To think books should have age certificates

[mrswhiskerson]

There is a debate going on at the minute about certifying music videos which I do agree with , I love music videos and some of them can be real works of art but I do not want my ds watching close ups of rihannas bum boobs or crotch. I also shouldn't have to not be able to watch the music channel while I am doing my ironing for fear of ds watching three am a
half minutes of soft porn.

What has surprised me though is no one ever mentions books. I have been an avid reader since childhood and some of the things I read were to old for me a notable book was American psycho which I read at fifteen after the film came out , it really disturbed me . Isn't the imagination worse than what you see? There is nothing in place to stop young people buying horrific books from waterstones and the like and these books could have a negative effect.

I was an early reader and know that I read Lady Chatterly & Fanny Hill and others around 11-12. I learned stuff, but I don't think I became depraved - lots went over my head. Life happens, it's better to learn early.
YABU

YABVU. Personally I'd sooner see a 'complete drivel' sticker on books such as Twilight.

I read all sorts as a child/teen,some much gorier and more disturbing than American Psycho,and they haven't affected me at all,and didn't at the time.

There was one book that I wasn't allowed to read,just one,and I've never forgotten the book.If I'd been allowed to read it it wouldn't have stuck in my memory as it has I'm sure. I can still picture the cover.

YABU. I was a very precocious reader and was bored with children's books by about 10. This was in the years before there were authors like J K Rowling or Philip Pulman who served the teen market. There wasn't a lot to bridge the gap. But classics like Dickens were a bit too sophisticated, so I read things like Harold Robbins (most politically incorrect books ever, but I got most of my sex education from them); Virginia Andrews (very weird stuff about incest); Stephen King (not exactly great literature, but I would say good for literate kids who can handle scary stuff); and, at 12, The Happy Hooker. Hmm, not the best thing for me to be reading, but even at that age I could see that it was fiction rather than career advice.

Books are different from films; you won't get five year olds inadvertently reading adult books. There is an argument that if you are old enough to understand the vocabulary and plot of an adult novel at 10 or 11, you are probably a bit more advanced than the average child of that age, and deserve to be rewarded for your reading efforts by having access to more sophisticated subject matter.

And what about more serious books? I read A Clockwork Orange at about 12 or 13. That is a very disturbing book. I read Lolita at about the same age. Instead of reading works of literature like this, should I have read something less demanding? Anne Frank was 13 when she started her diaries, so would you ban this from a curious 11 year old on the basis that it might be upsetting?

No! I'm a librarian and I hate the idea. I make sure that I read as much YA lit as possible so that I can advise the students in my school properly. Perhaps you should be campaigning for the return of specialist children's and school librarians. We are disappearing fast!

YABU. Books should absolutely not have age certificates on them. No. No no no no no.

Most libraries and book shops already have age suggestions above the shelves and I think that's all that is needed.

I read Carrie by Stephen King when I was about eleven. It gave me a scare but not so badly that I don't think I should have read it. However I think the film would have been much worse (and is rated 18 I think).

But although I agree with you that imagination can be much worse, I also thing that a well written book has a subtlety that films of that time can't always capture and that reading ability and maturity vary from person to person so putting a rating on books wouldn't work.

Children read at different ages and even adults cope batter with some topics that others. My mum would never read a Stephen King book for example, but I have high hopes that LO will love them when he is older. I feel I learned a lot from him and his books (in regards to attitudes, behaviours, tolerance, moral codes etc) and partly that's because I was reading them at the right age. An age limit would have denied me that and I think that would have been a shame.

DS1 (11) is a very prolific reader with a reading age much older than he is.

Several books he has read inc the CHERUB series already mentioned have a warning on them (mainly due to the use of swear words).

At our library he is reading from the teen/adult section being bored/having read all the childrens ones but to borrow from this section he needs to be 13 so at the moment, I have to take them out on my card! So in some respects books do have age certificates!

pointydog i read american psycho when i was fifteen after having watched the film and thought it was interesting and I have nearly always found books to be better than the film so i bought it read it and found it was the most horrific thing i have ever read. I am not saying i was traumatised but the things i read did stick with me for a while and now i am older it is definately not something i would want my ds to read until he is old enough or ever if i am honest .

I am not against children reading at all and i will positively encourage it in my ds and the quality of books for children and teenagers is much better now . Young people should read well written entertaining books and yes a a lot of children do have high reading skills which is fantastic and should be encouraged.
What I cant understand however is the fact that a lot of you disagree with me regarding adult themed books yet you would not let your children watch a porno or a very violent horror movie and are calling for age certificates on music videos, it is somewhat confusing

In jackie collins thrill me me kiss me kill me the story revolves around a psycho stalker , a young actor who has a history of beating his old girlfriend but she still takes him back even though he is using her ,a young underage promiscuos girl who has threesomes for money and takes drugs and is forced into incest with her father and that is just a brief summary and most of these types of books are very similar , I should know i have read most of them although I do not like them now .

I presume you would not let a fifteen year old girl or boy watch something like this so why let them read about it?

I stand firm on my point that at the very least there should be a guide to what is in a book if it has a very adult theme. If you were to buy a film which had a lot of graphic violence or rape or very bad language in it, it would give a warning on the back and you can then decide whether or not to let your dc watch it.

fwiw I liked twilight the first time I read it until I realised it was a story about a ninety year old control freak who fancied a young girl and went after her knowing he could kill her at any minute . On top of that the whole series seemed like one long advertisement for true love waits abstinence group. Bella seems to get punished horrifcally for having sex with her boyfriend even though she is by then a married woman , i find the books to be creepy and have serious reservations about the authors mentality.

climbs off soapbox

I read all sorts as a teenager so I can see where you're coming from but I don't see how it could be enforced.
After all, it's a lot easier for a forbidden book to do the rounds undiscovered by parents than a film.
I cant think of any books I have read that I wouldn't allow say, a 13/14 year old to read.

I've never read American psycho, from the sound of it I will have to give it a try :o

No WAY! As an English teacher who spends most of her life dragging faint glimmers of interest from reluctant teens, I rely on unsuitable books to make my life a little bit easier. Find them a bit of sex and they'll actually read.

Besides, have you any idea what kids actually talk about when you're not around? Books are, in my opinion, a really useful way of them dealing with sex, violence, drugs etc. without actually having to dabble themselves.

.....as a slight side issue, anybody read Twilight and think it's MORE suitable for teenagers than Lady Chatterley's Lover? Basically 900 pages of foreplay and sexual tension (don't even get me started on the portrayal of the violent sex. Rant, rant) followed by Bella's decision to abandon her aspirations and individual life in order to get married. And this is more suitable for teenage girls?

"I stand firm on my point that at the very least there should be a guide to what is in a book if it has a very adult theme."

Lots of books do have symbols on them to show the theme.

But the best guide to what's in a book is for you to read it first. I did that quite often when my neice and nephew were younger and I was buying them books as gifts.

Mrswhiskerson only just read your bit about Twilight. Oh, it sounds like we could have a good rant over a cheeky bottle of wine. Much, much more disturbing when you look at the books from the 'abstinence' perspective.

The Brontes and Austen get the Twilight treatment.

Not sure whether to applaud or sob gently.

If they pass the whole age banding books bollocks I will have to hyperventilate then go on a cover destroying binge.

Reading isn't supposed to be sterile and safe and shiny. It is supposed to be addictive and exciting.

Stupid stupid ideas. Kids should read at a level that suits their abilities, not some arbitrarily decided age point. If that means I get to be an awful mum who slips her kids Pratchett books too early, then knickers to it all.

Mind you, no need for slipping. Books on the shelves, Kindle available if it can be snagged afore I get hold of it :o

I think it's up to parents to read the books first themselves if they're concerned. FWIW, I had free rein of all the books in the house, and read Shakespeare and Homer at 11/12, medical textbooks, Shogun (loved it!) and yes, Jackie Collins, James Herbert and all sorts of other stuff at not much older.

Stuff I didn't understand went over my head until I read it again later. I think so many households either have no books or don't encourage children to read, and I've had to deal with so many semi-literate 16-18 year olds since that I'd say let them read what they want unless you think it'll be too much for them, and then read it yourself first... I'd rather a child didn't read something that was just badly written than scarey.

The book that most disturbed me as a child (about 10 maybe) was 50 tales of True Terror. It included really awful stuff from all over the world, including the Moors Murders. It put me off reading any kind of crime or misery book for the rest of my life.

I don't think you can police books. Secondary school age kids can pick up adult books in their own homes or in a library.

DS was given one of the Cherub books age 11 by school. There is a lot of sex, drinking, drug taking and violence in them, but I don't think it is written in a way that encourages sexualisation or that it is without a moral message.
Despite the sexual behaviour of the teens in the book, they are very clear on issues of consent, particularly around alcohol and consent.

So perhaps it is not the amount of sex and violence in teen books, but that the tone around those issues is appropriate.

You were 15.

As book-reading is a very solitary pleasure and as it is such an active past-time, I am surprised that anyone would carry on reading something they found truly horrific.

There are no peers to pressure you into reading it so it's not like horror films. It is not about passive watching while everything is provided for you.

Reading is about actively choosing to read on while completely on your own.

I did not realise there was already a system in place but it is good to know.
I do think people may have taken my point slightly wrong or I have not put it across as well as I should have. I was just interested to know what with all the debate over music videos films and watershed tv does anyone think books should be rated too as they can have an effect too and quite often rather shocking content , maybe not on the same level but an effect all the same .

my opinion also comes from the amount of utter drivel that passes for literature these days and authors are having to be more and more shocking to sell books.

tortu I completely agree. I read all the books and I will admit I enjoyed them at first then I watched the films and started to think hang on a minute this is all a bit weird and a extremely dysfunctional relationship to boot. Bella desperately wants sex and is constantly refused although he will tease her with kisses that leave her insane with desire before he stops and tells her it can go no further, the tone of the book seems to say that desiring someone is wrong and bella is punished by being left covered in bruises and pregnant after their first night together has a pregnancy that causes her to almost die and edward actively encourages her to get rid of the baby then she gives birth in the most horrific way possible. The worst thing is teen girls look up to the characters and think edward is the perfect boyfriend and it could lead to impressionable young girls putting up with a lot more than they should because they think it is romantic.

If a creepy dead ninety year old stood and watched me sleep every night and told me he could kill me at any minute i would reach for the nearest stake no matter how good looking.

Actually if someone did watch me sleep they would sharp be put off by the line of drool ,snoring and talking in my sleep not to mention the night farts

I haven't managed to read everything here, but a couple of points. I was a very advanced reader and one of the worst days of my life was the day that the library decided I could only borrow children's books (I think I was 12 and reading Austen etc etc)...I did read things that weren't suitable of course (but bear in mind that Watership Down was considered to be a children's book...). But it's all a question of consciousness, isn't it? A lot of the stuff I read I would now think outrageously limited in terms of how women's roles were represented, or how other races were depicted etc etc. It's fiction, not reality.

Second, I knew from a fairly early age that I was gay, and books were my absolute lifeline in terms of finding some (however pathetic, Well of Loneliness, so NOT helpful!!) validation of my feelings. Age stickers would inevitably mean this kind of content would be off limits to teenagers, and this would be very damaging.

Third, reading is stigmatized enough in teenage culture - it's surely the last and only redoubt of childhood freedom. With the possible exception of de Sade I can think of little that I would control. Also a ludicrous example when most kids in early puberty can access porn with barely a by-your-leave.

Finally, children are ghoulish and it's the way that they learn to deal with stuff; I remember (with shame) my early teenage obsession with the Holocaust: I learned a lot about the vileness of human nature, without actually having to live it myself. That's what books are for...

Drivingmisscrazy I have said I absolutely support children reading and I too found solace in books during some very hard times I am not saying i deny anyone that.
I dont think it is a ludicrous point about the porn just because our children can acess something behind our backs does not mean we would give them our permission to do it .

What I am saying is with the call for more censureship on tv programmes and music videos does this extend to books too? where instead of watching material that is unsuitable they can read about it instead.

for example rihannas new video depicts her being raped then shooting a man in the head and there is a huge outcry about its unsuitability for young people yet the majority of posters think it is fine for kids to read about it instead. It does seem like a double standard to be completely honest.

Plus I have never once said I am against young people reading quality literature which some people seem to think .

In answer to someones question earlier about anne frank I think it is good for our children to read about her experiences as it is real life history .I am not arguing against books like these I am arguing against novels that depict violence murder and sex in a very graphic way.

I admit I have maybe gone about getting my point across in the wrong way and it has obviously offended people which was never my intention .

pointydog I continued reading because the worst is right at the end and I always see a book thorugh to the end unless it is crap, reading almost an entire book then missing the end is something I cant do I always need to know what happens at the end, Plus I was fifteen ,Yes I was horrified it is a very very sick book and I would be concerned about anyone who disagrees.

YABU. In book shops books are usually divided into adults,teena,8 to 12.s. 5 to 8,s and pre school, So you should be able to make sure your children are reading suitable books, In our local libraies they are also dib=vided into those age groups,

pointydog I have re read your post and I do see it from your point .

millyr You have put my exact point across , just much better than I did .
Its not the issues themselves it is the way they are written.

I know teenagers can relate to a and be helped in their own personal lives by reading about bad situation or sexual relationships in a book with good writing and a good moral thread to it. I have also established some very good friendships which started through a mutual love of books and passing on a good read for someone else to enjoy.

Glamorised domestic violence (twilight) extreme violence and explicit sex however which are found in a large amount of adult books are and never willl be suitable for young teenagers .

I'm not sure where the majority of posters have said they think it is fine for their children to read about a woman being raped and then shooting someone.

The majority of posters have said that they feel capable of assessing the suitability of their children's reading material without further interference from government.

You know you have a really valid point, but for some reason my natural reaction is no. Not sure why. I do remember reading a book from my mum's room, a crime novel and the guy was a sadist, did horribloe things to the family he had killed in cluding kids. Genuinely fucked me up for a long while though. I still would have found it and read it though even if it said cert 18, if it had been in my mum's room.