The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Bad children's books?
by Joe Ferullo on Oct. 19, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionMy wife is angry. She is telling everyone we know that she is angry. And she is angry because somebody is knocking her favorite children's books.
Now, I'm not talking about the books she read as a child -- when you become parents, your literary love moves from the books you read as a kid, to the books you read to your kids. And this is where the anger comes in.
In a new column called "Parenting on the Edge," Los Angeles Times, writer Madeleine Brand talks about how bad some of the best-known children's books really are -- not bad for children, mind you, bad for parents. Brand's column picks out for special mention The Rainbow Fish, The Runaway Bunny, Love You Forever, and (this is the one that really set my wife off) The Giving Tree.
That's right: The Giving Tree. Apparently, the big thing wrong with The Giving Tree is that whole "giving" notion it seems to obsess on. You remember this: a tree and a boy grow up together, and the tree gives and gives of itself as the years go by, until it is nothing more than a stump -- which it happily offers to the boy-now-an-old-man as a place to rest upon. Writes Brand: "The tree says she's happy -- happy to be sat upon. What kind of message does that send to a child" about the value of parents?
All these books mentioned above have this theme in common: I, the parent, will always be there for you, no matter what. I give my life over to you. This makes Brand (and a children's book author she quotes, named Laurel Snyder) very upset, because the message these books send is that a parent's main purpose in life is the care of children. To which my mother, her mother, my mother-in-law, my father, my aunts and uncles in Yonkers, my sister in Tampa and a host of others would say: "Yes. And your point is?"
It seems that in Brand's version of The Runaway Bunny, the mother would just stop answering her child's incessant and nagging questions about just how hard she would look for him if he ran away. She would tell the boy to please be quiet because mommy needs some "me time." In The Giving Tree, the tree would stop after parting with just a branch or two. After all, everyone says those branches are tree's best features, and she'd be nothing without them.
This is all part of a trend in writing about parenthood -- a focus on just what a royal pain it is to raise kids, and how it all really restricts what you can do with your day. Look, my wife and I have two girls; we get it. We drive them everywhere, go to all their school and sports meetings, work the fundraisers, help with the bake sales.
In fact, here is how much we get it: five days ago, we celebrated our 20th anniversary -- except we didn't. We had too much to do for the kids, so (just as in every previous year) we put our time off. We'll find the time eventually. But we won't.
We worry that we are too extreme, that we deny ourselves too much as a couple by spending too much time as parents. I'll admit: this skipping-our-20th-anniversary moment drove me crazy for a couple of days. In the end, though, it was OK. We took the long view. This was the choice we made when we started a family and, if ancestry is any guide, it is the choice our girls will make when they have kids of their own.
As for Madeleine Brand and her column, all my wife could say as she tossed the newspaper aside was: "Wow. She must not be Catholic."
Presbyterians disagree with
Presbyterians disagree with this junk, too! Absolutely ridiculous. Now you've gotten me all angry, too! :-)
The timing of this article is interesting. Just last week I bought "Love You Forever" for my college age-daughter, and she called to say that she was touched to receive the book which she loved while growing up. So, yes, "if ancestry is any guide," our kids will cherish these books and read them to the next generation.
When I was in youth ministry,
When I was in youth ministry, I had doubts about The Giving Tree as well.
I even had doubts about it when I was a youth being ministered to, and the book
was presented to me.
It seemed to me that it didn't point to a partnership in which both parties
thrived. I mean, where was the bit about the boy/man taking some seeds or
shoots of the tree and planting them. Let's face it, as far as "sustainability"
goes, the book is a miss.
And I would maintain that if the author and his wife are so focused on the kids'
activities, etc., that they don't have time to properly take care of their
relationship, then there is real risk that the kids will at one point or another
from the loss of that relationship's health.
What Joe is saying is "We'll water this plant when the kids are grown." The real
news is that if you defer watering the plant, it withers and dies. Come back with
a watering can then, and it won't do any good.
If all the kids' activities mean that you don't have time to tend to your marriage
properly then (and I know this is heresy in a country that seems to think that
children are deprived if they don't to every activity) the kids need
to have fewer activities. And more time to participate in real family life; you
know--- being together?
And it is probably the choice that your girls will make. After all, they've seen
you do it.
And it will be a questionable choice then, too.
Perhaps your marriage will survive being neglected "for the sake of the kids."
Perhaps theirs won't.
Will your grand-kids really be better off for having done ballet, soccer, CCD,
scouts, and drama club all at once but having parents who are either in an
unhappy marriage or perhaps one parent gone?
In my experience we don't do anybody any favors when we take care of everyone
else and fail to take care of ourselves.
Your children benefit greatly from a properly-tended marriage.
The will also benefit greatly by seeing a marriage in which the partners make
a conscious decision to take the time to be present to the one-to-one partnership
that is a marriage. Even if that means saying "no" to some of the chaos that can
be generated by overbooked kids.
One final thought--- if the kids are so busy that Mom and Dad don't get any "me"
time or "us" time, when do the kids get "down" time? When do they have time to fill with ad hoc activities of their own choosing, or to spend in contemplation?
What would you recommend they
What would you recommend they do together other than take care of their children? Do you think some other activities would be more rewarding?
"Take care" of their
"Take care" of their children?
Why not teach their children to take care of themselves and others instead of sucking the life out of others? That's what responsible parents should do, not give everything they have to their children. Teach them to earn what they get, to work for rewards instead of having gifts put in their laps.
Sheesh!
Giving Tree Pure Gospel Pure
Giving Tree
Pure Gospel
Pure Spirit of Vatican II
In Action
Readers here might find intriguing the Latin Version entitled Arbor Alma
and the rest of the late great Silverstein's opus, including Boy Named Sue
Love You Forever!
grants, liberates, the prayer of tears
(and wonder at where is this guy's dad
- wasn't another version written for dads?)
produces such virulent opposition because of the strong emotion it evokes from the loved and less than loved . . .
oops. Better send my mom another copy while I still can . . .
yeah but that Rainbow Fish?
I mean
what was THAT all about?
and Goodnight Moon?
Don't these bunnies have a television set at all?
What was THAT message supposed to be?
Kill your television?
oh
wait
GOOD message, dude . . .
Just read.
and pray for a good and restful night
frère charles du désert OSB OBLAT (Congrégation de Subiaco)
I happen to be reading Louise
I happen to be reading Louise DeSalvo's biography of Virginia Woolf (Virginia Woolf: The Impact of Childhood Sexual Abuse on Her Life and Work). The book begins by describing Victorian attitudes toward children and the accompanying child care style. It seems that some people might be advocating for a return to that abusive way of rearing children without quite being aware of it.
I've used "Runaway Bunny" in
I've used "Runaway Bunny" in my youth ministry as a discussion piece on how hard Christ would search for us as lost sheep.
And "The Giving Tree"... it's about a TREE, not a doormat.
It never ceases to amaze me that any parent has difficulty understanding giving one's all for another. Hmmmm... isn't there something in scripture about that?
In my Youth Ministry program
In my Youth Ministry program I have used "Runaway Bunny" to help small children (and adolescents and teens) understand just how dedicated Christ would be to searching for any lost sheep.
And "The Giving Tree"... it's about a TREE, not a doormat.
It never ceases to amaze me that any parent would have difficulty understanding giving one's all for another, especially their own child. Hmmm.... isn't there something in scripture about that?
Post new comment