Great Middle Grade Reads discussion

We were discussing books we liked when younger and dislike now, and vice versa. Jai suggested that too many books of the 1960s were simply boring, and today's kids wouldn't tolerate them. Good challenge!

Here are a few Listopia lists Goodreads members have compiled... do we think books were more boring then?

Children's Fantasy of the 1960s
Middle Grade set in the 1960s
Born in the 1960s - what we read as children
Best Children's books set in the 1960s
Children's Time Travel fiction of the 1960s
Children's Ghost stories of the 1960s"

That gives a sample of the huge number of lists in the Listopia section. (I've read hardly any of them... I must check UK children's booklists some time). If you ever get stuck for a book, try running a search in it and see what lists pop up! And you can vote and add your own suggestions to these lists.

Over to you - any of these books stand out? Boring, or not?

I just googled 1960s Children’s literature. It looks like that decade produced outstanding picture books, including WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE, THE SNOWY DAY, FREDERICK, GREEN EGGS AND HAM, SYLVESTER AND THE MAGIC PEBBLE, and THE GIVING TREE (to name a few) .

That era was certainly ripe with social and political tension, so you'd think some great, thought-provoking MG/YA books would have been written. So I wonder why I haven't read many. I have ISLAND OF THE BLUE DOLPHIN and THE EGYPT GAME sitting on my book shelf right now, but I've never been compelled enough to pick them up. I then scanned the 1970s list of Newbery winners and found that I've read, and heard of, many more. Hmmmm.

I seem to remember enjoying a lot of girl's school tales, in the 1960s - Malory Towers, St Clare's, the Chalet School... (and the occasional boys' school like Jennings, as well). They don't seem to appear in the lists. Is this a British thing?

For me, books written pre 1980s are very slow and not particularly page-turning. Their pace is so sedentary I don't think they would make it past the slush pile in the modern publishing world. I wasn't an avid reader as a child. Now, as an adult who enjoys MG books, I can still understand why I wasn't inspired when I read books from that era.

I think we need to be careful about not generalising so much. Each reader has his or her own experiences and his or her own tastes and what one might find tedious another would find engaging. Frankly, I personally find many of the more modern books boring simply because there seems to be such a concentration of adventure and possible excitement (or an overabundance of issues and possible gloom and doom scenarios), but that is MY opinion and only my opinion and I in no way would expect others to generally agree with me (but that also goes both ways or at least it should).

I think those are good points. Our children expect to have immediate excitement (or maybe we expect to give them it). I'm not sure that's a good thing. Some really need the opportunity to sit down and experience a book with rather kinder events and slower developments, which are really more lifelike.

Jemima wrote: "I think those are good points. Our children expect to have immediate excitement (or maybe we expect to give them it). I'm not sure that's a good thing. Some really need the opportunity to sit down ..."

I find that such a difference even when I am reading myself, that I do generally neither want or expect the immediacy of excitement (or engagement) while many so-called millennials for lack of a better word expect that (on the other hand, it is a fine line, and with some older books, a slow start can be an issue if this slowness of plot development goes on and on and on).

Interestingly enough though, I think that in today's ever more fast paced world, children but even parents often expect immediacy for everything, including the act of learning. They expect their children to immediately be able to grasp a concept (and for teachers to be able to immediately instil this concept into a student and sorry, but while this might work with basic ideas, more often than not, concepts, problem solving skills, grammar rules and the like take time to be both understood and internalised).

I used to teach a Children's Literature course at the university level for future teachers. Until Robert Cormier's "The Chocolate War" (1974), children's literature had a very strict set of publishing criteria: wholesome, no violence, no questionable language, happy endings, no serious issues. Even in the 1060s it was a "Leave it to Beaver" world for kids' books.

"The Chocolate War" was the turning point for making children's literature more realistic. Cormier opened the way for Judy Blume and others. The faster paced books did come later. I sometimes miss the more leisurely books, but times change.

It's not surprising that books from the 1960's seem a little "boring" by current standards. However, I like what Jemima points out that children might surprise you. My kids loved the Borrowers series. Children still adore "Charlotte's Web" and other books from mid-twentieth century. When my youngest son was 4, my older two wanted me to read "Heidi" to them. I was reluctant (slow is putting it mildly) and told them if their brother didn't like it, I'd read it to them at another time. To my surprise, my youngest was the one who clamored for one more chapter.

In the 1960s, I didn't read age appropriate books. I read adult books because I found them more interest. I'm glad middle grade readers have more options now. I would have liked the books that are being published today, which might be one of the reasons I like reading them and passing them along to my nieces, nephews, and grandkids.

Like you Cora, by the time I was 10, I was reading adult books (mainly mysteries) as I was a prolific reader and had read all the children's books in the local library - there was no such genre as Middle School in the 1960s - in Australia anyway. As a child, I do remember enjoying Alice in Wonderland, the Billabong books by Mary Grant Bruce and the fantasy books written by Irish author, Patricia Lynch. I should revisit Patricia Lynch titles now. I am now a teacher librarian in a Prep-Year 12 school and love reading (and of course promoting) Middle Grade and Young Adult titles.

Jennifer wrote: "Great post Cora.

I do think Charlotte's Web benefits from its strong opening line: "Where's Papa going with that axe?", and immediate life-and-death stakes. The Borrowers opens with "It was Mrs M..."

Oh, I agree that the older books are often harder to read and more likely to wander all over the place. I think when we were children we were enthralled with the story and the other stuff doesn't matter.

Cora wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "Great post Cora.

I do think Charlotte's Web benefits from its strong opening line: "Where's Papa going with that axe?", and immediate life-and-death stakes. The Borrowers opens w..."

Actually, I have seen that tendency with both older and newer books. And a bit of expansiveness and so-called wandering all over the place is actually not so bad. A book that is too slavishly one sided is often as bad as a book that goes off on too many tangents (one needs a good balance of both).

Carmel wrote: "Like you Cora, by the time I was 10, I was reading adult books (mainly mysteries) as I was a prolific reader and had read all the children's books in the local library - there was no such genre as ..."

I sometimes think being a librarian would be the perfect job. Guiding kids towards good books or just books they want to read would be wonderful. I'm all for any kind of reading. I spent a lot of time at the library when I was young, and my librarian seemed to know exactly what I should read. She was my go to person for new books.

You should go back and read Lynch. I love Nancy Drew when I was young, but soon switched to adult mysteries. After revisiting Nancy Drew, I understood why I switched, but I'm still glad those books were there for me. They got me started on a lifetime love of mysteries.

As one of those people who was in fact a child in the 60s and 70s, I find this discussion interesting. I didn't seem to have a problem with the slower pace of many of those books--I read and re-read Black Beauty, for example, as well as books like Little Women and Anne of Green Gables were, by modern standards, nothing does happen. (Or the Bobbsey Twins, heaven help me).

But I also loved my Hardy Boys and the adventures in those books, and by jr. high (so say age 12 or 13) had graduated to Louis L'Amour westerns and adult science fiction; I would argue that very little SF of that time was in fact for children (there are a few, but I saw some on the list that I would not at all consider kids' books).

To be honest, from about 2nd grade up, I'd read anything I could get my hands on, and doubly so if it was about horses.

Jennifer wrote: "Rebecca, ditto re the horses!! ;)"

Rebecca and Jennifer: I agree.

I still love Anne of Green Gables. Those books are so charming. My kids loved them too. They wore them out. I just bought my nieces (12) the first two Anne books. They seem to trust me and will read just about anything I tell them is good.

I think the reason that so many of us (1960-1970s kids) read "adult" books as kids and teens is because we quickly out grew the "leave it to Beaver" type books that were for our ages group. The adult books were the fun/interesting books, and I don't thinks parents had to worry too much about content. I don't remember reading anything shockingly explicit.

I don't remember reading the Bobsey Twins, but I loved Nancy Drew--those stories got me hooked on mysteries. I outgrew Nancy Drew before I reached my teens, but I always loved Anne of Green Gables, Little Women, et al. Funny, I was about 12 or 13 when I switched to mysteries, crime, and gothic romances--I thought those heroines were pretty dumb to go outside to investigating sounds in the dark, but I loved reading them. My brother introduced me to science fiction and fantasy.

Today, there are so many good books for kids, I'm a little envious, which is probably why I like reading children and YA books. Can't even count the times I've thought, "I wish I has this book when I was growing up."

BTW: l love this group.

Mmmmm, horsey books. Now there's a theme for BOTM!!

Jemima wrote: "Mmmmm, horsey books. Now there's a theme for BOTM!!"

Definitely!!

Jemima wrote: "Mmmmm, horsey books. Now there's a theme for BOTM!!"

Yes!

Jemima wrote: "Mmmmm, horsey books. Now there's a theme for BOTM!!"

The only problem will be which horse book to actually nominate and then later choose; I have so many favourites.

Manybooks wrote: "The only problem will be which horse book to actually nominate and then later choose; I have so many favourites."

Well, it could be limited by the criteria for BOTM - easily available, for example. I'm also thinking we might specify that any 'older' books have to be timeless... so that I suspect something like Misty of Chincoteague might be okay, whereas the ones I read like Jill's Gymkhana may have aged beyond enjoyability. Unless it fits historical, like Black Beauty, perhaps.

Jemima wrote: "Manybooks wrote: "The only problem will be which horse book to actually nominate and then later choose; I have so many favourites."

Well, it could be limited by the criteria for BOTM - easily avai..."

I consider both Misty and Black Beauty timeless.

Those are both amazing books. And maybe add The Black Stallion to the list of timeless horse books...oops. Looks like I've started a nomination thread here!

Rebecca wrote: "Those are both amazing books. And maybe add The Black Stallion to the list of timeless horse books...oops. Looks like I've started a nomination thread here!"

All books that are lovely ...

Hold it! We won't be doing horsey books for BOTM until at least May!

Jemima wrote: "Hold it! We won't be doing horsey books for BOTM until at least May!"

So...hold your hosses!

(sorry).

Rebecca wrote: "Jemima wrote: "Hold it! We won't be doing horsey books for BOTM until at least May!"

So...hold your hosses!

(sorry)."

GROAN :D