Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Power of Mediocre Children’s Fiction
Reach back in your mind to the time when you emerged as an independent reader. You could choose your own material, and didn’t have to rely on others to read it for you. What stories did you prefer? For some of us, the books that drew us in weren’t sophisticated. In fact, there’s a good chance the books you’re recalling were formulaic series that publishers cranked out at high volume. Although it’s tempting for parents to steer their children toward richer literature, there is a case to be made that you actually derived benefit from your obsession with Superman comics or your seven weeks in a row of checking out Babysitters Club books.
Students who learn ably to read and write early on, and then build on that knowledge exponentially throughout their education, are ones who enter Kindergarten already primed with a large vocabulary. This vocabulary development comes from regular conversation with loved ones at home, life experiences such as outdoor walks and petting zoos, playtime with other children, and hearing books read aloud.
With such a stimulating and varied daily life, children build a network of long-term memories through which to interpret anything new they come across. The more they know — the greater number of connections they formed — the faster new information is meaningfully processed and assimilated. A child’s knowledge can be expressed and demonstrated in terms of vocabulary, words with their attendant associations and indication of familiarity with a domain. Any book that increases that word-hoard, filling out familiar concepts and introducing new ideas, strengthens the mental network and thus lays the groundwork for further learning. In sum, reading mediocre children’s fiction makes you smart.
Learning new words in context is difficult; the research tells us that we have to encounter the word many times before it becomes part of our vocabulary. When you were lounging with that middling story back ten, twenty, thirty years ago or more, you were grappling with words and their associations, creating mental layers that now give precision, depth, and clarity to your communication. Furthermore, our brains give favored status to stories, lending the takeaways from your reading extra vibrance and permanence.
A strong vocabulary builder was, in my case, the Nancy Drew series. I didn’t read all of them, but I did binge on them occasionally in my preteen years. They were especially beneficial for me as someone who hadn’t fully lived in American culture. I could learn and experience it second hand through these works and others.
Nancy was a character who had it all — looks, smarts, boyfriend, confidence, a car. Her father was a handsome lawyer, and wealthy. Anytime Nancy needed to go somewhere to solve a mystery, she and her friends could pack and be whisked to an exciting new destination. Nancy could pick up on any new skill immediately — acting, playing tennis. Circumstances always ended well for her and criminals were always apprehended. Nevertheless, this character took me places and showed me new things I would not otherwise have come upon for some time.
The first Nancy Drew book I picked up was Clue of the Whistling Bagpipes. I was eight and was absorbing all the newness of my first semester of boarding school. This book with the pretty young woman on the cover, playing bagpipes in a kilt — I think I already had bagpipes, Scottish, kilt in my head — was a promising read. Next was Password to Larkspur Lane. That one I remember for its introduction to the ideas of nursing home, visiting hours, perhaps password. (Really? Hospitals in America had only certain hours when you could visit? Picky and strict!)
Other words acquired from the series were as varied as Nancy’s adventures: amateur, phantom, titian-haired, kachina dolls, false bottom (as in a secret compartment). There was a criminal with pale blue eyes that startled me to contemplate pale blue eyes as perhaps being pretty, but in this case meant to confer more creepiness on the bad guy. I had thought blue eyes were desirable. I also less consciously absorbed the idea of describing a character’s physical traits to indicate the non-tangibles. I still reflect on pale blue eyes occasionally, especially when I see examples of what the writer must have been thinking.
Just a survey of vintage Nancy Drew titles shows the enormous variety of ideas young readers encountered: Stagecoach, dragon, mannequin, locket, quest, ranch, tolling, moonstone, ivory, sapphire. The attractive covers, the range of settings and contexts, the fast-paced narrative with suspenseful chapter endings, and the scary parts gave rich meaning to the words and a permanent place for them in their minds.
Published in General
Links to come. I am called away.
See C S Lewis, in his essay Lilies that Fester:
http://willtypeforfood.blogspot.com/2008/09/live-dog-and-dead-lion.html
Thank you, Sawatdeeka.
Yes, the most important thing is to read, and read lots. Once they learn to really love reading for pleasure they can be gently nudged towards good books through recommendations, although as long as they’re reading it doesn’t really matter.
I like to read a wide variety of books, but I still will read formuleic, intellectually light stuff if I just want to curl up for an afternoon with a book. Historical romance and thrillers are perfect for that purpose. I call it my mental bubble gum. (It amused me years ago to read an interview with Stephen King in which he referred to his books as the “literary equivalent of a Big Mac.”)
I think the only books my son ever read for pleasure were the Harry Potter books. He waited eagerly every year for the newest book to be released so he could devour it. Not terrible, but not exactly highbrow literary stuff.
OMG I read every Nancy Drew mystery all in a row. Even though the language was archaic (Nancy went in her roadster to have luncheon with her chum Bess haha), I couldn’t get enough.
I read the first Nancy Drew in the 40s, and then bought about 20 or more for my daughters.
With me it was Cherry Ames, a nurse. I read every single one. Now, at my advanced age, historical fictional series are my favorite fiction. I am a total Harry Potter freak, and just finished the Outlander series. Now embarked on the continuation of the Ender’s Game series (after reading all the Ender’s Shadow first).
We are such Harry Potter geeks in our house. It’s a little extreme, actually. I did a Harry Potter birthday party for my youngest daughter’s 11th birthday. I had so much fun planning it! I made wands, chocolate frogs, butterbeer, and pumpkin juice. We sorted the guests into the different houses and had wizard duels. The middle three in the mug shots below are three of my daughters <3
My hard-earned babysitting money was spent on the Nancy Drew and Trixie Belden series which I stored in sequence and re-read in order more times than I can count.
—Yes, I was a nerd before nerds were cool. ;)
This is fantastic!
I taught at a week-long Harry Potter summer day camp for several years. We would sort the kids into house and keep track of house points. We even played Quidditch matches. We had more kids than you would imagine. It was as much fun for us as it was for the kids!
Love this, and so true! I was a binge-reader in general, and still am – at least aspirationally. Loved Nancy Drew, which I first checked out from my church grade school library. I was a little obsessed with secret passages, and I will confess that in our recent home remodel I insisted upon several hidden compartments and rooms.
I am not sure which came first, however. Did I have a natural predilection for reading, which my baby sister did not share, or did access to books foster this love? Not sure, but I suspect there is a pretty hefty element of nature here.
I love your characterization of reading from the low rent section as “bubble gum” Sheila S.! I call it “junk food” and require myself to either simultaneously or alternatively read something healthy. My commute is about an hour, and I have a toddler, so most of my reading is currently audible.
I don’t remember a plot from any of Willard Price’s books, but my 5th grade teacher (thanks Mrs. West) got me started reading back in the day. Part of that Johnny Quest influence I guess.
Willard Price – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
More specifically the Adventure series.
I loved the Nancy Drew books.
I wanted to be just like her.
Interestingly, I have listened to the feminists throughout my life tell me that the world was holding me back because I was girl or woman.
Thanks to Nancy Drew, I have never felt that way at all. It was cool to be feminine. I’ve never known what these people were talking about. I have never felt limited in any way.
I think the feminists and I have been living on different planets. Mine has been great!
MarciN- I generally agree, and have been lucky to be in a field where women dominate. However, I do really understand the pressure to conform to gender-specific norms, particularly when it comes to corporate situations. Maybe it’s just me!
Could a similar case be made for “mediocre” visual arts and music? Widespread exposure helps one to learn patterns and styles, thus recognizing the “vocabulary” of elements being used to create the final effect in a work.
Intriguing!! How can one know greatness without experiencing mediocrity? Quantifying the gap is the work of a lifetime, perhaps lifetimes. Nice!
I have spent my life in publishing and as a mom. I have experienced nothing but respect from everyone around me. In fact, not one person in my entire life has ever told me I shouldn’t try to do something or I couldn’t do something because I’m a woman. That is the truth. For me, at least.
That said, I’m sure sexism exists. I’m not discounting others’ experiences.
I’m saying only that thanks to the Nancy Drew books, that became the world to me–just very nice people except for the bad guys. :)
I would generally agree, and I am pretty sure that looking for sexism does not serve any purpose at all. I think this might be the definition of self-defeating. My parents also were pretty awesome about telling us we could do or be whatever we wanted if we were willing to work. My dad especially acknowledged and celebrated what he identified as leadership – Miss him every day.
Thank you for seeing what I meant. :)
I’m sitting here suddenly realizing I’ve said something that was probably offensive.
Just to be clear, my daughter got her master’s in English in a women’s studies program. And I think the women a bit older than I am were really the trailblazers. By the time I set foot into the business world, the battle had been fought and won.
My apologies to anyone I might have offended.
Sigh.
Not at all- Please don’t apologize for authenticity at Ricochet! Honestly, I feel the same way about race relations. It never occurred to me (despite pretty economically disadvantaged roots) that we or anyone else were anything other than the masters of our own destinies. I find the concept simultaneously foreign, deflating, and insulting, and given my home (chicago burbs) I am presented with this view fairly frequently.
I do too.
I’ve seen too many young people with what I’d describe as mild paranoia, and I think it is sad. It’s almost self-fulfilling.
If we keep telling kids people will hate them, those kids are going to be afraid. I think it is wrong for the literary world to tell young people that everyone is out to get them.
That was really my point. In my Nancy Drew world, everything was wonderful, and I tended to trust people.
Ha I was at O’Hare Airport once, reading a pulpy novel when my old English teacher came over. He said, “Oh, what are you reading?” Before I could hide it and say, “Jude the Obscure,” he saw the cover. “Officers’ Wives.”
Here I am last year at Halloween at work. Professor Sprout, since I was in Hufflepuff House on Pottermore.
Yep, right on — Nancy Drew (I read them all), and mediocre books rule for kids. Everything you say about them is true: I spent my whole childhood making excuses to get out of everything I was supposed to do so I could sneak off and quietly read a mediocre book. I was always getting in trouble for it. But who has the last vocabulary laugh now? The Phantom Tollbooth, Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing, everything by Laura Ingalls Wilder, Ursula K. Leguin, Madeleine L’Engel, Roald Dahl, CS Lewis, EB White, Stephen King, Judy Blume … not all of them were mediocre, by the way, as I discovered when I returned to read them again in adulthood (CS Lewis is a great writer), although some of them are. The main thing is that I was lucky enough to grow up before the age of nonstop digital distraction: We had a single, small, black-and-white TV in our home, and we weren’t allowed to watch it except on Tuesday nights, for “Happy Days.” The only alternative to crushing boredom was reading. I don’t know whether kids could possibly experience that, now; I know my nephew Leo can always find a million things to do that are more exciting — video games, cartoons, bright Italian shows for children and for childlike adult Italians. Just life; he’ll miss out on what I had, but he’ll be completely trilingual and a digital native, so maybe that will make up for it.
I have a question for folks here: In my homeschool Co-op this past year, one member was interested in teaching a class on the Magic Treehouse book series.
In my mind, that is a terrible idea. Those books are meant to be read independently by children who are just starting to read their own books. Teaching a class based on these mediocre, but quite commercially successful, books seems completely wrong to me, but obviously the other mother thought it a great idea.
One of my objections is that teaching them in a class might kill the joy in the books themselves. I know a young woman whose mother taught her the Lord of the Rings in a class, and she now hates the book.
The other is that this literature, while perfectly laudable in itself as escapist brain candy, is not strong enough to endure scholastic rigor.
(If you have read any of the books, they take children in a magic treehouse to various historic periods as long if they point to an image in a book and ask to go there. The treehouse turns out to be the property of Morgan, the sister of King Arthur, who is not a witch or anything, just a really super librarian. Yes, really.)
Am I just a snob?
I strictly limit my own tadpoles’ time on electronic devices. They get maybe five hours a week or so total, with possibly a family movie thrown in there. We don’t have cable, so mostly they watch stuff online, play games like Spore, Minecraft, or things at Steam, play on the Wii… but mostly for entertainment they play outside or read.
There are books all over my house. There are always books all over my house: on the stairs, on the table, on my desk, in the bathroom, in the car, in the children’s hands…
Comic books (Foxtrot, Peanuts, Calvin and Hobbes), manga, Rick Riordan, Eoin Coffer, choose your own adventure, Brian Jacques… these are all right now in visual range lying around my living room…
I certainly assign good literature for my students, but most of the books they read they are just reading for fun.
I read Nancy Drew, The Hardy Boys, and Tom Swift as a lad, but my favorite was the Freddy the Pig series. Very definitely not great literature, the books have a gentle but sly humor and well-defined moral compass. I was outraged when I read Animal Farm at age 13 or so; I thought that Orwell had appropriated Brooks’ characters and perverted them. I have yet to see an analysis of Animal Farm that acknowledges its (obvious to me) indebtedness to Freddy.
The words I learned from the Hardy Boys are chums and gallivanting.
Oh! That reminds me: I have homeschooling questions for you. I’ve been meaning to ask. Do you find that there are any subjects in particular that are harder to teach, either because you don’t know them well, or because the resources for home-schoolers aren’t as good? If so, what are they? I ask because I’ve been thinking what a great, inbuilt resource we have here on Ricochet for online lesson exchanges. We have so much collective expertise among us, and so many kids whom we don’t really want taught by Indoctrinate U. (Well, I don’t have kids, but I wouldn’t want anyone’s kids taught by Indoctrinate U.) I keep thinking we should find a way to match Ricochet parents who are home schooling, or whose kids could use tutoring, with other people here who have subject-matter expertise — a tutoring bank of some kind. Does that idea strike you as useful?
I remember devouring Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys books for a while. And in addition to the vocabulary and the ideas, after about the 50th book they taught me something else — how to recognize genre and formula. The obvious suspect would be a red herring, there’d be some kind of physical threat to warn her off, then dramatic climax … Of course, once I came to that epiphany, I couldn’t really enjoy them again.
But I think it’s why I’ve become enamored with genre and formula twists. One of my favorite pop songs is “Kiss From a Rose” by Seal. Name another song on the radio in 6/8 time, in a minor key, and with an oboe solo!