Quote:
Originally Posted by Amethyst
Ooh, this is quite interesting, Im not sure how well rating books would work as it may actually have the reverse effect than that intended-alot of teenagers and adults in the UK have low reading ages and they may feel inferior or be bullied for reading younger books....AND to be honest, some kids books are better written than adults books.....
|
That's a very good point I hadn't thought of that. Though are we now getting caught up with books cuitable for different LEVELS rather than the suitability of the content? I suppose the wo do go hand in hand to some extent- higher levels may have more adult content, but in the cases of books such as Betty Smith's "A Tree Grows In Brooklyn" this is not the case. The content is very similar to that of a Jacqueline Wilson book (poverty, death in the family, growing up) yet it is quite a thick book and could be tricky for children below teenage years. Also, as it is over 60 years old (I can't be sure of the exact date of publication- I think it is 1940s) the style of languiage is slightly different.
So this could be difficult for a 12 year old, say, to read but the content would be fine and actually quite educational- it is set in the poor areas of turn of the century New York.
So would this be rated suitable for children because of the content, or not suitable because of the abilities?
(Oh and Amethyst- I agree about children's books being better than adult's books. I had to read 75 children's books during the first year of my course and loved it
)
Don't know about this idea though. It might spur on some kids, nut if a kid who has trouble reading knows that they are reading a book for someone much younger then they might give up. No age suggestion means no parental pressure about reading the right book for their age instead of their ability.
75 childrens books? I woulda been in heaven lol
Im gonna have to read it again....
Linear Mode
