Bad books for children?

[Realitygf]

I am studying for a Masters in Writing for Young People and writing an essay on whether there is any such thing as a bad book for children. In the past people have described Enid Blyton, Rainbow Magic/Beast Quest and even David Walliams as 'bad books'. What do you think? Have you bought Rainbow Magic books for your dd or do you refuse to let her read them? I would love to know your views. Thanks

[PomBearWithAnOFRS]

Horrid Henry is the only character I have ever "banned" - we don't watch it on TV, and we don't have the books in the house. I detest it with every fibre of my being !
I'm not over-fond of Jacqueline Wilson either, I read all of hers before DD is allowed to read them as the content and suitability vary wildly from book to book and it's nigh on impossible to tell without actually reading the whole book.

[TheNightIsDark]

We love Horrid Henry here it makes my DCs seem like angels. My naughty little sister isn't much better. The sister telling the story is never cross or naughty.

I collect books I enjoyed and save them for the DCs. Also if I see any mentioned on here. I have a notebook and a whole little system worked out

[Nocomet]

Lord of the Flies. No one of any age should be forced to read it!

DDs aren't keen on a lot of Michele Marpogoue (so) for similar reasons to much death and misery.

DD1 couldn't be arsed with Jackie W, to much real life. DD2 loved them.

Since from 12 I devoured adult thrillers I'm not qualified to say much.

[yomellamoHelly]

Horrid Henry books. Small children too small to understand how horrible his behaviour is and replicate it.
Personally don't enjoy books where there's no hidden depth, pictures aren't fab etc so nothing extra really to talk about. They tend to get left on the shelf.

[CalamitouslyWrong]

If you find original versions of the noddy books they'll probably make you suicidal too.

[TheNightIsDark]

Actually scrap that. The mr men books are bad. They make me suicidal. As do biff chip and fucking kipper. DD (3) is obsessed. Every single night she chooses one despite having shelves of lovely books.

[CalamitouslyWrong]

Hidden from ds2. Ds1 is nearly 14 and in no way interested in noddy.

Ds1 reads just about anything, but there is some unbelievable drivel out there in YA literature. He's able to talk about why it's drivel though. And particularly the problems when authors get entirely the wrong stick about what a 'strong female character' actually is. Hint: it's not someone so super special (despite not being at all interesting) that two incredibly special and handsome make characters will devote the rest of their lives to fighting over her/be willing to die for her no matter what she does. And then when she choses one over the other, the rejected one will hang around forever hoping she'll change her mind/just being happy with whatever scraps of attention she'll throw him.

[CalamitouslyWrong]

DH's aunt and uncle have us a load of noddy books, which I've hidden from DS1. They are dreadfully written and plotted and full of messages I thoroughly disagree with. The one where the gypsies steal noddy's car is a particular low point. I would absolutely call them 'bad' books. We found them almost unreadable, to be honest.

DS2 adores beast quest. Neither DH nor I enjoy reading them to him, but he gets such joy out of them and spends so long discussing them with us that we really can't complain.

Horrid Henry has a horrible effect on ds2.

[MitziKinsky]

DH is appalled by Charlie and Lola books, and refused to read them to the DC due to the poor English. (I, however love Charlie and Lola!)

I've never enjoyed Enid Blyton, as a child or adult.

My DD has never shown any interest in the Rainbow Magic books. The front covers don't appeal to her, it seems.

I avoid Disney books. Mainly because I don't like the pictures.

DD brought home a book from the school library about a baby who'd had his eyes pecked out by a bird....I promptly sent it back. It looked like a really good book, though. Just not suitable for a 7yo.

Oh, and can I say the Magic Key books? Please, I can take no more....

[ASmidgeofMidge]

DD1 is particularly intrigued by Sarah Waters' The Little Stranger - she asks endless questions about who the 'stranger' is, whether she is good or bad etc etc.

[ThinkIveBeenHacked]

The Bloody Mr Bloody Men. I run from DD when she holds out one of these.

No rythm, no descernable plots, no moral, no humour, badly illustrated, crap stories. Hate beyond the capacity of the word Hate.

[ASmidgeofMidge]

Absolutely TheNightisDark - I'm not keen on the idea of censorship either, and of labelling books as 'good' or 'bad'. If children enjoy reading it, it's good, as far as I'm concerned

[ASmidgeofMidge]

I was a voracious reader as a child (still am) and my parents never restricted anything I read. I used to borrow, for example, Stephen King books from the library when I was probably 'too young' for some of the swearing sex content, but I don't feel, looking back, that my access to these books was problematic or inappropriate. Reading was massively important to me as a child (an escape from problems at home, bullying etc) and I think I wanted to read things that felt real rather than saccharine. (I know that sounds a bit weird with reference to Stephen King!) My dd is 6 - she's asked about what some of my books are about (although she's horrified that they have no pictures at all ). At the moment it's all about the Disney Princesses for her, but she gets a thrill from her factual book about dangerous animals, and I think expanding into adult fiction is an extension of this.

[MrsKCastle]

Revolutionary No, I wouldn't want to stop children from ever being scared. When I posted, I wasn't really thinking of fear, so much as misunderstanding. In fact, thinking about it more, I would possibly be more worried about a child not fully comprehending a heavy subject- reading War Horse and taking away the idea that WWI was quite cool because the soldiers got to ride horses.

I didn't mean to suggest that reading material should be provided or allowed on a basis of age, either. I used the word 'young' reader but I see this as entirely an individual thing. Some 5 year olds can cope with subjects/books that would be too much for some 9 year olds. I don't believe in censoring what children read, butI think as parents we should be aware of what children are reading, and be prepared to talk about why Huckleberry Finn contains the 'n' word, and what happened to Anne after the diary finished.

[TheNightIsDark]

I was reading jackie Collins at 12 so I'm prob not best placed to comment on bad books for children!

I'm reading the secret 7 with DS (5) and I'm making an effort to hunt out the original versions of EBs books because I think it's important for children to understand how attitudes have changed. I really don't like the censorship of books in any form.

We have loads of the bloody magic fairy books. DSD devours them!

[GoogleyEyes]

That Large family book got 'lost' to the charity shop. And I have steered dd1 away from Horrid Henry and towards other books by the same author, as I don't like the way Perfect Peter is portrayed.

I also had a discussion about racism when we read the first chapter of The Horse and His Boy, and she actually decided just to skip on to the next book in the series (though that was more to do with the flowery language being hard work).

[BertieBotts]

I've found some crappy ones. Often TV/other tie ins are awful - no substance, no plot, spelling and grammar errors - I counted about ten in an Angry Birds annual. Some TV or film based books are good but IME, they are the minority.

I also hate educational books which have incorrect facts or things which are really badly explained so could lead to confusion. I don't mind simple explanations for younger children, but confusing or plain wrong explanations are a bad thing IMO.

Rainbow fairies etc are a bit like "chick lit for kids" - not stunningly intellectual or well written, and deathly boring if you're not interested in the genre yourself, but perfectly harmless and definitely fun, for the child anyway!

Enid Blyton has some date issues like racism, sexism, social concepts but that's not necessarily bad it's just a discussion point (and perhaps a reason to avoid older copies!)

[plantsitter]

I think as long as you talk about them most things are ok. As someone up thread said makes them discriminate and start thinking critically.

Would want to read books I didn't know before my children read them though (however we'll see - DD 1 is only 5!).

[TheTravellingLemon]

When I was a child the librarian refused to let me take out anything by Rald Dahl as it was 'not suitable for little girls.'

[revolutionarytoad]

Straddling there's probably loads going on below the surface that no one can see- her idea of princesses has probably evolved hugely during the year, even if no one but she could see the difference! I mean think how much our images of things shift all the time....


MrsK would you also then whenever possible want to avoid the child being scared?

Like, there's always threads on here asking whether say Harry Potter is too scary for this age or that age...again, is it because parents as empathetic creatures simply don't want their kid to experience pain (and why not- it's a learning experience, no?), because they don't want them to become desensitised to certain things or because they think it is actively damaging to the child, something they won't be able to repair?
I tend to think that we group kids too much by age. Just like maybe all ten year olds shouldn't be taught together, maybe readers shouldn't be classified by age either. Of course it's a useful tool to a large degree because we're not all that unique, but on the other hand....

well anyway. I'll stop my semi drunken blatherings....interesting thread though OP!

[MrsKCastle]

I wouldn't say there are 'bad' books as such. I think all books have their place, and things like Rainbow Magic are great for motivating children.

I do, however, think that we should aim to help children access a wide variety of reading material. They should know that there's more to life and literature than defeating bloody Jack Frost again... And again.... And again. And we should ensure that they can make and explain their own choices about literature.

I do also think that some books need to be read with adult guidance, so that children are able to consider the context, and recognise that just because it's in a book does not mean it's true/good/appropriate.

E.g. I wouldn't want a young reader coming across something like 'Huckleberry Finn' and reading it completely independently. Or Anne Frank's diary. Or Out of the Ashes, War Horse or many other books by Michael Morpurgo. They're not bad books, but neither are they appropriate for children of any age.

[StraddlingTheFence]

revolutionarytoad I'll admit that I did rather hope think that the phase would have passed by now (it's been over a year now) and I do struggle with it. I balance it by making sure she has access to a wide range of other books and by talking about the stories and gently challenging some of the more troubling themes (eg. The princess and the frog - we talk about when it might be ok to break a promise)

I don't want to censor them though (within reason of course!) My parents gave me almost free rein with books and I'm eternally grateful to them.

[revolutionarytoad]

Oh I love the Penguin books of blockbusters- read the Philadelphia, Kramer vs. Kramer and The Graduate ones.....I think they're so funny! They're so exactly true to the film. Who gets to write those? Sign me up!

[Asleeponasunbeam]

Oh that bloody Large Family book! 'Lets all force ourselves to eat carrots then go for a healthy jog round the park'. Awful. And the one in which mum is ill in bed and Dad is incompetent. Ugh.

Those kinds of books, with insidious messages, are bad ones, IMO. I also dislike most TV/ Disney spin off books as they're so badly written. But I can see they have a place in encouraging reading in some families.

[revolutionarytoad]

I think it all links into the modern concept of what it means to be a child, how adults can manufacture this separate world of childhood that magically ceases to exist for the individual when he eventually crosses over the line into the real world, when we're deemed to be mature enough to experience what will in fact happen to everyone, whether someone makes the decision or not. We are very keen to 'preserve' or maintain something that seems to actually have little basis in history. Is childhood a good idea? I mean, to create these two states of being and create a distinction between ages? Why do we desperately want to suspend reality for children- is it really for them or is it for us.

Must say Straddling I'm v. happy to hear that you let your daughter have so much access to something you obviously have some trouble with. My parents always limited my reading (they wanted a clever kid, so), and that's fine to a certain extent, but it's not left me without a few complexes about what's 'worthy' and what's not. For example I wish they'd never used the word 'baby books' to me, to describe stuff which everyone else my age was reading and which I'd have loved to read too, but wasn't allowed.