to think Roald Dahl's 'Revolting Rhymes' should be banned?

[SquareholeRoundpeg]

I know Dahl is a national treasure and children love a bit of gore and all that - but DH and I were shocked at some of the language used in some of the stories (it is not easy to shock DH!)

There is a line in the Cinderella story where the prince says of Cinderella, 'who is this dirty slut'. Had to pause on that part when reading to DS!

The language in the story shows how deeply engrained misogynistic attitudes are, and continue to be carried through in our children's literature.

How can this be allowed?!!!

SquareholeRoundpeg Fri 06-May-16 13:58:37

"Cory - do you still think it is ok for a young child to learn such words then?"

Given the general complexity and tone of the poems in this book, I don't suppose they are aimed at 4yos.

I would expect to exercise enough judgment as a parent to decide when any offspring of mine is mature enough to understand that there are words out there which you may hear but which there are very good reasons for you not to use.

Just like I would expect them once past a certain age to be able to read fairy tales and understand that you can't behave like the people in them.

By the time they are 8 or 9, they are learning about the air raids in WW2, about children being bombed to death. What is so worrying about them hearing a bad word in a context where it is specifically made clear to them why this word is bad and why they should be wary of people who use it?

YABVU.

"Where they have burned books, they will end in burning human beings" a quote/prophecy from a German Jew, Heinrich Heine, written in 1821.

www.bookbrowse.com/quotes/detail/index.cfm/quote_number/390/wherever-they-burn-books-in-the-end-will-also-burn-human-beings

just read another book.

I started to read Huckleberry Finn to my DC - then realised there was lots of use of the N word in there. I thought I would discuss this with my 8 year old who could comprehend it, but my 4 yo wouldn't be able to get it.

So I put the book aside, and READ THEM ANOTHER BOOK! sorted.

And that is before we go into the whole debate of the changing meaning of the word. I would not buy this book for a 4yo before there are too many other things they wouldn't understand either (references to gambling etc). But if I gave it to an 8yo, I would talk to them about the book, about the words in it, about how they change their meanings, about the difference between what a character thinks and what the author/person reading the book thinks. You know, just talk... As one does.

I was reading a Noddy book to DD last night in which Noddy fed Bumpy Dog chocolate I said to DD that in real life dogs must not eat chocolate, it will make them poorly.

There is lots of stupid stuff in children's books, if you banned all the books with rude/dangerous/factually incorrect stuff in them there would be nothing left to read

I wouldn't ban it but I do agree that Roald Dahl – much as I loved him as a child – sometimes does come across as a bit unpleasant and dodgy, and I don't just mean amusingly shocking in a Gorey kind of way.

I read ds a fairytale that ended with the wolf having stones put in his stomach and thrown in the well.

Ds said 'well that was silly. They won't have any water to drink now'

(He will be a health and safety officer I'm sure)

"Iwould prefer my DS not to encounter such words at such a young age"

But he is going to, especially if you read him books that are decades old such as Dahl, Beatrix Potter, Blyton etc, they may still be mainstream today but their original text is still there, and it includes words and attitudes that have totally changed.

I remember the word "slut" being in a Jacqueline Wilson book. Think it was the Suitcase Kid. It was used in the context of being untidy, messy.

What's wrong with Esio Trot???

I think The Swan is an amazing story, I remember reading it as a child and very much identifying with the bullying victim. Definitely wouldn't ban that.

I seem to recall a critique of esio trot on the basis he was gas lighting her

I read it as an adult and thought it was creepy but kids don't understand adult relationships that way.

David Walliams uses some horrible language

OP, you can consider 'slut' to be an inappropriate word for small children whilst also believing that it is totally unnecessary to censor the text. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I am a feminist. I don't want DD to learn the word 'slut' yet. Right now, however, I am more concerned with the deeply unpleasant gender politics of many traditional fairy tales. It doesn't mean that I censor them; I just ensure that she is exposed to a wide range of narratives, especially subverted fairy tales (the Worst Princess and the Wrestling Pricess are both fab).

OP, you are still arguing against the word slut - it's already been explained to you 100s of times on this thread.

Slut = slovenly.

And the prince said it - the prince who is a proper twat.

Cinderella sees the prince for the twat he is and bins him off straight away.

How is it not a good example of how men shouldn't behave, and how women deserve more than a twat even if he does happen to be a prince?

I have actually used the word recently with it's original meaning, me to DH 'Oh my god look at those cobwebs I didn't clean, I am such a slut'. I didn't mean it sexually, didn't even think about that actually, just that I was a lazy cleaner!

YABU, there are lots of books with unacceptable words now, just edit and explain (when your DS is old enough obviously). Though to be honest if you had read the word in a normal way he wouldn't have demanded to know its meaning surely, probably wouldn't have noticed.

Struwwelpeter.

Nothing wrong with teaching your child the actual meaning of words. It's a bit like teaching them that 'you' if spelt y o u , not u.

Surely the use of the word "slut" in this poem reflects badly on the person using it, that can't be bad IMHO.

I think that you have to appreciate the meaning of the word at the time it was written. Words go both ways. People throw bastard around pretty freely these days - it just doesn't have the same sort of meaning or impact now.

I loved Matilda and the BFG as a child. Small, seemingly powerless little girls coming out on top. There is a Spielberg film of the BFG coming out this year with Matk Rylance as the BFG. I can't wait to see it!

I'm not sure that Revolting Rhymes is necessarily meant for children. It's not like his other childrens' stuff. It is clever and funny though.

Why don't you try some Dr Struwwelpeter for your DH to read aloud instead? I've probably spelled it wrong. My DCs used to really like it - especially the one about the child who wasted away and died because he didn't eat his soup.

I don't think 'Revolting Rhymes' should be banned, but placed firmly in the rubbish bin. It is a cheap read.
Much of the vocabulary was chosen deliberately to shock, and calculated to appeal to undiscriminating children and adults, who thought they were being daring by reading it. It was a cynical ploy to boost sales. They were written at a time when his brilliant talent was running dry, although some of his adult short stories from other times are deeply unpleasant too.

He understood that children liked to be shocked. I don't agree with putting books in the rubbish bin, at least give it to a charity shop so that someone else can enjoy it.

Of course children think they are daring if they read something that their mother disapproves of - it makes it twice as interesting!

Oh great we've moved from banning books to 'just' destroying them. Perhaps we should burn them?

Slut isn't sexual in this context.

Yabu. Go and read 'Fahrenheit 451.' Twice.

This yhread is very circular...

Ban nothing, but books are not sacred texts - you don't have to read your child a specific book because its on a "classics" list somewhere - if you don't like it leave it on the shelf.

Equally you can bin your own personalcopy ofa book you hate without bringing on the apocolypse - I loved Topsy and Tim as a kid but when my mum sent me a copy of one of the books I discovered it was the most sanctimonious drivel and it made me irationally angry to read. Charity shops don't want children's books in English here in rural Germany so I binned it - this was in no way the beginning of a Fahrenheit 451 situation (and yes, I have read it) and the world kept on turning.

I also change the words in books I read aloud (you can only read Mr Tickle so many times as it's written...) make up different stories to go with the pictures, "read" books picked up in waiting rooms written in German aloud to my youngest in English, translating only in the loosest sense...

Banning publication/ ownership of a book is evil, doing what ever the hell you want with your own personal copy is 100% fine and an utter non issue. Use the complete works of Shakespeare to prop up your wobbly table or read Peter Rabbit to your kid swapping in your child's name for Peter and you will not be struck by lightning...

I was caught out by this on my final teaching placement. A child in Y1 had projectile vomited all over their classroom so the rest of the class was sent into Y2 where I was teaching. I grabbed a book off the shelf and came across this line. I just changed the word to one that was more suitable and was really impressed when the lack of rhyming was noted.

I totally agree that a child who has never heard the word slut before will not even take any notice of it. My kids let books wash over them and basically ignore any word they don't know unless I specifically say "Do you know what that means?" and go on to explain it.

Lots of childrens books, old and new have questionable role models, language, behaviour etc. They're only books though... and as everyone else has said, you can use them to discuss stuff with your child if you think it's needed.

I am worried now though that someone said Rhyme Stew is NOT for kids, I have a feeling it is on my daughter's shelf along with Revolting Rhymes hmm must check.

Revolting Rhymes is probably a little bit too old for a 6 year old though, just because they have to have the maturity to understand the comedy in taking a well-known fairy story and giving it a twist.