Wow, I can't believe this thread! It all started out so...well intentioned.
However, put me in the no-censorship crowd. Actually, technically, that's not true, because there's a few books I've 'tossed' (to second hand store) that I just wasn't interested in reading to my 2-3 yr old son...tv-inspired nonsense (the rugrats and space monsters) and other 'crap'. (think the junk food version of literature).
That being said, however, I don't mind books that are unrealistic, ridiculous, violent, boring, excessively rhyming, have bad art, sexist, etc, etc. I get annoyed with books that have characters shamed or are pointlessly mean (usually related to tv/movies). However, we usually read everything, unless it's just innapropriate. I think it's important to read a variety of books, old; new, imaginative, well written...and like others have said books are a safe place to discuss ideas. I think the messages we send and affirm as a family are far more important than what we read in books. I think books can be so many things: an important learning tool, a vehicle to send positive messages, a tool to develop bonding, a mode of pure entertainment and a way to occupy time. It's all valid!
I happen to love some of the books mentioned, as others have said. The Giving Tree seems to me to be about unconditional love. Love You Forever is about a parents devotion. Beatrix Potter humanizes the animal world and animalizes the human experience.
Books are a way to interpret life. I'm really not worried about harming my child through them. However, I don't really blame some families for avoiding certain topics, there's topics I'll avoid until I think my kids are ready for them, and I think that's responsible. However, as others have mentioned, books are a great discussion tool too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannahsmummy
The books for kids that really get my back up are those that are based on TV characters or just generally churned out and badly written. It's not even relevant listing them as there are so many that don't seem to have had any love or even thought put into them at all.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smalls181
I want to be careful not to get too "censorship" with my kids. Thats what my parents did with us, and it backfired. It took me quite awhile as an adult to be able to objectively look at things and figure out why they were good or bad. We were never given the chance. I know for toddlers you can't have that dialogue quite yet, but I dont want to rule out books like the B-Bears or Beatrix Potter just yet. I want her to be able to look at these books critically, with our help if need be, and decide for herself what she values.
|
Yes, very good point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbymom05
I wonder, though--you read about how as a society we're so sanitized and removed from death and sickness, disease and poverty, etc., and a lot of older books and fables are just dealing w/ what used to be very commonplace events. I can't imagine reading my toddler, say, Grimm's for instance, but I sometimes wonder if when I tell the Red Riding Hood story or Jack and the Beanstalk if I'm really doing ds a favor by leaving out the gory endings.
I dunno. I worry about reading Curious George and the zoo (and that George loves a good pipe, lol) but yet we GO to the zoo, and we eat meat for cryin' out loud, so why do I feel the need to explain why George shouldn't have been kdnapped?
|
So true. I also feel no need to 'protect' my kids in an already sanitized world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawncayden
It's funny  I love a lot of the books that have been listed as being 'hated'. I will avoid anything that has spanking in it. Or lots of shaming.
But if its out of fun, than I don't see the problem. I LOVE Robert Munch, I love being over dramatic when I read them, because they are supposed to be crazy!
I also like dark fables, I can't wait to read Roald Dahl to ds. I like it when fables have a scariness factor and I think kids need the balance of having dark and scary mixed with light and happy. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by gus'smama
We don't live in an isolated island of crunchy AP perfection. I don't think I'm harming my kids by exposing them to other ideas and lifestyles.
I don't believe in censorship, even for little ones. I mean, I obviously don't select books that I think will be frightening for my kids (and actually, Bedtime for Frances scares my kids, but not b/c of the spanking!  ), and I stop reading a book at any time if anyone asks me not to continue, but like I said, I'll basically read anything.
Except those truly insipid ones, like Bearenstien Bears. Those ones, I tell my kids, are for when you learn to read all by yourself!  |
I agree- except I do read the Bearenstien Bears, Axel loves them. Of course, especially 'The Messy Room'. Hey, even I yell sometimes like papa.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Makes 4
I really dislike The Giving Tree. The boy just takes and takes until the tree has nothing left. Not one single "Thank you" in the whole book.
|
But that's the
point. It's not about the
boy, it's about the
tree. Aren't we the same way? Sure, a 'thank you' would be nice, as parents (and even in a broader application, like nature) we're not going to stop giving because we don't get a thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSerene
Oh, heck no!
We read all sorts of books. On average, we pick up 20 books from the library per week. I agree with the people who said the insidious books, like the B. Bears, are much worse than the overt stuff that's easier to talk about. It's very easy to start a discussion after "There was an old woman who lived in a shoe...she beat them all soundly and sent them to bed" than the subtle sexism or general negativity that is present in so many books.
If I really don't like a book, we read it once and it goes away. I'd much rather spend time with quality books like "Alexander and the Dragon" that is subtly positive with remarks about how brave the boy is to jump out of the bed and run downstairs and that he's brave because the only thing he's afraid of is the dark. That's much better, IMO, than books that have the older sibling calling the little one names for being afraid or dismiss the fears as silly.
My dd and I will critique childrent's books together when she's older; as a not quite 3 year old she's trying to make sense of the world and I don't need her incorporating the messages from some of these awful books into her world view. Some of the messages of the old nursery tales are okay by me, however. For instance, if you build your house soundly and are clever, you won't be eaten by the wolf. Or, as in little red riding hood, it can be dangerous to talk to strangers. The world is not a safe place, and my toddler knows it.
Also, I can't stand poor writing, regardless of content. I won't waste our time with those either. I refuse to rubber stamp mediocrity.
|
Excellent post. I completely agree!
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnmama
This is what we do, too. When dd was a toddler/preschooler, I would read whatever she brought to me. We've read nearly all the books on this thread, and had many interesting conversations! Dd is not particularly sensitive in this way, however, and she has always been fairly sophisticated in separating fiction from reality, so that might make a big difference for many families.
I do think that what we adults get from many of these books, and what our dc get, can be very, very different.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LynnS6
According to my Mirriam Webster:
Censor: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable
There seems to be a shocking amount of book censorship going on among MDC parents.  : and I would add that books are a SAFE place to explore these ideas. What's it like to be eaten? Why would someone spank?
A good way to develop a sense of good literature is by reading a lot of books - some good, some bad. It's amazing how rarely my kids ask to read the stupid, insipid, morally good for you fairy tales that a relative gave us and how often they ask to read stuff that is better, like Mike Mulligan & the Steam Shovel (NOT a toddler book, by the way - way too long!)
Don't y'all see the irony in this? A number of people mention that they don't remember the bad things in Peter Rabbit and then being shocked at what there was. Do you think maybe your kids are somehow different? Need to be protected more than you do? can't handle a discussion on this? Your kids can't handle negative messages at all?
A lot of the books that people "hate" also are not appropriate for Toddlers. Satire, Irony and a lot of humor takes YEARS to develop (7-8 to be exact). |
Yes, another great post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellymama
GOD, thank you.
this is my point. thanks for making sense.
i feel bad for all the kids that don't get to read Peter Rabbit, Where the Wild Things Are and all the other awesome kid books. when i think of my childhood, the books my parents read me are some of the most happy memories i have...
kids are a lot smarter and tougher than a lot of you are giving them credit for.
and also, stories are symbolic...fairy tales are symbolic...like myths and legends and other tales that survive the test of time.
this reminds me of kids that have moms that make them wear helmets to the park. what a watered down childhood.
if your kid get scared or asks a "why did they do that" question, how AWESOME...now you get to talk with them and let their little brains start thinking for themselves. for example, i am part american indian, but i won't stop my kid from watching Peter Pan, which has some of the most racist imagery of indians...why? because the rest of the story is cool. because the movie was made when that was okay. because it gives me the opportunity to talk with my kids about why people saw indians that way, and why it was okay to do that back then, but how we have come so far now (even though we still have the Clevelan Indians, but i digress). i probably won't purchase that movie, or rent it myself, but if my kids want to, i would let them. because censorship sucks. and it makes people dumb.
|
), but my dislike of Boynton books is more impressionistic: I simply don't like the style and find them simplistic in a way that bores me (there are plenty of "simple" books that I love, though--just not these). If I were pressed to go further, I might suggest that I find them to have a superficial style that I associate with greeting cards (which, of course, if where Boynton got her start). But it took quite a bit of intellectual prodding for me to come up with that--mostly, I just don't like 'em. I think it is perfectly acceptable to choose this book over that one, to like X but not Y, without needing an actual justification that involves your child's emotional well-being.
Apparently so! Although ... the book that got us hooked on Eric Carle was 
. seriously, try having some fun. we are talking about 5 page board books.
:
Follow Mothering