From: kathleen duey <kathleenduey>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:21:22 -0700

I just want to say that I am reading all of this with intense interest and thanks to everyone contributing.



kathleen duey




----- Original Message ----- From: <ccbc-net-request at lists.education.wisc.edu> To: <ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 10:00 AM Subject: CCBC-Net Digest, Vol 48, Issue 19


> Send CCBC-Net mailing list submissions to
> ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ccbc-net-request at lists.education.wisc.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ccbc-net-owner at lists.education.wisc.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CCBC-Net digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Hidden Adult (valhobbs)
> 2. Re: A question for Perry (Mullin, Margaret Boling)
> 3. Re: Hidden Adult (Perry Nodelman)
> 4. "Manipulative" (Sally Miller)
> 5. Re: "Manipulative" (Paul W Goldschmidt)
> 6. Re: "Manipulative" (James Elliott)
> 7. Hidden Adults & manipulation & A Snowy Day (Kathy Johnson)
> 8. Hidden Adults & manipulation & A Snowy Day (Kathy Johnson)
> 9. Re: "Manipulative" (Perry Nodelman)
> 10. THE SNOWY DAY (fran manushkin)
> 11. Re: Hidden Adults & manipulation & A Snowy Day (James Elliott)
> 12. KEATS/THE SNOWY DAY (Lbhcove at aol.com)
> 13. Re: KEATS/THE SNOWY DAY (PAGOOSE at aol.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 12:08:59 -0700
> From: valhobbs <valhobbs at cox.net>
> Subject: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adult
> To: CCBC -Net <ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu>
> Message-ID: <58C09EB9-93CE-4960-806D-DD46330FAF16 at cox.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> I, too, have been following the discussion with interest. Like
> Butcher, I too am a kit lit reader, author, mother and former
> teacher. I'd like to add that when I write I do my best to become my
> characters--so much so that breaking out of character is sometimes
> difficult. That is not to say that I always do it well, or that I
> completely submerge my adult self, but there is never the intention
> to manipulate in any way or for any reason; in fact, if any
> manipulation is being done it's probably coming from my "inner
> child", trying to have her say (!) And metaphors/themes/symbols, if
> forced, never work. They arise organically in fiction as they do in
> "real" life, only, one hopes, a bit more creatively.
>
> Valerie Hobbs
> www.valeriehobbs.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:30:25 -0400
> From: "Mullin, Margaret Boling" <mbmullin at indiana.edu>
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] A question for Perry
> To: ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Message-ID: <20090719173025.zd9rf3qfxkows44g at webmail.iu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format="flowed"
>
> I really appreciated Marcy's question and Perry's response.
>
> I was planning to post this response to Marcy individually, but then
> decided to post to the list. As an elementary teacher and doctoral
> student in literacy education, I also read children's and young adult
> literature avidly. I thought that Perry's reflection about the
> presence of manipulative messages in advertising was right on target.
>
> As a teacher, I believe that children's lit, both picture books and
> novels provide excellent vehicles for helping students learn how to
> identify and respond to such manipulative messages. Such approaches
> are typically referred to as critical literacy and focus on helping
> students disrupt commonplace notions, examine multiple viewpoints,
> focus on sociopolitical issues, and take action to promote social
> justice. In my experiences with my students, I find that they are much
> more interested in participating in discussions focused on bullying,
> whose voice is heard, who is marginalized or excluded, and fairness.
> These discussions help my students become involved on a very personal
> level, as compared to discussions which ask them to focus on which
> strategies they've used to understand the text. Perhaps critical
> discussions give them an authentic reason to understand a text. When I
> give students opportunities to unpack issues in the text, they are much
> more engaged and choose to read more.
>
> Two articles might be of interest to teachers interested in learning more.
>
> Lewison, M., Flint, A., & Van Sluys, K. (2002). "Taking on Critical
> Literacy: The Journey of Newcomers and Novices." _Language Arts_,
> 79(5), pp. 382-392.
>
> Clarke, L. & Whitney, E. (2009). "Walking in Their Shoes: Using
> Multiple-Perspectives Texts as a Bridge to Critical Literacy." _The
> Reading Teacher_, 62(6), pp. 530-534.
>
> Best,
> Margaret Boling Mullin
> Elementary Reading Specialist, Indianapolis, IN
> Doctoral Candidate, Dept. of Literacy, Culture & Language, Indiana
> University
>
>
> Quoting Perry Nodelman <perry_nodelman at shaw.ca>:
>
>> On 18-Jul-09, at 2:00 PM, Marcy Troy wrote:
>>
>>> Perry,
>>>
>>> I have been reading about your book for several days and twirling
>>> your ideas around in my brain. Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish I
>>> could have read your book before posting, but I can't. So if my
>>> wonder is answered in your book, forgive me. As a relatively new
>>> teacher, I love to read picture books to my 4th and 5th graders.
>>> Oftentimes, we talk about the message. We also read many novels. If
>>> I am understanding your position, you feel that the embedding of a
>>> message in childrens literature is manipulation of the minds of
>>> children. Is this a correct statement about the message that you
>>> wish to convey in your book, The Hidden Adult ? If so, I would be
>>> interested to know why you think it is a bad thing.
>>
>> I hadn't really thought about in in these terms before this
>> conversation on CCBC-net, but yes, Marcy, guess I do think that
>> children's literature in inherently and characteristically
>> manipulative. As a literature written by adults for people they think
>> of as needing both protection from certain aspects of reality and
>> education about other aspects of it, it has to be manipulative,
>> right? It wants to manipulate its implied audience into knowing less
>> than there is to know about things like sex and and violence, and
>> also, learning information and values that the adults in charge of
>> writing and producing and sharing it with children approve of. Or
>> even in just assuming an idea of childhood that might well not fit a
>> child reader's sense of him- or herself, they imply a manipulative
>> drive to encourage child readers to be more like the children the
>> texts present as typically and desirably childlike.
>>
>> As for it being a bad thing. Well, in my last post yesterday, I named
>> four ways in which it might actually be a good thing, or at least not
>> inherently and absolutely harmful to young readers. But I do think
>> that it is often a bad thing, because I believe that any effort to
>> manipulate other human beings of any age without them being aware they
>> are being manipulated is, well, manipulative--an assault on their self-
>> control and their inherent right to figure things out for themselves
>> and arrive at values and beliefs they fully understand the
>> implications of.
>>
>> But of course, the world is always going to try to manipulate us all
>> against our will, and Macdonald's and Burger King are going to try to
>> make us believe without really thinking it through that a sensible
>> portion for one person is an amount of hamburger that might well feed
>> three or four traditional gluttons, and the guys on Fox News are going
>> to work hard to convince us that shouting down opinions they dislike
>> represents rational political discourse and that rich white men are
>> the most truly oppressed and downtrodden group in America. And
>> children's books are therefore always going to try to manipulate an
>> audience they inherently take to be vulnerable to manipulation, or
>> else the literature wouldn't even keep on existing. If the literature
>> won't really change, then, it's up to wise parents and teachers to
>> help the children they know change, and develop enough critical
>> thinking skills to fend off manipulation--and even, also, to wisely
>> enjoy the clever attempts to manipulate them without having to buy
>> into the often suspect values and ideas about who they are or should
>> be that texts for young people so often try to sell their audiences.
>> Learning to read and respond to the pleasure a text for children
>> offers without necessarily needing to commit to its themes and values--
>> that would open up young readers to a vast range of intriguing
>> children's literature experiences.
>>
>> Dancing contentedly on the brink of doom, with a safety net of
>> critical thinking.
>> Perry
>> _____________
>> Perry Nodelman
>> http://pernodel.wordpress.com/
>>
>> Book Trailers:
>> The Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3t7JAfPQeA
>> The Ghosthunters2: The Curse of the Evening Eye
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qapDE1Kwnis
>> The Ghosthunters I: The Proof that Ghosts Exist
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw0ow7oQV7k
>>
>>>
>>> Not intending to be confrontational, just trying to understand,
>>>
>>> Marcy Troy
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: ccbc-net-request at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>> To: ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>> Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 12:00:02 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
>>> Subject: CCBC-Net Digest, Vol 48, Issue 17
>>>
>>> Send CCBC-Net mailing list submissions to
>>> ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>>
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>> ccbc-net-request at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>>
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>> ccbc-net-owner at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>> than "Re: Contents of CCBC-Net digest..."
>>>
>>>
>>> Today's Topics:
>>>
>>> 1. Hidden Adult and Adult Agenda (Megan Schliesman)
>>> 2. Re: Hidden Adult and Adult Agenda (Perry Nodelman)
>>> 3. Re: Hidden Adult and Adult Agenda (Perry Nodelman)
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 12:31:32 -0500
>>> From: Megan Schliesman <schliesman at education.wisc.edu>
>>> Subject: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adult and Adult Agenda
>>> To: "ccbc-net, Subscribers of" <ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu>
>>> Message-ID: <4A60B574.1070604 at education.wisc.edu>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>>
>>> Perry Nodelman wrote:
>>>
>>> "I find myself having to admit that some of the things i like about
>>> those likeable texts are exactly the ways in which they work to
>>> manipulate their readers, including me."
>>>
>>> Perry, I'm curious about whether you see this manipulation as being
>>> conscious, or whether it has become subconsciously imbedded in our
>>> understanding of the genre, so that authors and artists may in fact
>>> be--at least at times--unwitting participants. Of course, we can all
>>> think of books where the manipulation is obvious rather than artful,
>>> but
>>> it is those artful books--the ones that manage to be well written,
>>> sometimes beautifully written, and child-centered--that I find myself
>>> thinking in terms of this idea of the manipulation of the child
>>> reader.
>>>
>>> Your discussion of A Very Special House by Maurice Sendak suggests a
>>> concsiousness to this. Would you say that is typically true?
>>>
>>> And what do others of you-- readers, and writers or illustrators--
>>> think
>>> about this?
>>>
>>> Megan
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Megan Schliesman, Librarian
>>> Cooperative Children's Book Center
>>> School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison
>>> 600 N. Park Street, Room 4290
>>> Madison, WI 53706
>>>
>>> 608/262-9503
>>> schliesman at education.wisc.edu
>>>
>>> www.education.wisc.edu/ccbc/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:13:26 -0500
>>> From: Perry Nodelman <perry_nodelman at shaw.ca>
>>> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adult and Adult Agenda
>>> To: Megan Schliesman <schliesman at education.wisc.edu>
>>> Cc: "ccbc-net, Subscribers of" <ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu>
>>> Message-ID: <AD312A76-CACD-48BF-BABA-3357DD77136F at shaw.ca>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>>>
>>> On 17-Jul-09, at 12:31 PM, Megan Schliesman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perry Nodelman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "I find myself having to admit that some of the things i like about
>>>> those likeable texts are exactly the ways in which they work to
>>>> manipulate their readers, including me."
>>>>
>>>> Perry, I'm curious about whether you see this manipulation as being
>>>> conscious, or whether it has become subconsciously imbedded in our
>>>> understanding of the genre, so that authors and artists may in fact
>>>> be--at least at times--unwitting participants. Of course, we can all
>>>> think of books where the manipulation is obvious rather than artful,
>>>> but
>>>> it is those artful books--the ones that manage to be well written,
>>>> sometimes beautifully written, and child-centered--that I find
>>>> myself thinking in terms of this idea of the manipulation of the
>>>> child reader.
>>>
>>> Hmm. I'm wondering if it's a combination of both conscious
>>> manipulation and unconscious embedding.
>>>
>>> A lot of it is, of course, conscious. We do tend almost always to
>>> talk about children's books almost exclusively in terms of their
>>> pedagogical effects on children--and not always just in relation to
>>> their obvious didactic contents. For instance, we say things like,
>>> "It's a funny book, so it'll help children to develop a sense of
>>> humour," or, "it's a fun read, which will encourage children to think
>>> positively abut literacy" (University students I taught in children's
>>> lit courses were always saying things like that, and I hard to read
>>> then that a good enough reason for children to read a fun book would
>>> be simply that it was fun.).
>>>
>>> Also, most of our endless worrying about which books to keep out of
>>> children's hands is a concern with what the books might teach or how
>>> they might manipulate pliable young minds. Our current North American
>>> discourse about children and books is almost a hundred percent about
>>> how the books can or should or shouldn't or will or won't manipulate
>>> young readers. And when I say "our" here, i don't mean just adults--
>>> how often have you heard a child say something like, "It's a good
>>> book, but not for little kids younger than me because they might get
>>> nightmares from it." These children have already learned the
>>> acceptable way to talk about children's books--in terms of going
>>> through all the reasons for keeping them out of vulnerable younger
>>> hands before actually recommending them as safely okay.
>>>
>>> And in that context, then, it'd be almost impossible for anyone with
>>> much knowledge of children's books not to be engaged in unconscious
>>> thinking about how the books might effect or manipulate young readers,
>>> without any even awareness of doing so. From its beginning,
>>> children's literature has been defined as a literature which both
>>> educates young readers and, just as significantly, leaves things out--
>>> things children ought not to know about in order to preserve their
>>> childlikeness. If you know your business as a writer or editor or
>>> publisher or library purchaser, then, and you know what makes a
>>> children's book a children's book and what makes a saleable children's
>>> book, then you're probably unconsciously operating with ideas about
>>> children's literature based on your previous experience of it that
>>> emerge from those primal concerns. (Your own description, Megan, of
>>> books that "well written, sometimes beautifully written, and child-
>>> centered," for instance--how much are our idea of good writing in
>>> texts for young people tied up with ideas of suitable simplicity, and
>>> how much is "child-centered" understood in terms of how well the book
>>> evokes the right kind of utopian childhood?)
>>>
>>> As far as I can see, all the qualities characteristic or even just
>>> typical of texts for young people that I describe in The Hidden Adult
>>> emerge from and relate to efforts to manipulate of child readers, to
>>> create a safe version of childhood for children to imagine as being
>>> where they are and who they are. As I say in The Hidden Adult,
>>> children's literature is like the home that so many of its
>>> conventional texts insist is the best place for children to be--a
>>> haven protected against the dangers of the bigger world out there.
>>> And in our time, especially, childhood is increasingly understood by
>>> far too many parents, teachers, librarians, and others as a state of
>>> constantly being under siege by the dark forces of out there--and
>>> therefore, for many children nowadays, a prison of constant adult
>>> surveillance and never being very far away from the world-views of the
>>> Disney folk and their cronies in the kid's entertainment biz and never
>>> going outside to play unsupervised with your friends and without an
>>> appropriately age-rated video game in your hand. Childhood IS, more
>>> and more constantly, a state of being under authority and
>>> manipulation? And so children's literature is that, too?
>>>
>>> Cheerily on the edge of doom,
>>> Perry
>>> _____________
>>> Perry Nodelman
>>> http://pernodel.wordpress.com/
>>>
>>> Book Trailers:
>>> The Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3t7JAfPQeA
>>> The Ghosthunters2: The Curse of the Evening Eye
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qapDE1Kwnis
>>> The Ghosthunters I: The Proof that Ghosts Exist
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw0ow7oQV7k
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Perry Nodelman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "I find myself having to admit that some of the things i like about
>>>> those likeable texts are exactly the ways in which they work to
>>>> manipulate their readers, including me."
>>>>
>>>> Perry, I'm curious about whether you see this manipulation as being
>>>> conscious, or whether it has become subconsciously imbedded in our
>>>> understanding of the genre, so that authors and artists may in fact
>>>> be--at least at times--unwitting participants. Of course, we can all
>>>> think of books where the manipulation is obvious rather than artful,
>>>> but
>>>> it is those artful books--the ones that manage to be well written,
>>>> sometimes beautifully written, and child-centered--that I find myself
>>>> thinking in terms of this idea of the manipulation of the child
>>>> reader.
>>>>
>>>> Your discussion of A Very Special House by Maurice Sendak suggests a
>>>> concsiousness to this. Would you say that is typically true?
>>>>
>>>> And what do others of you-- readers, and writers or illustrators--
>>>> think
>>>> about this?
>>>>
>>>> Megan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Megan Schliesman, Librarian
>>>> Cooperative Children's Book Center
>>>> School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison
>>>> 600 N. Park Street, Room 4290
>>>> Madison, WI 53706
>>>>
>>>> 608/262-9503
>>>> schliesman at education.wisc.edu
>>>>
>>>> www.education.wisc.edu/ccbc/
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CCBC-Net mailing list
>>>> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>>> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>>>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 3
>>> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 20:51:57 -0500
>>> From: Perry Nodelman <perry_nodelman at shaw.ca>
>>> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adult and Adult Agenda
>>> To: "ccbc-net, Subscribers of" <ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu>
>>> Message-ID: <A5EC2055-AC4D-46A0-90E9-136A922A5FC4 at shaw.ca>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>>>
>>> Looking it over again, I see that last post of mine was pretty
>>> depressing--too depressing, maybe? Let me try to think of some ways
>>> in which all of children's literature always might not be dangerously
>>> counter-productive from beginning to end.
>>>
>>> So: it's characteristically and inherently manipulative. Well, yes,
>>> I think it is. But:
>>>
>>> First, in good texts for young people it's fun as a reader to be
>>> manipulated. The rich experience they offer of a childhood utopia
>>> where childhood innocence is always better than adult cynicism and
>>> pessimism and things always work out very well for the children we
>>> care about can be very, very satisfying to read about, for both
>>> children and adults. It's like chocolate, maybe--a delight to taste,
>>> but too much eaten too inattentively can make you sick (and tired of
>>> chocolate). And if you're controlling how much chocolate you eat,
>>> then why waste your chocolate ration on bad chocolate? Concentrate on
>>> the really tasty quality stuff--let yourself be manipulated
>>> ingeniously
>>>
>>> Second, the chocolate can still taste good even to those who know how
>>> sick it can make you, and who eat it carefully and warily. So, too,
>>> manipulative books; you can enjoy their attempts to manipulate just
>>> as much if you know how manipulative they are and actively work
>>> against letting them manipulate you too much. It can be a game with
>>> two equal players, not just one manipulater and one completely
>>> gullible manipulee. The more critical thinking the better, for human
>>> beings of all ages and stages. Down with thoughtless and
>>> unquestioning responses. Down, I say! Let children be wise enough to
>>> be able enjoy the same kind of nostalgia for what we identify as
>>> childlike innocence as adults do when they read children's books.
>>>
>>> Third, some of what we've been calling "manipulation" is really just
>>> plain old teaching, and some of what adults try to teach children is
>>> things they should legitimately be taught. Sometimes we let our faith
>>> in the wonderful individual freedom of each and all to get in the way
>>> if our sense of responsibility to help children find ways to cope with
>>> being alive, as children and in their future life as adults. It's an
>>> adult duty to manipulate children--i.e., to socialize them, to help
>>> them become capable of living in the culture they inhabit and
>>> understanding the world.
>>>
>>> And fourth, the really great children's books, i think, tend to
>>> undermine their own apparent manipulations, to say both what they seem
>>> to teach and its opposite. Like the books I admire that I named
>>> yesterday: Peter Rabbit is both about the bad things that happen when
>>> you disobey your mother and the satisfyingly heroic adventures you can
>>> have when you do. Charlotte's Web is about both enduring friendship
>>> and the ways affections come to an end (Fern's transfer of her
>>> attention away from Charlotte), about both triumphing over impending
>>> death and having to give in to it. And so on. Really good writers
>>> for children can always find a way of both seeming to meet the
>>> conventions and typical characteristics of children's books and at the
>>> same time defying them, or being ambivalent about them. I suspect
>>> that's why so many adults write essays about books like Peter Rabbit
>>> or Charlotte's Web or Where the Wild Things Are; they mean much more
>>> and are much less definite about it than they at first appear to, so
>>> that different readers can interpret them not only differently but
>>> often, oppositely. (I say more about this in the last section of The
>>> Hidden Adult.)
>>>
>>> So manipulation, yes. Bad for children and other human beings? Not
>>> necessarily.
>>>
>>> Stepping gingerly away from the brink of doom,
>>> Perry
>>>
>>> _____________
>>> Perry Nodelman
>>> http://pernodel.wordpress.com/
>>>
>>> Book Trailers:
>>> The Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3t7JAfPQeA
>>> The Ghosthunters2: The Curse of the Evening Eye
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qapDE1Kwnis
>>> The Ghosthunters I: The Proof that Ghosts Exist
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw0ow7oQV7k
>>>
>>> On 17-Jul-09, at 4:13 PM, Perry Nodelman wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 17-Jul-09, at 12:31 PM, Megan Schliesman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Perry Nodelman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "I find myself having to admit that some of the things i like about
>>>>> those likeable texts are exactly the ways in which they work to
>>>>> manipulate their readers, including me."
>>>>>
>>>>> Perry, I'm curious about whether you see this manipulation as being
>>>>> conscious, or whether it has become subconsciously imbedded in our
>>>>> understanding of the genre, so that authors and artists may in fact
>>>>> be--at least at times--unwitting participants. Of course, we can
>>>>> all
>>>>> think of books where the manipulation is obvious rather than artful,
>>>>> but
>>>>> it is those artful books--the ones that manage to be well written,
>>>>> sometimes beautifully written, and child-centered--that I find
>>>>> myself thinking in terms of this idea of the manipulation of the
>>>>> child reader.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm. I'm wondering if it's a combination of both conscious
>>>> manipulation and unconscious embedding.
>>>>
>>>> A lot of it is, of course, conscious. We do tend almost always to
>>>> talk about children's books almost exclusively in terms of their
>>>> pedagogical effects on children--and not always just in relation to
>>>> their obvious didactic contents. For instance, we say things like,
>>>> "It's a funny book, so it'll help children to develop a sense of
>>>> humour," or, "it's a fun read, which will encourage children to think
>>>> positively abut literacy" (University students I taught in
>>>> children's
>>>> lit courses were always saying things like that, and I hard to read
>>>> then that a good enough reason for children to read a fun book would
>>>> be simply that it was fun.).
>>>>
>>>> Also, most of our endless worrying about which books to keep out of
>>>> children's hands is a concern with what the books might teach or how
>>>> they might manipulate pliable young minds. Our current North
>>>> American
>>>> discourse about children and books is almost a hundred percent about
>>>> how the books can or should or shouldn't or will or won't manipulate
>>>> young readers. And when I say "our" here, i don't mean just adults--
>>>> how often have you heard a child say something like, "It's a good
>>>> book, but not for little kids younger than me because they might get
>>>> nightmares from it." These children have already learned the
>>>> acceptable way to talk about children's books--in terms of going
>>>> through all the reasons for keeping them out of vulnerable younger
>>>> hands before actually recommending them as safely okay.
>>>>
>>>> And in that context, then, it'd be almost impossible for anyone with
>>>> much knowledge of children's books not to be engaged in unconscious
>>>> thinking about how the books might effect or manipulate young
>>>> readers,
>>>> without any even awareness of doing so. From its beginning,
>>>> children's literature has been defined as a literature which both
>>>> educates young readers and, just as significantly, leaves things
>>>> out--
>>>> things children ought not to know about in order to preserve their
>>>> childlikeness. If you know your business as a writer or editor or
>>>> publisher or library purchaser, then, and you know what makes a
>>>> children's book a children's book and what makes a saleable
>>>> children's
>>>> book, then you're probably unconsciously operating with ideas about
>>>> children's literature based on your previous experience of it that
>>>> emerge from those primal concerns. (Your own description, Megan, of
>>>> books that "well written, sometimes beautifully written, and child-
>>>> centered," for instance--how much are our idea of good writing in
>>>> texts for young people tied up with ideas of suitable simplicity, and
>>>> how much is "child-centered" understood in terms of how well the book
>>>> evokes the right kind of utopian childhood?)
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can see, all the qualities characteristic or even just
>>>> typical of texts for young people that I describe in The Hidden Adult
>>>> emerge from and relate to efforts to manipulate of child readers, to
>>>> create a safe version of childhood for children to imagine as being
>>>> where they are and who they are. As I say in The Hidden Adult,
>>>> children's literature is like the home that so many of its
>>>> conventional texts insist is the best place for children to be--a
>>>> haven protected against the dangers of the bigger world out there.
>>>> And in our time, especially, childhood is increasingly understood by
>>>> far too many parents, teachers, librarians, and others as a state of
>>>> constantly being under siege by the dark forces of out there--and
>>>> therefore, for many children nowadays, a prison of constant adult
>>>> surveillance and never being very far away from the world-views of
>>>> the
>>>> Disney folk and their cronies in the kid's entertainment biz and
>>>> never
>>>> going outside to play unsupervised with your friends and without an
>>>> appropriately age-rated video game in your hand. Childhood IS, more
>>>> and more constantly, a state of being under authority and
>>>> manipulation? And so children's literature is that, too?
>>>>
>>>> Cheerily on the edge of doom,
>>>> Perry
>>>> _____________
>>>> Perry Nodelman
>>>> http://pernodel.wordpress.com/
>>>>
>>>> Book Trailers:
>>>> The Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3t7JAfPQeA
>>>> The Ghosthunters2: The Curse of the Evening Eye
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qapDE1Kwnis
>>>> The Ghosthunters I: The Proof that Ghosts Exist
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw0ow7oQV7k
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Perry Nodelman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "I find myself having to admit that some of the things i like about
>>>>> those likeable texts are exactly the ways in which they work to
>>>>> manipulate their readers, including me."
>>>>>
>>>>> Perry, I'm curious about whether you see this manipulation as being
>>>>> conscious, or whether it has become subconsciously imbedded in our
>>>>> understanding of the genre, so that authors and artists may in fact
>>>>> be--at least at times--unwitting participants. Of course, we can
>>>>> all
>>>>> think of books where the manipulation is obvious rather than artful,
>>>>> but
>>>>> it is those artful books--the ones that manage to be well written,
>>>>> sometimes beautifully written, and child-centered--that I find
>>>>> myself
>>>>> thinking in terms of this idea of the manipulation of the child
>>>>> reader.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your discussion of A Very Special House by Maurice Sendak suggests a
>>>>> concsiousness to this. Would you say that is typically true?
>>>>>
>>>>> And what do others of you-- readers, and writers or illustrators--
>>>>> think
>>>>> about this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Megan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Megan Schliesman, Librarian
>>>>> Cooperative Children's Book Center
>>>>> School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison
>>>>> 600 N. Park Street, Room 4290
>>>>> Madison, WI 53706
>>>>>
>>>>> 608/262-9503
>>>>> schliesman at education.wisc.edu
>>>>>
>>>>> www.education.wisc.edu/ccbc/
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CCBC-Net mailing list
>>>>> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>>>> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>>>>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CCBC-Net mailing list
>>>> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>>> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>>>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CCBC-Net mailing list
>>> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>>>
>>>
>>> End of CCBC-Net Digest, Vol 48, Issue 17
>>> ****************************************
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CCBC-Net mailing list
>>> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>>> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CCBC-Net mailing list
>> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:27:54 -0500
> From: Perry Nodelman <perry_nodelman at shaw.ca>
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adult
> To: CCBC -Net <ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu>
> Message-ID: <F8C9CF9B-DE62-4135-A1F5-56FD73936771 at shaw.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> I'm intrigued by the various comments from writers--especially since I
> do some writing for children myself. Thanks, Kristen, Sheila, and
> Valerie, and after reading your messages, I thought I'd say a little
> more about conscious and unconscious manipulation on the part of
> writers.
>
> For those who haven't read The Hidden Adult, I talk there about what
> what writers and editors do, in their involvement with children's
> books, in terms of the sociological theorist Pierre Bourdieu's idea of
> fields of production. Those who are successful in a specific field of
> production, such as, say, children's literature, have what Bourdieu
> calls a habitus, a sort of expertise or feel for the game. The
> habitus includes an awareness of actual rules or conventions--like
> knowing not to submit a 5000 word picture book text to an editor, or
> not having your mistreated orphan hero eventually find happiness as a
> dedicated opium smuggler. But it also includes a kind of unconscious
> ability to act in ways that bring success in the field--an awareness,
> learned more from experience of the field and its previous products
> than from conscious teaching, of what works and what doesn't and who
> matters and who doesn't, and so on.
>
> As I'm thinking about it, then, a writer with an appropriate habitus
> for the field of children's literature production knows all the spoken
> and unspoken aspects of a manuscript that are or aren't likely to
> bring it success as a book for children. And my argument in The
> Hidden Adult is, in part, that the desirable aspects--typical
> characteristics of writing for young people by adults--can be seen as
> ways in which the texts actually do their main job, which is both to
> offer children an image of childhood adults feel comfortable with and
> want children to share and also, often if not always, to teach child
> readers various specific ways of becoming more adult; less egocentric
> and more empathetic, maybe, or more aware of what happened in World
> War II. So even an author who didn't want to further those goals
> would nevertheless, if he or she had written a successful book, be
> replicating these characteristics, and therefore, logically speaking,
> also replicating the manipulative effects they were originally
> developed to further.
>
> But a successful writer with a habitus for children's literature who
> produces texts with these typical characteristics might well not be
> aware of how the characteristics operate in the service of those main
> goals of writing for children. So writers might well be unconscious
> of ways in which their texts might work to manipulate readers.
> Indeed, I'd be surprised if a successful children's writer nowadays
> admitted even to him- or herself to having written a novel that was
> deliberately and consciously didactic. Part of the habitus that makes
> for success currently in the field of children's literature production
> is to underplay or deny didactic elements in texts and insist they
> accurately represent how children think or imagine (as, for instance,
> A Hole Is to Dig does, in its efforts to promote one particular
> adult's way of imagining as childlike).
>
> I feel free to say all that because I am also myself unwilling to see
> ways in which my own novels for children might be manipulative or
> didactic. They seem to me to be stories meant purely to entertain, as
> Kristen says hers are. (Well, maybe not my Dear Canada book, Not a
> Nickel to Spare, but I do think even that book is more significantly
> entertaining than educational. Or so I hope.)
>
> On the other hand, though,I've been having some interesting
> discussions lately with Carol Matas, my collaborator in the
> Ghosthunters trilogy we're currently working on (The Proof that
> Ghosts Exist and The Curse of the Evening Eye have come out, and we've
> just finished writing The Hunt for the Haunted Elephant, scheduled for
> publication next spring--Key Porter in Canada, distributed by PGW in
> the US.) We've been speculating that the books are less successful
> than they might have been because they are, in fact, merely
> entertaining. We made the dumb mistake of not putting a therapeutic
> element in them, not setting them up so that they conform to, as
> Sheila says in her message today, "the way books are expected to
> provide positive role models for kids." We've been thinking we might
> have had more readers if we'd made our central characters more upset
> about the death of their grandparent and in need of coming to terms
> it, or if one of them had anorexia or an experience with as bully or
> something like that, and learned to cope better. Instead, they're
> just slightly eccentric but basically happy people totally focussed on
> dealing with the annoyance of ghosts and trying to solve a mystery.
> These books are in fact less obviously manipulative than the
> conventional model of a children's novel would suggest, and so, we're
> speculating, less successful: adults with a children's lit habitus
> just don't feel comfortable abut buying them for children when there
> are so many more obviously helpful books to spend their budgets on. I
> guess my habitus as a writer of fiction ain't what it should be, eh?
>
> But I bet some perceptive critical reader not as personally involved
> in these Ghosthunter books as I am or Carol is would have no trouble
> finding manipulative ideological content in them. My theory suggests
> it's bound to be there even if i can't see it, just as long as the
> books do satisfy the conventions enough to allow them to be published
> by a reputable publisher as children's books--which they have been.
> The hidden adult, in this case, is hidden from me, but not necessarily
> from others.
>
> Perry
> _____________
> Perry Nodelman
> http://pernodel.wordpress.com/
>
> Book Trailers:
> The Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3t7JAfPQeA
> The Ghosthunters2: The Curse of the Evening Eye
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qapDE1Kwnis
> The Ghosthunters I: The Proof that Ghosts Exist
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw0ow7oQV7k
>
> On 19-Jul-09, at 2:08 PM, valhobbs wrote:
>
>> I, too, have been following the discussion with interest. Like
>> Butcher, I too am a kit lit reader, author, mother and former
>> teacher. I'd like to add that when I write I do my best to become my
>> characters--so much so that breaking out of character is sometimes
>> difficult. That is not to say that I always do it well, or that I
>> completely submerge my adult self, but there is never the intention
>> to manipulate in any way or for any reason; in fact, if any
>> manipulation is being done it's probably coming from my "inner
>> child", trying to have her say (!) And metaphors/themes/symbols, if
>> forced, never work. They arise organically in fiction as they do in
>> "real" life, only, one hopes, a bit more creatively.
>>
>> Valerie Hobbs
>> www.valeriehobbs.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> CCBC-Net mailing list
>> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
>> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
>> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:24:00 -0400
> From: "Sally Miller" <derbymiller at fuse.net>
> Subject: [CCBC-Net] "Manipulative"
> To: "ccbc-net" <ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu>
> Message-ID: <6FB3AA4C9DC14631AA45615B68CD6FD1 at SallyLaptop>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> 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
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:38:25 -0500
> From: Paul W Goldschmidt <goldschp at tds.net>
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] "Manipulative"
> To: "Sally Miller" <derbymiller at fuse.net>, "ccbc-net"
> <ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu>
> Message-ID: <4a647354.27b38c0a.668b.2df6 at mx.google.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> Perhaps "educational" or "pedagogical" would get at the same meaning
> without being carrying the weight of "manipulative"?
>
> -- Paul Goldschmidt
>
> At 08:24 AM 7/20/2009, Sally Miller wrote:
>> 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:14:56 -0400 (EDT)
> From: James Elliott <libraryjim at embarqmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] "Manipulative"
> To: Paul W Goldschmidt <goldschp at tds.net>
> Cc: ccbc-net <ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu>
> Message-ID:
> <846519267.4292441248099296088.JavaMail.root at md42.embarq.synacor.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> I agree with Paul.
>
> A book or author may convey a message WITHOUT being manipulative.
> MANIPULATIVE is one of those words with a loaded meaning, whether for good
> or ill, that carries a negative connotation. No one likes to be
> manipulated.
>
> I do not think it is the right word to use in connection with children's
> and YA literature. Perhaps simply referring to the author's "point of
> view"?
>
> Jim Elliott
> North Georgia
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul W Goldschmidt <goldschp at tds.net>
> To: Sally Miller <derbymiller at fuse.net>, ccbc-net
> <ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu>
> Sent: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:38:25 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] "Manipulative"
>
> Perhaps "educational" or "pedagogical" would get at the same meaning
> without being carrying the weight of "manipulative"?
>
> -- Paul Goldschmidt
>
> At 08:24 AM 7/20/2009, Sally Miller wrote:
>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> CCBC-Net mailing list
> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:49:30 -0400
> From: Kathy Johnson <kmquimby at sover.net>
> Subject: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adults & manipulation & A Snowy Day
> To: ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Message-ID: <200907201550.n6KFotfA017716 at mailgate7.sover.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>
> I, too, need to get my hands on a copy of The Hidden Adult. I do
> think that writers, like all artists, want to have a particular
> effect on their audience, and thus we are inherently manipulative.
> Perhaps the question is whether we are manipulating our young
> audience to achieve conformity or whether we are manipulating them in
> order to open their eyes.
>
> I have vivid memories of both of these types of manipulation from my
> childhood reading. Even before they became popular picture books, the
> Berenstain Bears showed up in a monthly women's magazine (Good
> Housekeeping? McCalls?). At first, I was thrilled that there was
> something for me to read in one of my mother's magazines, but not too
> many months passed before I caught on to the didacticism behind each
> one-page story. That was it. I never read another Berenstain Bear
> story. Even when my daughter discovered the picture books, I refused
> to read them to her, leaving those particular titles to her father.
>
> The Snowy Day is a book I loved as a child, both in the flesh and in
> the version I saw and heard on Captain Kangaroo. For white girl like
> me, growing up in extremely rural Vermont (hometown pop. circa 1960,
> approximately 450), was amazing. I didn't know about cities, or
> people of any other color, but I did know about snow. Seeing Peter do
> things with snow that I did, seeing the snowbanks pile up in the city
> the way they did beside my rural road, all that gave me a "wow!"
> experience, one that I have trouble putting into words. I think it
> had something to do with finding commonality despite or within
> difference. The Snowy Day became one of my favorite books. It was
> also reassuring that he avoided the big kids' snowball fight, because
> I generally avoided the big kids who were intimidating even when they
> didn't intend to be.
>
> As a pre-published writer, as a parent, and as a reader of the gamut
> from picture books to YA, I have become aware that picture books do
> tend to portray childhood as idyllic, with the less positive aspects
> of life creeping in as readers age. I don't know what we do about the
> idealized image found in picture books, because they are the genre
> the least directly available to their young audience, who must rely
> on adults to read the books to them, to allow them to check the books
> out of the library, or to purchase the books. Writers and
> illustrators, and editors and publishers, are constrained by what
> those adults find acceptable.
>
> Thanks to Perry for his thought-provoking comments. This has been an
> eye-opener!
>
> Kathy Quimby
> Cambridge, VT
>
>
>>I'm looking forward to reading in The Hidden Adult Perry's comments
>>on The Snowy Day. It was published in 1962, but I wasn't aware of it
>>until 1971 when our first child was a toddler who adored listening to
>>stories. There it was, in the library of a small Minnesota city, the
>>perfect book for a small black boy who was surrounded by a lot of snow
>>and a lot of white faces. I have a hard time seeing how Keats is
>>manipulating kids in this simple story. Peter doesn't join the big boys
>>in their snowball fight, but the implication is that he's figured out on
>>his own that he's not old enough. He thinks the snowball will survive in
>>his warm house, but this isn't so much a teaching moment as an
>>opportunity for little kids to realize that Peter is making a mistake.
>>Our son had this book memorized before he was three. I didn't find out
>>that Keats was white until a few years later, which points toward another
>>topic about authors writing outside their experience. I'm not going there
>>. . . it's getting late.
>>
>>Sorry for rambling on, but it was fun thinking about these ideas.
>>
>>Sheila Kelly Welch
>>Author/Illustrator
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:48:52 -0400
> From: Kathy Johnson <kmquimby at sover.net>
> Subject: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adults & manipulation & A Snowy Day
> To: ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Message-ID: <200907201550.n6KFoFtX053553 at mailgate6.sover.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>
> I, too, need to get my hands on a copy of The Hidden Adult. I do
> think that writers, like all artists, want to have a particular
> effect on their audience, and thus we are inherently manipulative.
> Perhaps the question is whether we are manipulating our young
> audience to achieve conformity or whether we are manipulating them in
> order to open their eyes.
>
> I have vivid memories of both of these types of manipulation from my
> childhood reading. Even before they became popular picture books, the
> Berenstain Bears showed up in a monthly women's magazine (Good
> Housekeeping? McCalls?). At first, I was thrilled that there was
> something for me to read in one of my mother's magazines, but not too
> many months passed before I caught on to the didacticism behind each
> one-page story. That was it. I never read another Berenstain Bear
> story. Even when my daughter discovered the picture books, I refused
> to read them to her, leaving those particular titles to her father.
>
> The Snowy Day is a book I loved as a child, both in the flesh and in
> the version I saw and heard on Captain Kangaroo. For white girl like
> me, growing up in extremely rural Vermont (hometown pop. circa 1960,
> approximately 450), was amazing. I didn't know about cities, or
> people of any other color, but I did know about snow. Seeing Peter do
> things with snow that I did, seeing the snowbanks pile up in the city
> the way they did beside my rural road, all that gave me a "wow!"
> experience, one that I have trouble putting into words. I think it
> had something to do with finding commonality despite or within
> difference. The Snowy Day became one of my favorite books. It was
> also reassuring that he avoided the big kids' snowball fight, because
> I generally avoided the big kids who were intimidating even when they
> didn't intend to be.
>
> As a pre-published writer, as a parent, and as a reader of the gamut
> from picture books to YA, I have become aware that picture books do
> tend to portray childhood as idyllic, with the less positive aspects
> of life creeping in as readers age. I don't know what we do about the
> idealized image found in picture books, because they are the genre
> the least directly available to their young audience, who must rely
> on adults to read the books to them, to allow them to check the books
> out of the library, or to purchase the books. Writers and
> illustrators, and editors and publishers, are constrained by what
> those adults find acceptable.
>
> Thanks to Perry for his thought-provoking comments. This has been an
> eye-opener!
>
> Kathy Quimby
>
>
>
>>I'm looking forward to reading in The Hidden Adult Perry's comments
>>on The Snowy Day. It was published in 1962, but I wasn't aware of it
>>until 1971 when our first child was a toddler who adored listening to
>>stories. There it was, in the library of a small Minnesota city, the
>>perfect book for a small black boy who was surrounded by a lot of snow
>>and a lot of white faces. I have a hard time seeing how Keats is
>>manipulating kids in this simple story. Peter doesn't join the big boys
>>in their snowball fight, but the implication is that he's figured out on
>>his own that he's not old enough. He thinks the snowball will survive in
>>his warm house, but this isn't so much a teaching moment as an
>>opportunity for little kids to realize that Peter is making a mistake.
>>Our son had this book memorized before he was three. I didn't find out
>>that Keats was white until a few years later, which points toward another
>>topic about authors writing outside their experience. I'm not going there
>>. . . it's getting late.
>>
>>Sorry for rambling on, but it was fun thinking about these ideas.
>>
>>Sheila Kelly Welch
>>Author/Illustrator
>>
>>
>
> Katherine M. Quimby
> P.O. Box 437
> Cambridge, VT 05444-0437
> Tel: (802) 644-8233
> Email: kmquimby at sover.net
>
> "Before you can think out of the box, you have to start with a
> box." --Twyla Tharp
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:05:01 -0500
> From: Perry Nodelman <perry_nodelman at shaw.ca>
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] "Manipulative"
> To: ccbc-net <ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu>
> Message-ID: <4F48C4C7-B129-4A25-B730-A1B96106DE17 at shaw.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> On 20-Jul-09, at 9:14 AM, James Elliott wrote:
>
>> I agree with Paul.
>>
>> A book or author may convey a message WITHOUT being manipulative.
>> MANIPULATIVE is one of those words with a loaded meaning, whether
>> for good or ill, that carries a negative connotation. No one likes
>> to be manipulated.
>>
>> I do not think it is the right word to use in connection with
>> children's and YA literature. Perhaps simply referring to the
>> author's "point of view"?
>
> The fact the nobody likes to be manipulated doesn't mean that it
> doesn't happen, though, right? Or that people are trying to do it to
> us even if it doesn't work? I use "manipulation" here for a couple
> of reasons. First, unlike Paul's suggestions of "educational" or
> "pedagogical," it conveys the sense of sneakiness I'm after. A lot
> of texts for children do make their educational or pedagogical
> intentions obvious--but many others certainly do work hard to hide
> them, to persuade young readers without the young readers being aware
> they are being persuaded. And certainly, any text of any sort emerges
> from the time and the place and the occasion of its writing, and
> inevitably invites agreement with what it takes for granted--the
> ideology it assumes and invites readers to assume. All texts are
> manipulative in that sense, surely? And text written for children by
> adults with conscious or unconscious conceptions of an audience--i.e.,
> of what childhood is or should be--are then especially manipulative?
> I think that's more than just an "author's 'point of view'", because
> it's not just what the author thinks. It's what the author thinks in
> the context of a kind of writing for a specific audience, the point of
> view shaped by the generic demands of that kind of writing. Those
> generic demands establish their own meanings which an author may or
> may not be conscious of, and which may even undermines the views an
> author is conscious of having.
>
> And once more, I don't find that all that necessarily bothersome, as
> long as we're aware of it and ideally, work to help young readers to
> become aware of it. Furthermore, becoming aware of ways in which
> texts might be sneaky is itself a great pleasure, a matter of mastery,
> and reading them in terms of how they work to achieve their intended
> goals is for me a deeply pleasurable sort of reading. I like to
> think. I like to hope that a lot more children than who do so now,
> given the opportunity, would like to think in these ways also. My
> reading of books about children responding to literature like ones by
> Larry Sipe and Sylvia Pantaleo and Morag Styles and Evelyn Arizpe and
> Janet Evans certainly suggests that that can happen, and that many
> children love the experience and the mastery of more aware, more
> critical reading practices. (If anyone wants, I'd be happy to provide
> bibliographic info about all those books about children reading and
> looking at picture books.)
>
> Perry
> _____________
> Perry Nodelman
> http://pernodel.wordpress.com/
>
> Book Trailers:
> The Hidden Adult: Defining Children's Literature
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3t7JAfPQeA
> The Ghosthunters2: The Curse of the Evening Eye
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qapDE1Kwnis
> The Ghosthunters I: The Proof that Ghosts Exist
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw0ow7oQV7k
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:29:16 -0400
> From: fran manushkin <franm at nyc.rr.com>
> Subject: [CCBC-Net] THE SNOWY DAY
> To: Subscribers of ccbc-net <ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu>
> Message-ID: <77F58BA8-8FD6-43C6-9C1B-0C57B0835D69 at nyc.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> I've been following this thread with great interest. I knew Ezra Jack
> Keats and he showed me the photo of a boy in the snow that he cut out
> of LIFE magazine. Many years later it was the inspiration for THE
> SNOWY DAY. Perry, I haven't (yet) read your book and would be very
> eager to hear what you can tell us about the "manipulative" qualities
> of THE SNOW DAY. I know that Ezra felt he wanted there to be a book
> about an African-American child that offered a universal childhood
> experience (unless you live in a sunshine state). Anything else you
> can share about this book would be fascinating. Fran
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:29:53 -0400 (EDT)
> From: James Elliott <libraryjim at embarqmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adults & manipulation & A Snowy Day
> To: Kathy Johnson <kmquimby at sover.net>
> Cc: ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Message-ID:
> <27438899.4340421248107393069.JavaMail.root at md42.embarq.synacor.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> I just ordered a copy for my library. I'm hoping my Children's services
> staff will read it -- after I do, of course.
>
> Jim Elliott
> North Georgia.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Kathy Johnson <kmquimby at sover.net>
> To: ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Sent: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:48:52 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: [CCBC-Net] Hidden Adults & manipulation & A Snowy Day
>
>
> I, too, need to get my hands on a copy of The Hidden Adult. I do
> think that writers, like all artists, want to have a particular
> effect on their audience, and thus we are inherently manipulative.
> Perhaps the question is whether we are manipulating our young
> audience to achieve conformity or whether we are manipulating them in
> order to open their eyes.
>
> I have vivid memories of both of these types of manipulation from my
> childhood reading. Even before they became popular picture books, the
> Berenstain Bears showed up in a monthly women's magazine (Good
> Housekeeping? McCalls?). At first, I was thrilled that there was
> something for me to read in one of my mother's magazines, but not too
> many months passed before I caught on to the didacticism behind each
> one-page story. That was it. I never read another Berenstain Bear
> story. Even when my daughter discovered the picture books, I refused
> to read them to her, leaving those particular titles to her father.
>
> The Snowy Day is a book I loved as a child, both in the flesh and in
> the version I saw and heard on Captain Kangaroo. For white girl like
> me, growing up in extremely rural Vermont (hometown pop. circa 1960,
> approximately 450), was amazing. I didn't know about cities, or
> people of any other color, but I did know about snow. Seeing Peter do
> things with snow that I did, seeing the snowbanks pile up in the city
> the way they did beside my rural road, all that gave me a "wow!"
> experience, one that I have trouble putting into words. I think it
> had something to do with finding commonality despite or within
> difference. The Snowy Day became one of my favorite books. It was
> also reassuring that he avoided the big kids' snowball fight, because
> I generally avoided the big kids who were intimidating even when they
> didn't intend to be.
>
> As a pre-published writer, as a parent, and as a reader of the gamut
> from picture books to YA, I have become aware that picture books do
> tend to portray childhood as idyllic, with the less positive aspects
> of life creeping in as readers age. I don't know what we do about the
> idealized image found in picture books, because they are the genre
> the least directly available to their young audience, who must rely
> on adults to read the books to them, to allow them to check the books
> out of the library, or to purchase the books. Writers and
> illustrators, and editors and publishers, are constrained by what
> those adults find acceptable.
>
> Thanks to Perry for his thought-provoking comments. This has been an
> eye-opener!
>
> Kathy Quimby
>
>
>
>>I'm looking forward to reading in The Hidden Adult Perry's comments
>>on The Snowy Day. It was published in 1962, but I wasn't aware of it
>>until 1971 when our first child was a toddler who adored listening to
>>stories. There it was, in the library of a small Minnesota city, the
>>perfect book for a small black boy who was surrounded by a lot of snow
>>and a lot of white faces. I have a hard time seeing how Keats is
>>manipulating kids in this simple story. Peter doesn't join the big boys
>>in their snowball fight, but the implication is that he's figured out on
>>his own that he's not old enough. He thinks the snowball will survive in
>>his warm house, but this isn't so much a teaching moment as an
>>opportunity for little kids to realize that Peter is making a mistake.
>>Our son had this book memorized before he was three. I didn't find out
>>that Keats was white until a few years later, which points toward another
>>topic about authors writing outside their experience. I'm not going there
>>. . . it's getting late.
>>
>>Sorry for rambling on, but it was fun thinking about these ideas.
>>
>>Sheila Kelly Welch
>>Author/Illustrator
>>
>>
>
> Katherine M. Quimby
> P.O. Box 437
> Cambridge, VT 05444-0437
> Tel: (802) 644-8233
> Email: kmquimby at sover.net
>
> "Before you can think out of the box, you have to start with a
> box." --Twyla Tharp
> _______________________________________________
> CCBC-Net mailing list
> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:47:12 EDT
> From: Lbhcove at aol.com
> Subject: [CCBC-Net] KEATS/THE SNOWY DAY
> To: ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Message-ID: <cbd.42b4ebe0.3795f990 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> I, too, knew Ezra quite well and spent a lot of time with him. In an
> interview with
> Ezra (known as Jack to his friends) he told me back in the late l960's:
>
> "I decided to make young peter a Negro child. I had been illustrating
> books by other people showing the goodness of white children, and in my
> own
> book I wanted to show and share the beauty and goodness of the black
> child.
> I wanted the world to know that all children experience, wonderful things
> in life. I wanted to convey the joy of being a little boy alive on a
> certain kind of day -- of being for that moment. Theair is cold, you
> touch the
> snow, aware of the things to which all children are so open."
>
> Upon her death, Tillie S. Pine gave me two original drawings from one of
> Keat's
> first books THE INDIANS KNEW., which she wrote with Joseph Levine. How
> different are these drawings from his experimentation with collage and
> his
> future work. One would hardly know these works are by Keats. From
> 'Indians'
> to a 'Negro' child...to now...talk about giant steps for humankind!
>
> Lee Bennett Hopkins
>
>
> LEE'S POETRY A-B-C' s
>
> ALPHATHOUGHTS: ALPHABET POEMS (BOYDS MILLS PRESS)
>
> BEEN TO YESTERDAYS: POEMS OF A LIFE (BOYDS MILLS PRESS)
> *STARRED REVIEW/SCHOOL LIBRARY JOURNAL
> CHRISTOPHER AWARD
> SCBWI GOLDEN KITE HONOR BOOK
>
> CITY I LOVE (ABRAMS)
> STARRED REVIEW / SCHOOL LIBRARY JOURNAL
> STARRED REVIEW / PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
>
>
> NEW TITLES:
>
> SKY MAGIC (DUTTON) *STARRED REVIEW/ HORN BOOK
>
> INCREDIBLE INVENTIONS (GREENWILLOW BOOKS)
> **************An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy
> Steps!
> (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221323041x1201367261/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=Jul
> yExcfooterNO62)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:58:31 EDT
> From: PAGOOSE at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] KEATS/THE SNOWY DAY
> To: Lbhcove at aol.com, ccbc-net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Message-ID: <bbb.538fe45c.3795fc37 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Thanks, Lee. Our new book SNOW WONDER pays homage to Keats with
> illustrations by Julia Woolf of multiracial children playing together in
> the snow.
>
> Charles Ghigna
> FatherGoose.com
>
> Recent Titles:
> Snow Wonder, Random House
> SCORE! 50 Poems to Motivate and Inspire, Abrams
> Oh My, Pumpkin Pie! Random House
> One Hundred Shoes: A Math Reader, Random House
> Mice Are Nice, Random House
> See the Yak Yak, Random House
> Animal Tracks: Wild Poems to Read Aloud, Abrams
> Animal Trunk: Silly Poems to Read Aloud, Abrams
> Halloween Night: Twenty-One Spooktacular Poems, Running Press
> A Fury of Motion: Poems for Boys, Boyds Mills Press
> Christmas Is Coming! Charlesbridge Publishing
> If You Were My Valentine, Simon and Schuster
>
>
> **************
> An Excellent
> Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps!
> (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221323041x1201367261/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com
> /pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&amp;hmpgID=62&amp;bcd=JulyExcfooterNO62)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CCBC-Net mailing list
> CCBC-Net at lists.education.wisc.edu
> Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe...
> http://lists.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
>
>
> End of CCBC-Net Digest, Vol 48, Issue 19
> ****************************************
>
Received on Mon 20 Jul 2009 12:21:22 PM CDT