Jacqueline Wilson - thoughts?

[whattimeisitrightnow]

Posting in AIBU for traffic and also because there's another thread currently running here that's sort of about her works.
I grew up reading JW obsessively, really loved her work. If I'm honest, I'd probably still enjoy reading some of her books as an adult! However, now that I'm older I'm easily able to identify problems with a lot of them: some of it was my own fault, as I read the ones for teens/mature readers when I was too little for them.

That being said (talked about this on the other thread) there's one book, Love Lessons, based on a student-teacher relationship where said relationship is presented in an almost positive light, in a very romantic way. The female student is pretty much blamed entirely for what happens and is kicked out of the school while the teacher keeps his job. The abuse of power isn't explored at all. Generally, I think JW books really seek to give a voice to children, especially those in extremely difficult situations who might feel particularly powerless, and that's commendable. LL seems to be an exception.

What do people think of JW books? Did you enjoy reading them? Do you think they're too 'dark' for children? Did you even find them helpful at times? (I remember the ones with abusive parents really resonating with me, even before I was old enough to articulate why.) And do you let your own kids read them?

The level of stock that DW is mad. It’s so hard to get a middle grade book into supermarkets because he’s - no exaggeration - guaranteed at least 50% of the shelf space.

This is so strange to read this because last week I mentioned this exact book to dh and how mad it now seems to read about a teenage girl having a thing with her teacher! I always knew it was wrong, but I don't think I saw it as grooming, I think I thought he really liked her too. I said to dh I want to read it again and see what I pick up on and see differently as an adult. I adored her books. Love lessons, lola Rose, the diamond girls and the girls in love series were my Favourites although I read them all over and over. This makes me want to dig them out and read them!

I was always on the fence about JW when I was younger. I read a few and liked them but grew out of them quickly. My parents were not readers and never checked out what I was reading so I don't think they had an opinion.

However I know that some of the vulnerable children that I work with love her books. Because they can articulate, on the most basic level, their own complicated feelings around family/loss/abuse/abandonment. One girl actually gave me her copy of Hetty Feather as a memento as she identified so strongly with Hetty.

It's not Nobel prize winning fiction but it definitely has its place for pre teen and teen readers.

There is a distinct divide in the responses here - one the one side those who say JW's characters are real and relatable - and on the other side, those who worry that her books transmit poor values.

I think this second view is big mistake. One of the very points of reading good literature is to expand your mind. Part of what makes literature good is that the characters are real, and the story 'works'. I think JW qualifies on that score.

The OP mentioned The Secret Garden and worries about 'values dissonance'. I'm afraid I think this is downright silly. It's better to give children these books as part of a balanced diet of reading and let them discover that people in other times and other places have their own way of doing things, some of which we'd agree with, and some of which we would not. This is all part of the ability to develop critical thinking and understanding the context of the characters.

I'm also surprised at the unfavourable comparisons with Michael Morpugo, who I find mawkish, sentimental and moralising. In the unlikely event that Michael reads this I do apologise, but I find his books unbearable. I wanted to shoot the whale halfway though. JW books aren't like that at all in my view.

I did read them as a pre-teen/teen but they always vaguely irritated me because the voice never sounded like a real child. It always sounded like an adult trying to be cool with the kids.

I think it's great that JW writes book to help children in difficult situations, though as the child of a poor single parent I could never relate to similar protagonists. It just never seemed authentic.

@TomPinch when I mentioned values dissonance re TSG, I don’t mean it shouldn’t be read and enjoyed (I re-read it during lockdown!), I just meant that there are some things e.g. negative descriptions of Indian people that should maybe be addressed if reading with a younger child. An older child would likely pick up straight away on the fact that it was written and set in a different time period. The poster I recommended it to has a DD who is only five, though. So if they were reading it together, the poster could (for example) use it to start a conversation about race issues etc. And, as you said, explain that this doesn’t mean that Mary is a bad person just because she does/says/thinks something we now disagree with. Were the DD older, I would say leave her to it and she’d figure it out herself.

That’s just me, though. I’m sure no-one ever explained different times and ideals to me yet I figured it out. So I guess it depends on the child.

I’m sure no-one ever explained different times and ideals to me yet I figured it out. So I guess it depends on the child.

When I was made head girl of my inner city comprehensive I was convinced by Enid Blyton that I would be universally admired and adored.

It was not so.

@AnnaBanana333
I’m sorry. Admiration is yet to come for you, I’m sure.

I used to love The Secret Garden as a child and I don't remember any racism towards Indians! I must not have noticed it at the time, which is quite probable - I had no idea about racism when I was a child, I lived in an extremely white area and it just wasn't really ever discussed.

OK, I've googled the summary and that is quite obvious/blatant, actually! I probably did notice it at the time...

@BertieBotts I don’t remember noticing it either as a child! As I said, I re-read it as an adult in lockdown. It’s strange, isn’t it?

Yes, but I think in hindsight, it feels like quite a separate part from the rest of the story, plus she is such a horrible/snobby sort of person at the start anyway, it makes total sense that she would have looked down on her Indian servants. She wasn't happy in India in general due to the heat and restrictive lifestyle and probably emotional neglect from her parents, so it didn't feel like the book was saying "Indian people are inferior", even though she clearly felt so, it just felt like the character was rejecting that part of her life if that makes sense.

I had forgotten the ending with the magical "disabled person magically becomes well due to fresh air and somebody believing in them" though :o I adored Heidi as a child but that had the exact same story!

Yes that's right. I haven't re-read the book recently but my recollection is that she's horrible to her Indian servants because she is horrible. It's an illustration of how plain nasty she is, in part through neglect from her parents. I don't see values dissonance there at all. I think it's very unlikely that a child would ignore all that and interpret the book as meaning that Indians were inferior. And I think a younger reader might simply not notice that at all.

Issues like this crop up in all books over a certain age. Huckleberry Finn features a well-meaning elderly woman who owns a slave. The Calormenes in the Narnia series are clearly Turks (and decadent slave owners, unlike those upright, free, white Narnians). The Lord of the Rings is full of racial stereotyping if one wants to look hard enough. Children of the New Forest features gleeful slaughtering of harmless animals and worship of the monarch. Jack Holborn, in the book by Leon Garfield, ends up in West Africa and takes part in a slave auction (although to be fair he does free them).

Rather than simply not allowing children to read these books, or only letting them read them with a health warning (which could only be ineffective, or dull and worthy, or both) just let them read and enjoy some of the best literature in English, and as long as they are well-educated, they will spot all these issues for themselves in due course.

Whereas by contrast Michael Morpugo... actually no I won't.

The Secret Garden is a wonderful book about bereavement and healing - how the neglected and lonely can wither but with a bit of care and love can bloom again. Mary Lennox is an unhappy, spoilt but neglected child in India. Her behaviour to her Ayah is not presented as acceptable and when she moves to Misselthwaite Manor, Martha and Ben Weatherstaff put her straight. To call it a racist book is pathetically simplistic - I pity people that are too blinkered to allow themselves to understand the messages in a beautiful, timeless book about nature and healing.

Misery lit for kids

Jacequeine Wilson I mean, I lioness the secret garden

The Secret Garden would be a story in Take a Break magazine these days.
Mary - "My parents ignored me, then died. I was sent to live with my uncle I had never met and he completely ignored me. He left the housekeeper to take care of me but she chucked me outside every day whatever the weather".
Colin - "My Dad was a heartless man who told me I would die as a child. I was forced to live in one room all day and never allowed out".

I loved Jacqueline Wilson books growing up. Adored The Story of Tracy Beaker, though The Suitcase Kid devastated me. I remember it having quite a profound effect on me at the time - I didn't come from a broken home so couldn't really relate to the situation, but that said, when I look back now, I wonder if it was a little bit too dark and too upsetting for the target audience. I'm not sure I stopped to wonder if there were young girls going through what Andy was going through, so it wasn't thought provoking for me at the time - I just remember it being quite an upsetting read. Particularly when she always longed to go back to Mulberry Cottage

I loved Jacqueline Wilson growing up and still read them when I'm at my mums as they're all in my old room still

Double Act, Girls in Love/Under Pressure/Out Late, The Illustrated Mum, The Lottie Project and Vicky Angel were my favourites

I didn’t know about Love Lessons, I was an adult by the time that was published. Just read the synopsis and I’m vaguely horrified by it. I had a relationship with my teacher before it was an illegal act on the part of the teacher (which he never got in trouble for) which was bad enough, but by the time this book was published it was illegal, so at the very least the book should have had an ending where he was punished. Can’t believe that her publishers have this the green light aside from anything else.

@bookmum08

The Secret Garden would be a story in Take a Break magazine these days. Mary - "My parents ignored me, then died. I was sent to live with my uncle I had never met and he completely ignored me. He left the housekeeper to take care of me but she chucked me outside every day whatever the weather". Colin - "My Dad was a heartless man who told me I would die as a child. I was forced to live in one room all day and never allowed out".

Well yes, you could reduce any book to a magazine story by reciting the bare bones of the plot like that. I don't really see your point? That is not how The Secret Garden is written, which is why it is not a magazine story but an enduring classic on loss and growth.

Funny I saw this thread. Yesterday my 9YO DD asked me what a blue movie is I asked where did she get it from - JW book.
I wasn’t happy!

To call it a racist book is pathetically simplistic - I pity people that are too blinkered to allow themselves to understand the messages in a beautiful, timeless book about nature and healing.

Who said it was racist book?
I already said that I recently re-read it and really enjoyed it - as you said, the story of Mary growing strong, healthy and happy through nature and friendship is lovely and always will be. There’s nothing wrong with highlighting certain bits of a book that might be unpalatable, especially when said views are clearly a product of their time and not written out of malice.

OP - you said you would have to contextualise it for a child and 'explain that this doesn’t mean that Mary is a bad person just because she does/says/thinks something we now disagree with'. I think you must have missed the point of the book, which is that at that stage, Mary Lennox is quite an unpleasant little girl, if also pathetic and sad. Martha and Ben Weatherstaff do a very good job of putting her right on her views and she grows and develops through the book. I don't actually think an interventionist mum's voice to over and incorrectly explain it to the young reader would assist in their comprehension and enjoyment - quite the opposite. Let young people discover the book on their own terms and stop trying to micro manage children's responses to literature. There could be nothing more off putting to the young reader.