Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wonder if the OP has issues with this book specifically or if it's the general theme of kids killing kids? And if its the latter, at what point do you allow kids to read books with this theme? As others have pointed out, there's some significant literature that involves children killing and it seems wrong to deny children the education of these books. Additionally, it isn't as though you can limit children to themes no more complex than the works of Roald Dahl and Beverly Cleary and then expect them to understand violent themes when they're eventually exposed. It takes time and easing to work up to more graphic books like 1984.
So how do you manage children's exposure to violent themes?
Even Dahl has some pretty twisted themes if you read closely. The BFG has giants devouring children in the night. Wonka is arguably a cruel man who sets up children to fail.
As I've said, my reading was never censored or restricted. I was reading 'adult' science fiction and fantasy in elementary school. I'm not sure working up to difficult reading is as important as grounding the child in reality. I knew that in real life, guns killed people and violence was bad. I knew that books weren't real life. And I was a VERY imaginative and quite literal child.
And I think part of the reason why the division was so clear to me was because my parents never overreacted to play violence. If I pointed a finger at another child, they didn't react as if it were the same as pointing a gun OR could lead to eventually pointing a gun. I think that acting as if all violence (real, play, mild, etc.) is the same as killing or cruelty is more confusing to children. Children aren't stupid. They know that pointing a finger doesn't hurt anyone. If mom and dad act like it does, other messages about violence become just background 'noise.'
I think the same thing applies to books. When children as restricted to reading 'easy' material or have parents who overreact to violence in lit., they'll still learn about violence in other ways. Books like The Hunger Games are very clear that violence is bad. And that even though it is bad, it is sometimes needed, as when protecting one's own life. And that's true! We don't need to pretend to children that it isn't. I think they're well capable of understanding the difference between a book that glorifies violence and one that shows that even when it is necessary, it is still destructive. The books themselves manage the exposure.
I just don't think that learning about the concepts of futility and hopelessness is something kids should be learning without guidance. Very important lessons, no doubt. But not for 13, 14, 16-year-olds to just delve into for the fun of it. Maybe I'm oversensitive, but if I had read stuff like this on my own, when I was that age, I probably would've had nightmares.
But that's not the lesson...the lesson is that futility and hopelessness are something that can be overcome.
I have a lot less problem with The Hunger Games that I do books like Twilight. That series isn't as violent (well, except vampire assisted C-section), but it has some very, very twisted themes about relationships. Even then, I wouldn't call for censoring them or selling them only to older teens. As much as I hate Twilight, the messages in it aren't going to overcome the messages that come from the parents.
I do understand what you're saying though. I've recently started watching the series Adventure Time. It looks like a typical children's cartoon...bright graphics, goofy characters, etc. The first few seasons are fairly typical, but later on the show gets DARK. If you pay attention, you realize the universe the characters inhabit is actually post-apocalyptic after a great war mutated most of the population. There are scenes of a little girl crying while cities burn behind her. Some of the villains are honestly gruesome and scary. My jaw dropped at one scene where a man is slowly crushed under the weight of an atomic bomb that he sacrificed himself to stop from exploding...only for it to explode anyway, causing a storm of screaming souls that twist the main character's best friend into a monster that he's forced to kill.
For kids!
On one hand, I was stunned that this program is aimed at young teens...it's rated PG and is on later at night, but not during the 'Adult Swim' block for adult cartoons. I think much of the really dark themes will pass the younger set by, like the post-apocalyptic setting. But still, there's a lot in there that would have probably given me nightmares as a kid.
But...are nightmares so terrible? Are difficult themes so awful? Isn't it on the parent to investiage what their children are watching and discuss it instead of having shows/movies/books geared older to avoid the need?
I guess I take a more "bookish" view on the subject matter. I don't see it as "learning about violence" at ALL...I think the violence is merely the method of delivery of the actual lesson. And to me, the entire series is a study of moral and existential nihilism vs. altruism. This is pretty heavy stuff for kids but as I said, it's important for them to learn about. In a philosophy class. But this is not light summer reading for kids who are bebopping to Justin Bieber.
But that's not the lesson...the lesson is that futility and hopelessness are something that can be overcome.
Futility and hopelessness were -not- overcome though. They were safe - for now. Just like they -were- safe - for then - prior to the chaos that started the first Hunger Games and change in government. The whole series is about a Futuristic Post-Armageddon world where the government DID, very successfully, determine every aspect of life, from conception to death, even controlling whether or not citizens were -allowed- to eat - let alone what choices they could eat - the air they were allowed to breathe, the movements they were allowed to make, their choices for mates, whether or not they were allowed to even keep their own children, AND their fates. And they did it successfully for generations - and everyone was already impacted by it. The damage had already been done, and they were helpless to undo it. It was not overcome, because - at the end, there was still that lingering fleeting thought that it could happen again.
It's the kind of world view that turns the stomach, that changes your equillibrium.
Dahl also wrote James and the Giant Peach, in which an orphaned boy is beaten and starved by his horrible aunts, only to escape in a giant peach inhabited by monstrous insects. The giants in BFG are quite bloodthirsty; they have names like Gutgobbler and Bonesmasher.
Well then I guess the next question is have any parents had problems with their kids reading books that led to issues like nightmares, anxiety, or negative obsessive thoughts? My reading was never censored and I never had any problems, but maybe others have?
My 12 yr old loves the hunger games books, I had to sit through the movie too. I thought the movie was depressing, and theme is a little scary but she knows it is fiction and the more important thing is that she is reading and taking an interest in books which will take her far in life.
I guess I take a more "bookish" view on the subject matter. I don't see it as "learning about violence" at ALL...I think the violence is merely the method of delivery of the actual lesson. And to me, the entire series is a study of moral and existential nihilism vs. altruism. This is pretty heavy stuff for kids but as I said, it's important for them to learn about. In a philosophy class. But this is not light summer reading for kids who are bebopping to Justin Bieber.
I can't speak for other parents or children, but my son and most of his peers read this book, and they talked about it to one another, and to me, in great detail.
Well then I guess the next question is have any parents had problems with their kids reading books that led to issues like nightmares, anxiety, or negative obsessive thoughts? My reading was never censored and I never had any problems, but maybe others have?
No problems here, and my son (now 15) is an avid reader. I was as well, in fact I was a very early reader and consistently read for pleasure, on my own, from pre-k on. I always read above my age level as did my son, and no one ever censored my book choices. Same with my son. When he was in elementary and his older brother in middle school he would read his brother's assigned reading for fun, and he would also read my college textbooks for the heck of it (heck, I didn't even read those voluntarily! )..
So anyway, none of us have ever had any lingering negative effects, just plenty of interesting conversations as a result of what we've read.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)..
