I’d say you just put you’re finger on the inherent problem (pardon the pun) with such YA literature. “educators want them to” - - even as a 13 year old, when I read Go Ask Alice and the Outsiders, I could pick up on the condescending tone of the writing. These books don’t deal with problems in a realistic way. Rather, they are simplistic morality tales designed to coerce kids into behaving in the way adults think they ought to act.
Cecil himself did a column exposing Go Ask Alice as a fake diary written by an adult, one who obviously had very little first-hand knowledge of young people in general, let alone young runaway drug addicts. The authors of such books don’t seem to think much about the kids they are writing for; they seem to think they’ll swallow any B.S.
IMO, kids can tell they are being written “down” to; meaning that they can spot a hoax, and realize when they are being preached at.
I’d say you just put you’re finger on the inherent problem (pardon the pun) with such YA literature: “[what] educators want them to [read]” - - even as a 13 year old, when I read Go Ask Alice and the Outsiders, I could pick up on the condescending tone of the writing. These books don’t deal with problems in realistic ways. Rather, they are simplistic morality tales designed to coerce kids into behaving in the way adults think they ought to act.
Cecil himself did a column exposing Go Ask Alice as a fake diary written by an adult, one who obviously had very little first-hand knowledge of young people in general, let alone young runaway drug addicts. The authors of such books don’t seem to think much about the kids they are writing for; they seem to think they’ll swallow any B.S. (“Alice” in particular is riddled with factual inaccuracies - namely that drug abuse can cause teenage girls to think lesbian thoughts! ‘oh the horror!’)
IMO, kids can tell they are being written “down” to; meaning that they can spot a hoax, and realize when they are being preached at. It explains why the ‘Harry Potter’ series was such an unexpected success - these books aren’t written ‘down’ to kids; and aren’t written with an agenda in mind.
Reading lists are usually compiled in a bunch of different ways:
[ul]
[li]Favorites from the librarian’s YA-hood[/li][li]Suggestions from publishers[/li][li]Suggestions from teachers[/li][li]To round it out the library’s teenage staff are asked what books they’re reading[/li][/ul]
Don’t you hate when you read threads in the morning before work, and then you don’t have a chance to jump back in the conversation until the end of the work day?
I really do think her point was that the Newbery Award is dominated by “problem” books as opposed to … I don’t know, fun loving books or something. I think the phrase “problem” book is troublesome, but I’m trying to use it in the same sense it was used in the article – but the longer this thread goes on, the stupider I think the term is!
However, I agree that the target age of the Newbery winners does seem to be creeping up, although I feel it’s still safety within the “up to and including 14” range stated in the ALA guidelines. Still, it’s been a while since a really solid book for younger readers got the nod from the Newbery committee. I would say that Shiloh is probably the most recent (1992) winner that’s aimed a little younger.
I remember I use to sneak off to the bathroom in 2nd and 3rd grade with my sister’s Judy Blume books. “Otherwise Known as Sheila the Great”, “Superfudge”, and “Are You There God, It’s Me, Margaret”, were a beginning introduction into the world of secret and guilty pleasures. To be honest, I don’t remember a lot of them as it’s been 20 years except that Judy Blume thought that it was possible to cover a toilet seat with toothpaste to the point that someone wouldn’t notice it. It didn’t work too well for me.
Okay, maybe Judy Blume, who is known to be funny, is not the best example but my daughters know all they have to do to stop dad from asking more about what they are reading is to describe some of the Girl Stuff (and you know what I mean) in it. :eek: