Anyone know about the history of children's literature? I have a weird question.

What an interesting thread!

I think that in the 60's there was a bit of an explosion in children's books, when picture books became more mass produced, and more children had access to them. At this point some writers started making books with more of a child's voice, as the books were now owned by the children. Whereas you can imagine books being lent to children and needing to be returned to the family bookcase previously.

Clever polly, for example was written for the author's children, and she used the language they used to put their voices into print.

You can see that the intention of this was really quite radical in the 60's, and will have made books more accessible and interesting to children. However this was done under careful editorship by the likes of Kaye Webb who published so many richly written books in the 70's and 80's.

I don't know where to begin with the state of current children's literature. It is so depressing. And the sad thing is that so many wonderful books have been published in the last 40 years, and so few of them remain in public libraries...

The brilliant thing about the Little House books is that they grow up with the reader. I was given Little House in the Big Woods when I was six, about the same age as Laura in the book - I found the setting quite confusing but the level was spot on for me at that age, and I loved reading the rest of the series over the next few years.

The eurghh modern rainbow fairies books are all about doing the right thing, restoring the whatever to its rightful owner etc, aren't they? You wouldn't call it 'doing your duty' any more, but that's an old-fashioned phrase now.

Horrid Henry, Captain Underpants etc deliberately celebrate naughtiness, but I think they still have a moral undertone of some description, ie there is a clear right / wrong, good / bad dividing line?

mmm x post. gruffalo is great but what about (ok only slightly) older stuff like raymond briggs, asterix, and tintin. Elephant and the bad baby and alan ahlberg. All aimed at different age groups but weren't they 70s and 80s?

Interestingly I'm reading Little House in the Big Woods(American) to the dc (written at a similar time) and that is very basic.In fact DS 10 pointed out that it wasn't written very well as they're doing a lot re making sentences more interesting and complex at school.

I was a bit as I love that book.I pointed out that she was probably aiming it an audience of children.

perhaps it's that 'right' was more defined when those books were written. Now I think all literature has a more loosely defined moral code and things just aren't so black and white whereas beliefs were more homogenous (Sp?). I haven't read any of the newer fiction with the kids except the godawful rainbow fairies so i don't know how much they touch on it but dd read some of it to me like warhorse etc, I only heard snippets as she'd read most of it on her own.

re sharing passions from our own childhood - errol reminded me when mentioning bbc adaptations. I bought the bbc narnia series for them as Id loved it as a child. It is hilarious. The costumes are archaic. made them watch it all though.

Hi,really interesting thread. I have mixed feelings about whether children's books use easier language or if it's a good thing or not.
I know the discussion has been about novels but the genre which has the most immediate plot access and virtually no description are fairy tales. I know they would have been passed down through oral tradition before they were collected and printed, but they were for children to scare the little blighters into behaving. So is it right to say that children's books lack long descriptions and extended vocab? Perhaps it's a more precise use of language? I dunno.

I am going to argue that picture books for children of all ages are very sophisticated. They keep language simple but rely on a visual literacy which takes the reading far beyond the sentence. I can only think of straightforward examples- such as the central devise of The Gruffalo where one thing is being said but the reader can see what is actually happening.The important thing is that they do not match, that the author/ illustrator is toying with the reader's understanding. Sorry,I'm too knackered to put together a decent description. Does that make sense? Picture books are a much more visual genre,they are for much older readers and they use visual literacy in a way that books in to 70's or 50's didn't.

I don't think modern fiction would necessarily use the language of 'morals' or honour or doing one's duty, but some of the books, probably moreso for older children have good 'ethical' content - sometimes quite complex. Apart from Harry Potter, the ones that spring to my mind are the Tiffany Aching 'childrens' discworld and (IIRC, its ages since I read them) the Dark Materials trilogy.

YY. I think it is one of the things that (to me) makes some classic children's literature seem very 'grown up', in that it does seem to expect children will be aware of quite big ethical questions. But then, there's also a total lack of awareness about stuff like bullying/animal cruelty ... it's such a mixture.

That's what I think, LRD. Hence why it came to me in church really (I am not a Christian) but within that context of thinking about wider morality it was bound to appear in children's literature, wasn't it.

Oh, that's interesting ... I immediately think of Harry Potter where they do talk about it. But then that is deliberately evoking older fiction, I guess.

I think it is a 'thing'. I think perhaps it's cultural as well as in books, too -I was reading some old family letters the other day and they are much more full of the idea that you must be constantly 'doing your duty'.

I was thinking about this thread during a carol service today. I remember as a child noticing how much books like the Nesbits (Wouldbegoods etc) talked about morals, honour, doing the right thing. I haven't come across that kind of content in modern day children's literature - although since my DD is only 5 really the only contemporary chapter books we have read are Horrid Henry, Rainbow Fairies and Amy Wild Animal Talker so I don't know whether this is a "thing" or not - anyone care to comment?

Well, I'm thoroughly looking forward to a shared dose of The Hogfather tonight, which by lucky chance is the book we're on ... once I can get DD's nose out of the book she's been lent for the holidays which is entitled something like 'Applications of Operational Amplifiers'. (no, me neither, we didn't do electronics back in my day! )

What an interesting thread.

My 6yo DD is reading My Naughty Little Sister (written in 1950s) and I would not say the language is generally more difficult than, say, the rainbow fairies books (excepting words which are no longer in common use, eg counterpane).

However I've certainly noticed it with other books, eg Just William mentioned above.

Hassled I was an avid reader and enjoyed Gerald Durrell, but I remember finding the descriptive bits of My Family and Other Animals too long and tedious and skipping to the bits with his family in!

now bring us some fuzz or are you nbusfp?? I don't think pushy works but I think it's nice to try and inspire your kids by sharing passions. I enjoy reading with them. Not that they nec needed/wanted me to just that I did espec as I have two littler boys and I think my girls get less time with me because I'm always caught up with the babies. ALTHOUGH errol I kind of meant it in a more 'because i then get a secret read myself' way, it sounded a bit patronising when I read it back! sorry.

I think we will start little women together now and they can read some of the others on their own.

101 Dalmatians
The book is so much better than the films!

I find that sometimes even a ten year old needs reading to

absolutely! Just because a child can read themselves doesn't mean that we should stop reading to them if they (and we) enjoy it.

Little Women is one with a rather difficult start - especially as a child nowadays may not have come across Pilgrim's Progress, and the setting in Civil War America is unfamiliar - I seem to remember stalling on it but then we acquired an abridged version with illustrations - after reading that I read the full version of all the books.

Some books I came to after seeing the wonderful BBC serial adaptations - some of which are available on DVD.

Plenty of kids can and do read old literature these days just the same as they did in the olden days.

My DS read PP&W to himself at 6 and loved it.

We've been reading all the E Nesbit books at bedtime and they've understood most of the language with hardly any input from me.

If you read a lot you're exposed to far more language.Kids read a lot in the olden days,many do these days.My dc do read a lot and a huge variety,all sorts new and old.Language and comprehension certainly isn't a barrier.

What about some more recent stuff. All those brilliant war books like Carrie's War or the Machine Gunners or the silver Sword? disney films are a good source of good kids novels: Mary Poppins, bedknobs and broomsticks, 101 Dalmations (and not a Disney film but i cApture the Castle). There are too many kids books and not enought time!

mooncup, thanks too. Will do. I find that sometimes even a ten year old needs reading to...i read swallows and amazons to her and dd2 a couple of years ago and found it hard to put it down. It's fab rediscovering old friends - as I think someone up thread said.

ok thanks a lot, that's reminded me of a few, LRD I've read goodnight mr tom but not the others and nothing by sutcliffe.

Errol She's read a lot of current popular fiction in her age bracket but not a lot of historical, I think E.nesbitt, blyton but soon gave up on them, swallows and amazons and secret garden and little princess. Just she doesn't immediately want to read some of my old books because the covers aren't as appealing and it takes a little longer to get into them. But I'd totally forgotten quite a lot of things i loved like katy and little women - thanks both of you, I can now create a granny list for her birthday...

Oh, yes.

Oh to be 10/11 again with all those books waiting for one...

Have you tried looking down the list of Carnegie Medal winners? Many of the 20th century children's greats are there.