CCBC-Net Archives
Re: How Much Do We Tell the Children?
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Christine Taylor-Butler <kansascitymom_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 13:29:44 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
I wonder if the r eal answer is - everything - with some adult intervention to be a sounding board for questions and to spark a dialogue.
Children are exposed to significantly more variety and more explicit material than when we were growing up. Many live in households that feature game systems centered around first-person killing. Television stations no longer limit adult content to late evening hours. The media tends to favor sensationalist material, crime dramas and "scripted reality TV" for the sake of ratings. And the increased popularity of Mango has many teens reading the original, more explicit versions from Japan. Those without access have found the material on fanfiction websites. And let's talk about how many young children will be flocking to see the hybrid vampire birth in Breaking Dawn.
So sometimes the most credible source of material may be in a book - if thoughtfully presented and absent of the authors own bias or agenda.
Right now I'm having a rousing argument on a boarding school discussion board sparked by a 14-year-old and several adults who assert that racism has been eradicated in the country. I still meet people who think the Holocaus t never happened. I encounter legions of children still growing up thinking their opportunities are limited to the boundaries of their own neighborhoods. Movies are more violent and more explicit in their depiction of natural disasters and apocalyptic outcomes. And traditionally "safe" neighborhoods are no longer immune to drug and alcohol abuse, spousal battery, divorce, child abuse, murder, poverty, homelessness, foreclosure.
I think "safe" books serve a purpose. To allow the reader to escape, have hope, and to test out ideas before real life hits. For urban youth especially, I think more of that is
needed.
But I'm not sure "protecting children" from information does us, or them, any good. I sometimes wonder if it's the child we're  ; protecting or if the real purpose is to shield adults from having to conf ront a difficult subject. I know, for instance that I took my daughter to see the Great Debaters and was uplifted - until I got to the lynching scene. And yet - it served a powerful purpose for the movie and sparked a good discussion particularly about everyone's discomfort with that aspect of the movie. Likewise, our family laughed and cried through Life is Beautiful, and yet - despite the difficult setting and harsh ending - we were left with some hope and the manner of presentation made it easier to engage in conversation afterwards.
I think we should be honest in our work. With all the competition for the reader's attention, can we do anything less? And if individuals disagree on a particular subject - isn't that a good thing? To spark a discussion that leads to further enlightenment despite that discomfort? Don't we want children asking questions rather than getting their information "in the street?" Having said that -- my interest in this topic was piqued because I'm in the middle of college interview season. Because I'm screening for MIT the students tend to come, primarily, from well-educated suburbs. Man y seem the least prepared in terms of their knowledge of social issues and most proud of what little they do know. The ones that are surprising ly enlightened are the ones who read for pleasure outside of the classroom and can actively discuss the merits of those books with me - especially boys. I had several this year and it was a delight. Those students
give me hope that we have underestimated their capacity for absorbing and analyzing "hard truths.".......C
Received on Sat 19 Nov 2011 01:29:44 PM CST
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 13:29:44 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
I wonder if the r eal answer is - everything - with some adult intervention to be a sounding board for questions and to spark a dialogue.
Children are exposed to significantly more variety and more explicit material than when we were growing up. Many live in households that feature game systems centered around first-person killing. Television stations no longer limit adult content to late evening hours. The media tends to favor sensationalist material, crime dramas and "scripted reality TV" for the sake of ratings. And the increased popularity of Mango has many teens reading the original, more explicit versions from Japan. Those without access have found the material on fanfiction websites. And let's talk about how many young children will be flocking to see the hybrid vampire birth in Breaking Dawn.
So sometimes the most credible source of material may be in a book - if thoughtfully presented and absent of the authors own bias or agenda.
Right now I'm having a rousing argument on a boarding school discussion board sparked by a 14-year-old and several adults who assert that racism has been eradicated in the country. I still meet people who think the Holocaus t never happened. I encounter legions of children still growing up thinking their opportunities are limited to the boundaries of their own neighborhoods. Movies are more violent and more explicit in their depiction of natural disasters and apocalyptic outcomes. And traditionally "safe" neighborhoods are no longer immune to drug and alcohol abuse, spousal battery, divorce, child abuse, murder, poverty, homelessness, foreclosure.
I think "safe" books serve a purpose. To allow the reader to escape, have hope, and to test out ideas before real life hits. For urban youth especially, I think more of that is
needed.
But I'm not sure "protecting children" from information does us, or them, any good. I sometimes wonder if it's the child we're  ; protecting or if the real purpose is to shield adults from having to conf ront a difficult subject. I know, for instance that I took my daughter to see the Great Debaters and was uplifted - until I got to the lynching scene. And yet - it served a powerful purpose for the movie and sparked a good discussion particularly about everyone's discomfort with that aspect of the movie. Likewise, our family laughed and cried through Life is Beautiful, and yet - despite the difficult setting and harsh ending - we were left with some hope and the manner of presentation made it easier to engage in conversation afterwards.
I think we should be honest in our work. With all the competition for the reader's attention, can we do anything less? And if individuals disagree on a particular subject - isn't that a good thing? To spark a discussion that leads to further enlightenment despite that discomfort? Don't we want children asking questions rather than getting their information "in the street?" Having said that -- my interest in this topic was piqued because I'm in the middle of college interview season. Because I'm screening for MIT the students tend to come, primarily, from well-educated suburbs. Man y seem the least prepared in terms of their knowledge of social issues and most proud of what little they do know. The ones that are surprising ly enlightened are the ones who read for pleasure outside of the classroom and can actively discuss the merits of those books with me - especially boys. I had several this year and it was a delight. Those students
give me hope that we have underestimated their capacity for absorbing and analyzing "hard truths.".......C
Received on Sat 19 Nov 2011 01:29:44 PM CST
