Adults who read children's books

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

For those who are confused as to why I held back my "laughter" when my friend told me what it was she was reading; it wasn't ill-spirited or in a mocking way. It was instead my reaction to something I didn't quite understand, which is why I started this thread. My friend is actually quite intelligent, mature and well-read. It was her reading choice that particular afternoon that I was curious about and nothing else.

Since I personally don't read books targeted at kids, I wanted to hear other people's thoughts on why they themselves do or why they think adults in general seem to be reading more and more of these books nowadays (Not that there's anything wrong with that!) I sometimes see books I once read in elementary school and think back fondly on that time in my life; however, I never really have the desire to read them again at this stage of my life, let alone the latest children's lit to come out over the past few years. The same goes for cartoons. I LOVED cartoons as a kid and when I see familiar characters in passing on TV or the web, I can't help but smile and watch a little bit of it just to reminisce. But sit through entire episodes of these cartoons? I have no desire whatsoever! Again, I don't think there is anything wrong with people who do. It's just my personal preference.

Kudos to all the people who posted well articulated, insightful responses and did not revert to name calling and other playground tactics. Not everyone is capable of such a feat.

I'm a bit of a literary snob, too. Don't fight it. I can't help but laugh when people say they're reading HP or, God forbid, Twilight. Embrace the snobbishness, young padawan.

[wat??]

Watership Down is one of my favourite books!

Is Watership Down really targeted at children though?

[Brad Coelho]

Is Watership Down really targeted at children though?

It is accessible to them & its facade certainly lends itself to that audience. I'm not sure were Adams or his publisher intended to 'target' it; but I do think it firmly falls into the deceptively adult category. It is one of my favorite books too To me, another of the beauties of literature is that its breadth is endless...I can extoll the vitures of Ulysses, Sound & the Fury, Sirens of Titan and a book about bunny rabbits.

[Vautrin]

I'm a bit of a literary snob, too. Don't fight it. I can't help but laugh when people say they're reading HP or, God forbid, Twilight. Embrace the snobbishness, young padawan.

If you insist on calling me a snob, okay, I'll play along. For starters, you personally can't qualify as a literary snob, since you list Stephen King as your favorite author. In the Kingdom of Literature, King is more like a jester. Therefore, you are not even eligible to be labeled a literary snob.

"I'm a film snob. My favorite filmmaker is Michael Bay." That's basically what you're saying.

How'd I do Jedi Master?

[OrphanPip]

Is Watership Down really targeted at children though?

It was definitely intended by Adams for children, it started as a private story for his daughters. I've even read that he denies any intentional political or religious allegory in the novel.

Related to the ongoing funny criticism thread, there was an essay titled "Male Chauvinist Rabbits" published in the New York Times attacking the representation of the female rabbits in the novel lol.

[Brad Coelho]

It was definitely intended by Adams for children, it started as a private story for his daughters. I've even read that he denies any intentional political or religious allegory in the novel.

Related to the ongoing funny criticism thread, there was an essay titled "Male Chauvinist Rabbits" published in the New York Times attacking the representation of the female rabbits in the novel lol.

I remember reading about that denial- while he may not have intended to add particular theological and political layers to the story, his creation of the society was so developed that it made their inclusion inevitable (and particularly provocative to me).

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

If you insist on calling me a snob, okay, I'll play along. For starters, you personally can't qualify as a literary snob, since you list Stephen King as your favorite author. In the Kingdom of Literature, King is more like a jester. Therefore, you are not even eligible to be labeled a literary snob.

"I'm a film snob. My favorite filmmaker is Michael Bay." That's basically what you're saying.

How'd I do Jedi Master?

Touche.

[Katy North]

With my toddler, I'm even starting to realized that picture books can be literary in a way. There's something about reading "Harold and the Purple Crayon" and experiencing the simplicity and wonder of the book through my son's eyes.

That sense of wonder works its way up through *good* children's literature... Narnia, Oz, Wonderland, Dr. Doolittle, Black Beauty, The Giver, Harry Potter (to name a few). Many of these books can be read seriously and enjoyed thoroughly by all ages.

Or is it simply just one of the signs of the apocalypse?

That would be one awesome apocalypse.

[stlukesguild]

I think the line between what is "childrens' literature" and "adult literature" is not as clear as some would have it... if the literature is first and foremost good writing. Aesop's Fables, The Arabian Night's Entertainments, the collected fairy tales and fables of Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson, even Italo Calvino, Gulliver's Travels, Lewis Caroll's Alice books, Huckleberry Finn, Edward Lear's "Nonsense" poems, Christian Morgenstern's "Nonsense" poems... none of these are strictly literature for children... indeed I would argue that some aren't children's literature at all. What makes Huckleberry Finn a children's book? The fact that the main characters are children? So does that make Oliver Twist a children's book? Does that make much of the first book of Proust's In Search of Lost Time reading for children? And what of Sterne's Tristam Shandy? Or do we assume that it is the fantastic that makes something "childrens' literature"? But where does that leave Poe, J.L. Borges, Dante's Comedia, or Ovid's Metamorphoses... to say nothing of the Bible? Or is it the simplicity of form and language? Again, where does that leave Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience, Hemingway, J.L. Borge... even Samuel Beckett... or again, the Bible?

Seriously, a great deal of what we love about literature... the sheer love of story telling... the audacious and fantastic imagination... are to be found in forms of literature that are close to the folk tale, the fable, the fairy tale, and what many may call "childrens literature". These forms are integral to the great Indian Epics such as the Mahabharata, many parts of the Bible, Ovid's Metamorphoses, Dante's Comedia, Boccaccio's Decameron, Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, Ariosto's Orlando Furioso, the various Arthurian myths and the legends of Roland/Charlemagne, etc... There is often a profundity beneath the surface of these works belied by the apparent "artlessness". I have repeatedly read and re-read Lewis Carroll, Christian Morgenstern and Italo Calvino's wonderful fable, The Baron in the Trees. I will admit to perusing Dr. Seuss' works from time to time if I happen upon them (unfortunately my parents gave away my childhood copies) and just recently I sat down to read A Wrinkle in Time which I had not read since I was in 3rd grade (9?). I personally have no use for the Harry Potter novels or the Twilight series... not because I am an adult and I feel these are books for children or adolescents... but rather because they just aren't that good.

Is Watership Down really targeted at children though?

It was definitely intended by Adams for children, it started as a private story for his daughters. I've even read that he denies any intentional political or religious allegory in the novel.

And Lewis Carroll's "Alice" books were intended as entertainment for children... does that make them exclusively childrens' literature? Michelangelo's Last Judgment in the Sistine Chapel was intended as a counter-reformation statement... does that mean that it only has any worth to practicing Catholics? And here I am... an agnostic Lutheran going around proclaiming Michelangelo to have been the greatest artist of time.

[JBI]

There is children's literature, and Children's literature. I am not about to read Amelia Bedelia or whatever, nor am I likely to read picture books, but I may flip through some easy children's stories in a language I am not too competent with.

[The Comedian]

I like comics and I consider myself semi-literate.

[BienvenuJDC]

I like comics and I consider myself semi-literate.

Do you have any favorites?

[hellsapoppin]

{Ahem} Got to clear my throat before I attempt to answer this one.

There are certain things in life that are meant to appeal to children such as professional wrestling, comic books, the Three Stooges, Twinkies, Clair Bee's writings, etc. Some people continue to love these things well into their adulthood and cannot envision their lives without these things.

{Ahem} If you can keep a secret - I'm one of those adults and I'm approaching my 60s! Ask me to give these things up and I'll say, no chance!

[Vautrin]

I think the line between what is "childrens' literature" and "adult literature" is not as clear as some would have it... if the literature is first and foremost good writing. Aesop's Fables, The Arabian Night's Entertainments, the collected fairy tales and fables of Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson, even Italo Calvino, Gulliver's Travels, Lewis Caroll's Alice books, Huckleberry Finn, Edward Lear's "Nonsense" poems, Christian Morgenstern's "Nonsense" poems... none of these are strictly literature for children... indeed I would argue that some aren't children's literature at all. What makes Huckleberry Finn a children's book? The fact that the main characters are children? So does that make Oliver Twist a children's book? Does that make much of the first book of Proust's In Search of Lost Time reading for children? And what of Sterne's Tristam Shandy? Or do we assume that it is the fantastic that makes something "childrens' literature"? But where does that leave Poe, J.L. Borges, Dante's Comedia, or Ovid's Metamorphoses... to say nothing of the Bible? Or is it the simplicity of form and language? Again, where does that leave Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience, Hemingway, J.L. Borge... even Samuel Beckett... or again, the Bible?

I never stated that books in which the main characters are children are automatically categorized as children's literature.

I chose The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn as examples of children's lit because, well, they are, even if Huck Finn falls within that gray area. Tom Sawyer was originally marketed at children, or the "boy's book" market. Huckleberry Finn started off that way too until Mark Twain began experiencing trouble writing it and it eventually morphed into something else. The end result was a marriage between a sequel to a boy book and adult literature. Many scholars still classify it as a "boy book", while others don't.

I really don't know what Ovid or the Bible have to do with any of this. The two examples of recent children's fiction I mentioned were Harry Potter and the Chronicles of Narnia. Is it really necessary to have a philosophical discussion as to why they are considered children's fiction? That's not even the point of my post. I simply wanted to ask people why they enjoy reading these books as adults. I'm genuinely interested in why.

[pooteeweet]

I have not yet studied children's literature in college, but from what I have gathered from my readings is that the older novels, such as Peter Pan and Alice and Wonderland, deal with more adult issues than Harry Potter...with that said, I have not yet read anything by Rowling, only seen the movies, so maybe I am wrong?

Patrick