Back to the book with the funny title. There it was, The History of the United States: Told in One Syllable Words by Josephine Pollard. Of course the subtitle itself breaks the book’s promise, but the entire concept seems absurd. A
After doing a bit of research, I learned that McLoughlin published a whole series of “One Syllable Word” books and that the volumes actually used multisyllabic words, but they were shown broken into syllables (for example, Wash-ing-ton). So their claim to fame clearly was a case of false advertising. But it hit a nerve because it implied that a hokey device such as breaking words into syllables could make a book more appropriate for young readers. It caused me to flash back to my early years of writing for Scholastic's magazines, when every article had to be “leveled” with a readability formula. Nothing inhibits creativity more than performing long division on the sentences you’ve just written.
A friend of mine suggested that using those readability formulas might have helped me internalize certain rules about writing for children. Maybe so, but I’ve always believed that any good writing was a matter of rhythm and flow, not numbers. That’s why I felt so liberated when I wrote my first book, A Whole New Ball Game. Although a trade book is a commercial enterprise, I felt unrestrained in every way. There were no word counts, no page counts, no rules about how to present the story I wanted to tell. Sometimes all that freedom can be terrifying, but in this case it was empowering.
So as charming as the McLoughlin Bros. books were, I’m glad I live and write at a time when successful children’s nonfiction is influenced more by inspiration and insight than by syllable counts and the formulas of Spache and Dale-Chall. But if you happen to be in
By the way, that monosyllabic president was James Polk.
3 comments:
Trade book authors may not use readability formulas today per se, but those who write for the school market, unfortunately, are still, way too often, at their mercy. And though, to my knowledge, school libraries do not use a readability formula when trying to determine what titles to add to their collection, there are certainly other rules and criteria (both written, spoken, and just understood) that they must either accept, ignore, or fight when making their purchases.
Though I agree that we are in a much better place than those who wrote for kids a century or so ago, there are still many underlying "rules" that apply when writing for kids--some good and valid; others that perhaps, a century from now, will still be seen as antiquated--things like whether some will be offended if religion is presented in certain ways (unless of course they are published by a religious publisher), how family is depicted (how traditional or not), and so on.
We've come a long way, but even today there is still always room for improvement.
My son just read your entry and you've inspired him to go see the exhibit with me this Sunday. The Brooklyn Ice Cream Factory afterwards was my idea.
The Ice Cream Factory is definitely a good selling point.
Also look at the Little Slovenly Peter booklets. They're cautionary tales, where a kid gets his thumbs cut off because he's a thumb sucker, and an overeater actually explodes. Scary stuff!
Post a Comment