junie B. jones books - Page 2

[momlovesmusic]

thank you, you said just what I was thinking. Kids aren't always aware of social conventions and they often just don't care about others feelings,not because they are unkind or insensitive, just because they are kids. Junie does the acting out that they can't.

[Charles Baudelaire]

Okay! Some feedback....

Queen Gwen -- You're right, it should be subjunctive. I guess my big objection is in the degree of grammar errors and the type. Believe me, I wishmy students only had problems with subjunctive tense! Whee!

Arthead -- You said, "As long as she is realizing that Junie makes errors in attitude & grammar & enjoys reading the books & finding the flaws, what's the harm really? I don't see the connection with stuffing junky food in her face, with the book, she's learning, which can't be compared to eating useless food."

***I agree, she's learning, Arthead....but my problem is WHAT she is learning. I think children learn that it's acceptable to be unkind and rude to others, like when Junie chases down her "boyfriend" on the playground and sits on him, screaming in his face. If she were a minor character or a character whose actions were frowned-on, that would be different. Instead, she "gets away," as it were, with her rudeness, incivility, and unbelievable self-absorption.

***I think ultimately, she's stuffing junky ideas, language, and attitudes in her brain. Just my opinion, though -- I know it's certainly colored by dealing with 180 kids a year who think i'ts okay to be rude...and as a parent, I wonder where they got their attitudes from. I think JBJ isn't the only source, of course -- that's like saying McDonald's is the only reason an overweight child is overweight -- but it's one source that's easy to cut off.

To Lilyka -- I agree, some of these are "hard," but for almost every one I recommended, there are simplified versions for earlier readers -- the Bullseye Step Into Classics series. They're short (short as or shorter than JBJ) and are, IMHO, great introductions to the books. By the time they're older, they won't be intimidated by the prospect of reading, say, Great Expectations if they're already 'friends' with Pip, Estella, etc. As for Alice in Wonderland/Looking-Glass, we read that together.

I agree that not all books should be educational and some should be for fun!

[arthead]

Originally posted by Charles Baudelaire
***I agree, she's learning, Arthead....but my problem is WHAT she is learning. I think children learn that it's acceptable to be unkind and rude to others, like when Junie chases down her "boyfriend" on the playground and sits on him, screaming in his face. If she were a minor character or a character whose actions were frowned-on, that would be different. Instead, she "gets away," as it were, with her rudeness, incivility, and unbelievable self-absorption.

***I think ultimately, she's stuffing junky ideas, language, and attitudes in her brain. Just my opinion, though -- I know it's certainly colored by dealing with 180 kids a year who think i'ts okay to be rude...and as a parent, I wonder where they got their attitudes from. I think JBJ isn't the only source, of course -- that's like saying McDonald's is the only reason an overweight child is overweight -- but it's one source that's easy to cut off.

mmm... I have to clarify that we're on exactly the same page as far as the constitute of the Junie series. It's definitely NOT okay to behave like Junie, believe me, that girl is not an idol, just an example with whom my niece DOES relate & also, thankfully, find problems. I did have MAJOR reservations from paragraph 1, but it was a gift from gramma, again, respect had to be given to gramma's gift & choices since she, too, is an educator.

In a schoolyard situation - actually a lot of normal streetkid situations, I see 10 year-olds smoking cigs, hear 12 yr olds talking like I've NEVER (in my 30 years) been comfortable talking, ETC... & at first call, chalked it up to media, books included. A lot of it IS due to the loose-tongued media that any six year old can grab ahold of on any given day. But, then I realize that this world is what it is TODAY. & we must respond accordingly, which does not include guarding, for the most part. My niece attends public school near Chicago. I'm certain that she is exposed to much larger & waaaaaay more vulgar attitudes & wrongdoings than she sees within a Junie B Jones episode, KWIM?

My initial response to those books was one of disrespect for the author... "how could she add to this dissarray of healthy kids", ETC... but now, thanks to your post & more thought on my own part... I can see it as a place that my neice can relate her very REAL circumstances (attitudinal & otherwise) WITH me & figure out how she could/should react within that given circumstance, all without my having to "crash" her playground.

I love what you believe in, Charles, I really wish every kid had the chance to be so guarded from the ugly public attitudes & misgivings, to make better students... but my niece doesn't have that option. So, books like these can let us, together, figure out that a snotty attitude is NOT cool & acting out how Junie does won't get her very far in this life... unless she finds a way to divert her SPUNKINESS (ugh, how us artistic types must suffer thru the deemed social graces!!! ).

I do, totally, agree with you on several levels, I hear about my mother's obnoxious kids at times & just want to throttle the media. Guess thats why we don't run TV thru our own television(only useful tapes, documentaries, something that will enhance us as people, etc.). Without supervision, kids are free property of the media, for better or for worse.

Hopefully for you, as an educator, and for all kids' health, the media will chill with it's pre-teen & teen HUGE attitudes in the near future.

[Charles Baudelaire]

Well, I see what you're saying...I guess what it comes down to for me is that you're absolutely right -- younger kids are doing, saying, and experiencing life in a far more mature way than (probably) you or I did.

For me, I think that there are two basic choices: buy into it or don't. I don't.

I see the wisdom of those who do -- I understand the argument that, "This is how life is, so we had better adapt." It makes sense, but for me, I want to do what I can to *change* "how life is." Some people do this through their choice to vax or not, to buy fast food or not, TV or not, et cetera. Hey -- each to his own! ;-)

[srain]

Originally posted by Charles Baudelaire

Here's a list of WAY better books than Junie Jones, in my opinion:

I'm sure you read a lot of other books with your kids, but most of your suggestions, besides being a century old, are pretty sappy/ treacley. I think if Dickens were around today he'd be writing for Readers Digest or Parade magazine, despite his use of language. I think there is a big place for literature with less overt moral goals.

[EFmom]

While I wouldn't feed my kid solely a diet of literary junk food, I really don't see the harm in it. I read every Nancy Drew ever written, at least three times each, and actually, I think it was good for me. It gave me a sense that reading can be a relaxing, pleasurable activity and is much more fun than sitting in front of the tube. Of course, I also read much more challenging books, but I do credit the Caroline Keenes for making me a lifelong voracious reader.

Personally, I agree that Dickens is fairly awful. Most of his books were the soap operas of their day. The plots are not well crafted and rely heavily on stupid coincidences.

I'm also not sure that I think reading simplified versions of books is such a great thing. I'd rather have my child read literature designed to be age appropriate. I'm a university librarian and I get so tired of the undergrads coming in asking for Reader's Digest versions (or Cliff Notes) of books they are supposed to be reading.

[spero]

Originally posted by EFmom
Personally, I agree that Dickens is fairly awful. Most of his books were the soap operas of their day. The plots are not well crafted and rely heavily on stupid coincidences.

ITA. "Great Expectations" was the single most boring, slow-moving novel I ever had to misfortune to read. We had to plod through that drivel in 11th grade English, and THEN had to view the movie.

BO-rinnnnnnnnngggggggggggggg

Didn't Dickens write serial stories for some periodical, for a living?
(I remember reading THAT in a Trixie Belden book :LOL )

[EFmom]

Great Expectations, the worst! We read it in 9th grade and also had to see the stupid movie afterward. We called it, "Mediocre Expectations." Yes, many of Dickens' works were published in instalment form, and were written on the fly as it were.

Dh teases me by threatening to read Dickens to me as a form of torture.

[Justice2]

I read a great deal of "older" stuff to my 8 year old dd. We just finished with the "Pied Piper" fairy tale and followed that with the history of the Pied Piper and how all of the children did disappear in this German town. She was just as fascinated by the history as she was by the fairy tale. I have read many of The Brother's Grimm to her. I prefer their version of the fairy tales to Disney's adaptations.

[journeymom]

Nahh. If Dickons was around today he'd be writing for Salon or Slate. Obviously, having grown up in the 20th century he wouldn't write the way he did in the 19th century. Oliver Twist and A Christmas Carol were strong jabs at the social status quo.

Eta, I totally agree though, Great Expectations was dull.

[Charles Baudelaire]

And to respond to the person who said they wouldn't read Dickens because they wanted to read something with less overtly moral goals, the only thing To Srain -- I'd like to point out is that all literature (well, almost all...I can't think of an exception off the top of my head, but it's a wide world out there...) has a moral goal -- and it's usually an overt one. Actually, that's one of the reasons I dislike JBJ: the author's moral values and mine are irreconcilable. She values or condones rudeness (although she might call it 'energetic self-expression') and poor grammar (although she might call it 'realistic children's dialect') and I value being considerate (although she might call it 'conforming to social ideals') and using the language correctly (although she might criticize the lack of opportunity to construct the language freely).

Anyway...

As far as Dickens goes, I really think it's a matter of personal taste. I used to hate Dickens until I heard a really talented reader read him aloud on tape, which is where I think his strengths are. It's *meant* to be read aloud. However, it's not for everyone and doesn't suit everyone's tastes. I agree that the plots are soapy, though!

As far as it being a century old, it's actually older...but that, to my mind, is not a problem. At least as far as our household goes, we *want* our daughter to be very well-versed on those blow-the-dust-off-the-cover classics of European literature. To the person who objected to the short versions, I understand -- but the shorter versions *are* designed for younger readers and are age-appropriate. My grand master plan...and we'll see if it works or not (what do I know? ) is that by the time she gets IN to college (if she wants to go), Odysseus, Hamlet, Catherine and Heathcliff, Ahab, Pip, and all those other folks will be as familiar to her as Simba, Belle, Jasmine, and Mulan are to other kids, and she *won't be* one of those university students who's looking for the Reader's Digest versions of those stories. KWIM? Anyway, we'll see if it works.

By the way, just to counteract what might be your impressions, we really don't sit around all day reading dusty books. Sometimes we just run around chasing each other or dressing up as princesses.

[lorijds]

Yeah, that's a pretty haute list, there, Charles. That said, my dd's read most of them. As well as The Count of Monte Cristo, the Hobbit, the Lord of the Rings Trilogy....she's in third grade, and has a better active vocabulary than I do.

BUT, despite my degree in Germanic Language and Literature, I don't just read high German literature like Thomas Mann or Goethe, I also read trash. I LOVE some of the completely trashy detective novels, like the Da Vinci Code, or the Unburied. I LOVE virtually anything by John Irving. Anything by Timothy Parks. Paul Theroux. Bruce Chatwin. As a matter of fact, I would much RATHER read the Da Vinci Code than anything by Goethe.

I kind of equate books like Junie B Jones to those trashy romance books that line the shelves at Walmart. Well, at least their reading. And I think that is different than at least their eating.

I do not encourage my kids to read abridged versions of books. I think those are silly; kind of like the publishing companies putting out an "American" version of the Harry Potter books. No thanks. Read the original, if possible, or read something else.

Kids don't need to be reading great literature at every reading session. Which is why we have Captain Underpants books at our house!

If your child like Junie B Jones, great. If your child like ONLY Junie B Jones, weeeell, there might be a problem. Variety is the spice of life, right!

however, I don't personally like the Junie B Jones books, and I am glad dd#1 is too old for them. Dd #2 hasn't discovered them yet; I still prefer Ramona, but that is probably just because I loved her so much when *I* was growing up!

Lori

[lilyka]

I would rather my children qwait and rea the real books when they are old enough. There is plenty of good reading to go around and I would hate for her to base her opinion of a book on parts of it that someone else thought was appropriate or important.

ijust wanted to mention, I think the reason my dd likes Junie B is that she does all the things Madeline wishes she could get away with and knows she better not even try :LOL omeitmes it is nice to fantacize that we are the center of the universe (as JBJ seems to think she is) and that we could actually act on our impulses. Anyway, i am sure it is just a fad and it is much better than some of the things my friends kids were jumping on at this age (pokeman comes to mind uke)

And you can add me to the list of people who hats Dickens. I htink his wriitng is awful and have never understood why people think it is so high and mighty.

[guest^]

I bought a JBJ at a garage sale this past summer, read some of it privately, and decided not to let dd read it. Pretty much for the same reasons CB is listing. For me, I feel dd is such an impressionable child, and she tends to act/talk like her lastest character she has been reading/watching. KWIM?
When she is old enough to have her morality/value system in place, I will allow her to read(pretty much) what she wants. But, for now, I feel the need to protect her from trashy literature,tv,videos,clothing,media,junk food,etc....

FTR.....we just finished A little Princess. I read way ahead of her and finished it at some odd hour in the middle of the night,I loved it that much. It is above her reading level, so sometimes I would read to her or we would take turns by reading two pages each at a time. We had many,many discussions about it, and she is still talking about it. If you go to Target now, they have it there for $6-$7, and it comes with a locket. AAnndd we also bought The Wizard of Oz-which comes with a necklace that has the sparkly red shoes on it.

mp

I want to add that I don't meant to sound judgemental, as if those of you who are in favor of JBJ books,are reading trash to your kids....I've just not been in a gentle way of communicating lately...I hope I didn't offend anyone.....