my website at www.nancygarden.com Budding Writers: The Exercises, #2 is up!
Received on Thu 23 Jun 2005 08:56:58 PM CDT