Step up standards in kids’ literature

By Jennifer Bioche

------

This Christmas, my list for Santa is small but specific: good children's literature for my family.

While in my car this week, I heard a discussion on NPR's “Talk of Iowa” that featured a bookstore owner and a librarian discussing just this.

“The lead seller for us this holiday season,” said the bookstore owner, “is ‘Bad Kitty Christmas' by Nick Bruel.” And so unfolded a detailed but sad account of what our children are reading, or even sadder, what is readily available to them.

The “Bad Kitty” series entered our home when one of our children found it at the school library. “Bad Kitty vs. Uncle Murray” featured the main character - a mischievous feline - and his temporary human sitter. In short, the kitty is very naughty, and it and Uncle Murray - illustrated just a notch above an Archie Bunker character - go round and round with conflicts.

There is no real story; the “hero” or kitty is, well, annoying at best. One look at the eyesore illustrations, and the overall message that rambunctiousness rules, and I told my son “sorry - we're not reading this one.”

“Bad Kitty Christmas” is more of the same. A bratty cat and a story centered around “what's his next bad move gonna be.” A new character is a grandma that takes Kitty in when Kitty runs away after demolishing his human home. Grandma shows Kitty photos of her relatives, which includes a small but noticeable reference to a same-sex couple.

When I was younger, we didn't have huge bookstores or Amazon.com, but we managed to read and read richly. We were given thought-provoking characters, memorable story lines and, almost always, a moral to uphold.

For me, that was “The Diary of Anne Frank, ” Helen Keller's biography, “Little House on the Prairie,” “Little Women,” and so on.

Today, my children come home from school with book orders with title offerings such as “Naked Mole Rat Gets Dressed”, “Two Bad Pilgrims” (in reference to the Mayflower arrival) and lots of Sponge Bob Square Pants. In fact, many books available to children are based on television series or channels, such as Nickelodeon and Sesame Street.

I thought the premise of increasing children's literacy was to improve critical thinking skills, imagination and vocabulary building, rather than reminding them of a favorite TV show. Visit any local bookstore and you'll find some good children's titles, but they're dwindling, or moved to the back section to make room for the enormous “Star Wars” series display.

Then there's the goal of making children laugh while they read. Enter series such as “Diary of a Wimpy Kid” and “Big Nate Out Loud.” “Nate” is based on the comic strip by illustrator Lincoln Peirce. I'm sorry, but an illustrator is not the same thing as a really good writer.

Both “Diary” and “Nate” take pride in line-by-line quirky exchanges, usually referring to the child character getting into trouble and suffering because of the clumsy, clueless adult in their life. In one “Diary,” the child actually steals his grandmother's lawn mower to further his freelance summer gardening gig.

As a parent, I'm rolling my eyes, longing for the beautiful prose of Louisa May Alcott, and lamenting that my children's brains are being shortchanged.

I'll hear adults say “well, I want them to read something - anything, so long as they're reading.” Insert the same logic with food, and you'd be trying to raise your child on sugar and soda pop.

We can do better. Just like with food choices, we parents need to be more demanding as consumers. And pay attention to what's coming into our schools, libraries and bookstores.

What good is a healthy body, if all we put into our children's brain is junk?

Jennifer Bioche lives in Marion and writes parenting blogs at http://www.facebook.com/prageru. Comments: jbioche@yahoo.com.