stereotypes in classic children's literature

[Word Nerd]

I read a variety of books, both contemporary and classic, with my kids. (They're 7 and 3, so I'm mostly referring to read-alouds here, though my older daughter is reading chapter books now.)

 

Recently I came across a book that I liked and think could spark some interesting discussions, but I groaned at how backwards and stereotypical its portrayal of black slaves was. I know that the attitudes it expresses and the romantic depiction of life in the Old South is common in literature written in its time, but I definitely don't want my daughter taking that message from it.

 

How do you handle it when you come across literature from previous generations that contains stereotypes, racism, sexism, etc. and is out-of-date according to today's views and social customs? Do you avoid reading it altogether? Does it depend on your child's age? Do you seek out reprints that have been edited to reflect today's standards? If you or your children read it as is, how do you go about discussing it with them?

Edited December 5, 2008 by WordGirl

[Murphy101]

um - I think that's the whole point of reading it?

To see that different times, places, cultures, people have had different attitudes and opinions?

:confused:

[Snickerdoodle]

um - I think that's the whole point of reading it?

To see that different times, places, cultures, people have had different attitudes and opinions?

:confused:

 

 

I agree.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I would reserve a book and discussion about how people have changed their perceptions over time for older children - esp. if it is something that is more pervasive to the tone of the book. What is the title of the book?

[NorthwestMom]

I have basic philosophy of not protecting kids from unpleasant information, but instead trying to explain it in an age-appropriate way. So, I would not find a modern version with the offensive parts expunged; instead, I would read it and comment that back when the book was written, many people felt this way, but in 2008 we have come to understand these reasons why that attitude is wrong, etc.

 

My son is 9, so older than yours, but in September he read Peter Pan which has very offensive stereotypes of Native Americans. I did a whole lesson on what stereotypes are, common Native American stereotypes, why stereotypes are wrong, and showed him some web pages I'd found with examples of those stereotypes. (For example, the Land O' Lakes butter in the fridge has a stereotypical "Indian Princess" advertising a product that Native Americans did not eat). It made a bog impression on him.

 

Good luck.

[texascamps]

um - I think that's the whole point of reading it?

To see that different times, places, cultures, people have had different attitudes and opinions?

:confused:

 

:iagree: If they are books contemporary to the period, then they probably aren't stereotypes, either.

 

If they are more modern than the time period they are talking about then read Martha comment above.

 

Politically correct modern fiction concerning history, comes across as sterilized history. Boring.

[Word Nerd]

um - I think that's the whole point of reading it?

To see that different times, places, cultures, people have had different attitudes and opinions?

:confused:

 

I agree that is one reason to read classic literature, but it's certainly not the only reason.

[Carol in Cal.]

I add what is dated, wrong, or unreliable as my DD gets older, but always with that basis of what is right and true.

 

I don't want her to not know what people used to think. Frankly, there are cultures that are still extremely prejudiced in various ways, and she will be at a disadvantage if she is not familiar with that kind of point of view, if only in self-defense. And, there is a lot to like even in those old books that contain stereotypical language. Difficult indeed.

 

So. How do I start with what is right and true? Talk, talk, talk--mostly about how things should be. God wants us to love everyone. Even those who are difficult to love. God wants us to find good in everyone. God wants us to get to know how people really are. God would hate it if anyone was judged based on something superficial. Then act, act, act. Be kind to the autistic child who is a little scarey sometimes. Be kind even to the kid who hits people really, really hard--don't let him do it, but still treat him with respect. Judge an action, but love a person. Then, talk some more. What just happened? Did you notice how E*** responded when I told him what TO do instead of what NOT to do?

 

I also judiciously use books to help. My fave's for this are "The Sneetches" and "All of the Colors of the Earth". And of course there is always Galatians 5:28--In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, no more male and female, but all are one.

 

Then I pick. And I raise questions. And I try not to throw out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak. We have not chosen to read the original "Dr. Doolittle" because it's just not a good enough book to be worth the casual racism. But, we love the Narnia books, although a couple of them include a lot of material that seems biased against Middle Easterners and people of Spain. So we talk about that, and I surface those issues--but there is a lot more to discuss in those books than just that, and they are good enough in many ways to be well worth the time and energy to work through them thoroughly despite these issues. I have not been able to read Huckleberry Finn to DD, but someday she will read it to herself and we will talk about it. I literally can't read the n-word aloud, and I have decided not to make myself do so. Also, the casually accepted and extreme domestic violence is completely unacceptable to me. So, again, I'm not censoring it, but I'm not pushing it either--someday this book will be a great one to discuss, but not this year.

 

My favorite picture book when I was a child was Little Black Sambo. I had no idea at all that it was stereotypical or racist. I loved it because of the rythmic cadences of the story, and because of all of my books, it was the most beautifully illustrated. Same for a Chinese fairy tale book that I was given years later. But, although I still have both books, I have never read LBS to DD. There are so many other beautiful books. There is nothing so special about that one to make it worth the stereotypes.

 

OTOH, I have read her books in which American Indians are considered dirty or objects of great fear, because that is really how many colonists experienced them. We have also attended pow wows and read some very NA friendly books. We've visited Missions and seen artifacts and read books by Scott O'Dell. We will get to Ishii one of these days. I want her to know the complexities of the NA situation here--that there was both beauty and cruelty in their cultures, just as there is in ours--that nothing is so very simple. And she does. Again, we do talk about this stuff. I've read her a few books in which African Americans are considered simple, but also "Amistad" and "Amos Fortune, Free Man".

 

I'm feeling my way through, but she's 12 and I feel successful so far.

[emeraldjoy]

um - I think that's the whole point of reading it?

To see that different times, places, cultures, people have had different attitudes and opinions?

:confused:

 

It seems to me that the orginal poster was asking a very good question and sincerely wanted some advice..... I guess I don't understand the "snarkiness" of this response, and it really didn't even answer the questions she posed. (Very sincerely I am going to add that I could be reading into this in all the wrong ways, however)

 

It is fascinating for me to think about this topic. I am pondering right now what the future generations would think of our current literature??? I think it is important to be aware of how close we all are to situations that we find uncomfortable in older literature. This is what I feel is important for my children to know: that without awareness and attention things can be as they were then.... and sometimes ARE still, just with different people groups or different verbage.

 

I, as someone previously alluded to, am not one to keep the harsh realities from my children. I stongly feel that the truth is incredibly powerful and that it has the ability to set things free, if that makes any sense. I would simply tell them the truth.

 

Emerald

[Word Nerd]

It seems to me that the orginal poster was asking a very good question and sincerely wanted some advice..... I guess I don't understand the "snarkiness" of this response, and it really didn't even answer the questions she posed. (Very sincerely I am going to add that I could be reading into this in all the wrong ways, however)

 

 

I have to admit I originally read it as, "What an idiotic question!" but then decided I was reading too much into it.

[jamnkats]

I heavily censored books until my kids were around 3 or 4 and then started letting some stuff in, more around 5 (but still censored) and around 6 or 7 or 8 (depending on the kid) stopped the censorship and started talking about stuff as it came up in books.

[Word Nerd]

I think it's important to share the reality of times past with my kids, but sometimes I wonder about when certain subjects are age-appropriate and how much detail to share. Since my daughter is getting older and will be reading much more on her own in the coming months, I was mostly curious how others handled it or if they have an "anything goes" attitude toward it. So far, I've talked about issues as they've come up for the most part, like when we were reading one of the Little House books and Ma made some cringe-worthy comments about the Indians. A few times while reading books I've decided that my daughter wasn't old enough for the topic yet (or I wasn't ready to discuss it with her yet) and skipped that part or edited it. My questions aren't based in any desire to shelter my kids from reality or shield them entirely from the ugliness of the past (or present), though.

Edited December 6, 2008 by WordGirl

[Jenny in Atl]

I read a variety of books, both contemporary and classic, with my kids. (They're 7 and 3, so I'm mostly referring to read-alouds here, though my older daughter is reading chapter books now.)

 

Recently I came across a book that I liked and think could spark some interesting discussions, but I groaned at how backwards and stereotypical its portrayal of black slaves was. I know that the attitudes it expresses and the romantic depiction of life in the Old South is common in literature written in its time, but I definitely don't want my daughter taking that message from it.

 

How do you handle it when you come across literature from previous generations that contains stereotypes, racism, sexism, etc. and is out-of-date according to today's views and social customs? Do you avoid reading it altogether? Does it depend on your child's age? Do you seek out reprints that have been edited to reflect today's standards? If you or your children read it as is, how do you go about discussing it with them?

 

We have run across a few that required more than a short comment. I don't censor, but discuss, discuss, discuss. I think reading bks like the one you mentioned, are a great learning tool to explore how people have treated and related to each other (and often still do) as well as how things have changed. I've also explored with the girls how bks and later movies were used, and still are used, to stereotype groups, instead of celebrating the individual.

[Momto5]

:iagree: If they are books contemporary to the period, then they probably aren't stereotypes, either.

 

If they are more modern than the time period they are talking about then read Martha comment above.

 

Politically correct modern fiction concerning history, comes across as sterilized history. Boring.

 

I'm not sure I understand your first statement. Would you mind elaborating?

[abbeyej]

Yeah, I understand what you're saying. Wanting our kids to know what the past was like -- including some of the ugliness towards fellow human beings -- is one thing, but there *are* topics that are over their heads or too complex to explain adequately when they're young. And sometimes it *is* just a matter of editing a few words or giving a brief commentary explaining the historical context ("she said X because... but we know that isn't true" or "but she wasn't quite right / didn't have all the information"), but other times... Maybe it *is* best to hold off on something for a few more years -- when the kids have more historical understanding, more experience with human nature, an ability to analyze meaning and intent on a higher level...

 

And really, I think it ends up being a case-by-case and family-by-family thing. There just aren't "rules" you can apply, unfortunately...

[Nicole M]

 

And really, I think it ends up being a case-by-case and family-by-family thing. There just aren't "rules" you can apply, unfortunately...

 

I agree with Abbey.

 

Take heart in the fact that children are not stupid. We were listening (again) to a "classic" children's story, one that I'd read aloud to my boys and one that we'd heard over and over, in anticipation of a movie coming out. At the end of one CD, as we were switching discs, I commented about how I just did not like a certain scene that was coming up. My son said, quietly, "Yeah. Seems as if... some authors just have it out for women." I hadn't even mentioned sexism in relation to this particular author, but he saw it, recognized it for what it was. We still enjoy the story, but recognize that not all authors share our values.

 

Your children are still very young. If you remain thoughtful and honest with them as you approach books, your children will pick up on that.

Edited December 6, 2008 by Nicole M

[Nicole M]

Politically correct modern fiction concerning history, comes across as sterilized history. Boring.

 

Not necessarily. My mother's favorite book growing up was also Little Black Sambo, as someone else mentioned in this thread. There is a perfectly lovely reworking of that book:

 

http://www.amazon.com/Sam-Tigers-Retelling-Picture-Puffins/dp/0140562885/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1228574637&sr=8-2

 

My mother gave this to my boys when they were young, and it was a thoughtful gift. Where racism is concerned, "sterilizing" is not the only outcome of calling a spade a spade.

[Murphy101]

I have to admit I originally read it as, "What an idiotic question!" but then decided I was reading too much into it.

 

*sigh* yes, reading too much into it.:001_huh:

 

It was a simple statement.

 

It's never occured to me to censor books. If it's not appropriate, we don't read it until they are older. Usually not appropriate is deemed as too harsh. Otherwise, my little kids wouldn't even be allowed to read the Little House on the Prairie books, because ma ingalls was VERY prejudiced against indians for example. Or Sister Anne's Hands, which is entirely about a black nun teaching in a white school in the 60s.

 

So the content itself wouldn't bother me, but if it was unduly harsh, I'd wait. No one can make that distinction for you though b/c only you know where your harsh line is.

[Nicole M]

Thinking more about this, I would also mention that there are some "classic" books I simply hate. For instance, Roald Dahl: barf. There are so many good books, I don't have time for the ones that I don't love. We don't read them. (Though I would not forbid my children to read them, either.) Just because a book has been handed down as part of the "cannon" of great children's literature doesn't mean you have to like them or read them.

 

Some books have redeeming value beyond the occassional sexist remark or stereotypical portrayal, and those we read. But really, only you can decide which are acceptable to you and which are not.

[MKS]

While this may not help for very young children, I had a professor say to me once: "There are some books that are good literature and terrible history, all at the same time."

 

Given the book we were reading, I took it to mean that not all women were happy with not having the vote nor property rights.

 

I have found myself paraphrasing this over and over, for example, just because Ma Ingalls thought American Indians were dirty and savage doesn't mean they were.

 

So while the reporting of Ma Ingalls opinion may, indeed, be accurate history, her opinion itself was not.

[Murphy101]

While this may not help for very young children, I had a professor say to me once: "There are some books that are good literature and terrible history, all at the same time."

 

Given the book we were reading, I took it to mean that not all women were happy with not having the vote nor property rights.

 

I have found myself paraphrasing this over and over, for example, just because Ma Ingalls thought American Indians were dirty and savage doesn't mean they were.

 

So while the reporting of Ma Ingalls opinion may, indeed, be accurate history, her opinion itself was not.

 

I don't think anyone is arguing that the opinions and attitudes references in classics is always right in themselves (e.g. that indians were all dirty savages) - simply that the reference is ormight be an accurate portrait of how many people (of that segment of people) did believe and act during those times.

 

I don't think that makes it terrible history or literature.

Just a sign of the times as they were at that time.

I presume it should be a given to discuss right, wrong, true, and false, and change as we read anything. Or watch it on TV, or encounter it in life on a dialy basis.:)