Adults and children – a different reading experience?
My Open University course on children’s literature started yesterday so I’ve been immersed in the pages of Northern Lights, Little Women and Harry Potter for the past week.
The first part of the course is about defining the term ‘children’s literature’. Do we mean literature specifically about children or written specifically for them or even written by children? With the increasing popularity of cross-over fiction like Hunger Games, the boundaries – if they ever really existed – have become ever more blurred.
Reading the course material has also got me thinking whether children and adults read differently. I don’t mean just in terms of the complexity of vocabulary or sentence structure but in terms of what we look for in the act of reading itself.
According to David Beagley who lectures on children’s lit at Trope University in Australia, children tend to read externally by which he means that they use novels to explore and discover experiences that they have not yet had themselves. Experiences such sleeping out of doors (Swallows and Amazons), coping with the first days in a new school when you don’t know anyone (Harry Potter or Blyton’s Malory Towers for example), being falsely accused of being a liar (Jane Eyre) etc etc. Read many books aimed at younger readers and you’ll find a large “education” element mixed in with the pure entertainment element – showing and guiding the reader on appropriate ways to behave and that some reactions are natural aspects of growing up.
I’d never read any of the Harry Potter series until recently but what struck me was how well J..K Rowling balances the ‘education’ and ‘entertainment’ elements. Strip away the fantasy and the magic elements and you’ll find there are plenty of messages about appropriate ways to behave whether that’s about being loyal to friends or sticking up for what you believe in. There are also multiple examples of situations which a child reader could encounter themselves – so we see how Harry deals with bullies like Malfoy and how he decides who will be the friends that are really worth having.
Little Women stands in complete contrast to this. It’s so heavily didactic that I became frustrated with it – far too many episodes ended in a moral lesson from Marmee or a little homily from one of the sisters. But of course, this is my view as an adult reader. Was my experience different when I read it as a young girl? Undoubtedly it was. Reading it as a 10 year old, I never noticed how much sugary ‘lessons in life’ it contained. Instead, I was entranced by the character of Jo Marsh. I wanted to be a tomboy like her and not have to worry about whether my socks were falling down or my dress was stained. So in a sense I was reading as Beagley indicates – I was reading to discover an experience of what it would be like to climb trees. And then I put that knowledge to use by taking my bunch of friends and cousins on our own adventures in the hills near my grand-parents’ home. But now of course, I’ve had those tomboy outdoor experiences so I am less entranced by what Little Women can tell me, which means other aspects of the book (the role of mothers versus fathers in society for example,) come more to the forefront. And they are not substantial enough to keep me as an adult reader engaged.
Fascinating column. I remember my childhood library was in an ancient looking round stone building. The children’s section was in the basement and when you got old enough you could get an adult card and check out the books upstairs. Quite the achievement!
I think as an adolescent I also read to discover what the adult world is like. I remember reading my first sex scene at a friend’s home — and I can almost remember the title. Wow, was it revealing to me.
I had forgotten the sex discovery element Barbara but now I remember all my friends desperate to get their hands on Lady Chatterly’s Lover just for the one scene and thinking we were terribly sophisticated having done so.
Sent from my iPad
This is an interesting approach to this question, which is always the first one in any children’s literature course. I assume you also read what Peter Hunt has to say about it. If not, his work is worth looking at. Of course, what any book is trying to “teach” its child readers will reflect the ideology of the author who has written it. If you want to explore this further, have a look at the work of Peter Hollingdale.
I absolutely agree with you about “Little Women”. I know I read this very differently as a child to the way I would read it now as an adult. However, if you really want to encounter Louisa M Alcott at her most didactic, then have a look at “Eight Cousins”, or its sequel “Rose in Bloom”. As a “teaching” text these two knock “Little Women” into a cocked hat.
As far as “Swallows and Amazons” is concerned, having read this as an eight year old I was convinced I knew how to sail. And you know, I was right. Ransome, taught me very well indeed.
It’s hard to equate the Alcott of Little Women with the author who wrote all those sensation stories. She seemed to have kept that pretty quiet – wasn’t her pen name only discovered some years after she died?
I’m trying to get to grips with Hunt – his key point seems to be that some ideology about the child or childhood will always be conveyed by a writer even if they don’t openly admit it. But wouldn’t the same thing be true of all writers (not confined to those writing for children?).
I haven’t come across Hollingdale yet but will take a look…Thanks for the tip Alex