Is To Kill A Mockingbird okay to give to my ten year old?

The problem is that if they read an adult book too soon, and don't enjoy it, they often don't want to read it years later, when they would probably love it. There are so many wonderful children's novels for them to enjoy, why risk spoiling the pleasure of reading the adult ones when they are older?

At this age my DS loved the Hornblower books and Sherlock Holmes.

Hoards read The Hunger Games,Gone series etc in primary school.

I'm totally against any age censorship on books for children as are many authors.

If he can handle the themes let him read it. If he doesn't get the maximum out of it who cares? Is there a law saying he can't read it again?

What's wrong with Lord of the Rings? Is it your taste colouring it? I read them at about ten. Also read lots of Diana Wynne Jones.

Could you read it together? I did this with my daughter when she was 10 - having read previously at school as a teen - which was helpful to her re the nuances of speech and language/ race issues etc. She was a v advanced reader too but I definitely think she got more out of the book this way; understand and enjoyed it because she was able to discuss it as we went along.

Kids are very aware of racist issues these days and the rape issue isn't in any way graphic or salacious..... overall it was a positive for both of us - so yes, I'd let DS read it if I were you

Tomorrow when the war began series is also excellent for slightly older D.C.'s... in fact John marsden has written lots of great books which we read in school from about age 12.

lucked thanks for mentioning Holes! It's great and so is the movie!!!

Dd1 read it at about 12yo, after she'd heard dh saying (not to her) that he thought it was a really good book.
She was saying about a year ago (aged 15yo) that she really wished she hadn't read it then as she felt that she hadn't really appreciated it and, having read it once, felt that it wasn't quite the same reading it again.

If she'd asked me then I would have advised she waited as, although she was more than capable of the language much younger, and she's very mature, it is one that is better to wait on.

I don't generally sensor books, so if he was desperate to read it, then I wouldn't say no, but I wouldn't give it to a child of that age.

Certainly it's taught in schools so can technically be classed as a children's book

The book is taught in HIGH school, to GCSE students. Your child is in PRIMARY school. There is no 'technically' about it. The book is unsuitable for a 10 year old. As for The hunger games in primary school? That is ridiculous.

OP
I would say it's a fairly central part of it. I think something going over the head of a child actually deprives them of reading an awesome book and appreciating it when they are old enough to get it.

I read TKAM in secondary school and fell in love with it. But part of that "wow" moment came from understanding what is going on.

That said I have a y8 student at the moment who is working her way through the Brontes. She loves them.

I love The Graveyard Book. American Gods is another good one of his too.

I think different children like reading different things. I always found it odd how many y7/8 students loved reading the puke inducing depressing read that is the Fault In Our Stars (I borrower a copy from a 6th former and as you can probably guess absolutely hated it).

Neil Gaiman's The Graveyard Book is a good one. I liked it too. I'd forgotten about him.

Books are so subjective, kids are so different. Some kids will read things that are more adult and most of the content will go over their heads. I have a sensitive 11 yr old who is a worrier and a deep thinker so that influences my decisions and makes me err on the side of caution. Other kids might be more robust and capable of reading more complicated topics without getting anxious.

I feel like kids have their whole adult lives to worry about rape and violence and discrimination and the like, and they have such a short time in their lives to not have to worry about these things. When issues come up in everyday life we'll deal with it then, but for as long as I get to choose, I'm going to choose not to voluntarily introduce the difficult stuff.

Burying my head in the sand maybe, I don't know.

The books are much more graphic and disturbing than the films. And anyway, the film is a 12A . A primary school woildn't show a 12A film without parental permission- I think they should be equally responsible with books.

I wouldn't personally give hunger games to primary kids. But I can see how people do.

Mortal Engines is great.
Skullduggery Pleasant is also a nice series.

The Hunger Games books are more graphic than the films. I would never let a primary child read it (although I know plenty of parents who have - none of whom bothered to read it first).

DS1 loved the philip reeve mortal engines series but at the end of year 6.

I don't think they are Bertrand.
Whilst it wouldn't be my choice for the children, lots of their parents have taken kids to see the films. I've seen lots of kids going ad katniss for world book day. If that's the case then I can't see why the books are an issue.

The school is very wrong indeed to make THG available to primary children.