Homework over spring break (long)

In article ,
Clisby wrote:

Cathy Weeks wrote:
bizby40 wrote:


Ender is a child who is taken away from his parents because they had
more children than allowed by law. He is taken to a training center
with other children, where they are trained in war games.


He's taken away, NOT because they had more children than allowed by
law, but because he's a child genius, and the hope is that he'll be the
one child that's talented enough to beat the aliens. In fact, because
their first two children were so promising (the parents are themselves
highly intelligent, as are the first two kids) they were given
permission to have a third, though he suffers some dislike because he's
a "third." The "rationing" of children is due to a world-wide shortage
of supplies due to the incredible world effort at beating the aliens.

Sorry... I just had to say something... my family is fanatic about the
Ender books, which are wonderful.

Cathy Weeks
Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01


Since somebody earlier in the thread mentioned these as possibly not
appropriate for young children - do you agree? Purely based on the
synopses posted here, they sound fine for children.

Clisby


The level of violence in Ender's Game is pretty impressive -- both
physical and psychological violence towards the children who are being
trained. My mother couldn't stand it, and quit reading it. Plus, in
the end, Ender commits genocide -- as far as he knows at that point, he
kills an entire race. (It WAS done to save the human race -- these
critters would have killed everyone if they'd had the chance.)

So, if you are inclined to not allow your children to read certain
books, it is probably one that you would not allow a younger child to
read.
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:38:36 EST, "Sue"
wrote:

I find it interesting that, if I had to guess, that most of you would not
let children watch certain things on TV because of the content. But, from
what I am reading here, content in a book is okay. Why is that? Is it
because when you see something it's real to a child, but if he reads it and
doesn't know what the meaning is, that they just gloss over it?

There are a lot of books out there that my kids *could* read, but because of
the content and where they are at tempermentally, I haven't let them read
it. My friend didn't want her 2nd grader reading Sounder because the dog was
killed. Her daughter's temperment was such that she would be really upset
over that. But, she *could* read it. I don't know, I guess I am of the
opinion to wait until they can understand the meaning of a book to read it
and not just because they can.

As others have observed, my experience is that if they can't
understand it, they will get bored and put it down. If that happens,
and has happened more than once in my family, then so be it.

My second grader would have been equally upset at bambi's death.

However, no I do not censor what my children read or what they watch.
I do put major limits on television, and videos in terms of time. And
although I wouldnt censor something, I would proably not have sat down
and watched something totally inappropriae while they were in the next
room or awake, unless i was willing to watch them as well.

I have one child who was reading christopher pike and then the ohter
"monster" author who I cannot think of. She also watched the real
psycho at age eleven and has read most stephen king. She had no
problems whatsoever. If she had problems then I would have discussed
them with her and suggested sh read something else.

My son is just the opposite. He's the kid who until about twelve was
hiding his head when the played the "jaws" theme at the commercial in
the movie theaters (was it for coke or something??). However, again, I
let her learn by trial and error what he was and was not comfortable
with. This child hasnt read a fiction book unless it was required by
school since about age seven. But he can watch the beginning of
"Saving Private Ryan" without a whimper.

I guess my point is that we need to let our kids follow their own
muse.

Sue wrote:
I find it interesting that, if I had to guess, that most of you would
not
let children watch certain things on TV because of the content. But,
from
what I am reading here, content in a book is okay. Why is that? Is it
because when you see something it's real to a child, but if he reads
it and
doesn't know what the meaning is, that they just gloss over it?

That *is* what happens. With Ender's Game, most younger kids would
only see it as a rousing adventure of a bunch of brilliant children
playing video games. Adults and older kids will understand the
morality aspects and think about those issues. Does that mean younger
kids shouldn't be exposed to it, just 'cause they won't get it? No.
It's like planting a seed of an idea.


There are a lot of books out there that my kids *could* read, but
because of
the content and where they are at tempermentally, I haven't let them
read
it. My friend didn't want her 2nd grader reading Sounder because the
dog was
killed. Her daughter's temperment was such that she would be really
upset
over that.

There are always reasons to censor for your kids. But it's an
individual family thing, based on intimate knowledge of your own child.
If I thought a certain book would be bad for one of my kids, I'd not
hesitate to say no. But most books are fine, and kids tend to only
understand and see what they are ready to see.

But, she *could* read it. I don't know, I guess I am of the
opinion to wait until they can understand the meaning of a book to
read it
and not just because they can.

So, how do you know when a child will understand the meaning of a book?
I mean, censoring based on something that might be destructive is one
thing, but censoring because they might not "get it" is quite another.
And you never know when that "get it" moment is.

Cathy Weeks
Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01

"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sue wrote:
But, she *could* read it. I don't know, I guess I am of the
opinion to wait until they can understand the meaning of a book to
read it
and not just because they can.

So, how do you know when a child will understand the meaning of a book?
I mean, censoring based on something that might be destructive is one
thing, but censoring because they might not "get it" is quite another.
And you never know when that "get it" moment is.

I don't think Sue is talking about censoring -- she's talking about
offering. Right now, DD(9) does her browsing completely on
the Juvenile stacks at the library. There are plenty of books there
that are entertaining and challenging for her. Though even at that,
she probably wouldn't have stumbled on Lemony Snickett if I
hadn't read a review about them, read them myself and then
offered them to her. (Well, she would have eventually -- the
entire 4th grade is nuts about them now).

So there is 0 chance that she will read Ender's Game or Gone
With the Wind, or any other book off of the adult book shelves
unless I offer them to her. In her specific case, despite being
an avid reader, reading above her grade level, being in the
"Gateway Program" and making straight A's in school -- she
doesn't seem ready for them. Books that are too long or
involved bore her. In fact, she wants me to get some
Captain Underpants books for her at the library -- she's too
embarrassed to check them out herself at the school library.
And hey, most of what I read is more fun than really challenging,
so what the heck?

As for me, I started reading "adult" books as a middle schooler.
And when I did, it was my dad's sci-fi, and my mom's romance
novels. I still love sci-fi/fantasy (fantasy more), and still sneer
at the idiocy of the romances. As I get all my books from the
library, and my husband doesn't read fiction of any sort -- my
kids are not going to have the same opportunity. I'll just have
to hope they recognize when the Juvenile books bore them and
it's time to move on.

Bizby


Cathy Weeks
Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01

dragonlady wrote:

The level of violence in Ender's Game is pretty impressive -- both
physical and psychological violence towards the children who are
being
trained. My mother couldn't stand it, and quit reading it. Plus, in

the end, Ender commits genocide -- as far as he knows at that point,
he
kills an entire race. (It WAS done to save the human race -- these
critters would have killed everyone if they'd had the chance.)

So, if you are inclined to not allow your children to read certain
books, it is probably one that you would not allow a younger child to

read.

Define "younger child?" We read it to my stepson when he was about 8.5
or 9, and he loved it, nor does it seem like he was scarred by it. My
advice from the beginning was for the parent to pre-read the book, to
judge for the individual child.

There are two major scenes of violence, where Ender gets into fights
that he couldn't avoid. You find out that he committed genocide AFTER
the war was won - as far as he or anyone knew, he was playing on a
simulator. There are no scenes of horrific bloodshed. The whole point
of the discussion up to now is that the interpretation of what the book
is about is dependent on the age of a child. The younger child would
see the adventure, and the older would see the moral issues.

Cathy Weeks

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:05:53 EST, (Robyn
Kozierok) wrote:

In article t,
Clisby wrote:

Bruce Bridgman and Jeanne Yang wrote:

Like Sue mentioned, it's the appropriateness of subject and language as well
as reading ability. While a child *may* be able to read "Gone with the
Wind" or "Ender's Game" (to pick two random books) doesn't mean she *should*
read it.

I don't know - I wouldn't stop my 3rd grader from reading "Gone with the
Wind" if she had the stamina for it. (I've never read Ender's Game, so I
don't know about that.) I think I was in the 4th grade when I
recognized the existence of homosexuality, all because I had read a book
that belonged to my parents. Unless a book's out-and-out porn, I don't
think I'd stop my child from reading it.

Well, there's a difference between stopping a child from reading a book
they choose to read, and offering that same book to them.

And while I wouldn't prevent an interested younger child from reading a
classic better suited to an older audience, I usually don't encourage
it either, mainly because many children (mine included) are unlikely to
re-read a book once they've read it once (unless they fall in love
with it) and so I don't necessarily want to encourage my kids to read a
book when they are too young/inexperienced to get out of it all I
think/hope they might eventually get out of it.

--Robyn

by the time my children were in the third grade they were selecting
their own books from a variety of sources - the library, picking out a
book at the bookstore, going to the school library. On occasion I
would pick up a book I thought said child might like, but I was
generally past selecting or offering.

dragonlady wrote:

The level of violence in Ender's Game is pretty impressive -- both
physical and psychological violence towards the children who are being
trained. My mother couldn't stand it, and quit reading it. Plus, in
the end, Ender commits genocide -- as far as he knows at that point, he
kills an entire race. (It WAS done to save the human race -- these
critters would have killed everyone if they'd had the chance.)

Yeah, I think it very much depends on the personality of
the child. Some children are very disturbed by stuff like this,
and others aren't.

Best wishes,
Ericka

"dragonlady" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"bizby40" wrote:


Ender is a child who is taken away from his parents because they had
more children than allowed by law. He is taken to a training center
with other children, where they are trained in war games.

Not quite -- his family was allowed to have a third, because the first
two were so promising. However, neither of them passed the tests to get
into the special training center. He was put in the center when he DID
pass the tests -- he wasn't removed as a punitive measure at all.
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

Hmm...I'll have to re-read. That's not the way I remember it.

Bizby

bizby40 wrote:

They might not re-read it right away, but they may eventually.**I*read
Lord of the Rings for the first time at about 13, and though it's
supposedly meant for that age group, I found it too involved and boring.*
So*I*read it again when I was in college, again when I gave a set to my
nephew, and again when the movies came out.**Just*because*they*may*not
read it again soon, doesn't mean they never will.

LotR is *not* meant as a teenage book: the Hobbit is a child's book,
but although LotR follows on, Tolkein himself said that he didn't
really think teenagers would get much out of it.

I must admit that like you I read it as a teenager and in college,
and didn't appreciate it at all. However when I re-read it before
the films came out, I did appreciate the complexity of the story.
But I only re-read it because it was such a classic: I can't imagine
reading a non-classic which I found boring the first time.

--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three

Sue wrote:

I find it interesting that, if I had to guess, that most of you would not
let children watch certain things on TV because of the content. But, from
what I am reading here, content in a book is okay. Why is that? Is it
because when you see something it's real to a child, but if he reads it
and doesn't know what the meaning is, that they just gloss over it?

There are a lot of books out there that my kids *could* read, but because
of the content and where they are at tempermentally, I haven't let them
read it. My friend didn't want her 2nd grader reading Sounder because the
dog was killed. Her daughter's temperment was such that she would be
really upset over that. But, she *could* read it. I don't know, I guess I
am of the opinion to wait until they can understand the meaning of a book
to read it and not just because they can.

I think the big difference between a book and a film is that when you read
a book, you make the pictures in your head, so they don't tend to be as
scary as some other adult's picture. Of course a book can be written so
the descriptions are very detailed, but most of the time it is easy to
gloss over them, and not quite understand what has happened. With a film
it tends to be more intense.

I know one of my kids will happily re-read things like Harry Potter and Lord
of the Rings, but finds the films very scary.

--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three