All Children’s Books are propaganda.
Would you care to elaborate on your theory? 
Do you suppose she’s just writing about Cecilia 's Celebratory CoVid 19?
I’m assuming it’s based on the “EVERYTHING is political” mindset that the mere fact a children’s book is teaching a lesson to someone who may not agree with it is propaganda.
No, all modern children’s books are intended to be instructional, at the cost of content–ie no fun for the kids.
And I don’t care what politics you keep, the term indoctrination is full interchangeable with propaganda.
All in all, it’s just another brick in the wall.
No one’s mentioned Rainbow Fish, aka no tall poppies for kids yet?
I’m sure you’ve done some in-depth research on recent children’s books to reach that conclusion. :rolleyes:
Here are a couple of lists to start you off:
Best children’s books of 2019: from picture books to young adult
26 of the best kids’ books of 2019
Which of the 39 books in those lists would you say are propaganda?
And if you say ‘all of them’ without actually bothering to look at the books, we’ll know you’re a phoney.
Not just a book, but a coloring book!
Long ago I heard a radio interview with John Robbins, son of one of the founders of the Baskin-Robbins chain of ice cream franchises. At the time he was making the rounds for his second book, May All Be Fed. In one portion of the interview he noted how the milk industry used to give schools free crayon-by-numbers coloring books with an interesting series of loaded questions.
For instance, a question would say, “Do you put milk on your breakfast cereal? If not, color all the #3’s brown.” and the resulting picture would look like a smiling happy man if the responses were pro-beef and it would look more and more like a hideous mis-colored monster for each anti-beef-industry response.
But, hey, those were free activity books, right?
–G!
And Apple was criticized for giving Apple II and MAC computers to schools. Do they still do that?
Are there any children’s books that aren’t propaganda? I don’t recall ever coming across any children’s books that didn’t try to instill a particular outlook in their readers. Old fairy tales are mostly about trying to scare children into certain behaviors, and modern kid’s stories almost always have a definite perspective they’re trying to instill.
Also, while it’s 15 years old and the poster is banned so I don’t expect them to respond, the idea that LOTR is an allegory for the Cold War is pretty hard to defend since the books were written before the Cold War was really going (written before 1950, published 1954). Writing an allegory of something that hasn’t happened is a bit difficult.
Is there any book whatsoever, for adults or children, that doesn’t reflect its author’s outlook, worldview, interests, etc.?
But that’s not propaganda.
Some children’s books have ‘little moral lessons’, but many don’t. Someone who considers a book that has a message of ‘play nicely and share your toys’ to be propaganda, must have weird idea of what propaganda is.
There certainly are propaganda books, but not too many of them, and they tend to be promoted only by people with specific religious or political views.
My six year old grandson is nuts for those Captain Underpants books and although he has read a couple of them to me I’m forced to say I fail to see any propaganda or moral lesson in any of them. The protagonists seem to be to be simple agents of chaos, who through dumb luck fail to do anyone any permanent harm, and often accidentally do some good. Kind of like the Hulk in that TV show with Bill Bixby.
I’m using the dictionary definition of propaganda, and the vast majority of children’s books press strongly for supporting or opposing a particular cause.
Note that this isn’t just something that I’m doing, a few uick examples:
https://hubpages.com/literature/rainbow-fish-socialism
If, as you assert, the majority of children’s books are not propaganda, it should be absolutely trivial for you to answer my post by naming some that are not, and the fact that you are unable or unwilling to do so is pretty telling. You won’t or can’t name a book that has a message of ‘play nicely and share your toys’ that isn’t propaganda, but expect us to believe that such books are so common that it’s downright foolish to question whether they’re even around.
According to at least some conservatives, the fact that the series includes a gay character who goes on to marry his domestic partner counts as pro-homosexual propaganda, and the book has been expunged from some libraries on that basis. Is showing paths to how to behave as an adult propaganda, and does showing only ‘straight married with kid’ (like older books do) or including ‘gay marriage’ count as propaganda?
I wouldn’t call gay married people propaganda. Gay people exist, I think any reasonable person would agree to that, and they do get married. It reflects reality, not some desirable outcome.
I’ve posted two lists of the best children’s books of 2019. I’d say none of them are propaganda.
Which ones do you think are propaganda and why? Or would that mean you’d actually have to do some work and some thinking to justify your claim?
[quote=“Ukulele_Ike, post:71, topic:302090”]
Don’t forget Irving Berlin’s “Cohen Owes Me Ninety-Seven Dollars.”
When I first met Eve, she was delighted that I knew that song, and we harmonized on it. Just a pair of goyim mocking the Hebrew brethren.
Although I later sang it to a work buddy, Eddie Rosenthal, and it tickled him pink.
[/QUOTE]Wait. Eve Golden is a shiksa?
Who nu?
Looking at your first page, the second book The Fate of Fausto is specifically a morality tale in which a character who is too full of himself gets his comeuppance when he goes one step too far in trying to get the natural world to acknowledge his supposed greatness. As an Amazon review says: “It is the sea, however, that teaches Fausto his lesson and leaves the reader with a hard-to-forget moral. Jeffers closes the story with an anecdote about the importance of knowing when what you already have is enough, ending the book with a direct hit in case (somehow) you miss the message through the story of Fausto himself.”
Skimming down, Katherine Rundell’s The Good Thieves is about how taking the law into your own hands when you can’t get justice from the system is good. From a review I found:“I love the concept of stealing back what is ours or stealing from thieves! The story revolves around Vita and her friends who have decided to steal back her late grandmother’s precious jewellery. ‘Justice’, Grandpa (Vita’s Grandpa Jack Welles) wrote in his letter ,’seems to be only for those who can afford it’.”
Nicola Skinner’s Bloom is according to the page you linked: “A riotous, original and timely reminder that sometimes rules are made to be broken.”
At this point, there’s no real point in diving deeper, because I’ve got good specific examples. The three books I noted are definitely pushing a specific moral lesson, which I would say qualifies them as propaganda and not just showing kids an ‘instinctive’ worldview (as the OP distinguishes it). I don’t disagree with any of them, in fact from the brief reviews they all look like something I’d be happy to give as a gift to a kid, but I don’t think it’s legitimate to say that propaganda isn’t propaganda if it supports your own viewpoint.
This is what I mean when I talk about kid’s books being propaganda - the vast majority of such books are trying to advocate that the reader should embrace or reject a particular world view. While there are certainly some books or stories that don’t (especially non-fiction), actually finding them takes significant effort. And if you’re going to say that a book specifically teaching a moral or ethical lesson is not propaganda, then several of the examples cited earlier in this thread also don’t qualify.
It reflects a recent reality that quite a few people want to undo, and a reality that’s only true in a fraction of the world, not universally. It is very clearly sending the message ‘being gay is a normal part of being human’ which, while I agree with it, is very clearly trying to promote a specific viewpoint. And pretty much everyone who writes propaganda uncoerced thinks that all reasonable people would agree with whatever they’re writing, after all they are reasonable and agree with it! The fact that you or I agree with the point of a piece of propaganda doesn’t make it not propaganda.