1 Comment
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Erisian's avatar

"even it is merely children’s literature"

Mr Sykes, I do not agree with your wording here about "children's" literature. Literature is literature no matter the intended reader. Would you call "Tom Sawyer" or "Huckleberry Finn" just children's lit? What about "Swiss Family Robinson?" How about the classics from Dr Seuss? Maurice Sendak, Shel Silverstein or EB White? The list of great authors who wrote/write books for children and young adults goes on and on.

I learned to love reading when I was a child, and it was due to the classic literature written for the young (as well as a few non-classics like The Hardy Boys mysteries). Yes, these tomes had words that are unacceptable in today's polite society, but that was it - they were just words. I was taught that words are nothing more than words, and hurtful words only have the power that you give them. Rewriting books for the sole sake of sanitizing the verbiage to account for today's sensibilities, IMO, serves no real purpose.

The old expression of "sticks and stones..." is as true now as it was. Words carry connotations and concepts (that can change over time) but no physical ability to inflict harm. We cannot protect our young from everything hurtful, but we can teach them to consider the source of the invective.

We should not alter the words used by an author, she/he put a great deal of thought into what they wrote. Instead, we should inculcate our youth with the concept that not everything they read is going to be free of hurtful words, and that in most cases the author does/did not intend to be insulting to the reader.

fnord

Expand full comment
ErrorError