What are they thinking? Books for all ages? Silverstein's work--just no. Not even close. Little Women? For all ages? Sorry, no. It's for eleven year old girls, and that's about it. The Wizard of Oz? Interesting in its way but even my daughter found it to be full of oddly sexist and racist references that make it rather dated today. Heidi? I enjoyed it as a kid but you couldn't get me to read it now; I have better things to do than read about such a Mary Sue at my age. These are books for all ages? They're serious? Where on earth are the HP books? Now THOSE are books for all ages.
The books for preschoolers aren't bad, I suppose, but I prefer Don Freeman's Norman the Doorman to Corduroy. (The avant garde artist in us all! Even a mouse who is a doorman to the art museum for other mice!) And The Runaway Bunny is boring, even for little kids. Even more boring if you're the one reading it to a kid. I loved reading On the Day you were Born to my kids at this age, and my daughter still loves it; the prose has a kind of flow you get with free-form poetry and the cut-paper art is amazing. And why isn't there any Dr. Seuss in this section? Are we serious? Or Sandra Boynton? I think what I'm chiefly seeing here is that none of the books listed is what I'd call FUN, which is what small kids need in their reading. Why are these "best"? Because they're teaching values or something? Fun is one of the best values kids can learn, and often they're the ones who have to teach it to the adults around them. The folks who made this list clearly wouldn't know "fun" if it came up and tickled them mercilessly. ;)
I see there are some Dr. Seuss selections in the next age range, but that's still neglecting the ones for younger kids. There's a wide range of books in this section (as there should be). However--The Boxcar Children? That treacle? No no no. And I think The Giver belongs in the young adult category, as most kids 9-11 wouldn't be able to deal with it yet. (Yeah, the ending was a bit disappointing, but there's a lot to recommend it despite that.) And my mother-in-law was never able to cope with the very IDEA of Stuart Little because a human woman gave birth to a mouse. Erg. I think she may have a point. There still aren't many books that are fun, and some that are fun are oddly lightweight and I don't get their being here. (Like Mr. Popper's Penguins, which is pretty much pointless from beginning to end, even though it's fun.) And no James and the Giant Peach? And once again--no HP books? No Jane Langton books are another significant omission. There is also a dearth of recently published books, such as The Tale of Despereaux. This list seems frozen in amber.
The Young Adults list is truly mystifying, though. Five books? No HP, no other fantasy (besides The Hobbit) or science fiction, nothing like Fever 1793 or Tithe? Where is Louis Sachar's Holes, at the very least?
Erg. The Silverstein inclusions are not the worst of this collection. The sad thing is some parents will treat this list as gospel. I shudder at the thought.
no subject
The books for preschoolers aren't bad, I suppose, but I prefer Don Freeman's Norman the Doorman to Corduroy. (The avant garde artist in us all! Even a mouse who is a doorman to the art museum for other mice!) And The Runaway Bunny is boring, even for little kids. Even more boring if you're the one reading it to a kid. I loved reading On the Day you were Born to my kids at this age, and my daughter still loves it; the prose has a kind of flow you get with free-form poetry and the cut-paper art is amazing. And why isn't there any Dr. Seuss in this section? Are we serious? Or Sandra Boynton? I think what I'm chiefly seeing here is that none of the books listed is what I'd call FUN, which is what small kids need in their reading. Why are these "best"? Because they're teaching values or something? Fun is one of the best values kids can learn, and often they're the ones who have to teach it to the adults around them. The folks who made this list clearly wouldn't know "fun" if it came up and tickled them mercilessly. ;)
I see there are some Dr. Seuss selections in the next age range, but that's still neglecting the ones for younger kids. There's a wide range of books in this section (as there should be). However--The Boxcar Children? That treacle? No no no. And I think The Giver belongs in the young adult category, as most kids 9-11 wouldn't be able to deal with it yet. (Yeah, the ending was a bit disappointing, but there's a lot to recommend it despite that.) And my mother-in-law was never able to cope with the very IDEA of Stuart Little because a human woman gave birth to a mouse. Erg. I think she may have a point. There still aren't many books that are fun, and some that are fun are oddly lightweight and I don't get their being here. (Like Mr. Popper's Penguins, which is pretty much pointless from beginning to end, even though it's fun.) And no James and the Giant Peach? And once again--no HP books? No Jane Langton books are another significant omission. There is also a dearth of recently published books, such as The Tale of Despereaux. This list seems frozen in amber.
The Young Adults list is truly mystifying, though. Five books? No HP, no other fantasy (besides The Hobbit) or science fiction, nothing like Fever 1793 or Tithe? Where is Louis Sachar's Holes, at the very least?
Erg. The Silverstein inclusions are not the worst of this collection. The sad thing is some parents will treat this list as gospel. I shudder at the thought.