JK Rowling against age banding on books

In my Pubisher's Weekly morning report for July 3rd, This article came out in the Scotsman news:

http://news.scotsman.com/entertainment/Rowling-blow-to-plans-to.4249548.jp

What do you think of the move to place children's books in an age range?

I guess I'm out of sync with the question since I thought most children's books in the states already had age or grade ranges on them.

That said, I agree with Rowling and Pullman. Age ranges already make a mess of the young adult market for some of us.

If you call a book an adult book, many teens won't read it. But if you call the book a YA book, then adults won't read it. Rowling attacked this problem by having two covers on the version issued in the UK.

Frankly, I could never understand why highschool students were taught to read adult books from the literary canon while in class, but once out of it, they turned to teen books while ignoring adult modern day authors.

Malcolm

Quote :

Frankly, I could never understand why highschool
students were taught to read adult books from the literary canon while
in class, but once out of it, they turned to teen books while ignoring
adult modern day authors.

That may be as simple as what happened with me in high school. I
literally detested being told what to read - ie, required reading
projects such as The Great Gatsby, The Naked Ape - even To Kill a Mockingbird and Lord of the Flies
(both really great books!). It was many years later when I decided to
give them all another chance, and enjoyed them. The problem was being
told what I must read.

I want young adults to be able to read and enjoy my books as well as older readers, so I don't want any age labelling.

Well said, Phil.

While you were posting that message, I was getting more ticked off about the whole thing, so went off and signed the online petition and posted my own two cents about it on my Writer's Notebook blog here: http://jockstewart.typepad.com/writers_notebook/2008/07/say-no-to-age-b.html

Malcolm

I think it's monstrous.

Forcing all kids into the same band of intellect?

It goes against every principle of literature, in my book.

I agree, labeling is ridiculous. When told by a teacher to read some particular book I reacted the way Brew did. By the age of twelve I was reading every adult mystery I could lay hands on - Christie, Gardner, Chandler, all the rest. None were written with kids in mind. It seems it would be much better to determine a kid's interest (and not just members of the opposite sex), then have them read and report on the books they enjoyed.

Putting age rankings on books is a really stupid idea. It will only discourage people who are older or younger than the age ranking from reading them. Age ranking books, in my opinion, will only serve to reduce book sales and discourage prospective readers.

Worse, once set up it leads to things like "word lists", restricting vocabulary to what some idiot thinks is what the little dears can understand.

God forbid a kid would read above his "age level" or go look a word up in the dictionary.

And limiting the vocabulary in books will limit children's learning and only serve to speed up the dumbing down of America, and possibly the world. I don't think we should be placing limits on literature.

Horror of horrors. By the second grade, one of my most treasured books was a dictionary. It was certainly the most used book in our house. One word always led to another, and another, etc. The folks who want to restrict by age grouping would have had a fit at the things I read through the years. I'm sure my mother would have landed in prison if she had known!

Well this seems to be one of those rare topics there's a consensus on.

So why are THEY out there so stupid?

Am I the only one who's noticed that "experts" many times don't know what ther're talking about? Mayby that's why they seem so stupid, or mayby it's just that they've come up with a really, really bad idea.

Experts are retired perts. Maybe they are all daffy!!

Placing age limits on most anything has ramifications. It is an attempt at control. Some want to control what we read, how we think, what we consume and generally how we live. The only thing that these controls accomplish is to challenge people to break the rules. Some rules are just plain stupid. It’s like telling a soldier, who is old enough to carry a gun and fight that he’s not old
enough to have a drink.

I don't think there has been any attempt to control children's reading. The idea behind the scheme was targeted at adults not children. Parents and adults have difficulty buying books as presents for children because they don't know if the book would be appropriate or not.

Labelling books is dumbing down. There's a general trend to do this in all forms of entertainment: reading, television, newspapers, magazines.

The British government set a target of 40% of school leavers attending university. When I was a student only 8% of school leavers went on to university. The same 8% now have to attend courses that are geared towards the lower 32% of students. The bright students take up a fraction of the time of the less able students who need almost constant supervision to get through the course.

Instead of spending time with the brightest students in the university, academic staff have to spend hours of their time with the least able groups just to get them through the exams. In the past, the final year students, who were capable of producing work worthy of publication, worked with their tutors and had their names on joint publications. That rarely happens today with undergraduates.

The majority of people would say that it is only right and fair that everyone should be given the chance no matter what the cost in time and money. The result is that Britain has slumped in world league tables for maths and reading:

"Britain is sliding down the world league table in reading and maths, according to the findings of the most authoritative international study, published yesterday.
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development downgraded the UK from seventh to 17th in reading, and eighth to 24th in maths."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/dec/05/politics.schools

The idea that spending more time with the least able at the expense of the middle group (bright kids will always get by on their own thirst for knowledge) clearly isn't working.

Quote :

I don't think there has been any attempt to control children's reading.

Well, in the US at least it sorts of looks like that.
Just the concept of a student "reading at his level" and having the school library set up in levels is a bit of pigeonholing.

But the main thing is, if you control the writing you end up controlling the reading. And many book publishers have "word lists" and such for writers.

The kids are restricted from books (except that they end up getting stuck with what their parents buy them to an extent) but they end up being presented with books, not only in school but in the school book clubs and competitions and stuff that bracket their ages.

Kids who seek out more challenging books can find them, but they're having a pre-fab course laid out for them from everybody from parents to teachers.

That's the real value of books like Harry Potter or Lemony Snickett--the kids are aware of them and ASK FOR THEM by name.


I'm continually apalled, by the way, at the "official" books for kids. Mindless pablum packed with all these social messages of "diversity uber alles" and political correctness.

The people who control kid's reading today would be horrified if Tom Sawyer or Robin Hood or Black Beauty hit their desks.

It appears that what the publishers are saying now is that they won't age-band a book without "consultation with the author." Yeah, that and a couple of dollars will buy you a cup of coffee.

Malcolm

zadaconnaway wrote:

Experts are retired perts. Maybe they are all daffy!!

Yeah it's like the "consultation" on the cover, right.

PUB: We wanted to consult you about the cover on your book.
WRITER: It makes me sick.
PUB: Thanks, you've been consulted.

I'd rather give the kid a giftcard and let them choose their own reading material rather than restrict them somehow, unless I know there is a book that they are keen to read. I think one of the most interesting - and underutilized - places to encourage reading are the public libraries, although they struggle hugely for funding and resources. Many of them run captivating reading programs in the summer that will really get kids hooked if they would just visit the place to begin with.

Shelagh you hit the nail on the head about watering down the university content too, and we're having the same difficulties with Canadian universities that you are seeing in the UK, which is exactly why I won't teach in them. Making Pam crazy is not my idea of fun!

Yep, Lin, it is like the cover consult. The writers are saying, though, that age-banding is (in the way Random House wants to standardize it) not a traditional part of the cover and cannot be considered part of any written contracts previously signed that stipulate that (for most authors) the cover is the publisher's domain. The pubs aren't agreeing with this, of course.

That gift card is a good idea, Pam.

Malcolm