conuly

Yes-- I try to turn off the critic part of my brain when reading children's lit. Or, if not, at least to dampen down certain aspects of it, like the part where I dislike repetitiveness and suchlike.

From:

conuly

Repetition serves an important role in kid's literature.

From:

I know, that's why I turn that part off. It's also more important in younger kid's lit than YA, which is what I read more (when I'm not visiting my sis and neices and nephews).

From:

lakidaa.livejournal.com

The thing that gets me is how she complained about the characters' roles in the Chronicles of Narnia.

'so 1950s' inDEED. *snort, chortle*

Besides, the reason Susan was kicked out was becuase she 'outgrew' it, lost her imaginiation or sommat. Not because she was the different one. Not sure how that figures into the GIANT CHRISTIAN METAPHOR.

Also: I also giggled a bit at people that complained how the books they liked as a kid were ruined by their new views. I can still read the Narnia boos because I have the same switch you do, Conuuuly. Also: is good way to see how memory corrupts reality of things.

From:

neurotica0.livejournal.com

Actually, I don't. I don't want any future children I may have having stereotypes, racism, sexism, etc. that's already reinforced so heavily by dominant culture also crammed down their throats by something that should be fun and healthy.

It's not as if I'd ban all books from my house that didn't meet up to a feminist ideal, but I'd certainly make an effort to have some that did in my house. Balance, or whatnot.

From:

i try very hard at that. but why must the damn hard-as-nails heroine always get knocked up after saving the lily-assed prince?

*grumble grumble* Screw you Patricia C. Wrede *grumble grumble*

From:

conuly

Didn't it take her three books to get knocked up? And she only did it once anyway.

From:

Yeah, but it was pretty much immediate. It's not that it happened that I was pissed, it's that it just went against her personality of the three previous books and led to a really subpar fourth one.

From:

Actually, the fourth book was the first written.

I was at the National Book Festival ... last year, I believe it was, and she was one of the speakers in the Science-Fiction/Fantasy pavilion. She mentioned that she wrote the last book, Talking to Dragons, and went back to write Dealing with Dragons et al. because she fell in love with the character Cimorene.

In fact, she may not have even been a published novelist when she wrote Talking to Dragons – I seem to recall that being the case.

From:

conuly

That explains why the last one always felt tacked on.

From:

Oh, wow, that explains a whole lot (including the fact that I thought the earlier publication date was just a typo, as I have a compendium of all four).

From:

Yep! It also explains why #3 didn't seem as good as #'s 1-2; she was trying to connect #2 to #4th-but-written-first, and she had trouble making it work. Not to mention explaining the series being called The Enchanted Forest Chronicles when the Enchanted Forest was only a small part of the first three books out of four.

Actually, strangely enough, I liked Talking to Dragons. Objectively, it wasn't as good as any of the predecessors, but I found the characters quite charming.

From:

madamjolie.livejournal.com

I read things with that eye because, well, what I read I hand over to my goddaughter and if ever my brains fall out of my head, I'm going to hand them to my kids.

Kids do pick up on those messages. You should hear the shit my goddaughter spouts after reading some more conservative books. Girls need boys to save them. When I grow up I have to get married and have kids. And then pan over to me and her mom clutching our hearts and staggering backwards.

From:

wakasplat.livejournal.com

I don't entirely shut mine off. It's not that there's a "criticizing part of my brain" as much as... sometimes things just seem pretty far off.

Like the gender stereotypes in the Tripods series. One of my favorite series, but really all but the prequel (which was written much later, and still has a few problems in that area) are very stereotypical in their gender roles, and the Tripods doing that on purpose doesn't really excuse it.

It's not that I try to notice it, I just do notice it because it seems out of place. If that makes any sense.

I don't, however, find a lot of problems with Harry Potter that way.

From:

leora.livejournal.com

No, I don't. And I didn't as a kid. And some of those stereotypes hurt me badly. But her examples are poor. Narnia is not representative - it's written to promote Christianity. Yeah, it portrays an idealized Christian world as a particular Christian viewed it, what do you expect? But lots of books vary. My childhood favorites still seem like good books.

But that comment was brilliant. :)

From:

kibbles.livejournal.com

Oooh poop. Just way to suck the fun out of things.

What does it say about me because I adore Little Women?

From:

conuly

My favorite book of all time is still Tikki-Tikki-Tembo. I just ignore the racism, the bad message for second kids, all that good stuff.

From:

Yes-- I try to turn off the critic part of my brain when reading children's lit. Or, if not, at least to dampen down certain aspects of it, like the part where I dislike repetitiveness and suchlike.

From:

conuly

Repetition serves an important role in kid's literature.

From:

I know, that's why I turn that part off. It's also more important in younger kid's lit than YA, which is what I read more (when I'm not visiting my sis and neices and nephews).

From:

lakidaa.livejournal.com

The thing that gets me is how she complained about the characters' roles in the Chronicles of Narnia.

'so 1950s' inDEED. *snort, chortle*

Besides, the reason Susan was kicked out was becuase she 'outgrew' it, lost her imaginiation or sommat. Not because she was the different one. Not sure how that figures into the GIANT CHRISTIAN METAPHOR.

Also: I also giggled a bit at people that complained how the books they liked as a kid were ruined by their new views. I can still read the Narnia boos because I have the same switch you do, Conuuuly. Also: is good way to see how memory corrupts reality of things.

From:

neurotica0.livejournal.com

Actually, I don't. I don't want any future children I may have having stereotypes, racism, sexism, etc. that's already reinforced so heavily by dominant culture also crammed down their throats by something that should be fun and healthy.

It's not as if I'd ban all books from my house that didn't meet up to a feminist ideal, but I'd certainly make an effort to have some that did in my house. Balance, or whatnot.

From:

i try very hard at that. but why must the damn hard-as-nails heroine always get knocked up after saving the lily-assed prince?

*grumble grumble* Screw you Patricia C. Wrede *grumble grumble*

From:

conuly

Didn't it take her three books to get knocked up? And she only did it once anyway.

From:

Yeah, but it was pretty much immediate. It's not that it happened that I was pissed, it's that it just went against her personality of the three previous books and led to a really subpar fourth one.

From:

Actually, the fourth book was the first written.

I was at the National Book Festival ... last year, I believe it was, and she was one of the speakers in the Science-Fiction/Fantasy pavilion. She mentioned that she wrote the last book, Talking to Dragons, and went back to write Dealing with Dragons et al. because she fell in love with the character Cimorene.

In fact, she may not have even been a published novelist when she wrote Talking to Dragons – I seem to recall that being the case.

From:

conuly

That explains why the last one always felt tacked on.

From:

Oh, wow, that explains a whole lot (including the fact that I thought the earlier publication date was just a typo, as I have a compendium of all four).

From: