CCBC-Net Archives
[CCBC-Net] boy in the stripped pajamas -caveat
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Benita Strnad <bstrnad>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 19:42:59 -0600
I too am concerned about historical inaccuracies to be found in fiction. Apparently others are more concerned about it in non-fiction as the recent furor over "Million Little Pieces" illustrates. Putting elements of fiction in non-fiction is a big no-no because it is considered lying, but misrepresenting historical truths in fiction doesn't seem to be as much of a problem for most folks. (We tend to have more of a buyer beware attitude.) I think it should be. It is really hard to unteach myths that grow up around historical truths. I believe that publishers and authors do have a responsibility to let readers know when artistic license may have played around with historical facts. This can easily be done through authors notes or historical notes placed at the beginning or end of a book. We need to put more pressure on publishers to encourage them to put this kind of note in books. (I really appreciated the extensive historical background notes in Zelinsky's Rapunzel and Wisniewski's Golem. They are so helpful when using these books in the classroom. Both author and publisher should be commended for this practice.)
Some may find this kind of solution to be superfluous. It should go without saying that a work of fiction does not have to be historically accurate. However, the age group of the reader comes into play at this point. Because this book is likely to be marketed to those too young to be able to judge the difference from reality and fiction human development is an important factor. Developmentally many children do not reach the point where they can easily distinguish between reality and fiction, past and present until sometime between the ages of 10 - 12. (4th to 6th grade) Therefore, teachers and parents have to be careful to make sure that historical inaccuracies are explained and understood by younger readers.
Adult readers and reviewers sometimes forget to look at material presented in various media formats through the eyes of the intended readers. (Therefore, I appreciate the remarks from Ms. Rassmussen regarding her internal decision making processes used for deciding on an age group. It is somewhat reassuring to know that these decisions are not made in an arbitrary manner.) Asking what interpretation an elementary school student is going to put on material that they read is an important and valid question to ask. I do not think that asking this question and reasoning out an answer through experience with children is censorship. Allowing children access to this kind of material does carry with it a huge caveat - the responsibility of making sure that readers understand the historical background and realities of what they are reading. That is a hard burden to bear on the part of parents and teachers.
I have long been an advocate of letting readers make their own decisions about material that they read. However, in some cases I feel strongly that letting readers make assumptions is the wrong approach. There are some cases in which the librarian, teacher, or parent must also be a guide. It is important to realize that even with guidance some readers are going to come to erroneous conclusions. There is nothing that any of us can do about that except to prepare the readers and help guide them to resources that can answer questions that might arise from what they have read.
I have not read the book, but did read the review from the Guardian (a source that I generally respect) and find it strange that the reviewer did not mention more about the potential problems with this book. It is up to us to get the word out about the book and do a bit of educating about its use. This might be one of those books that those who have concerns and questions about historical accuracy might wish to examine closely and recommend, with caveats included, to teachers and parents when we can do so.
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2006 19:42:59 -0600
I too am concerned about historical inaccuracies to be found in fiction. Apparently others are more concerned about it in non-fiction as the recent furor over "Million Little Pieces" illustrates. Putting elements of fiction in non-fiction is a big no-no because it is considered lying, but misrepresenting historical truths in fiction doesn't seem to be as much of a problem for most folks. (We tend to have more of a buyer beware attitude.) I think it should be. It is really hard to unteach myths that grow up around historical truths. I believe that publishers and authors do have a responsibility to let readers know when artistic license may have played around with historical facts. This can easily be done through authors notes or historical notes placed at the beginning or end of a book. We need to put more pressure on publishers to encourage them to put this kind of note in books. (I really appreciated the extensive historical background notes in Zelinsky's Rapunzel and Wisniewski's Golem. They are so helpful when using these books in the classroom. Both author and publisher should be commended for this practice.)
Some may find this kind of solution to be superfluous. It should go without saying that a work of fiction does not have to be historically accurate. However, the age group of the reader comes into play at this point. Because this book is likely to be marketed to those too young to be able to judge the difference from reality and fiction human development is an important factor. Developmentally many children do not reach the point where they can easily distinguish between reality and fiction, past and present until sometime between the ages of 10 - 12. (4th to 6th grade) Therefore, teachers and parents have to be careful to make sure that historical inaccuracies are explained and understood by younger readers.
Adult readers and reviewers sometimes forget to look at material presented in various media formats through the eyes of the intended readers. (Therefore, I appreciate the remarks from Ms. Rassmussen regarding her internal decision making processes used for deciding on an age group. It is somewhat reassuring to know that these decisions are not made in an arbitrary manner.) Asking what interpretation an elementary school student is going to put on material that they read is an important and valid question to ask. I do not think that asking this question and reasoning out an answer through experience with children is censorship. Allowing children access to this kind of material does carry with it a huge caveat - the responsibility of making sure that readers understand the historical background and realities of what they are reading. That is a hard burden to bear on the part of parents and teachers.
I have long been an advocate of letting readers make their own decisions about material that they read. However, in some cases I feel strongly that letting readers make assumptions is the wrong approach. There are some cases in which the librarian, teacher, or parent must also be a guide. It is important to realize that even with guidance some readers are going to come to erroneous conclusions. There is nothing that any of us can do about that except to prepare the readers and help guide them to resources that can answer questions that might arise from what they have read.
I have not read the book, but did read the review from the Guardian (a source that I generally respect) and find it strange that the reviewer did not mention more about the potential problems with this book. It is up to us to get the word out about the book and do a bit of educating about its use. This might be one of those books that those who have concerns and questions about historical accuracy might wish to examine closely and recommend, with caveats included, to teachers and parents when we can do so.
-- You are the same today that you'll be five years from now except for two things: the people you meet and the books you read. Mac McMillan Benita Strnad Curriculum Materials Librarian McLure Education Library The University of AlabamaReceived on Fri 03 Mar 2006 07:42:59 PM CST
