Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Library World Volume 52 Issue 9

The Library World Volume 52 Issue 9 THERE is no doubt that a lot of literary rubbish is current under the name of children's books there always was but it has become rather more apparent in recent times. Mr. McColvin, in a useful article in The Library Review, presents a nostalgic sigh for the days of Henty and Fenn and even of the earlier Ballantyne and upon that builds a somewhat severe criticism of the modern children's library. As so often with writers on this theme, he uses no halftones and points a rather dismal scene in primary black and white, and his moral is that it would be better to be without these libraries than that they should supply illwritten, badly devised and quite useless slush which makes no demands upon the child. If this were a complete picture we should agree. It is not in the first place, it is based mainly on fiction, a very incomplete view of children's books. But, even considering fiction only, while such writers as Noel Streatfeild, Elizabeth Goudge, Arthur Ransome and David Severn and a dozen others come to the pen are supplying us with books, it cannot be wholly true. Then, as one of our correspondents implies elsewhere in these pages, children are of many ages and stages, and it is not wrong to give little ones simple things. It is vain to long for the return of the days when the Pilgrim's Progress, Foxe's Martyrs and the Dore editions of Paradise Lost and the Cary translation of Dante's Inferno adorned, and required dusting weekly, on every parlour table, and to many subsequent readers Ballantyne, except for Coral Island, is as dead as the Pharaohs. We do thank Mr. McColvin, however, for bringing children's librarians to that state of vexed irritation which will induce them to reconsider their work, increase their standards and recall the commonplace that their almost entire purpose is to produce intelligent adult readers. The T.L.S., in an appreciation of Mr. McColvin's article, suggests that the influence of the children's librarian can be even greater in this direction than the teacher's, but, if what he asserts is true, through our libraries many children may be deprived of the intellectual capacity to read anything worth while. Does Mr. McColvin really believe that http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png New Library World Emerald Publishing

The Library World Volume 52 Issue 9

New Library World , Volume 52 (9): 24 – Apr 1, 1950
Download PDF
20 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/the-library-world-volume-52-issue-9-SyV3OI56JU

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
0307-4803
DOI
10.1108/eb009335
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

THERE is no doubt that a lot of literary rubbish is current under the name of children's books there always was but it has become rather more apparent in recent times. Mr. McColvin, in a useful article in The Library Review, presents a nostalgic sigh for the days of Henty and Fenn and even of the earlier Ballantyne and upon that builds a somewhat severe criticism of the modern children's library. As so often with writers on this theme, he uses no halftones and points a rather dismal scene in primary black and white, and his moral is that it would be better to be without these libraries than that they should supply illwritten, badly devised and quite useless slush which makes no demands upon the child. If this were a complete picture we should agree. It is not in the first place, it is based mainly on fiction, a very incomplete view of children's books. But, even considering fiction only, while such writers as Noel Streatfeild, Elizabeth Goudge, Arthur Ransome and David Severn and a dozen others come to the pen are supplying us with books, it cannot be wholly true. Then, as one of our correspondents implies elsewhere in these pages, children are of many ages and stages, and it is not wrong to give little ones simple things. It is vain to long for the return of the days when the Pilgrim's Progress, Foxe's Martyrs and the Dore editions of Paradise Lost and the Cary translation of Dante's Inferno adorned, and required dusting weekly, on every parlour table, and to many subsequent readers Ballantyne, except for Coral Island, is as dead as the Pharaohs. We do thank Mr. McColvin, however, for bringing children's librarians to that state of vexed irritation which will induce them to reconsider their work, increase their standards and recall the commonplace that their almost entire purpose is to produce intelligent adult readers. The T.L.S., in an appreciation of Mr. McColvin's article, suggests that the influence of the children's librarian can be even greater in this direction than the teacher's, but, if what he asserts is true, through our libraries many children may be deprived of the intellectual capacity to read anything worth while. Does Mr. McColvin really believe that

Journal

New Library World – Emerald Publishing

Published: Apr 1, 1950

There are no references for this article.