Children's Books discussion
Conversations: books & readers
>
Does Anybody Else Feel That Books Have Been Dumbed Down?
date
newest »
newest »
There are no end of 'simple' books. The top selling books in the UK are all simple books. The point I am making is that the UK is dumbing down and no one seems to be bothered. Until they panic about reading ages for exam age kids and wonder why they live on video games. Do you want simple books to be the only books that get read by age 13?
Mod
But that top selling books or that the most popular books are often not considered as worthy and as dumbed down is actually not something new.
It was also the case with Enid Blyton, but no matter what the critics were (and sometimes still are) saying, Enid Blyton especially during the heyday of her popularity did seem to make reading fun and encouraged even reluctant readers.
But contrary to what librarians, teachers and experts were claiming, and how much they raised the alarm with regard to dumbing down books and creating lazy uncritical readers, it has been shown statistically that the majority of Enid Blyton readers usually grew out of her stories naturally and by themselves wanted and chose more challenging books to read (case in point, I enjoyed Enid Blyton up to about the age of eleven tops and then started to get increasingly bored with and frustrated by the simple sentence structures, unimaginative plot lines and repetitive gender stratified and usually stereotypical themes).
And with those readers who did not outgrow Enid Byton by a certain age, who kept on continuously devouring Blyton novels even as young adults and beyond (and not for professional, literary purposes but for enjoyment and as their main reading fare, in other words, readers who were basically only or mostly reading Enid Blyton and not much else) it was often discovered that they in fact had reading issues or just did not like reading all that much to begin with and found Blyton simpler than novels where they actually had to think for themselves and solve mysteries themselves and independently (and that focussing not on the majority but on the minority who never move beyond Enid Blyton type of books is both silly and creating a controversy where there really is none to begin with).
And please note that the above is my personal take on The Blyton Phenomenon: The Controversy Surrounding the World's Most Successful Children's Writer, which is in my opinion one of the best analyses of Enid Blyton and her work.
The Harry Potter books were responsible for the NY Times creating a children's bestseller list and those books are far from dumbed down. Some kids can't understand the classics nor should they be reading them without understanding and context. I have one nephew with some possible probable learning delays/learning issues and he enjoys the Dogman 4 Book set: Dog man ( books when he'll sit still long enough to look at a book. If that's his gateway to reading, the classics can come later. Kids today are drawn more to action/.adventure/fantasy novels and especially graphic novels. They're used to much more media and have shorter attention spans than older adults. Fortunately, many writers are adapting the classics into graphic novels and other simpler forms for young children. For myself, I avoid any books labeled "New York Times Bestseller." I'm not into popular fiction and I've always been a voracious reader and anti-popularity crowd.
Mod
Good points. Nothing new indeed. Think of the popularity of the Ragged Dick formula stories, for example. And a little research will reveal all the nonsense that was published 'for the children' before Messrs Caldecott and Newbery (among others) promoted the idea of quality lit. for kids.
Also, I am glad that children have stories like "Dogman" instead of "Dick and Jane."
Another consideration - if kids want easier stories sometimes, who's setting a 'better' example? Certainly not the readers of certain best-selling franchises of adult books....
If you want your children or students to read more challenging books, have at it. There are plenty available.
And I honestly don't see how it's any business of anyone, even educators or parents, what books are bought in what numbers.
Mod
Good points. Nothing new ..."
There seems to be an attitude sometimes that children always have to read challenging works and guess what, we should be happy children are reading.
Thanks for sharing the Enid Blyton article. It is an interesting read. It is strange to see this trend with those works, but I guess they were easier reads at the time. GCSE English is now a lot more challenging than it was. If for no other reason I suggest it is a good thing to challenge young minds with at least some more difficult reading from age 8 to 12. I accept there will always be those who need and benefit from simpler reading. There are rightly loads of early reader books, schemes, blogs, challenges, charities and giveways. But what about the majority who need to dissect Shakespeare by age 16 to get a decent GCSE? And much earlier to get a decent school place and setting?
Roald Dahl sets a better example. Harry Potter sets a better example. Percy Jackson too.What sells is what sells. This is an open topic for discussion. Limiting what you believe people are allowed to comment on is odd. Sales trends are facts. They are news. Success drives more success.
If Harry Potter had not sold in such huge quantities it would not be a major feature in so many lives. I'm personally glad it did and I admire JK Rowling immensely.
The prevailing views I'm seeing here are about letting children read easier works because it is easier. This being the case, the sales trends for new books are consistent with the decision makers' thoughts.I'd urge anyone with this view to read an English GCSE paper and reflect on the real challenge. Which is set by those in charge of education. Who incidentally also publish reading lists.
I agree Harry Potter is a decent level of reading to reach. Exam levels dictate where pupils need to develop over time.For every exception there is a majority. The majority will need to progress through exam levels. Hence my concern.
In the UK, we have a lot of people wanting kids' lives to be easier. The reality is that it is getting tougher for them at school ages and beyond. Light relief is fine. However, more advanced reading for ages 8 to 12 is needed if children are to develop to GCSE level (UK first exam level) by age 14 to 16. Alongside the graphic novels and comics.
My five year old very much enjoyed the six Enid Blyton books (the Faraway Tree and Wishing Chair books) she read this year. I don't anticipate she will read more, however. There is just too much good stuff out there to forever wade in the world of the Secret Seven, the Famous Five, the Adventurous Four, or whatever. In terms of "dumbing down," one thing I have noticed in newer books is an attempt to make them "look" easier by maximizing white space. Even an excellent book that is not at all targeted to weaker readers, such as Beyond the Bright Sea is devoid of sensible paragraphs. Everything is just a sentence or two, regardless of whether what follows is a connected idea or not. I listened to the audiobook, and in that medium, the narrative makes perfect sense; it was only when I looked at the print book that I discovered this bizarre unnecessary choppiness. My pessimistic assumption is that editors (or even authors?) believe (perhaps rightly) that a book dense with text will seem unappealing to young readers. However, with this, another link to the literature of the past has been broken.
One of my primary objectives in selecting books for my kids is to develop in them an (eventual) ability to grapple with texts from the past - the world is much bigger than the current day-to-day and there is nothing new under the sun. If all they can handle are the magazines at the supermarket checkout, they will be intellectually stunted. Too many of the current books I have seen do nothing to cultivate what will be needed. The nonfiction is written essentially without a narrative, instead spattering the pages with captions, sidebars, definitions, and unconnected factoids - very much like glossy magazines. The fiction relies heavily on dialogue and is often written in the first person, aiming for a "realistic" voice - the voice of the reader, it seems to me, which is very much of the present day. Even supposed "historical fiction" of recent currency falls into this trap.
On the other hand, reading books from decades past provides vocabulary, sentence construction (paragraphs too, apparently), allusions, idioms, and literary style that will come in more than handy with future reading.
So, I very much agree with Kerstin's point. I want my kids to have the reading and thinking skills to be able to address Homer, Dickens, et al. What books should they be reading on their path toward that goal? We have enjoyed Rosemary Sutcliff's tellings of the Iliad and Odyssey, but those were only the first steps on that journey - where gaining familiarity with names, episodes, etc. was the intent. I would never say that those books gained much ground toward be able to read an adult translation of the real deal. In general, however, I am opposed to the simplifications, graphic novels, and inane board books that ride on the coattails of Jane Austen, L.M. Montgomery, et al.
We have spent much time going back to books that are now older than a century - Five Little Peppers and How They Grew, Five Children and It, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, A Wonder Book and Tanglewood Tales, Kipling, Burnett, many fairy tales (Lang-era), Greek and Norse myths, and of course poetry. Olive Beaupré Miller's My Bookhouse set has been another essential. I feel that these are the kind of things that will prove to be of aid.
I fully understand that my goals for my family may not coincide with anyone else's, but I do see the point made by D.M. (and the original poster, I think, although there seems to be much excised from this thread).
Mod
I think that there are enough sufficiently challenging books available for those readers, parents, and teachers who are interested in them. There are also enough fun and easy books available.
So, the only problem I see is that you think that not enough challenging books are being chosen.
If you have ideas about how to get more of them into the hands of more young readers, *without* infringing on the rights of their parents, please share.
Otherwise, I just don't understand the point you're trying to make, what you're trying to say here. Y'know, it's the whole "define the problem, analyze for causes, propose solutions" matrix.... You've done some the middle step and I've been interested to learn what you see in the UK compared to what I understand of how things are going in the US, but I'm still confused about how you're thinking about steps one and two.
You simply don't agree. Fine. Enough said. End of thread.
Michael wrote: " What books should they be reading on their path toward that goal? We have enjoyed Rosemary Sutcliff's tellings of the Iliad and Odyssey, but those were only the first steps on that journey - where gaining familiarity with names, episodes, etc. was the intent. I would never say that those books gained much ground toward be able to read an adult translation of the real deal. In general, however, I am opposed to the simplifications, graphic novels, and inane board books that ride on the coattails of Jane Austen, L.M. Montgomery, et al. "The only comprehensive compilation in this direction I know is based on the work of John Senior who led the fabled albeit short-lived Integrated Humanities Program at the University of Kansas in the late 1970s.
He developed the concept that you have to read 1000 Good Books to be prepared to read the 100 Great Books beginning at the elementary level. For instance, My Side of the Mountain, one of the books for this month for the group, is listed.
Now, the following link may not be everyone's cup of tea. The book lists are part of a Christian Homeschooling Website.
http://www.classical-homeschooling.or...
There used to be a good list for teachers. Unfortunately the website has changed over time, and all that remains are books more suited for high school.
https://www.teachersfirst.com/lifelis...
That's the extend of my knowledge on the subject.
Thanks, Kerstin. I'm familiar with Senior's list and many others (I'm a certifiable list-oholic). That classical-homeschooling list of 1000 Good Books, however, is NOT Senior's list. This is closer:
https://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/naughty-boys-and-the-defense-of-civilization-must-we-choose-between-great-or-good-books
It's hard to get a specific number of books because he says "and many others" for certain authors. I disagree that any kid needs to read over 30 James Fenimore Cooper novels between ages 7-12 (though I'm fine with reading all 8 Laura Ingalls Wilder books). Reading a couple each by Cooper or Henty or Wilkie Collins is probably good enough.
The GSCE lists I found contain a mix of old classics, new classics and modern issue novels. https://schoolreadinglist.co.uk/readi...https://www.silversurfers.com/culture...
http://www.litchamschool.net/gcse-eng...
I don't see dumbed down books except for the very young.
Mod
When I think of when children's novels began to become a thing, not simply stories that were written for adults that children ended up enjoying, two of the books that immediately come to mind are Charles Kingsley's The Water Babies and yes, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. In these books, I find the intended child reader is treated quite differently than how many books treat them today. They are complicated and technical works, ones that are still heavily studied in a scholarly fashion to this day.At the same time, of coarse books today will treat children differently. Books are a creation of one's experiences of the time, both true and untrue. I think that every era as well as every culture, where adults are writing for children, has a different understanding of what children would like or should be exposed to. Even Robinson Crusoe became the best selling book in England, I believe even beating the Christian Bible for a time. I do not see a book like that taking off today, but of coarse not, we are in a different world. Nevertheless, these works are pretty complex, not just in the language used, but also in the treatment of the audience. Children were small adults for them, who would not understand everything, but what they could access in the stories was exciting for them. With age and additional readings, they would understand more, or less in some cases.
Yes personal choice has a lot to do with what books are being created and read. Personal choice has everything to do whether someone likes something or not. And not all books are dumbed down, but with every change of generation, books change as well.
Also, it is great to have a variety of books. If they were all the same, that would make a very boring game.
But working in schools and seeing the attitude given to certain books, both newer and older, banning them, saying a child cannot read it as it contains situations, language, content they may find difficult, now this is something I conflict with. Because of this, books that are much cleaner, ones that will not be banned are more apt to be published. Yet, that does not mean other types are not being written. I think this has a lot to do with the cycle of consumers: buy what is available and what is available is what is available, until something new comes out, and if it sells, more things like that will be available.
I think the friction coming from the conversation has to do with what does it mean to be "dumbed down?" Of course this is not all books, but when someone notices a trend, sometimes it can feel like all books (but we all know no one has read or can read all books, simply many of the ones they were exposed to.)
Mod
And that's a *flounce,* folks. Rather than answer questions, the poster tries to shut down the conversation.
Thank you to rest of you who have tried to actually discuss the issue.
Mod
el like sometimes historical fiction novels for kids and teens are sometimes dumbed down. They don't always use period language and terminology, especially in clothing. Also, books written to align with Common Core standards are fairly easy to spot. They seem to tick off certain boxes and contain author notes for teachers/adults. They're not necessarily bad but don't have the same feel as books written just to be enjoyed. I was brought up with the classics but my nieces as of yet are not.
Wimpy Kid is a 5th grade reading level book that appeals to 2nd graders. I call that a win. Maybe you think the theme is stupid, but, my 2nd grader loves it and the series has her reading above grade level. I haven't run into too many 5th graders still reading Wimpy Kid. It's really not as simple as it looks at first glance. Granted, it has no adult appeal, but, the series absolutely gets kids reading above grade level.
Mod
I have been thinking and frankly, I find the entire term "dumbed down" insulting and offensive. If a book has been abridged etc. or if it has been written with less sure and/or early readers in mind, we should call these books simplified or perhaps even in a worst case scenario very simplified, but "dumbed down" just feels really nasty across the board (and is especially an affront to children who are not all that strong readers because it just seems to insinuate that they are intellectually behind and substandard).
Manybooks,Good point!
We are supposed to be considerate of others' feelings, and "dumbed down" seems to be totally inappropriate in this day and age!
Mod
Good point!
We are supposed to be considerate of others' feelings, and "dumbed down" seems to be totally inappropriate in this day and age!"
That his exactly my feeling and calling simple books dumbed down is certainly not going to in my opinion encourage reluctant readers or readers with reading comprehension issues.
I have no problem calling things dumbed down when the shoe fits. Here's a good example:http://melissawiley.com/blog/2007/09/16/the-martha-and-charlotte-books-by-melissa-wiley/
There's a whole lot of relativistic PC going about - "everything is just as good as everything else and how mean to say anything to the contrary." Not buying it.
Mod
http://melissawiley.com/blog/2007/09/...
There's a whole lo..."
I do get what you are saying, Michael. But if you use the term "dumbed down" across the board it kind of puts the truly horrible examples in with those books that have simply been shortened a bit etc.
Hmm, I never thought of considering simplified language to fall into the dumbed down concept; for me they are simply different reading levels, which some enjoy and others do not. But at the same time, I am against abridged version of books created for the ultra-sensitive (with the exception of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, as I find both version have something to offer).Now take The Wonderful Wizard of Oz for example. There are so many picture book versions that show only parts of the story in very easy/quick way to read. This is simply an adaptation that is a gateway for people to read the original, nothing wrong with this. What I find objectionable is when it is washed clean of anything violent for sensitivities sake (as there is human dismemberment and killings in the original). This has also been happening for a very long time with Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens / Peter and Wendy. You loose much from translations (i.e. original to politically correct).
If a book has simple language, I would not say it is dumbed down, but simply a stylistic choice for various reasons. If a book was created for a certain market who likes a clean world, that is okay as well. But if a book is ripped apart and censored to appease the helicopter parenting or pc wave, nope.
I don't have a problem with adaptations but when a book for teens ignores the actual social constructs, language and culture of the time period it's set in, or character is time traveling to, I feel that's not doing justice to the reader's intelligence. Also when books for tweens have a heavy handed moral kids can figure out easily without being hit over the head. I don't like being insulted as a reader or talked down to.I DID enjoy the Little House years spin-offs. They're cute and fun. I read them as an adult and wish my nieces would read them too. They're just not into historical fiction that much. They do like learning about history, just not through fiction the way I do.
Note that I am not complaining about the Little House years spin-offs as originally published. Until 2007, they were indeed nice additions and were written at more or less the same level as the actual Wilder books. They were the result of considerable historical research and added a great deal to the family story (though they are certainly fiction and not history). What I have a huge problem with is the discontinuation of some of these by Melissa Wiley and others and their replacement with cut-down versions in an attempt to make the series attractive to a younger set of readers. Some examples: On Tide Mill Lane went from 272 pp. to 159 pp. Little House in Brookfield went from 298 pp. to 176 pp. Little Town at the Crossroads went from 343 pp. to 159 pp.
There is a huge movement on the part of HarperCollins to make LHOP into an age-spanning "brand" - there are Little House board books, picture books (dumbing down single chapters from the originals), now these shorter revised books (dumbed down from their original versions), then you can finally get to the originals. It's all rooted in marketing - not history, and not literature.
Michael wrote: "Thanks, Kerstin. I'm familiar with Senior's list and many others (I'm a certifiable list-oholic). That classical-homeschooling list of 1000 Good Books, however, is NOT Senior's list. This is clos..."
Ah, so they took the idea and took it from there.
I remember that article! :)
Mod
I guess I can understand LHOP picture books to a certain extent, but considering that Laura Ingalls Wilder's writing style is pretty easy to read anyhow, abridging the novels into shortened so-called easy readers is ridiculous (very unenlightened, and for both the originals and the later spin offs).
And another thing that I have noticed and with both German and English language children's literature (but I am sure this will likely be the case with other languages as well), far too often, if a book is abridged, if it is shortened, this is not always mentioned on the book cover (or on the book page if one is trying to purchase a given book). I had to go through something like four German language Heidi novels before I was able to obtain a copy that had not been abridged (in one of the books, two entire chapters were missing along with all of the religious songs Heidi recites to Peter's grandmother and the book cover does NOT mention this).
Mod
And you've mentioned the problems in translation before, but I'm glad you brought it up here, too, Gundula, as it bears repeating. For me to think that I'm having the same experience with Heidi, or with some of the other stories you've mentioned, as someone who grew up reading the story in the original, and then to learn that I missed whole episodes... well, again, that's just exasperating.
Mod
It is totally exasperating and with the German books (which I purchased online and which were touted as being "complete and unabridged") I realised that something was missing when the scene in Frankfurt where Heidi is sleepwalking was cut so that the entire "haunting" scene was missing.
Mod
Mod
I know, the book went from everyone being weirded out at the spooking to Heidi being told by the doctor that she is going home. The entire discovery of Heidi being the "ghost" is gone. I sometimes wonder if this was a publication error but it sure was weird.
I agree more variety good for all readers but I like darker bolder old picture books. Blame heavy marketing for simpler stories with great illustration over text and more pc “feel good” themes. Started a job in a library with a very old, never weeded collection of children’s chapter-picture books 1950-1990 mostly. In these books, vocabulary was richer and themes could be fearlessly darker and bolder. The Five Chinese Brothers - how many boys started reading because of these early superhero’s? Great story that libraries cannot shelve. Compare the Three Robbers (Tomi Ungerer 1962) with a similarly illustrated but boring Shhh! We Have a Plan (Haughton 2015) and you’ll see great variance in vocabulary. Little Red Hen is better Old Tale retold as The Cock, The Mouse and The Little Red Hen by Felicity Lefevre.
How I miss those unweeded children's collections. We had one at a nearby branch, and it was a rich trove loaded with treasures to discover. Then, the budget came around for its turn for renovation, and now it's just bland vanilla like all the other branches in the system. Such a lack of diversity.
Actually, I've read those Little House books too. They're mostly just chapters from the original books so kids don't feel daunted by the length of a chapter book. The picture books are especially charming. Dance at Grandpa's is slightly edited to remove the part where the Lauras are arguing over whose baby is the prettiest. Oldest niece, alas, found even the picture books boring. She did start to read Little House in the Big Woods but just didn't get into it. What would get my goat is WHEN probably not IF they release edited versions to sanitize them removing all racist content but that's another story for another day.
Ellen wrote: "I agree more variety good for all readers but I like darker bolder old picture books. Blame heavy marketing for simpler stories with great illustration over text and more pc “feel good” themes. Sta..."Absolutely. There is so much richness, challenge, and they are far more entertaining, for my personal taste.
I also find an inhibited imagination, one that is not erasing every second word in fear and censorship, much more healthy and promotes a deeper more thoughtful level of creativity, one in which children need to better understand the real world around them.
Children's Books
Books mentioned in this topic
Little House in the Big Woods (other topics)Dance at Grandpa's (other topics)
Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens / Peter and Wendy (other topics)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (other topics)
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
John Senior (other topics)Olive Beaupré Miller (other topics)
Robert McCloskey (other topics)
Clearly, there will always be a place for early readers. My point was about UK bestsellers which represent the state of the buying market. My point is that the majority of sales are for dumbed down books. I find this sad. Clearly I am in the minority. No surprise then that kids live on video games.