What's wrong with historical fiction? (Circe people)

[Indian summer]

I wasn't here for the original Circe thread (last year?) so I didn't really know what you guys were talking about on the most recent thread, but I'm intrigued.

Some of you stated that Circe influenced you to ditch historical fiction and I'm wondering if someone could enlighten me. Is there a video I could watch about this? Why is that a recommendation? Or am I misunderstanding?

[8filltheheart]

Here is an answer that I posted in the Circe thread: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/359457-how-does-one-provide-a-classical-education-circe-institute-lovers/?p=3725310   FWIW, I used to incorporate a lot of historical fiction in my kids daily reading.   Now the only fiction they read that is "historical" is if it is great literature on its own merits.  

 

Here is part of the reply in the linked post:

Why am I rejecting {the historical fiction] approach now? B/c wonderful children's classics like The Princess and the Goblin get overlooked and by-passed in order to make room for historical fiction. I have always read books like those for bedtime stories, but the number read is low compared to the high number of historical fiction we have read (or that I have assigned them to read). To what end? Yes, it creates an appreciation for the historical time period, but it is at the expense of the elevated language, vivid imagination conjured by the truly great books for children. It boils down to which is actually more important in the formation of a child's cognitive development?

Spending the last couple of yrs completely absorbed in great literature w/my younger kids has been enlightening. I have witnessed growth in vocabulary, searching for allusions, appreciation for literary techniques (pure enjoyment in how something is written, not necessarily analyzing the writing. This is a quote that my dd fell in love w/just from encountering the words on the page b/c of the images the evoked for her: I hied me away to the woods--away back into the sun-washed alleys carpeted with fallen gold and glades where the moss is green and vivid yet. THe woods are getting ready to sleep--they are not yet asleep but they are disrobing and are having all sorts of little bed-time conferences and whisperings and good-nights. That type of writing is not found in the majority of historical fiction. Setting/plot/dialogue are more the focus vs. the use of language. (If you have ever read any of Henty's books, my kids can't stand them. They say it is the same story w/different characters simply moved into a new setting..... :tongue_smilie: )

What I mean by #2 is that my literature selections from here on out are going to be selected by the merits of the piece of literature.

[Kalmia]

I agree with 8 (as always). After reading the Circe thread, I understood the problem to be that the problem was not that there was something inherently wrong with historical fiction, but with limited time in the day, it was replacing better written and more meaningful literature. I'm sure historical fiction for "free reading" wouldn't be objected to and would probably be better than much of the twaddle on some of our library shelves these days, but assigning a lot of it and counting it for literature as well as history takes up valuable school time and excludes great works of higher value.

 

I also found that we got much more history knowledge out of reading autobiographies or diaries or historical figures than historical fiction, however due to the content of some of these autobiographies and diaries some are for upper middle school and high school only. The diaries and autobiographies are free of the "story arc" and "the character must show growth" conventions of novel writing while historical fiction is not. The story arc is great for keeping the readers interest, but sometimes authors have to use a bit of artistic license to make history comply.

 

p.s. 8Fills, is the quotation in your post from The Princess and the Goblin?

[Kathryn]

Your question also reminded me of a couple of articles that were linked in a discussion last year on Sonlight. They discuss the use of historical fiction in teaching history.

 

http://archive.hbook.com/magazine/articles/1998/jan98_macleod.asp

 

http://www.academia.edu/2144562/Toward_a_Theory_of_Historical_Fiction_for_Children

[CyndiLJ]

I feel that the whole "Historical Fiction" bandwagon is a little too much.  There is some great modern lit for kids as well, but seldom are there good book study guides for it, which pains me.  My kids have told me, "Mom, can't we read something that is in our times and not just old stuff?", and I tend to agree with them.  Historical fiction has its place, but not at the expense of other, wonderful reading experiences.

[Crimson Wife]

There is well-writted historical fiction (Sutcliff, Colum, etc.) and fiction that's one step up from "twaddle". I don't see it as something that's inherently good or bad. It really depends on the specific book.

[8filltheheart]

p.s. 8Fills, is the quotation in your post from The Princess and the Goblin?

 

No.  It is actually from a book that contains letters that LM Montgomery wrote.   Dd fell in love with that quote and now I use it as a great example of metaphor.  :)   It also goes to show that great writing can be found outside of lists of classic literature as well.   This yr my 2 oldest schoolagers and I have spent a lot of time with short stories.   There are some powerhouse short stories out there. 

[scrapbabe]

No. It is actually from a book that contains letters that LM Montgomery wrote. Dd fell in love with that quote and now I use it as a great example of metaphor. :) It also goes to show that great writing can be found outside of lists of classic literature as well. This yr my 2 oldest schoolagers and I have spent a lot of time with short stories. There are some powerhouse short stories out there.

. Do you have specific resources you could share? I'd like to read some well written short stories as my son likes writing stories.

[8filltheheart]

. Do you have specific resources you could share? I'd like to read some well written short stories as my son likes writing stories.

An easy place to start would be here
http://www.classicshorts.com

[Alte Veste Academy]

When the Circe thread was was going on, I remember being confused about why it was such a revelation. It took a spin-off thread for me to understand that many people felt enlightened to the fact that they were leaning too far away from great literature—books worth reading in their own right, not merely books which happened to coincide with the historic era being studied. I got the impression that some people had abandoned literature altogether. Thankfully, I had never fallen into that trap myself.

Honestly, IMO, I feel like some people were probably influenced to go too far in the opposite direction and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Historical fiction and narrative nonfiction help bring history alive here. I agree with a PP that there is a great deal of twaddly historical fiction, but there is also lots of good stuff, and I feel no shame in having my kids reading it. When it happens to work out, I read-aloud or assign great literature that coincides with the era. But  apparently some people were skipping some books altogether, missing the "sweet spot" of the right age for reading a particular classic because it wasn't what they were studying in history. If my kids are at the perfect age for a book, it gets read or assigned regardless of where we are in history.

Anyway, for me it is about balance. I personally would not be happy eliminating all historic fiction here, and neither would my kids. Now, if I had to choose one, I would choose classic literature for sure. But thankfully, I do not have to choose.

[KeriJ]

I'd love some more specifics.  For instance, I enjoyed the first article linked above and the specific examples it gave.

 

I know this topic is subjective, but I'd at least like to hear discussion on various titles to get more of a grasp on what books might be eschewed or included.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I'd love some more specifics. For instance, I enjoyed the first article linked above and the specific examples it gave.

I know this topic is subjective, but I'd at least like to hear discussion on various titles to get more of a grasp on what books might be eschewed or included.

Yes!

Now the only fiction they read that is "historical" is if it is great literature on its own merits.

I would love a thread with a list of books that fit this criterion. I think we would all benefit! Anyone want to start one? It would probably just be a display of my own ignorance if I tried. :tongue_smilie:

[birchbark]

I'd love some more specifics.  For instance, I enjoyed the first article linked above and the specific examples it gave.

 

I know this topic is subjective, but I'd at least like to hear discussion on various titles to get more of a grasp on what books might be eschewed or included.

 

Okay, I don't know if this is helpful, but a I grabbed a handful of what I would consider historical fiction off our shelf. I actually didn't have as much as I thought.  :lol:

 

The Golden Bull

The Tinker's Daughter

Boy of the Pyramids

Seaman

Songbird

A Triumph for Flavius

I also have a bunch of biographies of a mediocre writing quality

 

As others have stressed, it is not that these books are "bad" in themselves. We just realized that the bulk of our reading were titles like these, and very little or none of quality literature.

 

Yes!


I would love a thread with a list of books that fit this criterion. I think we would all benefit! Anyone want to start one? It would probably just be a display of my own ignorance if I tried. :tongue_smilie:

 

Is this what you're looking for? 

[Alte Veste Academy]

 

Is this what you're looking for? 

 

Yes. Only I'd like it to be exhaustive. LOL ;)

[Alte Veste Academy]

In the thread birchbark posted, someone linked this site, updated 3/29/14 (!!!!), so someone is making award-winning book searches easy. I'm stoked about this for our ongoing world geography study.

 

ETA: Editing to make what should be obvious crystal clear; this searchable archive of award winning books is not necessarily historically accurate. (Obviously they aren't all historical fiction either.) I wish I hadn't posted it in this thread, but I will leave it here for those who might wish to make use of it. 

[TracyP]

I'd love some more specifics.  For instance, I enjoyed the first article linked above and the specific examples it gave.

 

I know this topic is subjective, but I'd at least like to hear discussion on various titles to get more of a grasp on what books might be eschewed or included.

 

Bookshelf Central is TOG's book site. They tend to choose a mix of high quality historical fiction and classics for each year plan. There are a couple duds on the lists, but it might be a good place to start.

 

I can't recommend the site without adding one caveat. I hate that they suggest abridged versions of several classics. Abridged Secret Garden, Black Beauty, Tom Sawyer? No, no, no! Ignore those and the rest of the list is good.

[marmac]

I wasn't here for the original Circe thread (last year?) so I didn't really know what you guys were talking about on the most recent thread, but I'm intrigued.

Some of you stated that Circe influenced you to ditch historical fiction and I'm wondering if someone could enlighten me. Is there a video I could watch about this? Why is that a recommendation? Or am I misunderstanding?

 

Thank you!! LOL I randomly came across the post and had no idea what everyone was talking about. I was going to spend the day listening to the audios everyone was recommending to see if I felt the same or if it was just a fad idea.
 

[SarahW]

In the thread birchbark posted, someone linked this site, updated 3/29/14 (!!!!), so someone is making award-winning book searches easy. I'm stoked about this for our ongoing world geography study.

 

I'd add the caveat (sorry) that just because a book won an award does not mean that it is historically accurate. The award committees are usually made up of English/Lit people and historical accuracy is not one of the criteria upon which a book is judged.

 

 

Personally, I stick to "greats" that were written during or by the historical people being studied. I suspect this is how this whole thing got started - people thought to read Sutcliff's Odyssey while studying Greece, and since that worked out well, they thought to keep going with it, but didn't know what to pick, so ended up with fiction. With some digging, though, I've found children's retellings of literature for every time/people that we have written records for. So it is possible, but some of the books are quite obscure, or OOP. It is one of my nagging frustrations in life the SL reprints books of questionable value, yet allows real historical literature to molder.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I'd add the caveat (sorry) that just because a book won an award does not mean that it is historically accurate. The award committees are usually made up of English/Lit people and historical accuracy is not one of the criteria upon which a book is judged.

 

LOL Why be sorry? No need. :) Of course what you say is true. I just got excited (separate from the point of this thread) as someone who has been looking for books set in (relatively) obscure places. Naturally due diligence is up to individual homeschoolers when selecting books to fit into any area of study.

[WishboneDawn]

http://archive.hbook.com/magazine/articles/1998/jan98_macleod.asp[/url]

http://www.academia.edu/2144562/Toward_a_Theory_of_Historical_Fiction_for_Children

I think everyone should go read those links because the history of the thing is getting overlooked while people focus on literary merits.

If the point of historical fiction is to give kids a feel for an era then the fact that a book like Sarah, Plain and Tall that basically plants a modern-thinking girl in another time defeats the purpose. It's well written and won a Newberry. Quality of writing is no guarantee that a book will relate useful historical information beyond some of the material realities of living in a specific time.

You and SarahW brought this up before and, if I remember correctly, were treating dismissively by some. I think because for most of us, we don't understand the work of history as well as we understand literature.

But it's important. It informs how we shape our ideas of the future and past. For those of us who are Christian it can be valuable in how we approach the Bible, a book whose authors were most definitely not modern thinkers.

I'd just hate to see this topic turn into another discussion of what makes great literature when there's an opportunity to really understand how we approach history

[texasmama]

I can appreciate Wishbone Dawn's comments.  So does a list exist of historically accurate, well-written literature?  Because I need it. :)

[justamouse]

Your question also reminded me of a couple of articles that were linked in a discussion last year on Sonlight. They discuss the use of historical fiction in teaching history.

 

http://archive.hbook.com/magazine/articles/1998/jan98_macleod.asp

 

http://www.academia.edu/2144562/Toward_a_Theory_of_Historical_Fiction_for_Children

Those were excellent. 

[WishboneDawn]

As a side note the best but of historical fiction I've read recently that really understood it couldn't populate the world of the novel with modern mind was a fantasy, Game of Thrones. There is exactly one modern thinker in that book, Tyrion the dwarf.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I think everyone should go read those links because the history of the thing is getting overlooked while people focus on literary merits.

If the point of historical fiction is to give kids a feel for an era then the fact that a book like Sarah, Plain and Tall that basically plants a modern-thinking girl in another time defeats the purpose. It's well written and won a Newberry. Quality of writing is no guarantee that a book will relate useful historical information beyond some of the material realities of living in a specific time.

You and SarahW brought this up before and, if I remember correctly, were treating dismissively by some. I think because for most of us, we don't understand the work of history as well as we understand literature.

But it's important. It informs how we shape our ideas of the future and past. For those of us who are Christian it can be valuable in how we approach the Bible, a book whose authors were most definitely not modern thinkers.

I'd just hate to see this topic turn into another discussion of what makes great literature when there's an opportunity to really understand how we approach history

 

I think this is a great point. I would just like to point out that my excitement for that link was totally off point for this thread. I now wish I had not made the mistake of posting it here, lest people think I devalue history in favor of literary quality or awards given regardless of literary quality or historical accuracy. I simply went off on a misplaced geographical bunny trail for a minute... 

 

To be clear, when we are studying history, historical accuracy is of the utmost importance to me. 

[stripe]

I think everyone should go read those links because the history of the thing is getting overlooked while people focus on literary merits.

If the point of historical fiction is to give kids a feel for an era then the fact that a book like Sarah, Plain and Tall that basically plants a modern-thinking girl in another time defeats the purpose.

Well, yes, and I had the same feeling while reading the Phryne Fisher mystery books, set in 1920s Australia: not only does Phryne fairly openly bed-hop in a James Bond-like manner (at least one different partner per book), but everyone is fine with both gay people and prostitutes, and generally quite courteous towards Chinese immigrants, except for the occasional outlier; it doesn't strike me as particularly realistic, to put it mildly. There have been a fair number of criticisms lodged against Downton Abbey for the same thing. I think it's troubling that there's always an undercurrent that either a) someone has different views than "we" do because the matter hasn't been properly explained to them (i.e., if it were explained, they would surely come to see things clearly), or b ) everyone in the past was just exactly like us except for the funny clothes, and c) modern society is just perfect as is and would inspire people of the past (which makes us guilty of just what is supposedly wrong with people in the past -- they can't imagine life any other way, or at least, can't imagine the "improvements" that should be made). 

[TracyP]

I totally agree, WishboneDawn, and I don't want to seem dismissive of that aspect of the conversation. We read many genres and historical fiction is one of them. I don't use historical fiction to teach history, but I do not avoid all historical fiction either.

 

I read historical fiction as fiction. I do not go in expecting it to be accurate. That is why I look for quality. It is not part of history, it is part of literature. When the two collide it is just a bonus, IMO. That is how my family approaches this, anyhoo.

 

 

 

[Kathryn]

I read historical fiction as fiction. I do not go in expecting it to be accurate. That is why I look for quality. It is not part of history, it is part of literature. When the two collide it is just a bonus, IMO. That is how my family approaches this, anyhoo.

This, to me, is the takeaway point. A good book is a good book, worthy of reading in its own right. I don't schedule historical fiction as part of our history studies because I don't want my children to confuse a good story with good history. Our corresponding literature for grammar stage history are children's retellings of stories like Gilgamesh, the Odyssey, Beowulf, Canterbury Tales, etc. Historical fiction, on the other hand, is free time reading or may come up in literature as its own subject. Then, we often discuss what was "off" about how the book portrayed plot/characters/setting because DS is actually interested in finding that out.

[lewelma]

I can give you some examples of what we do, using literary historical fiction. When we studied industrialization and the Victorians, my dh read Oliver Twist out loud to my then 13 and 9 year old. Now when studying the great depression and civil rights, he is reading To Kill a Mocking Bird to the boys. I just pick classics for read aloud; its not typically to hard to find an appropriate one.

Ruth in NZ

[SarahW]

I think this is a great point. I would just like to point out that my excitement for that link was totally off point for this thread. I now wish I had not made the mistake of posting it here, lest people think I devalue history in favor of literary quality or awards given regardless of literary quality or historical accuracy. I simply went off on a misplaced geographical bunny trail for a minute... 

 

To be clear, when we are studying history, historical accuracy is of the utmost importance to me. 

 

No problem. I said "sorry" in my PP because I feel that whenever this issue comes up my "Yes, but....!" posts could be so discouraging that they'll lead to agnosticism.  :blush:

 

And I was being sensitive, because I have seen the "This book won awards, so of course it is accurate!" argument made before. But I keep very few mental tabs on who says what on forums, so who it was that said that is a complete mystery to me.

 

When studying history, historical accuracy is the most important thing. Of course. That's a given, isn't it? I hope?  :thumbup1:

 

 

Well, yes, and I had the same feeling while reading the Phryne Fisher mystery books, set in 1920s Australia: not only does Phryne fairly openly bed-hop in a James Bond-like manner (at least one different partner per book), but everyone is fine with both gay people and prostitutes, and generally quite courteous towards Chinese immigrants, except for the occasional outlier; it doesn't strike me as particularly realistic, to put it mildly. There have been a fair number of criticisms lodged against Downton Abbey for the same thing. I think it's troubling that there's always an undercurrent that either a) someone has different views than "we" do because the matter hasn't been properly explained to them (i.e., if it were explained, they would surely come to see things clearly), or B) everyone in the past was just exactly like us except for the funny clothes, and c) modern society is just perfect as is and would inspire people of the past (which makes us guilty of just what is supposedly wrong with people in the past -- they can't imagine life any other way, or at least, can't imagine the "improvements" that should be made). 

 

I agree, especially C. It seems that a lot of H/f seems determined to erase the fact that the past is a "foreign country" and promotes chronological snobbery. It puzzles me when I see "gurus" in magalogs rail against those very things, yet include in their curriculum books that I feel do exactly that.

 

 

I can appreciate Wishbone Dawn's comments.  So does a list exist of historically accurate, well-written literature?  Because I need it. :)

 

A good list is hard to find. I've been haphazardly compiling a list of my own, and it isn't easy. I once came across a cute picture book that the author said was "true story" from Ancient Egypt. Nothing about the story, however, seemed authentic to me though, so I did some digging. Turns out the "true story" was discovered by the author as something that happened to her in a previous life when she was some minor nobleman's daughter living on the banks of the Nile in Ancient Egypt. Yeah, pass.  :smilielol5:

[WishboneDawn]

I can give you some examples of what we do, using literary historical fiction. When we studied industrialization and the Victorians, my dh read Oliver Twist out loud to my then 13 and 9 year old. Now when studying the great depression and civil rights, he is reading To Kill a Mocking Bird to the boys. I just pick classics for read aloud; its not typically to hard to find an appropriate one.

Ruth in NZ

One of the links pointed out that there's a difference between historical fiction and period fiction and ur sounds like you're talking about the latter. I think that's probably where I'll condense my efforts as well.

[Soror]

I agree with a lot of the points made upthread. I'm looking for good books that are also historically accurate and unfortunately too much historical fiction isn't either. We are doing a hodge podge of good books that are non-fiction, fiction and classics. Obviously accuracy AND literary quality are both important.

[justamouse]

I apparently mixed up my threads here, but I think it still applies. :D

I think twaddle books are easily made into a food analogy. 

Would you let your kid eat skittles for every meal, or drink soda with every meal, even though the dinner was nutritious? "Well I let my child drink soda with every meal, I'm just happy he's drinking liquids!"

Same with twaddle, only, in a way, it can be more important because what we read develops our character. There's a reason Christ taught in parables. Story forms us. 

Once in a very long while skittles are ok. Once in a while, the occasional soda is ok. 

The great thing about not having them often, though, is that what you end up finding out is that they make you sick when you indulge, and so indulgence doesn't seem the decadence it once was. Your palate becomes more refined. That almost bitter flourless chocolate torte sounds much more appetizing. 

I wouldn't say that a book like Harry Potter is twaddle, (it's no LOtR!) but it's not something I would put before The Tempest. It's not something i would put before LoTR. 

Or, some recent reads for me-

Rumor Godden's China Court is no match to Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited, though both are good. Revisited SHOULD be read, whereas China Court is an indulgence. Neither should be read before The Tempest, and there's more important books to be read even before the Tempest.  
 

[KeriJ]

OK.... but specifics!  Maybe I'm asking wrong. :)  How about instead, someone start with a widely accepted historical fiction book and discuss why it is not good literature.  Like the article above did with Sarah Plain and Tall.  I would love to hear more discussions with specific books.  Even a brief list of books used by many literature based curriculum providers that you would consider not to be  quality choices.  (some of us need it spelled out a little more :) )

 

(and if I'm overlooking a post that has done this already, I apologize...I've been reading this thread on and off mixed with other things this weekend.)

 

ETA: when someone says they "got rid of historical fiction", I'm just curious to know what they got rid of!

[Erin]

When studying history, historical accuracy is the most important thing.

 

*chuckle*

 

There's no such thing.  History is written by the victors.

Beyond the truly simplistic, like names and dates, history will always have bias which means it will ALWAYS be inaccurate depending on who is doing the telling.

[8filltheheart]

OK.... but specifics!  Maybe I'm asking wrong. :)  How about instead, someone start with a widely accepted historical fiction book and discuss why it is not good literature.  Like the article above did with Sarah Plain and Tall.  I would love to hear more discussions with specific books.  Even a brief list of books used by many literature based curriculum providers that you would consider not to be  quality choices.  (some of us need it spelled out a little more :) )

 

(and if I'm overlooking a post that has done this already, I apologize...I've been reading this thread on and off mixed with other things this weekend.)

 

ETA: when someone says they "got rid of historical fiction", I'm just curious to know what they got rid of!

 

Anything by Henty.  Concise enough?  :)

[justamouse]

 

 

ETA: when someone says they "got rid of historical fiction", I'm just curious to know what they got rid of!

Most of the historical reading lists. I'm known for busting on Caddie Woodlawn. That one, and lists like it. 

[Shellydon]

So-- why can't you read both?  That is what we do.  We have historical fiction that ties into the history for the year AND we read tons of good literature.  Why does it have to be one or the other? 

[justamouse]

So-- why can't you read both?  That is what we do.  We have historical fiction that ties into the history for the year AND we read tons of good literature.  Why does it have to be one or the other? 

It doesn't have to be anything, it's your house, you can have your kids read whatever you want. 

In my house we don't read historical fiction; we just don't have time for it. 

[KeriJ]

Anything by Henty.

 

Caddie Woodlawn.

 

and..........

 

 

 

 

 

 

:)  

[justamouse]

Anything by Henty.

 

Caddie Woodlawn.

 

and..........

 

 

 

 

 

 

:)

How about you spin it into something positive? 

What books do you think your child SHOULD read in grades 1-8, and then see what people list and then figure out what you want to make a priority? 
 

 

[mom2scouts]

LOL, thank you for giving me permission to dump Caddie Woodlawn. We started it as a read-aloud in November, sometimes pull it out and read another chapter, but mostly just ignore the fact that we haven't finished it.

[8filltheheart]

Anything by Henty.

 

Caddie Woodlawn.

 

and..........

 

 

 

 

 

 

:)

 

It really boils down to the fact that there is only so much time in the day.   So, would I rather my child read a book off a historical fiction list or a something like The Princess and the Goblin or The Secret Garden.   It is simply about prioritizing what I want my kids to spend their time reading.   Providers like Sonlight are so historical fiction heavy that it chokes out the time that could be spent reading some really wonderful children's literature.   Most of my kids are not bookworms, so for them, focusing on better literature is more important to me than historical fiction.
 

[momma2three]

Why the Caddie Woodlawn hate?  I loved it when I was a kid!  Haven't read it since... maybe it doesn't hold up?

[SweetandSimple]

I agree-- we really need a comprehensive "best of the best" list. I just don't know who (or which list) to trust! For example, I've been eying the Great Books Academy's Literature guides, feeling as though they would give me some direction to make sure that we were studying some of the best literature. But how good are their choices?

 

For example, the Third Grade Guide looks good, and includes The Princess and the Goblin. But both the Fourth Grade and Fifth Grade guides include books by Henty, among others.

 

You would think that the Great Books Academy, for goodness' sake, would include only great books in its study guides. But this isn't the case?

[Lang Syne Boardie]

At some point you have to trust yourself on your book options. That's why people are reluctant to list titles -- we've learned that our minds will change concerning specific titles, over time. We'll also have slightly different preferences and approaches for each of our own children sometimes.

Historical fiction can be poorly written, inaccurate, harmfully stereotyping, and a total waste of time.

Historical fiction can also be near enough the mark as a first introduction to an era, and well-written enough to change a child's life.

At our house, a good book is a good book, and all good books lead to more good books. If Caddie Woodlawn made my son ponder, and wonder, and grow, and The Secret Garden freaked him out and made him sad not-in-a-good-way, for that year of his life Caddie was the better friend for him to meet in a book. It's not the last time he would ever hear about that time and place. It wouldn't be the sum total of his perception of those people or their lives. It was a family story that peeked into an era without really setting up camp there at all.

My Caddie lover and my Secret Garden lover (I did have one of those) both grew up to read the Holy Grail Great Books, because both learned to love reading. Both learned to love encountering new people, places, ideas, words, beliefs, values, relationships...all of it...through the written word. And they became more discriminating readers as they grew, and they had direction from me to help them always keep stretching their minds through carefully chosen reading. This has just really not been a problem here.

I don't have a dog in this fight, much, because all of my children are avid readers and we never did *have* to choose. We read everything, or so it has always seemed. But I am concerned that too much literary purity causes newer homeschoolers to doubt their intuition about what their own children should be reading.

We should each study literature and determine how to measure the worth of books that we introduce to our children. We should formulate our philosophies regarding lit analysis, vocabulary study, writing in response to reading, ALL of that...it takes time, but our children's education is worth our study time. But in the meantime -- just keep reading! Don't be paralyzed by others' values in this area. Develop your own beliefs, and then diligently live by those, for your own family.

Edited to add: I don't say any of this to majorly disagree with the Circe thread people. Not in the slightest. I know from close friends that the decision to jettison historical fiction, in particular, has been a very positive game-changer in their homeschools and families. And why shouldn't it be, when what they are talking about is (IMO) less about cutting out historical fiction and more about pursuing the best children's literature they can find for their dc? Why wouldn't that be positive? So I'm not saying I disagree...But what those home educators did in that instance is what I'm recommending for newer homeschoolers -- they studied, read, pondered, decided, made changes, evaluated the fruit, solidified their philosophy. And the fruit has been good. But nobody can do that for anybody else. We all have to come to those conclusions for ourselves.

 

[lewelma]

Historical Fiction that have been wonderful additions to our house:

Tikka Liktak

Carry on Mr Bodwitch

Walk the World's Rim

Master Puppeteer

The Land I Lost (well, this is an autobiography I think)

 

 

 

[ElizaG]

At some point you have to trust yourself on your book options. That's why people are reluctant to list titles -- we've learned that our minds will change concerning specific titles, over time. We'll also have slightly different preferences and approaches for each of our own children sometimes.

 

I'd put it more strongly, and say that if you're not comfortable making decisions about which books are worth reading, "do-it-yourself literature-based homeschooling" isn't going to be a good fit. 

 

I understand that many people want a ready-made curriculum to follow, and I wouldn't fault them for this.   And there are a bunch of options already out there, which can be used with or without tweaking. 

 

But trying to come up with the "one true book list," on the basis of a bunch of other people's opinions on blogs or message boards, just seems like a problem in the making. 

 

Even if someone has homeschooled their own children, that doesn't make them any more qualified than we are to choose books for ours. 
 

[justamouse]

Why the Caddie Woodlawn hate?  I loved it when I was a kid!  Haven't read it since... maybe it doesn't hold up?

 

That's exactly why it's hard to make a list. :p 

I don't hate Caddie Woodlawn, I'd just rather my kids read something else. 

Get some lists. Read the books, pick the ones you think are the most important. 

My kids read for about two hours a day. Every day. Then they read on their own at night, whatever it is they want to read. We just only have so much time, and so I chose what they read (and what I have for them to pull off the shelves) with care. So read the books. It's the only way you can decide. 

 

[Χά�ων]

We LOVE Historical Fiction. I use it all the time. In fact at DS's request we are spending two years instead of one year on US History so that we can include more historical fiction and non fiction books. Currently he is on the civil war and has listened to: 
 
War, Terrible War (Story of US by Joy Hakim)
The Long Road to Gettysburg (Jim Murphy)
Secrets of a Civil War Submarine (Sally Walker)
The Mostly True Adventures of Homer Figg (W.R. Phillbrick)
 
This has lead him to check out:
The presidents [videorecording] : the lives and legacies of the 43 leaders of the United States V. 1 
Shaping America [videorecording] : U.S. history to 1877 (all 22 volumes) 

[KeriJ]

How about you spin it into something positive? 

What books do you think your child SHOULD read in grades 1-8, and then see what people list and then figure out what you want to make a priority? 
 

 

 

I'm not trying to be difficult, really, I'm not. :)  I have no problem picking my own books.  I'm happy with our book choices.

 

It's just that so many people proclaimed that they dropped historical fiction and replaced it with better literature.  I would just like to hear more detail.  I'm not asking anyone to pick my books or make a list for me.  I just want to hear more about their experience.  I'm wondering why the need to be so vague.  I'm just looking for "We were reading......, but instead, we are now reading....."  

 

If you dropped so many books, why not list a few?  I can find lots of book lists.  I just want to hear some specific discussion from people here.