My kids HATE the classics!

[Mama2Many4]

So, my boys are almost 8 and 6 and I downloaded "The Water Babies" and "Robin Hood" from Gutenburg Texts to my Nook and tried reading to them tonight. They hated it! My youngest turned to me and said, " I like the foxes one better."

 

Does anyone else have luck reading the classics to their kids and them liking it? I ended up reading "The Rainbow Fish" picture book to my almost 3 year old and they were all gathered round for that. Granted it's the old time way of language, but will they ever like the classic stories? Is picture books only ok? I want my kids to have a broader view of great literature. This is not what I pictured when I settled down to read them a great!:001_huh:

[zenjenn]

Are you reading the originals?

 

You might want to consider looking into abridged and/or updated versions of the Classics. I like "Classic Starts".

 

Last year I originally wanted to read my daughter Tom Sawyer because she was attending a performance of Tom Sawyer as a play with a homeschool group. I walked into the bookstore and they had, in the children's section, the original Tom Sawyer, as well as the "Classic Starts" version of Tom Sawyer, side-by-side.

 

I picked up the original. I saw antiquated language. I saw the n-word. I saw a burden of dialect. Sometimes, extraneous scenes that I knew my daughter would not relate to.

 

I remember that really, most of MY experience with the classics were these "Illustrated Classics" that my mom purchased at McDonald's during some promotion in the 1970's, and I certainly never looked at a "real" classic before Jr. High - maybe High School. So, I went with the Classic Starts version.

 

She LOVED it. I read her The Secret Garden and Treasure Island as well. I wouldn't hesitate to read more from the publisher.

 

The way I see it, young people who originally enjoyed these stories enjoyed these stories unburdened by out-of-context language and references. The writing at their time was in-context and the references all made sense. They just enjoyed the stories. Our children reading these stories in the original form are reading them with extra layers of difficulty.

 

It is the STORIES that are "classic", not the language and references - much of which are locked in time.

 

It can be a worthwhile exercise for older kids to read the original text and analyze those contexts, but for young children, I think reading a version that captures the essence of the stories works better. It enables you to read a LOT more of the classic stories, the children enjoy/remember them more, AND, I suspect once they are in their teens and studying the originals, they will be able to do so with greater fluency if they are already familiar with the story.

 

Just my 2 cents!

Edited July 26, 2011 by zenjenn

[TracyR]

I do have luck with the Classic Starts books. If I read the originals my daughters' eyes glaze over. Plus I find most times I feel like I need a dictionary near me just to read the books. Don't get me started with 20,000 Leagues under the Sea.

But the Classic starts are the best to use for younger children. When the kids are teens they can go back and tackle the originals.

[TracyR]

I do have luck with the Classic Starts books. If I read the originals my daughters' eyes glaze over. Plus I find most times I feel like I need a dictionary near me just to read the books. Don't get me started with 20,000 Leagues under the Sea.

But the Classic starts are the best to use for younger children. When the kids are teens they can go back and tackle the originals.

[Harriet Vane]

I have a degree in English, and I love classic literature and I love classic childrens' literature.

 

That said, I HATED Water Babies. It's poorly written prattle that gets worse and worse the longer into the book you go. Get rid of it.

 

I have found that I have to choose the timing of classics carefully. At the ages of your kids, you might try the Little House series or some E.B. White. Read them aloud, with expression, in small chunks and see if it gets better.

[oraetstudia]

I would ease my way in. You don't have to begin with all old, classic books to work up from picture books. There are a lot of good things in between. Start with good chapter books with slightly less archaic language and ease them into listening to longer texts. They would probably enjoy something like Beverly Cleary's Henry Huggins books or The Mouse and the Motorcycle or John Fitzgerald's Great Brain series (or about a million other books).

 

If most of what you've read to them thus far is picture books, an old, long text will be a big leap, but your kids can get there. Another thing to work on is reading them older fairy tales, which you can download for free. Those have the more dated language, but are short and often pretty exciting.

[boscopup]

My kids aren't quite ready for those types of books yet. We're starting small with some Aesop's Fables and Lang's Fairy Tales to get used to "old language". For chapter books, I use more modern stuff (not really "modern", but 1950s+). They can understand the language easily and enjoy the story. As they get used to the old language of the free stuff, we'll work more in. :)

[Hedgehogs4]

We started family read-aloud time with books like Runaway Ralph, Charlotte's Web, and other books. Just as PPs said, work your way up. We have read some with definite antiquated language with no problem.

 

My kids (dd6 and ds10) are so enjoying the Little House series. We read a few chapters every evening before bed.

 

My boy and girl (even at a very young age) adored the Little Britches series of stories. We read 4 or 5 of them in succession. I finally made them give me a break from them.

[KrissiK]

Oh, you defiitely need to get abridged versions for that age. I have 7&8 year old boys and we read the "Great Illustrated Classics" versions of King Arthur and Ivanhoe - they loved them. We also read Geraldine McCreaghy's (sp?) version of The Canterbury Tales and those were also a hit.

[Satori]

We've been doing both. I read the unabridged version of The Secret Garden, Anne of Green Gables, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, etc... My daughter then wants to read Classics Starts version by herself. She'll then try to read the original again, but it's a bit too much of a jump for her on some of the wordier books. I have been buying both unabridged and abridged Classics Starts versions of books now. Oh, we just started Pinocchio (unabridged) a few nights ago, the whole family is loving it.

 

I started reading aloud more complex books early so now, at age six, she just gobbles the stories up, big vocabulary, accents, and all.

[Satori]

Barnes and Noble currently has a selection (not all) of Classic Starts books on sale for buy 2 get 1 free. Better than Amazon's deal, so I've been getting a few every week.

 

You might also want to check out this children's literature list I just started a few days ago, thanks to the help of some well-read, knowledgeable WTM moms. You can sort by Interest Level (last column) or page number to find some good literature to start. I chose Interest Level instead of reading level, as some families will read aloud books much earlier than when a child is able to read them independently.

[HollyinNNV]

I read Water Babies to my son this past year. He was in fifth grade. I think that it took us a few readings to get into it. I suspect that he would have hated it a few years ago. At your children's age my kids were listening to Beatrix Potter and AA Milne. That was about as classic as they could handle.

Holly

[justamouse]

Their ear has to be trained to that style. It takes a while, and it's hard at first.

 

It's like Shakespeare. You want to start with the picture books when they're little.

 

Then Edith Nesbit and Lambs and Mc Caughrean so they get the story straight in their head.

 

Then you watch a good movie of the play, then you pick up the real thing. And it doesn't come on the first reading, but later.

 

BUT, once their ear has been trained, they can read so many without complaining. Then you can pick up Howard Pyle and so many others.

 

And I wouldn't do abridged if the story is the right age. I would just read a few pages at a time, and have them narrate it back to you. Slow and steady wins the race.

[WTMCassandra]

At this age, I would start with the more lively classics, like from the 1000 Good Books list. Also, I found that they were willing to listen more readily to something long in the car as an audiobook rather than have to sit still at home for long periods of time. (At least this worked well with children who were NOT used to having an in-car DVD player with movies going.) I agree with the poster who said slow and steady wins the race to train their tastes.

 

Pssst--I'll let you in on a secret. Many of the 1000 Good Books kind of classics are my children's "fun" books. They don't even know they are "classics" or "schoolwork." Anne of Green Gables, Chronicles of Narnia, Caddie Woodlawn, Secret Garden, Wind in the Willows, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, etc.--all of those are on the "fun" shelf.

[Mommy22alyns]

At this age, I would start with the more lively classics, like from the 1000 Good Books list. Also, I found that they were willing to listen more readily to something long in the car as an audiobook rather than have to sit still at home for long periods of time. (At least this worked well with children who were NOT used to having an in-car DVD player with movies going.) I agree with the poster who said slow and steady wins the race to train their tastes.

 

Pssst--I'll let you in on a secret. Many of the 1000 Good Books kind of classics are my children's "fun" books. They don't even know they are "classics" or "schoolwork." Anne of Green Gables, Chronicles of Narnia, Caddie Woodlawn, Secret Garden, Wind in the Willows, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, etc.--all of those are on the "fun" shelf.

 

 

That's a great link! The girls love audiobooks in the car.

 

I second the recs for Beverly Cleary and Little House books. They've been much loved here.

[Jenny in Florida]

Okay, I'll be different.

 

I hate, HATE those Illustrated Classics and Classic Starts things. No matter what anyone tells you, kids who are reading those are NOT reading classics, but someone's simplistic and inferior re-telling of the story.

 

Eww.

 

My preference would be to start reading aloud good quality children's literature, modern if need be, and then work our way back in time to get to more classic and challenging books.

 

When my daughter was little, she loved hearing me read aloud A Little Princess and The Secret Garden and Peter Pan. We used to alternate one more challenging read aloud with a fluffier one.

 

Look for stories your children will find interesting, rather than just trying to force them to listen to something just because "it's a classic."

 

What kind of stories and characters do your kids like? Maybe we can help steer you toward some books that might be more accessible to them.

[Free]

I have found that I have to choose the timing of classics carefully. At the ages of your kids, you might try the Little House series or some E.B. White. Read them aloud, with expression, in small chunks and see if it gets better.

 

:iagree: I agree with this. It is important to choose the right classics which suit the child's personality and taste. My ds loves humour and adventure and he liked books such as Alice in Wonderland and Peter Pan. The Secret Garden, however left him unimpressed.

 

It is ok for a child to not like some of the classics, there will still be plenty of other wonderful classics to choose from.

[LanaTron]

Lots of good responses here...just want to add that it is certainly also okay to still do picture books. There are many great books that tell great stories and have beautiful artwork; they are just as edifying as reading "classics."

[jpklehm]

I know you want the read-aloud-as-a-family experience, but listening to these books on CD in the car is awesome. Do interlibrary loan and I'm sure you'll find many classics, some read by the authors themselves, like EB White. Some of the narrators are very talented in using different voices and they really make the stories interesting and fun to listen to. If you don't spend a lot of time in the car (yet...lol), then listen to these during lunch. They're a great way to "read" the classics and other very enjoyable books, and they offer many opportunities for discussion.

 

My boys love to read and do so every day; this is just a way for us to enjoy our time in the car.

 

As we get into the car each day, my boys call out, "Can we listen?" I love it!

 

Pam

[zenjenn]

I hate, HATE those Illustrated Classics and Classic Starts things. No matter what anyone tells you, kids who are reading those are NOT reading classics, but someone's simplistic and inferior re-telling of the story.

 

True, but you're not just reading them for bragging rights that you read the real thing to your child. Let's face it; you're just not going to be able to be exposed to as many of the classics if you read the entire book. You're just not. The body of human literature is too vast. There's not enough time in your life to read them all. Even with abridged versions, there's not enough time.

 

Part of being educated is being able to understand literary and cultural references, and be familiar with a wide variety of stories that make up the lexicon of human culture and experience.

 

Watching movies, plays, reading abridged versions, graphic novelizations, etc, are all perfectly valid *exposure* to the classics. If it is topical and the full-length version is not appropriate, interesting, or there is just not time, I still maintain these are great options to increase one's exposure and comprehension of those stories.

 

Just because you saw/read a bunch of Romeo and Juliet spin-offs as a child doesn't mean you still can't read the original Shakespeare as a teen or adult and appreciate it at both levels.

 

I mean if you hate them, don't read them by any means. But they serve a purpose. They're not just "inferior" junk.

[nmoira]

True, but you're not just reading them for bragging rights that you read the real thing to your child. Let's face it; you're just not going to be able to be exposed to as many of the classics if you read the entire book. You're just not. The body of human literature is too vast. There's not enough time in your life to read them all. Even with abridged versions, there's not enough time.

Time, exactly. I would far rather use our time reading original works as the author wrote them than on retellings or abridgements with diminished plot and language. We're not talking about a course in themes in Western literature, but rather about read aloud time with our children. By all means, use retellings and adaptations for fairy and folk tales, myths and epics, but there's such a wealth of age appropriate children's literature available there's no need to push adaptations of classics, especially those written for an older audience on children.

 

I mean if you hate them, don't read them by any means. But they serve a purpose. They're not just "inferior" junk.

Our opinions differ. :)

 

I would encourage the OP to start gently, employing audiobooks where possible to get a better "feel" when needed for antiquated syntax.

 

Good beginner choices include:

 

Roald Dahl

Dick King-Smith (Babe/The Sheep Pig and others)

The Mouse and the Motorcycle

Mrs. Piggle Wiggle

Geraldine McCaughrean's retellings of myths, legends, and world tales

James Herriot's Children's Treasury

Pippi Longstocking and the Noisy Village books

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang

The 101 Dalmations by Dodie Smith

A Bear Called Paddington

Just So Stories

E.B. White

The Troll with No Heart in his Body

stories from Lang's coloured Fairy books and Grimm

Padraic Colum

Farmer Boy

E. Nesbit (The Book of Dragons contains short stories and might be a good place to start)

The Wizard of Oz and sequels at least through Ozma of Oz

Margaret Hodges (St. George and the Dragon, The Kitchen Knight, etc.)

Peter Pan

Pinocchio

The Wonder Clock by Howard Pyle

A Wonder Book by Nathaniel Hawthorne

[Rosie_0801]

Enid Blyton's stories are very much aimed at children, so the slightly archaic language is quite digestible. More of them are suited to girls, but plenty are good for boys too. My aunt is reading the Faraway Tree series to my car loving, kungfu movie watching, six year old cousin.

 

Rosie

[Laura Corin]

Your children are a bit young for The Water Babies. I would look for more age-appropriate classics, like AA Milne, for example.

 

Laura

[sewingmama]

Enid Blyton's stories are very much aimed at children, so the slightly archaic language is quite digestible. More of them are suited to girls, but plenty are good for boys too. My aunt is reading the Faraway Tree series to my car loving, kungfu movie watching, six year old cousin.

 

Rosie

 

I love E.B. as a starting point to classics for reluctant listeners. My DD refuses to listen to anything that isn't a picture book but we are reading The Faraway Tree series and she is loving it. I plan to keep reading with this author until my DD matures enough to branch out :001_smile:

[Rosie_0801]

My DD refuses to listen to anything that isn't a picture book but we are reading The Faraway Tree series and she is loving it.

 

Oh, we used to have the most BEE-YOO-TIFUL illustrated version of The Faraway Tree! That must have been the one book from our childhood that I did not manage to scrounge...

 

My barely verbal four year old loves Winnie-the-Pooh and highly recommends the box set available on Amazon. http://www.amazon.com/Winnie-Pooh-Deluxe-Gift-Box/dp/0525422927/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_12 I'm sure I didn't pay that much, but it is Winnie the Pooh, so it was well worth it if I did. They sell the volumes separately, if you only want the two story volumes.

 

Rosie

[Lily_Grace]

So, my boys are almost 8 and 6 and I downloaded "The Water Babies" and "Robin Hood" from Gutenburg Texts to my Nook and tried reading to them tonight. They hated it! My youngest turned to me and said, " I like the foxes one better."

 

Does anyone else have luck reading the classics to their kids and them liking it? I ended up reading "The Rainbow Fish" picture book to my almost 3 year old and they were all gathered round for that. Granted it's the old time way of language, but will they ever like the classic stories? Is picture books only ok? I want my kids to have a broader view of great literature. This is not what I pictured when I settled down to read them a great!:001_huh:

 

I agree with others who have said it's just the age. There are LOTS of wonderful stories for little ones - Laura Ingalls Wilder's books, for example. Or The Little Prince.

 

We slowly upped our reading level as The Kid got older. We have some books that are read over and over, like A Christmas Carol, so that as he matures he gets more out of it (it's our week-before-Christmas book, leading up to Twas The Night Before on Christmas eve). Others, like Treasure Island and Tom Sawyer we did "full immersion" - reading from the tops of cliffs, the rocky shore of a quiet beach, inside caves, against a white wall, eating "hardtack"...anything that would help him grasp the story better. Treasure Island is still one of his absolute favorites. Peter Pan makes him giggle because Tink swears. When he was younger it was The Secret Garden - who doesn't love reading about a child so spoilt she wouldn't even dress herself?

 

Don't throw in the towel yet. The thing is to match the book to the kid. We never worried about "classics" but just about exposing to good books.

[Joyofsixreboot]

My 7 yo dislikes being read to or reading herself. No classics, no picture books, no audio books. She dislikes it all. My 10 year old will tolerate most classics like taking bad medicine. He does enjoy myths at least though. The 7 yo may make me crazy.

[woolybear]

Wind in the Willows with good illustrations or Pinocchio are two good ones to start with.

 

Paddington too!

Edited July 26, 2011 by woolybear
forgot to mention Paddington

[Robyn]

We started longer read-alouds with Roald Dahl, A.A. Milne, and Beatrix Potter.

 

We used Sonlight's K program (now Core A) when oldest ds was 5 and it was a big hit. I will be reading many of those books this year to middle ds.

 

His favorites were My Father's Dragon and In Grandma's Attic.

[Jenny in Florida]

Watching movies, plays, reading abridged versions, graphic novelizations, etc, are all perfectly valid *exposure* to the classics. If it is topical and the full-length version is not appropriate, interesting, or there is just not time, I still maintain these are great options to increase one's exposure and comprehension of those stories.

 

Just because you saw/read a bunch of Romeo and Juliet spin-offs as a child doesn't mean you still can't read the original Shakespeare as a teen or adult and appreciate it at both levels.

 

I mean if you hate them, don't read them by any means. But they serve a purpose. They're not just "inferior" junk.

 

Here's the thing, though: I would much, much rather my kids read good, contemporary children's books when they are children, and read the actual classics when they are old enough to appreciate them.

 

In my kids' case, it was never and either/or proposition. They enjoyed classics from early in their lives. But if I had to make a choice, I'd do that. If we're just in this for the "cultural literacy" aspect of it, they can read a synopsis or a Wikipedia article.

 

For what it's worth, by the way, we have a rule in our family that you are not allowed to see the movie until after you're read the book. We also try to read the original play or source material before we see live adaptations. We do make some exceptions, though, because sometimes we just don't have time to read everything first.

 

For example, we have had season tickets for the local Shakespeare theatre for eight or nine years. In each season, there are two or three Shakespearean plays and another three or four other things. Frequently, those "other things" are based on books. When possible, and when the source materials are things that align with something the kids are studying that year, anyway, we try to read the original plays or books before heading to the theatre. However, sometimes it just doesn't work, for whatever reason. So, they've seen many things over the years that wind up being introductions to classics. And I think that's fine, because the adaptation, itself, is worthwhile.

 

But I've never looked at one of those abridged-for-children "classics" that I thought was worth reading.

 

My kids do read junk, by the way, for fun and on their own time. I just try not to let it take the place of the good stuff for school. And when it comes to reading aloud, I decided that one of the advantages of reading to my kids was that it gave them the opportunity to enjoy books that would otherwise be too much for them to read on their own. So, for sharing aloud, I always tried to aim a little high, rather than going for the really easy stuff.

 

I keep seeing these books mentioned on these boards, though. So, I guess some people don't have the same strong feelings about them that I do.

 

If it works for your family, good for you. It's certainly no worse than a lot of what you'll find in the children's department at Barnes and Noble, anyway.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

So, my boys are almost 8 and 6 and I downloaded "The Water Babies" and "Robin Hood" from Gutenburg Texts to my Nook and tried reading to them tonight. They hated it! My youngest turned to me and said, " I like the foxes one better."

 

Does anyone else have luck reading the classics to their kids and them liking it? I ended up reading "The Rainbow Fish" picture book to my almost 3 year old and they were all gathered round for that. Granted it's the old time way of language, but will they ever like the classic stories? Is picture books only ok? I want my kids to have a broader view of great literature. This is not what I pictured when I settled down to read them a great!:001_huh:

 

Are your kids fluent read aloud listeners already? Because I think that it takes a little bit of practice to be able to listen and form the images in your mind.

 

Some good, but less venerable stories we've done are:

Homer Price

101 Dalmations (the book is quite different from the movies)

Swallows and Amazons (though I'd keep that one in reserve for a bit)

Redwall

The Year of Miss Agnes

Detectives in Togas

 

The Sonlight catalog has books separated into readers and read alouds in each core. I used to use those lists as reading lists, even when we weren't using SL. Same with the Veritas Press catalog (though you have to judge for yourself which ones are read alouds).

 

The Read Aloud Handbook by Jim Trelease has lots of good info on reading aloud to kids, as well as a long bibliography of recommended read alouds.

 

Not all good classic stories are good for reading out loud. For example, Eagle of the Ninth didn't work as a read aloud for us; in part because we were slower reading aloud than just having the kids read it. It drew out the action too much.

[Harriet Vane]

Okay, I'll be different.

 

I hate, HATE those Illustrated Classics and Classic Starts things. No matter what anyone tells you, kids who are reading those are NOT reading classics, but someone's simplistic and inferior re-telling of the story.

 

Eww.

 

My preference would be to start reading aloud good quality children's literature, modern if need be, and then work our way back in time to get to more classic and challenging books.

 

When my daughter was little, she loved hearing me read aloud A Little Princess and The Secret Garden and Peter Pan. We used to alternate one more challenging read aloud with a fluffier one.

 

Look for stories your children will find interesting, rather than just trying to force them to listen to something just because "it's a classic."

 

What kind of stories and characters do your kids like? Maybe we can help steer you toward some books that might be more accessible to them.

 

Well said.:iagree:

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Time, exactly. I would far rather use our time reading original works as the author wrote them than on retellings or abridgements with diminished plot and language. We're not talking about a course in themes in Western literature, but rather about read aloud time with our children. By all means, use retellings and adaptations for fairy and folk tales, myths and epics, but there's such a wealth of age appropriate children's literature available there's no need to push adaptations of classics, especially those written for an older audience on children.

 

 

 

Part of what made the books classics is often the rich, symbolic language in which the books were written. I don't mean that I think my kids should go around speaking as if they were Victorian. But I do think that a story that says a field was filled with crocus and snowbells is more rewarding than a story that says there were flowers.

 

Or to give another example, having grown up with just adaptations of Heidi, I was surprised to see how much Christian symbolism is part of the whole story arc. The story of the prodigal son is repeated over and over in different ways and is finally replayed again with the grandfather's restoration with his neighbors and former friends. Similarly, I reread Anderson's The Snow Queen earlier this year and was stunned at how much the main character girds herself with prayer and hymns. I don't remember this being part of the pretty children's versions I'd read before.

 

We have had some of the Illustrated Classics books in the house. My experience was that as often as not it made my kids reject the original story down the road, because the original required more mental effort and they felt like they "already knew the story" and didn't have the enticement of suspense for what was around the corner to keep them going.

 

I do like the series that have sidebars that explain some of the less known text. The Whole Story is one brand. The is another older style that I often see in used bookstores.

 

I think that you have to judge if your kids are ready to do long read alouds. For example, can they keep a continuing story in their head from night to night or do they need something more episodic.

 

You might need them to listen to shorter pieces of older works. Just So Stories or the original Winnie the Pooh or a Padraic Colum retelling of Arthurian legends can help them work up to longer and older stories.

 

Realize that some stories won't be hits, no matter how many of your friends and neighbors liked it. Carry On, Mr Bowditch was a huge hit at our house. But it was also being read by a former Naval Officer who loved the topic. Meanwhile, The Wind in the Willows and Paddington were failures with my kids.

 

Nmoira had some great books on her list. Many of them were good read alouds at our house too. I remember the Margaret Hodges' retelling of St. George and the Dragon especially, as it is really quite a long book with lyric language, but it comes wrapped in the most detailed illustrations that my kids asked for it over and over.

[Mama Geek]

I have started from day 1 with dd reading hard stuff. I read the KJV of the bible, we've read Huck Finn, Tom Sawyer, The Way the World Works, we are in the middle of the Hounds of Baskerville. We still read board books over and over and over. But I decided I was going to start reading classics that I had never read and why not read them allowed to dd. Yes I would read a lot faster if I wasn't reading to her, but I think in the long run it will really benefit her.

 

I agree with others that say to find classics that they will enjoy that aren't watered down and work your way up.

[amtmcm]

Michael Hague is an incredible illustrator and he has illustrated many classics. Most are in original language with a few updates (like removing some racist comments from Dr. Doolittle).

 

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=michael+hague&x=0&y=0

 

We have The Hobbit, The Wind in the Willows, Dr. Doolittle and Bill Bennett's books and they are all beautiful to look at and read.

[my2boysteacher]

My two very active boys will listen to almost anything I read aloud- provided I allow them to build with legos or blocks while reading. They are just not mature enough to sit for 30 to 60 minutes with still hands. I figure we're working on focus and attention, as well as reading comprehension. I ask questions periodically to make sure they are really hearing and understanding what is being read.

[gracyomalley]

I have no problem with kids reading the abridged versions to themselves, but part of the classics here is the vocabulary and rich language - which is simply not there when the book is re-written at a lower reading level. But have no fear, there are tons of good books out there. We have had excellent results with Sonlight, and lots of books on audiobooks. My middle did great with the original Secret Garden, Little Princess and Little Women, but not until she was about 7. Oldest has always listened to classics, but we started with EB White, Narnia, Hobbit, etc when he was about 4-5...And yes, we made it through 10,000 Leaques Under the Sea - and I was the one wanting to skip pages...

 

Each kid is different, and there is rich, wonderful literature out there from many time periods, but if you don't start, you'll never get there. Classic fairy tales, older picture books with less words, but still advanced vocabulary, short pieces like Aesop, all help to train the ear. They can only understand what they have been exposed to.

 

I did find that some of the WTM options were sometimes too dry for us - and with 3 kids, have "met in the middle" for some read alouds, but strongly recommend starting slow and persisting...

Erin

[EKS]

 

My preference would be to start reading aloud good quality children's literature, modern if need be, and then work our way back in time to get to more classic and challenging books.

 

 

 

:iagree:

 

Also when you do introduce some of the older literature, try to get heavily illustrated versions (unabridged and unadapted).

[tammyw]

:iagree:

 

Also when you do introduce some of the older literature, try to get heavily illustrated versions (unabridged and unadapted).

 

I'd love to know how to go about doing this (finding the best illustrated unabridged versions).

 

My dd8 has never had any problems listening to read alouds. I remember reading A Little Princess and The Secret Garden to her when she was very little (I want to say 4?) and her attention was 100% to it. But now I realize that this is her gift - literature is her special love. My son is 5 and has a much shorter attention span for books - pictures are very important and anything that looks too long or daunting is immediately deemed boring. They are two VERY different personalities :) I love reading him picture books, but would love some great illustrated classics, that I know he would enjoy, if presented properly (e.g. only the best initially, with great pictures!)

 

ETA: Angela - I noticed your list has the print function. I was wondering what the column Interest Level means. e.g. what's the difference between 1 and 3? Thanks!

 

Great thread - thanks for starting this OP!

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Time, exactly. I would far rather use our time reading original works as the author wrote them than on retellings or abridgements with diminished plot and language. We're not talking about a course in themes in Western literature, but rather about read aloud time with our children. By all means, use retellings and adaptations for fairy and folk tales, myths and epics, but there's such a wealth of age appropriate children's literature available there's no need to push adaptations of classics, especially those written for an older audience on children.

 

Our opinions differ. :)

 

I would encourage the OP to start gently, employing audiobooks where possible to get a better "feel" when needed for antiquated syntax.

 

Good beginner choices include:

 

Roald Dahl

Dick King-Smith (Babe/The Sheep Pig and others)

The Mouse and the Motorcycle

Mrs. Piggle Wiggle

Geraldine McCaughrean's retellings of myths, legends, and world tales

James Herriot's Children's Treasury

Pippi Longstocking and the Noisy Village books

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang

The 101 Dalmations by Dodie Smith

A Bear Called Paddington

Just So Stories

E.B. White

The Troll with No Heart in his Body

stories from Lang's coloured Fairy books and Grimm

Padraic Colum

Farmer Boy

E. Nesbit (The Book of Dragons contains short stories and might be a good place to start)

The Wizard of Oz and sequels at least through Ozma of Oz

Margaret Hodges (St. George and the Dragon, The Kitchen Knight, etc.)

Peter Pan

Pinocchio

The Wonder Clock by Howard Pyle

A Wonder Book by Nathaniel Hawthorne

Great list:D I also think that use of McGuffey Readers from 1879 and Webster's Speller from 1908 will help to increase one's vocabulary to allow more enjoyable readings of the classics:)

[Maus]

We're finding our way into unabridged classics by trial and error. We start a book and if they haven't gotten into by about the third chapter, we set it aside for later.

 

I thought my son the train buff would like' The Railway Children.' No. Same for 'Tom Sawyer' and ' The Great Brain.'

 

' The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe' was, surprisingly, a huge hit. (He doesn't usually care for stories with any element of fantasy in them.) We just started ' The Wizard of Oz' and so far it's a go.

 

I think the key is not to get your heart too set on reading a particular classic, but to be willing to start enough books that you find one they get hooked on. You can always revisit the others later, when they are older, or have gotten used to the classics.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Maus
Typo

[justamouse]

T

I would encourage the OP to start gently, employing audiobooks where possible to get a better "feel" when needed for antiquated syntax.

 

Good beginner choices include:

 

Roald Dahl

Dick King-Smith (Babe/The Sheep Pig and others)

The Mouse and the Motorcycle

Mrs. Piggle Wiggle

Geraldine McCaughrean's retellings of myths, legends, and world tales

James Herriot's Children's Treasury

Pippi Longstocking and the Noisy Village books

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang

The 101 Dalmations by Dodie Smith

A Bear Called Paddington

Just So Stories

E.B. White

The Troll with No Heart in his Body

stories from Lang's coloured Fairy books and Grimm

Padraic Colum

Farmer Boy

E. Nesbit (The Book of Dragons contains short stories and might be a good place to start)

The Wizard of Oz and sequels at least through Ozma of Oz

Margaret Hodges (St. George and the Dragon, The Kitchen Knight, etc.)

Peter Pan

Pinocchio

The Wonder Clock by Howard Pyle

A Wonder Book by Nathaniel Hawthorne

 

Awesome list. We actually hit most of them without aiming, but now that you wrote it out, I agree, it's a great place to start.

 

OP :grouphug:. You can do eeeit!

[KrissiK]

Okay, I'll be different.

 

I hate, HATE those Illustrated Classics and Classic Starts things. No matter what anyone tells you, kids who are reading those are NOT reading classics, but someone's simplistic and inferior re-telling of the story.

 

Nobody said they were reading the classics when they are reading those stories. But, I do think they serve an important purpose. When I was in high school, we read the classics. But I'd never been exposed to any of that before. I was completely lost. You have two things to have to deal with, the plot and the language. I think if I had read a simplified version previously and had an idea of the plot of Shakespeare's plays and whatever else I read (you can see how much of an impresion it made on me) I wouldn't have struggled so much. At least, if a child has read the Abridged Version of King Arthur, they have the basic plot down and so when they pick up Morte de Arthur, they have an idea of what they're reading and it's not so difficult. Now, I'm certainly not advocating a steady diet of Great Illustrated Classics, and I realize that a good way to prepare a child for high school literature is to read excellent age appropriate literature, too, but the two things don't have to be mutually exclusive.

[Mama2Many4]

Thanks so much for all the great advice! I'm taking a look at everything. :)

[stripe]

I don't think they hate "the classics." I think they didn't like those two books.

 

Pick something else. Something more appropriate for their age. How about Charlotte's Web or Half Magic or Chitty Chitty Bang Bang or Peter Pan or Pinocchio? Something with a strong plot and preferably boy characters. And some good myths. My kids have listened to the Red and Blue Fairy Books by Lang from Librivox extensively. One child knows almost all of them. I am way too lazy to read them as many times as they'd like. The Norse myths with all those wacky trolls also seem lively.

 

Think -- swashbuckling adventure! Active boys! Strange happenings! not demure Victorian miss embroidering while improving herself.

 

And funny. Paddington is funny. Other "kids/animals in mischief" storylines are fun and I think emotionally help our children not feel bad for being incompetent at some things, which is easy to feel as a kid.

Edited July 26, 2011 by stripe

[stripe]

My barely verbal four year old loves Winnie-the-Pooh and highly recommends the box set available on Amazon. http://www.amazon.com/Winnie-Pooh-Deluxe-Gift-Box/dp/0525422927/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_12 I'm sure I didn't pay that much, but it is Winnie the Pooh, so it was well worth it if I did. They sell the volumes separately, if you only want the two story volumes.

 

These are LOVELY volumes. I have them. I got them as remainders for a few dollars each. They have thick creamy paper and color illustrations. Just smashing.

[twoxcell]

I would start with Childrens classics, and build to stories like those. You can't just jump in head first. Read them some books like Charlotte's Web, Little House on the Prairie, Burgess, Marguerite Henry(my ds loved King of the Wind), Mr. Popper's Penguins, Winnie the Pooh(Originals), E. Nesbit, etc. Young children love pictures books, and there is nothing wrong with them especially if you choose quality ones. You have to train their ears to enjoy longer stories.

[Critterfixer]

As far as retelling of classic stories goes, I'm quite happy to use them with my ds7 boys, FOR SOME THINGS. Homer, for instance. I will probably introduce them to Shakespeare this year with McCaughrean and with the books by Coville, heavily illustrated, keeping some original language but using a storytelling style for my youngsters.

 

For other things, I wouldn't dream of using abridged versions. I'd rather wait until they are a little older so that they can enjoy the story better, and until then, if I want to introduce it, I get it on audiobook so that they can listen to it. Listening to people speak in a more archaic language brings familiarity with the sound, and also gives them the opportunity to ask me what this or that word means. Even objectionable language offers the opportunity to talk about why we don't use this or that word.

 

With boys, I have tried to pick out books that appeal to them, but I am often surprised at what interests them. Pinocchio was a huge hit from day one. Winnie the Pooh was not. Go figure. This year Winnie the Pooh is a big hit. Treasure Island-not. Sometimes it takes them a while to "get into" a story. We are finishing Caddie Woodlawn this week. I almost took it back to the library six chapters in because they got a case of the wiggles every time we read and clearly disliked it. Now I've got one boy angry with me because we've got two chapters to go and I said I wanted to save them for tomorrow. He's on pins and needles to find out if her dog, Nero, finds his way back home. Even little, active boys can take pleasure in things that you would not think would be interesting to them.

 

I forgot one other thing that I don't think has been mentioned yet. Your attitude toward reading the classics. I did not know just how important it is to read slowly and with great feeling when you are reading aloud to children until I listened to the audiobooks. We can have a tendency to read way, way to quickly for children to digest the language and the story. We get impatient to get on with the tale and don't allow enough questions. We count on the story to be amusing without reading with proper emotion. I have seen grown people listening avidly to material that they would have considered dull once it is read by someone who finds it fascinating and communicates that in their delivery. The more archaic and complex the words, the more emotion and expression should be added to help the child see the meaning.

Edited July 26, 2011 by Critterfixer

[Soror]

I wouldn't go to the abridged but start with some more entertaining books pp's suggested a lot of great ones. My Father's Dragon was one of our first chapter books, lots by Dahl, Lindgren, Potter, Milne and fairy tales. We read about half the Water Babies here and actually my son loved it but I found it horrible to get through so I dropped it. There are so many options out there.

[EKS]

I'd love to know how to go about doing this (finding the best illustrated unabridged versions).

 

 

 

I just poke around on Amazon.