yay, ya!

It turns out that tween and YA books aren't just for kids (and library students) anymore. In The Kids' Books Are All Right, Pamela Paul confesses that, though she is an adult, she's hooked on books for tweens and teens-- and she's not alone. From Harry Potter to The Hunger Games, Paul writes, adults are devouring books marketed towards kids. She cites a number of reasons for this. Some writers who have traditionally written for adults (Carl Hiassen, Francine Prose, John Grisham) are trying their hand at books for the younger set, and adults familiar with their work give these books a try. Paul cites the burgeoning youth lit consumer culture as another reason; time, money, and energy are devoted to capitalize on this fast growing market.

The biggest reason adults are reading YA and tween books is the simplest, says Paul: they're just great books. They are exciting, suspenseful, and fun. You don't have to work too hard at them. They're straightforward, heartfelt, and satisfying. There are books written in a series, and there is tremendous collective excitement and suspense as fans anticipate new additions featuring their favorite characters and settings (the hype Paul describes surrounding the forthcoming release of Stephanie Collins' Mocking Jay almost makes me want to try reading The Hunger Games again, but for the pesky dead children theme).

As the field of tween and YA literature has grown and expanded, this genre has made a name for itself as innovative, fresh, and exciting. Why wouldn't adults want to read along? This article made me think about my own experiences with the genre-- leaving a wedding early to stand in line for the midnight release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, laughing along with Diary of a Wimpy Kid (and incessantly saying "Bink says Boo!"), introducing the Eragon audio book to my husband, who now enjoys his hour long commute to work, but mostly thinking about kids out there enjoying the same books. Not only do adults want to read these books, but kids want to read them. And that is the whole point.

Paul, Pamela. "The Kids' Books Are All Right." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 6 Aug. 2010. Web. Retrieved 10 Aug. 2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/books/review/Paul-t.html?_r=3&ref=books

censorship and the role of the librarian

I think a lot about intellectual freedom and access to information when it comes to tweens. This age group is in need of information about all kinds of topics, and today's tweens are growing up during this great age of information. My general viewpoint is, information is good. Guidance about how to interpret information is also good. While I'm not always as gung-ho as my colleagues about information access ("sure kids, look at porn on the library computer!"), it seems to me that a librarian is not in the position to arbitrarily limit tweens' (or anyone's) access to library materials. Right? Right.

Apparantly, a librarian did just that recently, and it's causing an uproar. According to School Library Journal, the library director of the Burlington Country Library System in Burlington, NJ has issued a directive that all copies of Revolutionary Voices: A Multicultural Queer Youth Anthology (Alyson, 2000) be removed from circulation. The librarian did this despite no formal challenge being raised, and cited child pornography as the reason for the removal of the book. The book in question has earned praise from School Library Journal as well as GLSEN (The Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network). It is unclear exactly what prompted the librarian to order the book's removal, but her decision was upheld by the Library System's Board of Commissioners.

It's hard to tell from the outside, but this seems like a pretty outrageous and egregious exercise of power. It also reminds me of the enormous power librarians possess as gatekeepers of information, and the restraint with which that power needs to be exercised. Certainly, if a book is genuinely pornographic, that I say, get it out of the library.* But it's hard to believe that whoever works in collections development is choosing pornographic titles for the library. Also disturbing is the lack of a clear challenge to this book. There might be occasions where it is truly appropriate to remove a book that is inappropriate or offensive, based on concerns raised by the community.* But in the absence of a clearly documented challenge process, the whole situation winds up feeling fishy to me, especially given the "controversial" nature of this book. The irony, of course, is that there may be tweens out there who desperately need exactly this book, and it's a shame for their information access to be muddled in this way.

*cue the ALA and their pitchforks...

Barack, L. (2010, July 27). NJ library, citing child pornography, removes GLBT book. School Library Journal, Retrieved from http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/slj/home/886066-312/nj_library_citing_child_pornography.html.csp

UPDATE: Not such a random act by this librarian after all. The facists religious right put her up to it.

summer reading

Yesterday, on the phone...

Me: "What's your summer reading this year?"
My 17 year old brother: "Oh, The Odyssey and some other sh*t."

I had to laugh.The Odyssey was written about 3000 years ago, and has probably been assigned to every high school or college student to read since then. Presumably, my brother's English teacher has some good reason for assigning The Odyssey. Does that make my brother excited to jump into his summer reading? Not so much. Give him the 497 page manual for his Emergency Medical Technician training course, or Facebook, and he's perfectly happy to read. Reading about colleges holds his interest; also reading texts from friends. Should this sort of summer reading "count?"

According to Tara Parker-Pope, yes. In her article, "Summer Must-Read for Kids? Any Book," Parker-Pope describes the academic benefits of children continuing to read over summer vacation. According to a University of Tennessee study, a group of low-income students retained reading skills over the summer when given high-interest books to read during vacation, as compared to students who didn't have access to books. The key to the success of this project, researchers asserted, was letting students choose books that were of interest to them; books like biographies of Britney Spears and The Rock, and books connected to popular movies and TV shows like Hannah Montana. When children are excited about their reading choices, the article claims, they read more. And reading more is good.

The students profiled in the University of Tennessee study were first and second graders, but its findings have implications for tween students as well. Librarians have an important role to play in helping connect students of all ages with books and other high interest reading materials. Since teachers (who assign summer reading) and parents may have a specific type of book in mind for tweens to read. Librarians can interact with kids around books without an agenda, and we can empower them to make choices that are exciting and engaging.
 

Parker-Pope, T. (2010, August 2). Summer Must-Read for Kids? Any Book. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/02/summer-must-read-for-kids-any-book/

 
photo credit: The Art of Manliness blog, featuring a post on the 50 best books for boys and young men

on twitter

“If all the world was once a stage, it has now become a reality TV show: we mere players are not just aware of the camera; we mug for it.” –Peggy Orenstein

In “I Tweet, Therefore I Am,” Peggy Orenstein considers the impact of social media like twitter on users’ sense of empathy, privacy, and self image. Orenstein describes her own meta-awareness of her actions as she searches for tweetable moments, from the grocery store to political sphere. And while she describes the creative fun of crafting poetic tweets, she wonders also if all of this external identity manufacturing leaves a deficit of introspection or present moment awareness. While writing about an afternoon spent with her daughter, Orenstein realizes her tweet “was not really about my own impressions: it was about how I imagined — and wanted — others to react to them” (Orenstein, 11).

How does growing up with this performance-oriented awareness affect tweens? During a time that is by nature self-centered, when identities are shifting and connections are sought with peers, how does the extra layer of creating an online persona amplify the journey of tween identity? What impact does it have on a developing sense of privacy to have social media outlets that can make everything public? Websites like twistori.com are emblematic of this public/private dynamic. Orenstein cites a study by Sherry Turkle, whose forthcoming book Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, explores the impact of social media on relationships. Turkle’s study concluded that the presence of an audience does indeed influence young peoples’ relationship to their own self-identity. As Orenstein describes: “Among young people especially [Turkle] found that the self was increasingly becoming externally manufactured rather than internally developed: a series of profiles to be sculptured and refined in response to public opinion” (Orenstein, 11). To me, this sounds like a negative effect of social media. Perhaps, though, there’s another, more positive side to this phenomenon. Maybe this practiced self-awareness can translate from the external to the internal, and will help tweens who use social media like twitter become more genuinely self-reflective in other areas of their lives. Maybe the presence of an audience can help influence tween behavior in positive directions, too. Here's hoping.

Orenstein, P. (2010, August 1). I tweet, therefore I am. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/magazine/01wwln-lede-t.html?_r=1

what tweens read

“Should kids be allowed to read whatever they want, so long as they're reading?”

Katie Baker raises this question in 'Sweet Valley High,' the Great Retweening and Why Boys Won't Read, a fantastic whirlwind exploration of the tween literary and cultural landscape. Baker profiles the many books, TV shows, and other cultural products for girls, and explores the growing concerns of parents, educators, and cultural critics that boys are being left behind. She references a recent New York Times piece by Nicholas Kristof, who suggests that one of the ways to help boys engage more with the increasingly verbal world around them is to encourage them to read “lowbrow” books. Baker also discusses the re-release of two classic, decidedly non-literary series for girls: Sweet Valley High and The Babysitters Club. She cites interesting data profiling the reading habits of SVH fans, which demonstrates that reading trashy books does not scar you for life, apparently.

So. Is lowbrow reading better than no reading at all? Is Captain Underpants just as good as Moby Dick?

Well, yes. Reading Captain Underpants is better than no reading at all. The back of the cereal box is better than no reading at all. But that seems to be only part of the point to me. I think it’s dangerous to throw our arms open to Captain Underpants and his kind, only to have the story end there. Yes, we want tweens to read. Yes, they should have choice and agency about what they’re reading. But it’s also important that librarians, educators, and parents continue to work hard to source engaging, high quality materials for boys and girls to read, and present them in compelling ways. I don’t think it has to be either/or.

When I taught second grade, many boys in my class loved Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh cards. Boys who otherwise were only interested in banging themselves against walls could sit in rapt attention for 45 minutes, looking at cards, discussing powers, and reading all the while. Hooray for that. We had Pokemon card drawing time, we had student presentations on the various Yu-Gi-Oh characters and all of their fancy powers. Those cards and games became part of our classroom lexicon, because they were important to the children. But were they permissible at quiet reading time? Nope. Because books are important too.

We can talk to kids about these choices. We can relate our experiences to theirs. For example, sometimes I feel like reading a complicated novel; sometimes I feel like reading a cookbook or knitting pattern. Sometimes I feel like reading blogs. Sometimes I feel like reading People Magazine articles about Angelina Jolie’s new tattoo. These are all fine choices. But if I only read People, then that might not be so good. Part of becoming an avid, lifelong reader is exploring and celebrating all kinds of reading behaviors. If books about nose-picking are the most compelling for a fun read, that’s fabulous. And probably that shouldn’t be the only sort of book offered to a child. Especially as Kristof, etc. are talking about lackluster school performance, we want to be careful not to accept too low a standard for boys (or girls—Hannah Montana is a different kind of low standard all together. To see it touted as confirmation that there’s never been a better time to be a tween girl by Ada Calhoun in Baker’s article was a little unnerving. But I digress.).

Maybe I don’t digress, actually. The same highbrow/lowbrow dichotomy implicit in this discussion of tween reading behavior also seems implied in the discussion of boys vs. girls. That boys are not doing well is an assertion I don’t dispute (I like agreeing with Nicholas Kristof, plus, there’s data). We need to work harder and do better for boys. The place where this argument gets dicey for me is with the assumption that, because boys aren’t doing well that girls are doing great, that because there are shows about girls on the Disney Channel, all is right with the world. We need to do better for boys and girls. We need to give them lots of choices: lots of Captain Underpants and Hardy Boys and Sweet Valley High and also The Time Warp Trio and Island of the Blue Dolphins. We need to learn what’s appealing about video games and iCarly, and also give tweens the language and knowledge to become savvy cultural critics. We need to make sure that we don’t have only Captain Underpants expectations, but also welcome and respond to our students’ and patrons’ excitement about reading, regardless of what they want to read.

what to make of miley

Oh, Disney. Disney, Disney, Disney.

Such a track record you have with the tween stars. Britney… Christina… Hillary…Lindsay… Miley. You find them, you make them superstars. Of course you own half the world, so that helps. In Making New Mileys, we learn about the magic behind the Magic™, and how, with the tween consumer market being what it is, you don’t have plans to stop anytime soon.

So. Fine. Except…well, except that these are children being influenced here. Not only the children who consume these stars’ movies, TV shows, music, concerts, clothing, etc., but the children who are made into stars, and held to impossible double standards. The girls especially (Jonas Brothers, I’m not so worried about you). It is curious to me how so many of these stars, who start out with wholesome roles on the Mickey Mouse Club or some other Disney show, evolve their persona (with the help of marketing teams, we assume) into something decidedly unwholesome, and perhaps not appropriate for their original audience. How do 8 year olds understand Miley Cyrus, who they’ve come to know and love as wholesome Hannah Montana, wearing next to nothing and dancing on a stripper pole at the Teen Choice Awards? What does it mean that Miley is 17 and adults are telling her that short shorts and stripper poles are good ideas? Not just good, but marketable?

Why does this seem to be the formula for female tween success? How do companies like Disney, who are in the business of marketing these starts to tweens, handle this balancing act? There is a times a tacit acknowledgment that some of this stuff isn’t for kids. When Christina Aguilera, a Mickey Mouse Club alum, gained popularity with the song Genie in a Bottle, Disney promoted her through airing the song and video on Disney TV and radio—with the lyrics altered. It’s as if Disney was saying, yes, this song about being rubbed the right way is probably not appropriate for our audience, but we’re going to find a way to sell it—and Christina—anyway. Presumably Disney viewers were left to fend for themselves when Aguilera’s next album—full of leather underwear and not much else—premiered.

Britney Spears’ first video, Baby One More Time, featured the singer in a provocative schoolgirl outfit. An interview with the video’s director, Nigel Dick, shed some light about the wardrobe choice. “Dick gives full credit to Spears for that idea. ‘My idea originally was just jeans and T-shirts, and we were at the wardrobe fitting and Britney holds up the jeans and T-shirts and says, “Wouldn't I wear a schoolgirl outfit?”’ he said (Vena, 2009). So who is to blame? The male, adult director who passes the buck in order to make one, or the teenage girl, who may or may not know that her outfit presents a certain message? How do we sort this out with, and for, the tweens we work with?

Is this why Disney needs a perpetual queue of up and coming talent? So Selena can replace Miley who can replace Lindsay? Is that an inevitability of marketing media to tweens? Is there a point at which Disney has to part ways with starts whose sexy antics don’t fit the Disney image anymore? Or are these stars just growing up and therefore become less relateable? Where is that line? Miley Cyrus and the stripper pole is okay; Miley Cyrus in Vanity Fair isn’t. If I were Miley Cyrus, I’d be confused. If I were Disney, I’d feel responsible.

Making New Mileys
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1930657,00.html

Britney Spears ' ... Baby One More Time' Video Director Looks Back
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1626312/20091113/spears_britney.jhtml

a wee rant

Peggy Orenstein’s essay, Playing at Sexy, explores the intersection of tween girls witnessing and mirroring overtly sexual cultural products, and examines their impact. Orenstein describes a widely viewed and discussed YouTube video of a group of 8 and 9 year old girls performing a dance routine to Beyonce’s Single Ladies, inspired by the original, racy choreography in the song’s video. She discusses the alarming, age-inappropriate sexual suggestiveness of products and performances marketed to children and tweens: thong underwear, Monster High dolls (pictured above), the pole-dancing antics of Miley Cyrus, and, of course, Barbie, who frankly seems like the lease of our worries at this point. Which should indicate how big our worries should be.

It’s hard for me to read and reflect on topics like this in an intellectual way- I just wind up feeling so upset and a little sick. I feel so frustrated with how enormous and pernicious the issue of marketing sex to children is, how girls are taught that their image reflects their identity and value, and how the same people wagging their fingers at the impropriety of girls dancing around in their underwear are letting their children watch Beyonce videos in the first place, or buying Barbies.

I’m not a prude. If there was a genuine benefit to tween girls here, then that would be a different story. According to Orenstein, though, early play-acting at sexuality only serves to confuse girls about sexual desire and desirability as they get older. She writes: “Those bootylicious grade-schoolers in the dance troupe presumably don’t understand the meaning of their motions (and thank goodness for it), but, precisely because of that, they don’t connect — and may never learn to connect — sexy attitude to erotic feelings” (Orenstein, 11).

Is this problem new? No, not really. Is it a bigger problem than it was before? I don’t know, but it is coming at tweens from all directions. Mattel, who owns the the Monster High franchise mentioned by Orenstein, plans to release dolls, video games, movies, and books simultaneously, so that “teens and tweens [can] discover the brand in their own way and engage with the Monster High characters and storyline through multiple points of entry” (Tim Gilpin, Mattel, as cited in tradershuddle.com).

What does this have to do with serving tweens? I think it’s important, in the name of knowing our patrons, to know what tweens are up against, what messages they are receiving from society, and who they are trying to be as a result. Certainly all tweens won’t respond to these cultural influences in the same way-- the landscape of their lives is more nuanced and complex than that. But it’s a piece of the puzzle of a puzzling age.

Also, if tweens wind up reading the Monster High books, I suppose I’m required to be pleased that they are reading at all. Perhaps I would be. They may not understand the marketing machine, but we as adults can and should act as advocates and protectors on their behalf.

I think we can do better for them.

Orenstein, P. (2010, June 13). Playing at sexy. The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com.

Mattel unveils monster-themed franchise. from Traders Huddle. Retrieved June 27, 2010 from www.tradershuddle.com.