|WikiProject Books||(Rated C-class)|
|Children's literature has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Art. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|WikiProject Children's literature||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
- 1 shukri
- 2 Major rewrite, 4 March 2009
- 3 topics underrepresented
- 4 Age limit?
- 5 Spurious classification
- 6 Did some work
- 7 Under construction
- 8 Order of history section
- 9 Natural history (Boreman, 1730)
- 10 Middle Grade and Young Adult
- 11 Major revision today
- 12 Commons
- 13 Wind in the Willows
- 14 Feminist children's literature
- 15 Latin America
Major rewrite, 4 March 2009
- Evidently the following ten sections were all posted by User:ErinHowarth during major rewrite 3–4 March 2009. This reduced the page size by one-third, partly reported and explained here. See also edit history, Feb–May 2009. -P64 2013-04-27
In attempting to define children's literature, the following sentence refers to categorizing literatrue by format: "books can also be categorized by their various formats, such as picture books, easy-to-read books, illustrated books, chapter books, hardcover books, paperback books, grocery store books, and series books." These are not formats. Formats are hardcover, paperbacks, board books, large print, braille, books on tape and audiobooks on CD. Grocery store books are being categorized by their retailer which seems unfair and irrelevant to me. Picture books, easy-to-read books, illustrated books, and chapter books are being categorized by reading level (I think), but those are not formats. --ErinHowarth (talk) 22:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
children's books enjoyed by adults
The bit about children's books being enjoyed by adults is a bit confusing. I think what is being attempted is an example of a book orignially written for children which is enjoyed by adults, but the examples of The Amber Spyglass and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time are lost on me. I have never heard of either of thse books. Neither have I ever heard of the the Whitbread Award, so either I'm not a member of the target audience for this article or the examples are too obscure. We can either find different examples or we can explain these examples better. Almost as an after thought the following phrase is inserted: "Also included are the works of J. K. Rowling and Shel Silverstein." Now, these people I've heard of, but including them like this is sloppy writing. Either leave them out or let them replace the examples above. It would be an easy case to show that the work of Rowling was originally intended for children but is enjoyed by many adults. I think it would be similarly easy to show that for Silverstein, but the case must be made, it is not so obvious that it can just be stated as fact. Now I think I'm rambling, and I need to go sit down. --ErinHowarth (talk) 22:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Twain is an excellent example of an author who wrote for adults but was beloved by children, but Hcukleberry Finn is a poor example of a book with hidden dark themes that become evident when the reader returns to the text as adn adult, so I have cut the Twain example from that section of the article and left only the Alice in Wonderland example. --ErinHowarth (talk) 23:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
A children literature?
I'm not sure if Anne Frank can be considered children literature... I mean it's about holocaust, how can it be a children literature? There's some light topic diary in the beginning but I'm not sure it counts. [cough]btw, isn't it still a controversy to verify whether Anne Frank's diary was really written by Anne or a hoax made by her father? Sorry if what it means is another book though
I'm cutting this sentence:
An attempt to identify the characteristics shared by works called "children's literature" leads to some generally accepted guidelines. No one rule is perfect, however, and for every identifying feature there are many exceptions, as well as many adult books that share the characteristic. (For further discussion, see Hunt 1991: 42-64, Lesnik-Oberstein 1996, Huck 2001: 4-5.)
I'm cutting this until I can find a place to work it back in: "Anderson suggests that literary elements should be found throughout all of children's literature. These important elements include characters, point of view, setting, plot, theme, style, and tone.<ref>Anderson 2006, pp. 30–39.</ref>"
I doubt I'll find a place to work this back in: "Anderson also suggests that every teacher should have at least 300 books in their classroom library.<ref>Anderson 2006, p. 42.</ref>"
I"m cutting this until I can find a place to work it back in: "Anderson states that there are "several common themes in traditional literature" they follow along the lines of "Triumph of good over evil, trickery, hero's quest, reversal of fortune, and small outwitting the big," "Because one of the purposes of folklore was to transmit cultural values and beliefs, the theme is usually quite apparent."<ref>Anderson 2006, pp. 87–88.</ref>"
As I read through this talk page before I archived it, I noted that this topic has been much discussed, but I don't believe we (as editors) have reached an adequate solution. The list of popular contributors is too long (in my opiinon) and the notion of popularity is not defined. I propose the following: (1) we decide how long the list should be. Currently it has 43 names on it. I think ten is more than enough for an article like this. I further propose that we find a way to spread them out evenly over time. The current list includes names of people born between 1592 and 1970 with about 20 from 20th century and 20 from 19th century. I suggest that we loose Comenius from the list, work him back into the history section, keep Perrault and Grimm (because I've heard of them), and then choose one representative from each quarter century between 1800 and 2000, i.e. 1800-1825, 1825-1850, 1850-1875, etc. (2) Second, I propose that we define the author's popularity right in the list. Curretly, our list just includes some of the author's titles, and this might be enough if the reader has heard of the stories, but I think it best to make some kind of statement defining the level of the contributor's popularity, that will make it especially useful for future ediotrs who come along and what to put in a differetn name. --ErinHowarth (talk) 01:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- You're absolutely right. A list is inappropriate—ultimately this should be put into paragraph forms by "era" or the like. Mr. Absurd (talk) 01:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Non-European (See, e.g., Children's Literature in China: From Lu Xun to Mao Zedong Authored by: Mary Ann Farquhar Winner of the 1999 Children's Literature Book Award (Children's Literature Association); young children's lit (e.g., Sendak), poetry (e.g., A Child's Garden of Verse)Kdammers (talk) 00:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
In Archive 3 Piotr Konieczny complained the article wasn't global enough.
Beyond Chinese, what about other major literary languages: Arabic, Hindi, Spanish and Russian? Children's lit. is certainly well-developed in Russian. Then there are second-tier languages like Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai, Malay and Indonesian, Farsi as well as numerous European languages. LADave (talk) 20:52, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
The opening paragraph describes children's literature as being for "children up to about age twelve". It is sometimes used in this sense, excluding young adult literature, but I would suggest that young adult literature is actually a field within children's literature. Many children's literature awards go to young adult books, for example, and the teenage section of a library is usually in the children's library area. So should it say "up to age 18" - or 16 maybe? - with a note that the term is sometimes used in the exclusionary sens e. Any comments? Robina Fox (talk) 17:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Have deleted introductory text "Children's literature is for readers and listeners up to about age twelve; it is often defined in four different ways: books written by children, books written for children, books chosen by children, or books chosen for children. It is often illustrated. The term is used in senses which sometimes exclude young-adult fiction, comic books, or other genres."
This is at best unreferenced, and I think someone's opinion and plain wrong.Book reviews and ads are full of books for teenagers. The US Children's Book Council lists books described as for "age 14+". A definition must be uncontentious and sourced (if authorities disagree, it should be mentioned). Pol098 (talk) 08:29, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Ths classification into "books written by children; books written for children; books chosen by children; books chosen for children" seems spurious - is there a source for it? They are all books widely read by children, whether chosen by themselves or others. Some adult books get taken up by children (Gulliver's Travels); this is worth a mention, but not a formal classification. Books written by children for children again merit a mention, no more. Books read mainly by adults written by by children are nearly as rare as hens' teeth (maybe Anne Frank's diary), and are not called children's books. Pol098 (talk) 08:59, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Did some work
Hi, I did some work on this. I hope I didn't upset anyone, it's never my intent, but it clearly needed some work -- and still needs more. I removed a few larger sections of info that didn't belong where they were, but have saved them to see if maybe they could go someplace else. As of today I've only gotten through the history section, and clearly work needs to be done on the lead and the definitions parts, too. I am concerned that the 1900s is a list, not an analysis like previous sections are; I think it's not encyclopedia-like. Also, the whole article is still very European/North American centric.
If I did anything that upset someone I apologize. Feel free to make more changes or contact me about what I've done and what's left to do. I will be back and do some more work later. Tlqk56 (talk) 21:09, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
One reason I added the template is in hope of attracting others who might like to improve this article. All I ask is that we try to follow MOS guidelines, and cite our facts. This is too big a project for one person, especially since I have others going on, and my resources are basically all US/European-centric. If you can add other info, please do! Tlqk56 (talk) 03:43, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Order of history section
In an attempt to keep the history section in some kind of order, keeping the longer sections toward the end of each period, and using my reference books, I'm trying to add information in this general order:
- China/Far East
- Arab world
- Central, South America/Caribbean
- Russia/Eastern Europe
- Other Countries
- Western Europe and Great Britain (I'm not up to separating these, they are quite entwined.)
- United States/Canada
Tlqk56 and others: I think the whole huge article is unfolding very well and I'm enjoying your additions about other parts of the world. Still, I miss the reference to Geoffrey Trease in the UK interwar period. Earlier history "stories" for children were normally simplistic accounts of national myths (King Alfred and his cakes, Maid Marian, King Arthur). Trease and followers such as Rosemary Sutcliff and Carola Oman produced well-researched, historically more accurate historical fiction for juveniles that became immensely popular by the 1950s and form one of the main sides of the Puffin Books list in that period. I wish I could find a good reference or two for that and figure out where it would fit into the grand scheme of the article. Perhaps you will stumble across something. Now it's your bedtime, Tlqk56. What would you like Nanny to read you tonight? Bmcln1 (talk) 09:24, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the friendly words, Bmcln1. I know I have refs for Sutcliff, I just haven't added them yet. I'm trying not to overbalance Great Britain compared to the rest of the info, since this isn't "history of child's lit in England and the US". But it's all relative, of course. Right now I'm trying to get the other countries in, and there's surprisingly little out there. Tlqk56 (talk) 15:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
- When I see more clearly where the new version is heading I'll try to add a couple of sentences about Hungarian children's lit as well. Cordially Bmcln1 (talk) 16:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I see clearly where its heading. LOL. Please do add Hungary. I only have the statement, "Hungary produced its first children's book in 1538" with no mention of what it was! Frustrating. Tlqk56 (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Natural history (Boreman, 1730)
This is the lead sentence of entry "Natural history" in The Oxford Companion to Children's Literature (1999) --page 370, which is now available to non-subscribers at Questia.com.
Natural history was a popular subject from the beginning of British juvenile publishing; A DESCRIPTION OF THREE HUNDRED ANIMALS ( 1730), published (and probably written) by Thomas BOREMAN, was one of the first books that could justly be described as 'for the entertainment of youth'. It drew on the
Middle Grade and Young Adult
Major revision today
- Also posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Children's literature#Major revision of main article -P64
Wind in the Willows
Feminist children's literature
I removed this section which seemed to unbalance the article in terms of history and in being US-specific, and added it to the Feminist children's literature article. It needs to be integrated into that article by someone who know the material. We could perhaps have a section here on the general use of children's literature to propagate ideas and promote social and behavioral change throughout its history. It's fairly easy to find examples, but a source for the general idea would need to be found. Robina Fox (talk) 17:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)