From: Sally Miller <derbymiller>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:24:00 -0400

    Do you think our discussion of The Hidden Adult might be getting a little skewed because of the negative implications and associations evoked by the word "manipulative"? As a writer of children's books, I was ready to take offense at the idea that my books might be "manipulative" in any way, but now that I've thought harder about Perry's arguments and the responses of others, I have to admit that my books too could be considered to be subtly manipulative; but not, I insist, because I had a conscious intent to change my young readers. Or did I? Some of you may remember Jacob and the Stranger, my second book; obviously I was in sympathy with young Jacob's propensity to put enjoyment of life ahead of the conscientious devotion to duty that characterized his neighbors. And in my last book, No Mush Today, am I not endorsing a child's sometime right to rebel?
    But I've always been more interested in words than theories. And "manipulative" is such an ugly, negative term. Its associations have strayed far from its primary, more innocent meaning of to handle skillfully. (Webster's Collegiate). For me it brings up visions of the wife or husband who gives or refuses sex or money in order to achieve ulterior ends. Or the child who has learned that temper tantrums in a public area may make an embarrassed parent give in to his demands.
    I can't think, though, of a more apt word that Perry might have used. (Can you?) So perhaps as we are reading and reflecting on the "hidden" adult, we can keep in the back of our minds a picture of our hapless authors blissfully unaware (for the most part) of the skillful way in which they are perhaps changing a child's perception of the world. Because, if we were completely aware of all the possible effects of our words, who would dare write? Sally Derby
Received on Mon 20 Jul 2009 08:24:00 AM CDT