The problem with Junie B. Jones

Seems to me the key is to ask how the school is going to the use the books and why. If you are paying all that money for a private school, it entitles you to ask these kinds of questions and the school should be happy to tell you. Maybe the goal is to teach kids the joy of stories. Maybe there will be moral lessons attached to the moppet's misbahvior. Maybe they are going to make a whole lesson of correcting the character's grammar (although I can't imagine anything drearier than talking grammar with first graders). You won't know until you ask.

As for Ms Flanagan, I guess it doesn't take a village to raise children when you, like her, are a SAHM with a paid staff of employees to do the work. Me, I like the idea of a community and the sense that my wife and I aren't in this alone in developing our children. And we do it without paying nannies and personal assistants.

I don't know about Junie B. Jones. Sounds like we'll be avoiding that series. I do, however, have trouble with my mother- and father-in-law putting on "kids'" cartoons when we come over to their house. Butt jokes, slang, and general ugliness abound. The worst of it is that no matter how much I hint about it, it's their television, so I can't just ask them to turn that stupid thing to something more appropriate. And yeah, they think I'm a little off my rocker.

The first time I read a Junia B. Jones book to my daughter, I didn't really like it. The grammar was bad, so I was always correcting it. She seemed to be setting a bad example, etc... In fact, I don't think we even finished it and I swore we would NEVER read those books. Similar to the quoted author's experience.

However, I absolutely LOVE the books now. My daughter's teacher read them to her in kindergarten and she had 1st grader friends who liked to read them, so I tried again. I read them out loud to my daughter, who is entering the first grade, and just enjoy acting out the stories. You can do a lot with voice inflection. They are so entertaining. My daughter knows what is appropriate behavior, so we have had some discussions about how Junia could act better. I find myself laughing out loud at her antics. It's not so different from Beverly Cleary's Ramona character (those beloved books I read as a child). My daughter loves reading them on her own as well, which I'm only too happy to encourage since I want her to to have a love for reading.

So, I encourage parents of young children to read 2-3 of the Junia books before giving up on them completely. I now find them simply delightful.

Okay, I have lots of experience with this one. My seven-year-old daughter adores Junie B. Jones! We first discovered the books when our local librarian recommended them about 2 & 1/2 years ago. I totally concur with your reader, Rod, that the grammar and malapropisms can be hard to deal with. When Amelia was younger, I was constantly having to "edit" what I was reading to her. Now that she's old enough to read the books aloud to me, she gets a kick out of telling ME when Junie B's misusing the language. My daughter attends a well-respected public school (it's a "school of choice" with an "arts-infused curriculum") and her first grade teacher read several Junie B. books aloud to the class last year, which kind of surprised me, given the language issue. However, I have to disagree with your reader when she says Junie B.'s behavior is "consequence-free." From what I remember off the top of my head, Junie is always getting in trouble for her naughty behavior, and typically ends up "learning her lesson." I kind of see her as a modern day Dennis the Menace. She definitely provides lots of "teachable moments."

All in all, I'd say these books are a mixed blessing. I'll confess that I enjoy them, mainly because they're so darn funny. And they're VERY wholesome, compared to so much of what's out there for kids.

There's nothing wrong with Junie B. Jones books, they are entertaining and funny. My children she used to devour those like candy, and it didn't affect their grammar or behavior. I'm not sure I'm thrilled to hear that Junie is being taught in school, and I do agree there are much better choices.

You have to be on top of this stuff all the time. My daughter's middle school Texas history teacher thought it would be good to show the kids the movie "The Alamo," which is rated PG-13, at a time when we almost never let her watch a movie so rated. I got zero help from the administration of the school on the issue, and I was the only parent I knew of who complained. Why did he need to show a Hollywood movie to teach that lesson? They are terrible about showing movies all the time in our public schools, just to kill time. That's why I have no sympathy at all when teachers complain about not having enough time.

Rod,
I respect that you want to keep trash away from your kids. I know nothing about Junie B. Jones, this is the first time I've heard of it. And I don't know what I will do as a parent, as I don't have any kids yet.

But it's nothing short of hilarious when your reader defines him/herself as a normal middle-class American with normal middle class values, and then in the next sentence goes off about how they were the only parents to question PG movies and the only parents to question Junie B. Jones. Which is it man? Are you the only parents who prevent your kids from seeing this (an oasis of decency in a cesspool culture) or do all parents agree with you? Here's a hint. If no one else is complaining, maybe that's because they don't agree with you. That obviously says nothing about right or wrong, but don't pretend that you're the middle. You're well to the right of the middle.

It wasn't PG, it was PG-13, and I never said I was in the middle! But you do raise a good point. I stay at home, so maybe I have a little more time and energy to put into being watchful about this kind of thing. I think most of the other parents all worked and had very busy lives and simply ignored the movie issue or told themselves they were "choosing their battles." It may be that if the other parents had the energy, they would have complained also, and it may also be that the middle school "village" of parents honestly doesn't mind their 11 and 12 year olds being shown a movie that my movie review sources indicated would be best only for adults. I did at least convince the teacher to bleep out the cuss words.

I have two daughters, seven and twelve, and I have avoided these books. The poor grammar being the main reason. This is a series that gets cranked out for mass sales. Very different from Tom Sawyer or Huckleberry Finn. These are books with real cultural value and where the poor language is contrasted against the good.
For graded readers we have stuck with Amelia Bedelia, Frog and Toad and Little Bear. Mary Pope Osborne has the great Magic Tree House series that investigates history, science and literature. There is too much good to dwell on the mediocre.

That last post was mine. Sorry. It's the wine, don't ya know.

At times like these I have sympathy with C.S. Lewis, who voices through the Professor in "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe," the exasperated sentiment, "I wonder what they do teach them at these schools?"

The point is not whether the "Junie" books are entertaining mind candy, filling a spot in the books children read that was once occupied by "penny dreadfuls" and has continued to be occupied by any number of sloppily-written serials in every genre and format imaginable, from the offerings of the once-formidable Stratemeyer syndicate to the Archie comics and beyond. The point is whether such books should be presented as educational materials, or have any spot in the classroom at all beyond some shelf in the back of the room where light reading for rainy-day recesses may be kept.

Even in the first grade there are far better literary offerings available for the teacher to read aloud to the class, and as far as the students' own reading efforts are concerned, books which champion bad grammar or misspelled/misplaced words are hardly the most effective way to teach children to navigate the phonetic and spelling minefield that is the English language. Consider for one moment how many pronunciations there are for the simple "ough" combination and you start to recall the difficulties; why waste time handing children books which seem designed more to prolong the confusion than to assist them in overcoming it?

Frankly, were I in the position of the person who wrote to Rod, I would complain to the school on the grounds that I'm not paying good money for my children to hear stories read aloud that might just as easily be heard at any public library's reading sessions any Saturday of the year, for free; I expect the educative value of materials presented to my child to be directly proportional to the sum of money I'm handing over to the school system. After all, I've contracted with them to educate my child in the belief that the education they are offering to my child will at least meet, and hopefully exceed, my expectations.

Or I'd homeschool. But you knew I'd say that. :)

I read a snippet online. I can definitely see where parents would be put off by how Junie acts, but it's a story told in the first person by a kindergartner. The bad grammar is good characterization.

Some of the responses to this post point out one of the uglier consequences of the political polarization of everything. Everybody thinks everybody else is some kind of potential bad influence at best, or predatory deviant at worse. Go ahead, tell me there aren't parents who won't let their kids play with other kids in their neighborhood because they saw a certain political bumpersticker on their parent's car. Assuming they let their kids outside at all.

Posted by: Mike | August 15, 2008 5:51 PM

I agree, Mike. I long for the old days when our political leanings didn't brand us so completely. But you can't blame that all on "conservatives" who don't want their kids playing with "libertines." When I was self-professed "liberal," I got along with everyone. Liberals, conservatives, everyone. And they got along with me. A few years ago, I began becoming more conservative and, ultimately, returned to the Christian church after many, many years away. Because I'm a columnist by trade, and write about politics and culture for a local paper, everyone in my town eventually knew of my "conversion." It was only then that I began to lose friends, professional opportunities, and the general good will of my community. It caught me completely off-guard and has, in many ways, broken my heart. There are many children my daughter played with as a toddler and young child whose parents (once my good friends) want nothing to do with us now; most are university professors and all of them liberals. It's been hard on my entire family. I honestly don't know how it will ever get better.

Margaret, it appears that I did offend or upset you. You read my comments more negatively than I intended. I'm not wildly offended at Junie B. Jones, I didn't put my day-job credentials in my post, and I don't honestly care that much about this issue. I won't post again on children's books. My comments about "easy-reads" or chapter books in long series were more directed toward Rod. I'm glad for those of you whose fluent-reader children love the series. I wouldn't have. I also wouldn't have thought constructions like "runned" were believable. That's just me.

I was honestly more interested in the schooling question; perhaps I should have confined my comments to that. Person who wrote to Rod: I would reconsider the decent public schools you mentioned, or perhaps look into homeschooling with a few other children.

Hattio: I don't think the poster you criticized was the person who wrote to Rod.

If ungrammatical speech and hijinks are a problem, just wait 'til they get to Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn.

No offense, Anastasia, but your comment seems be the sort of thing that comes up when the study of literature is discussed.

Mark Twain employed dialect--so what's wrong with Junie B.?

Shakespeare wrote about illicit love--so why object to "Rainbow Party?"

Poe wrote stories of horror and suspense--so why not hand out Steven King novels to the class?

There's an odd idea in our society that the whole concept of literary merit is mere aesthetic snobbery, that the objection to reading Junie B. Jones books out loud to a first-grade class is really just an objection to the Voice of the People, that the relevance (I think that's the word Elizabeth was looking for, btw) of the book to the students' daily lives is more important than whether the book has any substance greater than a cartoon.

But that's not true. As as student of literature I'm happy to defend the rights of people to read whatever written nonsense is amusing enough to pass the time for beach-blanket or air travel purposes, and I agree that children should have access to amusing fluff too. But I object on principle to our extremely misguided tendency to pretend that the "Junie B." books are the modern equivalent to Twain, and so forth, and are thus suitable for classroom use; they aren't, and we're not doing children any favors when we remove their ability to discern the difference between books of substance and books that are no more weighty or substantial than a sit-com.

When my oldest son was starting school, I might have had a problem with the books, and I surely would have reacted like Erin. Now that I have tried homeschooling and deemed it not a good fit for our family, I have to accept that there are no perfect schools.

So, you have to look at the school situation overall. So the first grade teacher is for unknown reasons, at some point in the year, reading a book that's not great. What else? Are there some families in the school who do share your values? How many? Does the administration share your values (maybe not in this one instance - but in others?) Is the school teaching your child how to read, how to study, how to learn? Do the teachers in upper grades have the children read better material? If it is a religious school, is it sound theologically? Is the school so run by one or two people, that if they get unhappy and leave, the school will founder? Do your children enjoy being part of a larger community? Does the school deal well with bullies?

Frankly, if I got the answers I wanted to these other questions, I'd roll my eyes and let the book choice go.

I'm almost afraid to see how Erin would react to Captain Underpants.

"I'm almost afraid to see how Erin would react to Captain Underpants."

Tell me that's not your alter ego, Daniel.

:)

Actually, I'd react the same way: if parents want to let their kids read them that's a parenting value-judgment; I don't like the books and my kids don't read them, which is my choice.

However, if a school teacher wanted to teach them or read them aloud to the class, I'd have a problem with that, on the same grounds. They're not educational material. They are of, at best, extremely limited entertainment value for children of an age to think potty-jokes are the height of hilarity. Luckily for me, girls outgrow that stage early; some boys I know grew into men without ever outgrowing it.

As a doctoral student in an education college, I have been exposed to those who promote any reading and writing whatsoever even if it is grammatically incorrect or what have you. The theory behind using popular books is to get kids reading period. Some will go to the lowest common denominator while others try and challenge the kids. It all seems to depend on the teacher's philosophy of teaching.

The other problem is that education tends to jump on the next best thing before all the evidence is in. Right now the trend in education is to cater to students' interests while in a few years it may change. Education has a big problem with being trendy.

The other problem is that you may have a wide range of abilities and interests in a single classroom so trying to make everyone happy is impossible.

The parents should be happy the school allows books to be read aloud at all. There are a few reading programs available that are scripted in the sense that the teacher is told what to say and when to say it. The teacher could be replaced by a robot really...

I think the key is to talk to your kids about what they are doing in school. If you don't like what is going on, explain to your children why you think it is inappropriate. Turn it into an opportunity for your children to learn how to explain and defend their opinions and values, which will be far more valuable in the long run than what book was read.

I went to a private Catholic high school and I remember the teachers being floored at the SAT score this one girl had. They couldn't believe she scored so high because all she read was trashy romance novels. After that they were much more into getting us to just read anything at all.

Rod, I really like what you do here, but you are occasionally too sensitive. This is one of those times. Lighten up, dude. I don't recall bullying and I would weed out that particular title, but otherwise, c'mon do you think there's any chance that the grammar is going to hurt your kid? It is read for laughs at our house.

Keep up the good work (dude).

I was mortified the first time I read Junie B. Jones. They are awful books. We have received two now as prizes. They keep disappearing though.

No, my children don't rot because of them. Like others, I just don't think they have any business being in a classroom. On the whole, I'm grossly unimpressed with the commercialized garbage marketed to my children through the schools. Those who have been to a school book fair recently know what I'm talking about.

Well, it has been interesting to watch this discussion thread unfold. It has served, I think, as a Petri dish to observe both the best and worst instincts of our culture. A good snapshot.

For the record, I'm the individual who sent the original note to Rod. I was curious to see how this would play out, and I was honestly seeking multiple viewpoints as I attempted to figure out the best way to approach this issue with our daughter's teacher.

Let me deconstruct what I've observed with some detailed observations.

First, I think it's sad and awfully telling -- but probably correct -- that as one poster pointed out that my wife's and my own concerns about Junie B. Jones probably place us outside the mainstream of American society. I think that it's a bizarro, topsy-turvy world when two professional thirty-somethings with moderate political viewpoints and nominally Christian (but mostly secular) upbringings would be considered rigid and weird. But there it is, I suppose, and I think this is precisely the sort of thing Nietzsche had in mind in predicting the early 21st century would see a "total eclipse of all values."

Second, this is not a left-right issue, as I see it, or at least it shouldn't be. It's about insisting on rigorous academic standards and an appropriate paradigm under which young minds are shaped to carry forward the torch of civilization. Ideas matter, but the very idea that "ideas matter" is losing force in our culture just now. It has been fascinating to observe some people on this thread try to morph this into a left-right discussion. As one liberal commenter lamented, this shouldn't create a political divide. It should be about insisting on quality educational instruction. June B. Jones does not meet that test. I don't like Bratz dolls, either, for some of the same reasons, and that certainly should not be a left-right divide (most liberal feminists, I would warrant, find Bratz dolls incredibly troubling). Mindful parents should be able to agree that protecting our children's innocence is a top priority.

A bit of a digression: As this trend of trying to turn everything into a left-right divide continues, I think you'll continue to see a winnowing and division process occur. People will be forced to choose which side they're on. The latest PZ Myers controversy is one example of this. I used to be an agnostic, for example, but I found it increasingly difficult in this decade to say that with a straight face. I found myself more and more, thanks precisely to people like PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins, identifying as a theist, at first because I didn't want to be associated with such hateful fundamentalist materialism, but later because I began to see the clear rationality of the theist case. And I can clearly see now that appeals to reason with one set of people are truly ineffective, and that just about anything can be turned into a cultural battle with these folks. I find myself sympathizing increasingly with a countercultural point of view that I suppose could be labelled as traditionalist.

Third, here's the problem for those defending the Junie B. Jones books: I've actually read them, as I pointed out in my original post. And then I read some more just to confirm my initial reaction. They are junk. Not only that, but it goes beyond merely bad grammar. The bad behavior is contextualized as cute. And yes, my own daughter was easily able to spot these things even at the tender age of 4, when I first cracked open a Junie B. Jones book to read to her. She had already moved beyond the poorly-constructed language present in Junie B. Jones' lexicon when she was three, but that was probably because we'd adopted the strategy of using multi-syllabic words and complex sentences with her at a fairly early age.

Fourth, it's disturbing to me that some commenters (at least one teacher, for instance) seem to be implying that we ought to be relying on 5 and 6-year-olds to provide us with objective value judgments about such things (leave aside said teacher's inability to pick up a dictionary to determine if 'relatability' is a word). Isn't it our job to make objective value judgments about what children should be exposed to? I mean, aren't they, after all, the innocents we're trying to mold rather than the other way around? To put it more bluntly, who is in charge here? And just because a child happens to have the presence of mind to spot bad behavior and bad grammar (even if the adult parent or teacher seems incapable of doing so) that certainly doesn't mean there's some overarching value in reading said junk as a continual object lesson and having to stop at every page to talk about why this flawed piece of "children's literature" is so poorly-written.

Fifth, a commenter named "hattio" (who, interestingly, does not have kids; we can thank him for this full disclosure) thinks there's something outside the mainstream about our aversion to 4-year-olds watching PG-rated films. Also, hattio, just to clear this up, I am not the commenter named "Simpson Snail." I am the individual who wrote Rod with my initial concerns. We're two different people.

But to your point, hattio, unfortunately given where our culture is at the moment, you're probably right about my status as a countercultural weirdo. I don't wear it as a badge of honor. It just leaves me that much more bewildered and thunderstruck, 'man'. Because my viewpoint SHOULDN'T be outside the mainstream, else why are the films rated PG? By any objective standard, a 4-year-old should be watching G-rated fare, as this is deemed appropriate for a 4-year-old's psychological and emotional level, while a PG movie presumably isn't. If that isn't the case, you might as well throw out any objective standard and not rate films at all, in which case "Hostel" and "Brother Bear" could simply be placed alongside each other. Perhaps "Hostel" could even be used as an object lesson for pre-schoolers in why sadism can lead to depraved mass murder. Yes, I'm using hyperbole to make a point.

The truth is that in the downward slide of our culture, PG-rated "family" movies have crept into schools (as I pointed out in our own experience in a pre-K run by a church no less) without parental consent. These films are filled with sexual innuendo and potty-mouth language (words like "damn" and "hell" cropping up in cartoons marketed for children). The sexual innuendo sails right over the little ones' heads, no doubt, but I would argue that this trend is also a part of the general coarsening of our culture, and the loss of civility in general. Why would anyone, right or left, want to promote that? Is that really the hill upon which you want to take your stand, hattio? But rather than attack straw men about what you might think later on, I'll simply wait to hear back from you when you actually have innocent minds to protect within your sphere of responsibility.

Seventh, some commenters have weighed in with various shades of opinion about "sheltering" children. In some ancient cultures children were seen as little adults. One hopes that now we understand that children are indeed children, and deserve to be sheltered. I would, for instance, love to be a fly on the wall the first time that hattio is confronted with some affront to his unborn child's innocence. I've also seen many commenters referring to an 8-year-old being able to spot the humor in the Junie B. Jones books, and good for them. Of course, they aren't 6 are they? There is a difference, and I hope we can tell the difference. I certainly can.

Eighth, there have been hints here that I am hopelessly old-fashioned and rigid. This is a fascinating presupposition on the part of people who know nothing about me. We're not exactly hipsters, but my wife and I went to see "The Dark Knight" a few weeks back, and we absolutely loved it. I think it had a strong moral center, and it presents a stark picture of the end point of nihilism as a worldview. We're adults and we watched a movie made for adults. There were young children in the audience. This was not surprising, but it was incredibly saddening.

I think Erin Manning has dealt successfully with the fallacious line of reasoning various commenters keep bringing to the fore about Junie B. Jones being comparable to books that are assumed as part of the Western Canon. Of course, this is 21st Century relativism at its most base, but Erin has pilloried this pretty effectively. It is odd, nevertheless, that 'low brow' continues to has some mystically meritorious attraction to certain quadrants of our society.

Lastly, I would just end this little saga with a bit of an update: It turns out we were not alone in our concerns about the Junie B. Jones books, and other parents agreed with us. This was a relief, and confirmation that what many of the commenters here have said is simply wrong (but then, the New York Times reflects those concerns, too, had any of those commenters taken the time to read that piece). As I had anticipated, I addressed the issue today in a conversation with the teacher. I approached her with diplomacy and humility. It was a positive conversation. She agreed with my concerns, and she immediately volunteered that there exists a host of much better children's literature she could draw upon.

When my daughter was 12, she brought home a book from the school library that chronicled the life of a girl who was given to her mother's heroin dealer at age 6 in exchange for drugs, was raped at 12 (the readers were led to believe she enjoyed it), and experimented with drugs and alcohol at a very early age as well. She ended up delivering her own baby in a motel room (covered in "baby blood", as the book described it), had a teenage lover die in bed with her after they robbed a drug store, etc and etc.
The book was "Born Blue", and the library "showcased" it (i.e. placed it on the top of the bookshelf so it would stand out to generate interest in the book), which is how my daughter ended up with it.
We, in turn, were forced many awful, uncomfortable discussions after the book came home, ones I wasn't prepared to have with her until she was much older and better prepared to handle the horrors the book described.
I discussed my concerns with the librarian and other parents, and was dismissed as a religious nut (I was the school nurse at the time and primarily had concerns regarding the developmental appropriateness of the subject material and presented my concerns as such). I also wasn't thrilled about the condom ads and articles re: oral sex in the "Seventeen" magazines they had or the book that presented "cutting" in a positive fashion (it was rampant in the school and the book explained in great detail how to do it, what to use, and how to hide it from your parents). But ohwell, who was I to question such things? A common book burner, no doubt.
I took the initiative as a parent and the school nurse to raise formal concerns about the books, and the principal invited *20* staff and parents to speak against "censorship". Awful stuff, very discouraging.

Hold on to your hats, parents... it gets waaaaaaay worse.

Both of my daughters have read JBJ. The books lasted maybe 10 minutes, and that was it. My older daughter (now 15) was bored by them; my younger daughter (now 13) thought they were "stupid". I'm not quite sure what happened to them, although I think my youngest son (age 2-and-change) has torn some of them up.

If I were to offer advice to the other parents out there, my first piece of such would be to be more concerned over the television programming that finds its way into the house, both in terms of the amount watched (the bigger issue, IMO) and the "quality" of what is watched ("quality" television being an oxymoron of nearly comic degree), than with the printed matter that comes in. Books at least allow for an active, engaged mentality. Television, by definition, does not.

In dealing with written material, I'd suggest the following:

a) Keep the "women's magazines" and "teen magazines" out of the house, at all costs. JBJ and her fellow characters are fluffy and mildly mischievous at best; most children will get tired of them and move on. The material in CosmoGirl, Teen Beat and similar publications, on the other hand, are downright corrosive to good morals. Cosmopolitan, Glamour or Marie Claire ? Don't go there. Don't even start. If an adult female in your house reads them, you have what is called "one foot in the grave and the other on a vaudeville cliche", a/k/a Big Trouble.

b) Keep the "entertainment" magazines out, if you possibly can. Allowing publications like this encourages superficiality and vanity. Letting your children have access to these sorts of publications AND to much television is a lethal combination.

c) If you have sons, the same advice applies to sports-related magazines, particularly the more "entertainment"-types of so-called "sports" like pro wrestling or skateboarding.

d) Make sure you reinforce these principles in whatever TV-viewing habits you have, if TV is one of your vices. A TV-baseball-watching parent criticizing "Sports Illustrated", or an "Ugly Betty" fan talking "Entertainment Weekly" down loses credibility very, very quickly. In this struggle, parental credibility is a primary weapon.

e) If you frequent bookstores (my family and I are probably singlehandedly responsible for 50 % of the growth in Barnes & Noble's stock price over the last 5 years), make it a point to take an interest in what your children read. My daughters and I go to B & N on a weekly basis, and they will generally give me a pretty good handle on what sort of things they're interested in---and opportunity to provide a bit of guidance and/or constructive criticism when the need arises.

Finally, remember this simple rule: The Mass Media Are NOT Your Friends. The more you keep kids involved in things that do not involve "pop culture", the more likely you are to raise decent, Human beings. You also run the risk that they will be looked at askance by their peers. Given the current proclivities of the culture dominating teenage and pre-teen lives, this is almost certainly a good thing.

As parents, we are surrounded by what a certain writer (one Theodore Judson, in "Fitzpatrick's War") described as a "Culture of Sh-t". Of necessity, we have to acknowledge that it exists. We do not, however, have to surrender to it. Nor should we let our children wallow in it.

Your servant,

Lord Karth

No time, as usual, to read all the comments, but thought I'd put in my 2 cents anyway.

From a single mom of four, former homeschooler, whose younger three children are now in public school out of financial necessity: These were the kinds of scenarios I would struggle with when I was a SAH(homeschooling)M. My daughter (who's much like JBJ anyway) only encountered Miss Jones in school. Previously, I would have been much like Rod's original questioner. But now that I am working three part-time jobs, going to school, and managing a household, all the while worrying about how to pay the bills, JBJ is very low on the list of my worries. That's an important distinction that should be made about many parts of the Crunchy Con lifestyle: it is not always for those with limited resources (and I say that as one sympathetic to the CC way -- after all, I read this blog!). I do what I can to shield my children from bad inflences -- movies, books, music, video games, etc. -- but as a single parent in this culture, holding the line is very, very difficult. I don't see JBJ as the top of the slippery slope, but as something I ignore as I struggle to keep my children from sliding all the way down.

My wife and I have two sons, so we've been having a lot of similar discussions to others here on what is appropriate fare for the lads. My view is that unless a book is sexually graphic or full of gore, then my son can take a stab at it. To us, the important thing is that our kids make the effort to read, and if they want to read Junie B. Jones, then fine, at least they're reading.

I suspect our 6 year old is going to be like me. I had zero interest in reading until I hit the second grade, then - Bam! - I discovered comic books and from then on I wanted to read everything I could get my hands on. By the time I hit the 6th grade, I had read all the re-issued Doc Savage and the Shadow pulps novels, everything written by Edgar Rice Burroughs and Robert E. Howard, and every science fiction book I could find (especially by Robert Heinlein). Was I reading great literature? Far from it, although I'd argue that what these stories lacked in literary quality they more than made up for in being able to tell a great story - and they fired my imagination. Now the older I became (and thanks to some great teachers), I started in on more refined literature. But I don't think I would have appreciated finer writing if I hadn't first read about superheroes, mythical barbarians, and alien invasions; I could differentiate bad writing from good because I had read both. And all those comic books and pulp novels got me into the habit of reading for pleasure. I'm almost 50 now, but I still read voraciously all the time (and while I do read a lot more high-minded things, I still read crime fiction and science fiction).

So if my kids are enthusiastic about wanting to read a story about Conan, or Tarzan, or aliens from Pluto, then great - it probably means they'll get excited about reading Faulkner, Dostoyevsky, or Davies later on.

I wouldn't focus so much on school readers if you institute a good read-aloud program at home.

When our son was four we switched from picture books to stories from EB White, Greek mythology, Little House series, Narnia, Hobbit, LOTR and even Boxcar Children. When kindergarten started he was already used to good writing and good grammar.

When he was eight we jumped to adult level sci-fi and fantasy for read-aloud time. There was decent writing, good stories and our son recognized literary devices his teachers were covering and commented on the writing as well as plot developments.

The contrast between books we were enjoying together and the school readers did not escape him. Children's readers and juvenile books were but brief stepping stones to more rewarding material.

""instructional material" in the past when standards were higher."

The wife and I are both approaching 60. I don't remember reading much other than Dick and Jane in the first couple of years at school. Our parents read some classic nursery tale type stuff, but not a lot of it. They didn't know that we would be failures if they did not read to us all the time and monitor everything we did read.

Just out of curiosity, at what age do people think it ok to let their kids start reading the more racy parts of the Old Testament?

Steve

Too bad book-burnings are out of fashion. MDavid would be happier.

Mdavid: I don't think I would qualify as a moderate, by any objective yardstick, but I'm not out of the mainstream either. I guess this entire thread has been a real eye-opener, in that my legitimate concerns about this book have by turns been derided or made to seem outside the mainstream. Just as Dawkins drove me into the theist camp, I suppose the reaction I'm getting here is driving me hard into the traditionalist camp. So there you have it.

Steve: I'm 37, and I guess I'm just not all that surprised that a 60-year-old Baby Boomer would respond in the smarmy way that you have. When your generation was growing up, things were far different in our nation, and as Caitlin Flanagan has pointed out, the "village" was not a cesspool. But you're right about one thing, your generation has indeed been a failure of disastrous proportions for our nation. We -- and the generations after us -- will spend a long time trying to repair the damage that your generation has wrought.

Gosh, it's good to emerge from the beautiful and sane northwoods to find the old firm still in operation. Off the top of my head . . . if Junie B. Jones is your biggest problem of the day, you are living in clover, my friends.

My parents no doubt congratulated themselves on their outstanding performance as gatekeepers for my virginal young mind. At home I read Shakespeare, Dickens, translations of the Iliad, the Odyssey and the Aeneid, etc. etc. in addition to all the usual children's classics. I also read the Divine Comedy and "Witness," "Darkness at Noon," and "The Bull from the Sea," all of which would have been deemed "too old" for me if anyone had realized I'd pulled them off the shelves. I was strictly forbidden to read comics. However, I went over to my best friend's house and devoured Superman, the Flash, the Blackhawks, Archie and Richie Rich (both of which I despised, but read anyway) and Mad magazine, which was my first experience of meta-fiction, satire, and wordplay. I got hold of "Lady Chatterley's Lover," "The Song of the Loon," and "Fanny Hill" without having to go very far from the ancestral tree. And once I started babysitting, I soon encountered James Bond, Kurt Vonnegut, Terry Southern and Pierre Louys.

If you want to control what's in your child's mind, don't teach them to read. Once they learn to acquire information on their own, the battle is over. There never will be an intelligent, thinking being who is content to live within boundaries drawn for them by others. Content yourself with brainwashed dullards as offspring, or get used to the fact that smart, curious children will break your rules. Deal with it.

me, perhaps I spoke a bit too brusquely. I'm always irritated by futile efforts to control the perception of reality without changing the reality itself, and that's how this fussing over gradeschool books appears to me. It seems to me that parents would do better to provide as much of what they believe to be good as they can, and be willing to deal with what they see as bad in the culture by open communication and counter-cultural role modeling, rather than by trying to control and banish it from their children's consciousness. That never works. It only ensures that when their children do encounter harsh realities, they don't feel they can talk about them with their parents, because they aren't supposed to know about those things.

I am aware of this by experience, since when my little sister became pregnant at 15, she chose to confide in me rather than our parents. She wanted me to help her get an abortion, because of her fear that, as my father had often threatened, "any daughter of his who got pregnant out of wedlock would be thrown out on the street." I had to deal with this situation on my own, and I was only 19. I'd already done my best to cope with my siblings' drug abuse, running away from home repeatedly, shoplifting, heavy drinking and sexual acting out. That was back in the 60s, when my parents felt, as you do today, that "it's all too much for us to deal with." I dealt with it because they wouldn't.

When I raised four children of my own, I found myself in a doctor's office having to deal with the question of whether my 14 year old would be better off with birth control. Yes, believe it or not, teenagers had sex in the 20th century. And when I was raising my children, AIDS was not treatable. It could kill a healthy young person within a devastatingly short time, and I saw that happening, though not, thank God, to my own. Hard core porn? True, I wasn't 8 and I didn't find it in the kitchen, but yes, I'd definitely encountered hard core porn before I reached puberty, back in the dark ages. If you think porn was invented this decade, you're strangely out of touch with reality. And if you think conservative men don't use porn, you are living in a dream world. You don't control exposure to porn by controlling children. You have to control men, and that has not been on the agenda in this decade or any other.

You have my sympathy, but what is happening today is not really "different than what happened 30 or 40 years ago." I think it just seems that way to you because now it's happening to you. There are differences, but there are also similarities. And I would suggest that by dismissing so peremptorily the experience of the entire previous generation, you are making a most unconservative mistake. Sadly, it's not a new world, baby. It's the same old one we've all been living in for quite some time now.

Sigaliris, I wrote my first response to you before you'd address "me's" concerns.

But let me add that I would love it if the biggest concern for parents today was whether their children might be inadvertently sneak a Superman comic book into their room -- or that (like me) they might stumble across Slaughterhouse Five as a 7th grader and immediately fall in love with Kurt Vonnegut.

That isn't the environment we live in. The ground underneath parents' feet is much shakier these days.

me, In this milieu, the gatekeepers were sent home and the parents were left with no one they could trust.

Enjoyed the post. Comments:

First, there can be no "gatekeepers" unless we agree on what we are going to gate out.

Second, we have little shared values today that are not expressed by tv. We became truly multicultural with cable! So it's pretty foolish to expect public schools to educate well or to keep out filth. We simply do not agree on what is "filth" and what is "education".

Third, the workable solution that everyone will eventually embrace: separation, the free market, and bigger prisons. New groups will form that have their own values, and if one wishes to be part of this group they will conform to majority values. But trying to argue with fools in today's enviornment is simply a waste of time. You simply can't put reason into a fool's brain, and can waste a decade trying.

Fourth, boomers cannot be reached. It will always be 1968 for them, and the issues of racism, sexism, free love, and censorship will always dominate the discussion. Also, they have no stake in the culture (kids grown), and are the wealthiest old people ever and so don't need the youth nor care much about what happens to them.

Fifth, there are lots of young folk out there who are aware and becoming more and more concerned. Many just haven't been pushed over the edge yet. Give them time. It's getting better every year for those who are creating their own schools or homeschooling groups where I live.

Houghton, We simply want them to have a modicum of innocence as young children, and we ask nothing more in our schools than that objectively good standards of education be maintained.

I'm laughing here. Take, for example, homosexuality. How do schools handle this when a teacher proudly talks to his class about his homosexual spouse? What about when a kid/textbook deals with abortion? What about dress codes? What about dancing? What about sex ed? What are we going to teach about history? Religion? What is a "good education"? What about women representation in science? What about minority issues? What if a teacher were to talk about the strong evidence for racial divergence of IQ or evolution? Heck...what about Junie Jones?

My point: give it up. There will be no peace here. The real problem is that your version of "objectivity" holds no sway in our multicultural world. Everyone today thinks they are objective, but most couldn't reason their way out of a wet paper bag. Any intelligent person can see where this is headed.

I am not the biggest fan of the Junie B. series, but I have no huge objection to the books, either. I believe they were among the books that were suggested for reading as "early chapter books" in 1st grade at the Catholic school that my two oldest attend.

However, neither of my children cared for the books. My greater concern is that neither of my children seems all that interested in reading at all. (How's that to introduce an unrelated tangent on this thread?)

My daughter is entering middle school and will tell you that she hates to read. My son likes to read, but only in that it enables him to research his latest favorite snake, scorpion, shark or other creepy crawly on the Internet. We've had a real problem finding books that match his interests and are suitable for a rising 2nd grader.

I did all the things that one is supposed to do to instill a love of reading. We've always read aloud; still do. The kiddos like to be read to; they just don't want to do the reading.

Any CC suggestions to improve this situation? In my son's case, I honestly think the school's expectations (in regard to the amount and type of reading) are probably unrealistic. My son is a normal, athletic, very active just-turned--year-old. He'd rather be in the pool practicing his butterfly stroke and pretending to be Michael Phelps or running around with the neighborhood kids and slaying imaginery dragons than reading a book.

You know, me, I was mulling this over, and realized that one of the things that pushed my buttons about some of the comments here was that my experience is persistently denied. What I went through as a child, what I saw and experienced, all that doesn't matter a bit because today's parents are so sure that they are suffering as none has ever suffered before. My own parenting experiences don't count either, because it is thought that I must have had it easy compared to the terrors of society today. I guess that's inevitable, though. People always feel their own pain like no other, and are usually inclined to discount what others experience. So, therefore, I just want to assure you that I am NOT trying to discount your experience. I would not want to do to you what I don't like when it is done to me! ; )

However, when you say something like "What is different is that a completely healthy, intact, middle class family living in a nice area with "good" schools has zero protection against those things," I feel that you may be exaggerating just a tiny bit, on both ends. These things have always been present, if you have your eyes open, so no one has ever been completely safe. And, on the other hand, I'm sure you do have a lot more than zero protection. You wouldn't really switch places with someone who lived in section 8 housing, would you? I would guess that, for now at least, your children are in a pretty good, pretty safe space compared to a lot of kids, and will probably stay that way. I respectfully point out that a good life has NEVER happened by accident. It's always been the result of hard work by someone. I respect your willingness to do that work as a parent, and I hope that alarm and indignation won't wear you down in the process.

it takes parents who are much better, more involved and aware parents than have probably ever raised kids before. Well, you may be right about that. I think the exploitation of kids for money in all areas has certainly become much more intense and sophisticated. To stop that, you will have to go up against the source, and like it or not, believe "men are the root of all evil" or not, at the source, what you're going to find is a lot of men with a lot of money.

sigilaris,

I specifically said that no one was ever perfectly safe. Never happened, never will. However, I feel like if I were to move into section 8 housing (again), my kids would not fair significantly worse than they would where we are. But that's only because their dad and I are together and have done what we need to do (including living in substandard housing so I could be home with them) to protect them from the crap floating around our culture. To be perfectly frank, I am pretty sure that I could raise my kids in virtually any setting pretty successfully because I am parenting very intensely, I know what I am doing, and I have worked really hard to maintain great relationships with my kids. However, I'm not delusional enough to think that everyone else can, or even should have to parent at that level. Today I live in a nice area where the kids do drugs, the abortion clinic is busy, few of the young people get married before having kids, the kids are all fat because they are inside all the time, blah, blah, blah. But even if their parent's middle-class lives provide them a modicum of protection, what the hell good does that do all the kids growing up back in the sort of places where we used to live? They aren't getting what they need at home and even if they mean well, there's little to nothing in the culture they are regularly exposed to which points them in the right direction. But hey, my middle class neighborhood is only dealing with the sort of problems common in inner cities 30 years ago, so it's all good.

Look, I seriously doubt I would care if a teacher were reading my kids JBJ. I let my kids watch PG movies from a fairly young age, although I do try to screen out the worst Shrek crapola. My 9 year old has seen quite a few PG-13 movies of the starwars/ harry potter variety, although not in theaters. I'm pretty darn laid-back over all. But again, I feel like I can be because we are parenting so intensely which I know is a privilege most people don't have.

What bothers me is that there is this culture wide concept that we can just allow our kids to be exposed to whatever and they will magically be OK. I have younger siblings and friends who I've watched grow up through the 90s with this sort of free-for-all attitude and they are not OK. I grew up in the sex-drugs and divorce culture of the 80s and what we had to deal with was so much better than what kids growing up in the 90s had to deal with. What is crazy is that my 24 year old sister bemoans the changes she sees in the school she teachers at like a crabby old lady talking about "kids these days." Now you can be a young, hip woman who is still doing things that would make your grandpa spin in his grave and far from mature and stable in her own right and be appalled at what is going on.

Heck, where do you think the 40% out of wedlock birth rates are coming from? It's not baby boomers who snuck around reading Vonnegut and growing their hair long. Such endemic out-of-wedlock births are indicative of a population of young people who aren't mature, happy, emotionally healthy people. And nothing has turned the tide in the '00s for my own kids. I've lived through a milder version of what is out there for them and damned if I'm not going to fight tooth and nail to keep it from doing to them what it's done to me and mine.

I guess my point is that I don't understand the stubborn insistence that "the kids are alright" when the kids are saying, "um, no we're not" and their parents are saying that the culture is filthy and unhealthy in a way that previous generations weren't immersed in from top to bottom. It took me about a decade into adulthood to stop being kind of bitter about the problems, dysfunction and cultural garbage which marred my generation's youth. But now, as a slightly more mature adult, I can see that it's not a competition between the generations. I don't get to be pissy with the previous generation for my less than stellar childhood. But I also don't get to stick my fingers in my ears and squeeze my eyes shut and pretend that those who are coming behind me aren't dealing with problems that are even more pervasive and sick than those of my own generation. What I really don't understand is how after having lived through the worst of what our culture and family dysfunction have to offer, one wouldn't be alarmed and horrified to see that mess spread into families and communities which in the past were largely shielded from it.

It is precisely because I know how hard it has been for me and mine to deal with what has already come our way that I am alarmed. The way that I grew up (and the way that you grew up) and the way that my siblings and friends grew up SUCKED. The tide hasn't turned, it is filthy and is filled with flotsam and is stronger than ever. I sure as hell am not going to tell a parent who has the where with all to grab a chunk of passing debris to hold up for examination not to be an alarmist. Sure it may be a particularly small bit of trash, but if the water is ever going to be cleaned and the tide is ever going to be turned, it's going to take more people like Rod and his reader grabbing whatever they can find that does not make things better and offering up to be removed from the water stream. You can go chasing after evil old men to try and change things, but right now, I don't have time to tilt after windmills. I'm busy trying to build a boat and keep it from swamping. So if someone else who is boat building grabs a piece of flotsam that got into their boat and tries to toss it out, I'll cheer along. Their boat may be more pristine than mine, but I certainly won't begrudge them that. Maybe he'll be one of the ones who finds a way for us to get to dry land.

I'd say these parents are overreacting and yeah, they will come across as complete prudes. Kids relate to the books because the main character isn't perfect. They also know what is fiction and what is fact and will not base their own behavior on one book, particularly if they're being raised well at home.

I suspect the teacher in question also has the Captain Underpants series in her classroom for kids to read, for much the same reason. It's a good way to get reluctant readers engaged. I'm grateful that I had parents who let me read pretty much anything I could get my hands on from the first grade on, even the Judy Blume books that other parents considered inappropriate. Scatter good, entertaining books all over the house, read to your child regularly, answer her questions, take her to the library, and, most importantly, let her see YOU reading and enjoying books. This is the way to turn your kid into a reader and eventually a good writer and a successful taker of standardized tests such as the SAT and ACT. Attempting to ban Junie B. Jones from the classroom will probably not make you popular with anyone.

Sigilarius,

I was thinking about this conversation and it occurred to me that part of the problem may be a difference in the battles which each generation must fight to make the world a better place. The battles of the boomers were important ones involving dignity for women, minorities and people who are outside of the norm of society. The generations that went before were often intent on denying that there was any problem at all which needed solving. And although most people feel that the work of bringing about equality across gender, race, etc was done imperfectly, I for one am very glad that I haven't had to experience the secondary status that was common for women in the past. I am also probably freer to live and think outside the box than any previous generation. And I do know that I can thank the silent generation and boomers for those benefits.

However, any successfully fought battle gives way to the next cause. Today most parents don't know what it was like to live in a world as oppressive and unequal as existed in America well into the 70s. However, they do know from experience the real damage which is caused by the problems of family breakdown and pervasive, negative culture where values are derided rather than taught. We certainly do not want to go backwards and trade our freedom and equality for some imaginary nirvana of the wholesome 50s. However, that doesn't mean that we are not facing a serious battle which needs fighting. I could tell story after story of people who have made a complete hash of their lives who if they had grown up in a different era where values were transmitted through the culture at large would have made completely different choices. They still would have had to deal with their problems, of course, but they most likely wouldn't have to do it while carrying the baggage of child support, single motherhood, addiction, crushing debt, and so on and so forth.

This is our battle, just as equality and respect for women, minorities and outliers was for the previous couple of generations. I suppose it shouldn't be surprising that today, as then, there are many from prior generations who want to insist that there is no problem, and certainly not one worth taking radical steps against. But the simple fact is that we just have a different battle to fight than the boomers. It's not a matter of disregarding those who went before us or discounting their experiences. It's simply a matter of moving forward to face the new pressing issues which arise for each new generation. I would respectfully suggest that you may now be playing the role of your parent's generation in insisting that everything is basically OK and the young-un are making much our of very little. After all, they had their own experiences which showed them that everything was OK which your generation had to kind of reject in order to move forward. It's the nature of societal change.

me - Thanks for offering a useful lens for this conversation.

I have a foot in both the worlds being described. I was born in '54, and my son was born in 1987, so I was parenting in the 90s and 00s.

The difficulty of these discussions is that to some degree both sides of the argument are true. Things have gotten both better and worse in the past few decades. Many children today are doing great, with caring parents who are really focused on rearing their youngsters. Many "millenials" are "greatest generation"-like in their attitudes.

The kids who are doing worse are doing far worse than before.

The biggest "have vs. have-not" measure may not be material but the experience of being genuinely raised versus simply surviving childhood.

me-

Most of what I can remember of childrearing is exhaustion. It was worth it - our son is a Mensch. We were lucky to find a "village" of "tag-team- parenting" families with similar values to help us carve out a safe world for him.

I have any number of peers whose 1950s families were, um, less than ideal. And while they had significant problems for a number of years as a result, they all found one (or more than one) family in the neighborhood to serve as a surrogate. There are not enough surrogate family households anymore to mitigate what is going wrong.

As you and others have pointed out, even attentive parents have to deal with soft core porn magazine covers at the grocery check out and Whore-Dollz at Target. Given that environment, we shouldn't find it odd that a concerned father would want to talk to the school teacher about the books his child would be using to learn to read.

stephanie, I don't think people are saying that anyone's experience isn't valid. People's experiences are what they are and what they learn from them is always worth considering. I think that people are saying that some of the experiences (like say reading racy works of classic literature while baby sitting) aren't particularly relevant or illuminating to the current situation. It feels like when you tell someone a story about what is happening in your life and they respond by saying, "I know exactly what you mean" and proceeds to tell a story which is similar in only the most superficial and marginal of ways.

Even the language which you and sigilarius use to describe what parents are doing reveals a real disconnect from what is going on. You use the language of prudery, control, banning, etc which all fits with your experience and understanding of how parents deal with things they do not approve of. However, parents today largely understand from their own experiences that simply sheltering a child from negative things and when forced to deal with them, go on and on about how awful they are is beyond useless. Too many of us have been shredded up and spit out by a culture our parents may have tried to protect us from, but did not prepare us to deal with. What parents today are doing is trying to teach discernment to our children. I do not allow certain things into my house, although I generally do not hide the fact of their existence from my kids. I let my children know that although say, a particular book or song isn't going to irreversibly corrode their little brains, that is certainly no reason to partake of it. If our standards are so low that the only reason we would choose not to partake of something is that it will ruin us for life or set us down some slippery slope, then we pathetic excuses for human beings. Instead, we want to teach our children how to discern what is worth consuming and enjoying from that which is worthless, degraded (in ways big or small) or downright filthy.

Which is precisely why reading something like JBJ in class is problematic: not that it will instantly corrupt innocent minds, but that it elevates something which is fairly base to a position we ought to reserve for something praiseworthy. If anything, this is particularly important when they are young because little kids have no taste - they will happily consume the most pointless, worthless, mind wrecking crap imaginable - often repeatedly. Since we know that they are going to have to navigate a corrupt, negatively sexualized, grossly materialistic, shallow society without getting sucked into the siren call of immediate gratification and glory for the worst behaviors, we need to start by teaching them what is good. Once they have a firm understanding of what is good vs what is not, then as they get older they can start making choices about what is wise for them personally. However, if no one has ever bothered to teach this discernment; if everything is allowed under the pretense that we don't want to be prudes or overly controlling or alarmists, then our young people will not have the tools they need to wisely discern the negative aspects of the culture which they will inevitably face. Those of us who have found ourselves in the situation of having no tools for appropriately handling the pervasive negative messages and values which dominate the wider culture do not want our children to find themselves similarly adrift. This is why you have parents worried about JBJ and PG movies and other things which on their surface may seem particularly innocuous.

You're filtering this whole thing through lenses which simply are not as relevant as you think they are. This isn't a rehash of what your uptight, controlling, judgemental, close-minded parents did. It's a whole new world with a new way of understanding and dealing with things. Please stop trying to turn us into your parents and our battles into your battles. Have as much respect for the experiences of those of us who are in the middle of this particular battle as you would like us to have for your experiences.

This is a really interesting and worthwhile discussion, I think, and on returning to it this morning I've been moved by the heartfelt commentary, particularly from me, elizabeth, and stefanie. I think as a mother I'd probably have more in common with all of you than not, regardless of our respective generations.

There's really too much to comment on in detail, but let me just reiterate that I'm not dismissing anyone's concerns. No responsible parent believes that anything and everything a child encounters is healthy for them to consume. I would merely suggest, gently, that parents take a look at their focus. If you focus on controlling your child and her activities and reading material, you run the risk of making her feel that she is the bad one, that the locus of evil is in her. This is especially true when her natural curiosity leads her to explore areas that have been marked as "forbidden." Parents need to find ways to let their child know what is acceptable without making her feel that it is she who is unacceptable.

I agree with your description, Houghton, of things that have been deliberately "designed to chill and sicken on some psychological level." I too have encountered those things. If you want to protect your children against them, you're going to have to deal with the people who create them--men who are doing it because it sells, largely to other men. You say, It is curious that some commenters here have lamented the lack of responsibility and childish behavior so many men exhibit in our society today, yet when men step up to counter that trend we are ridiculed for it. I'm not ridiculing you in the slightest. I am pointing out, however, that most women would like to see men "counter that trend" by controlling themselves and other men--not women and children. Do that and you'll have my unqualified admiration.

me, I couldn't have said it better myself. The actions you describe are those of a good, responsible parent. I have no objection to Houghton's carrying out such actions, either. The behavior that I object to is something different from what you describe. Perhaps you are seeing opposition where none exists--on my part, anyway. For the record, I never used the word "prudery," nor would I, because I think it's too often just an insult.

"Burnpile?" The reference from Matthew's post on August 19th about his philosophical disposal of a children's book is troubling. Uphold your values, but be careful of perpetuating the idea that a displeasing book warrants destruction. Continue to discuss with your children why you disagree, reinforce the lesson that the world is full of differing values that are a struggle to sort out, but don't teach them to destroy what they don't believe in. How will children truly understand how they should act if they don't understand what the complete opposite looks like and why it is undesirable?

Alot of excellant points are made here in this article. However, I disagree with 'banning' the Junie B. books.

My daughter struggled with learning to read and has been in Titkle I classes for two years and has had a private tutor for just as long. Shehas finally 'caught up' to where she is on grade level. Yesterday morning she picked up the Junie B. Aloha-Ha-Ha book and is on the last chapter this morning. I'm thrilled! She came to me about five times asking for clarification on a word or phrase, otherwise she has read this book herself.

I had read the book prior to giving it to her. Yes, Junie B. uses bad grammar, wants to 'get away' with things, 'yells' at her mom for icecream. However these are all learning opportunities for both parents and your child. I learned when my daughter said "That isn't appropriate behavior for Junie" that yes, my constant teaching of what is appropriate behavior and what isn't are sinking in to my daughter.

I would rather my daughter read Junie B than watch ANY of the cartoons on tv. As parents we can utilize the bad grammar with reinforcing the correct way to say something and besides, who has not as a parent repeated some 'cute' word or phrase spoken by our toddlers? I for one still use 'hot hogs' for hot dogs as my daughter spoke it several years ago. She will correct me by telling me it is hot doGs mom!

The giggleing and her running to share a funny part of the book with me and my husband and even asking to phone her aunt to tell her about a Junnie escapade is worth the extra time I need to put in reinforcing good grammar and appropriate behavior. I give Junie B a thumbs up!

In fact, we are going to Barnes and Nobles after lunch to pick out another Junie B. book.

I am always amazed with the parents today who want these perfect little specimens that say all the right things, act like little kings and queens and do nothing wrong. In other words, not do anything child like....little adults. Please!!!! Kids are kids and I would be the first to say "never say never" because as soon as you do, your kid will. I have an 18 year old, a 15 year old and a 10 year old, who I think are well adjusted and considerate, caring indivisduals, with one problem maybe to all the perfect-seeking traits that these young parents all want today from their little Einsteins, that they did some if not most of these things and learned valuable lessons from having done them. Perfect no, but normal yes!!! It isn't just today that these issues in the Junie B. Jones books are prevelant, they have been every generation before us. There is always a mean kid, there is always a whiny child, a disrepectful child, but that is where you as a parent can teach your kids valuable life lessons. I have never enjoyed a series more or laughed harder than when my daughter and I read the Junie B. Jones series. We could not wait for the next book to come out and so on. I would not let her read them aloud until I had time to listen. We laughed till our sides ached. The humor is wonderful....we all can relate and I think it especially important for our kids to be able to laugh and not be so serious all the time. Yes, if you are talking to your kids anyway about what is wrong and appropriate, you will have conversations anyway regarding what you just read. For God sakes, just have fun!!!! Love these books!!!! And just lighten up!!!!

There have been many good points made here. The top five indicators of reading success include reading fluency. Every professional agrees that getting the kids to read, read some more, and read even more is the key to increasing reading fluency. If the kids are interested in Junie B., they will read more. Getting them to read is essential. The other life lessons in each of the Junie B. Jones books are just frosting on the cake.

To the parents who were astounded at the content in the Junie B. Jones books, you better pre-read every bit of material your child might possibly read because there are far worse materials out there. You will spend your lifetime "protecting" your child instead of educating them.

The book Junie B. Jones is a great book for kids. It has bad grammer for a reason. Because when she's writing in her journal it shows Junie B. fixing her mistakes. All the books have lessons in some of them. So Barbra Park made it it that way for a reason. I read those books when I was in 2nd grade and I still love them. Kids would have a fun time with those. The books aren't gonna make a kid do bad things.

I agree with the writer of the original post -- thank you for starting this discussion. The bad grammar, sarcasm, and rude behavior in these Junie B. books are really not ones I feel appropriate during such a formative time. In the same way that "we are what we eat", I believe that we also are what we read and think about. With so many wonderful, well-written, books available, why promote this kind of trashy reading? My daughter attends a public school, and I have offered to assist in finding better chapter book alternatives. Are there any you all would recommend? Would there be interest in my posting the ones I'm finding out about here?

cheers,
Madeline

I find it odd that the concerned parent thought the private Protestant school would be too rigid, but he has such a huge problem with a Junie B book.

My daughter has been reading Junie B books for almost 3 years and she isn't insolent or disrespectful to adults, she makes all A's and she uses near perfect grammar. I'd say that's pretty good for an 8 year old. Books inspire people to use their imaginations. They are an escape from reality for many readers. That is what is so great about reading.

I'm with the original poster and the one that said - you are what you read... I was looking into the series for my grand daughter but I think I will look for another series. Is there another series out there that is about the same reading level that involves a little girl?

Let me tell you why I'm asking - I am a doll collector and my grand daughter would like to start collecting dolls too. She's five. I have a doll picked out for her - blond hair by the way but would like to base the doll off a 'character' from a book series we could read together. When she is older we could venture into some of the Little House books and such but she is not mature enough for those types yet. I thought we could read books that take about a hour or two to finish from start to finish would be best since I only see her every other weekend. Longer books are just too long and the time between the chapters would be hard on her to remember. Are there any good suggestions?

My three boys attend a Christian School in an affluent area. I LOVE JUNIE B. BOOKS!!! Our five month old puppy's name is Junie B! My husband is a cardiologist and also have a degree by the way. I love that she is naughty and my boys and I laugh out loud when I read to them. They know proper English and are National Junior Honor Society members. Two of my sons received the Christian Character awards at their school.
We use the books for entertainment. Junie B. acts and speaks like many children in the U.S. SHe probably has a form of ADHD and your children need to be tolerant to kids like Junie B. in class. They have impulsivity issues and need glasses and anxieties such as riding the school bus or having to get up in fron of the class for reports. Wow, you people are weird. I need to take care of my puppy Junie B. because she is getting into some trouble but I love her anyway.

At first, I did not care for Junie B.'s poor grammar or behavior, and it does appear she is either ADHD or possibly Asperger's! The book series has grown on me and my son, and the point is the book is fun for the kid. We simply correct the poor grammar so he understands why something is not said correctly. There has not been any worse behavior in my son or his sister (who's 4- she listens to us read) in the two months we've gotten into the series. He also knows this is mainly "pretend".

i am a mom to a kindergartener...and i also work at the school she attends. the school i work at is a fan of Junie B.....i have heard kindergarten teachers and first grade teachers read the books out loud to class. i do not like the books, well as an adult i can see the humor, but not something i prefer my 5 year old to be read! with that said, since i know several teachers, including daughters, read Junie b outloud i decided to go ahead and get a few Junie B books to read at home to give daughter a clear understanding that the words (stupid, fat etc) and behaviors are NOT appropriate behaviors! as i read to daughter she puts up a finger each time there is something inappropriate on a page (sadly we can only read a page at a time before reveiwing the bad behavior...and even then have almost run out of fingers on many occasions!)...we discuss the bad words and behaviors and talk about what would have been a better choice. daughter often says that Junie B needs to go to the principal...but sadly Junie rarely gets consequences! daughter still for whatever reason still loves listening to Junie B.....personally i avoid reading them to her if i can! but as i said the school i work at that daughter attends has several teachers that read junie b outloud, so i felt that i had no choice but to read them at home to make sure daughter knew that Junie B is NOT someone that she (daughter) should act like............and yes i am disappointed that the teachers couldnt find something else to read to the classes...if they didnt read them outloud then my daughter would be clueless about junie b as i would not buy the books due to content....but as it is i felt forced to read them at home!

I just recently started reading the Junie B series to my 1st grade son, and we love them. Yes, I also was first rather "curious" about the grammar, frequent use of the word dummy, stupid, etc...but the more I thought about it, the more I realized 2 things...first of all...like it or not this is what a 6/7 year old thinks. Second of all, it is funny! Sitting there and correcting a book and every aspect of it just takes the fiction and fun out of it! I don't know what kind of reader you are, but I am a fiction reader...and there are books that I read that contain material that I would NEVER do...My son is an intelligent 6 year old boy...he reads at the top of his class, he has very good vocabulary for a first grader, and his behavior his to be expected for a 6 year old boy. Why?? Because I love to read.. he sees me read, and I read to him...I encourage vocabulary, and I teach him manners and rules. NOT the actions in the books that we read together.

So much is blamed on books, TV, movies, etc. Frankly, I am NOT a supporter of that theory. I am not saying I don't restrict anything my son watches..but there were things in the 60's, 70's 80's that had there own violence that noone made a second look at. Now everyone blames everything else but there own parenting.

I just started reading the series to my 5-year-old son and these books are the ones he requests the most and gets the most excited about. When Junie is sassy, as we say, he points it out and we might have a discussion about it. We laugh at her antics and have discussions about the books. I can understand why someone might not like the books because she is a sassy girl but we have found my son knows the difference about what is appropriate and what is not and have not noticed him acting like her.

Hi my name is Jennifer, My daughter is nine, she to went to private christian school for five years. Her teacher in first grade started reading these Junie b. Jones to the class. At first it sounded an alarm. But then once we were reading them together and listening to the story line it is okay, as long as your child knows that this is fictional, we don't speak this way, or act in this manor. Its true every six seven eight year old actually thinks or speaks this way at some point or acts this way"Like Junie:). And it really is helpful to have your child really interested in reading and it is giving them a good laugh as well. I mean at least it is not based on fairyland junk or magic, or witch craft. It is almost like the story is about a real girl. Lets be real here, our children have quite the imagination on there own. Junie isn't going to harm them. Just have a good laugh with your son.

with all the great children's literature out there, why bother with these poorly written books? The character is terrible! I say, if we as parents say "Oh, she's a terrible role model, just read the book and laugh at her antics" then regardless of what we say, our actions esteem this character and the things she does.

I think all of you are taking it way to seriously.. I mean I have a 7 year old daughter and she loves Junie B Jones... The author made this book from a first grade view point... The way that she acts and speaks in the book is exactly the way a first grader does. I took my daughter to see a play of Junie B Jones and we had a blast.... You should let your kids be kids and do something fun for them... These books go through every experience a first grader would go through and it shows children a different view point on how the experience is dealt with.... I do not see anything wrong with reading Junie B Jones to my daughter... Actually she almost has the whole collection. Just chill out and let your kids have a good time being a kid...

Wow! What a debate. I fell in love with this series a few years ago while visiting my sister's home. Drawn into the room by the giggles of my 3 year old niece, I found my brother-in-law reading Junie B outloud. Before long, the entire family was enjoying this funny girl. I remember how excited & eager my neice was to hear these stories. Of course, there were hundreds of books read to her and read by her over the years. Junie B made an impact, but it wasn't the grammar or behavior that imparted value--the stories were enjoyable and kept her coming back for more. My niece is now in the gifted program, playing multiple instruments & wowing us all. Her grammar is perfect, despite this early exposure to a "poor" example of grammar.

Actually, Junie B is following all the rules for grammar, as pointed out in the NYT article. She falls short in applying the exceptions to those rules. Junie B is navigating language learning - the rules for syntax, semantic and lexical development as well as the pragmatics or social use of language.

I can't wait to start reading them aloud to my little one. No doubt, my daughter will comment on poor behavior. It's an opportunity to talk about how to treat others and making good choices. Here's to Junie B!

I despise Junie B books.!!! I have 5 and 6 year-old daughters. I was introduced to this series at school. I took the book home that was given to me, read one paragraph and took the book back to school. The "s' word in our family is stupid, it is used constantly!! I could go on and on. My problem is that my daughter who will be going into 1st grade is required to read these books. I have voiced my concern and was told "oh well, everyone has their own opinion". I feel that I will have no other choice but to pull her out of the public school system. How very sad that is to me. These books should NOT be used in schools!

i love junie b jones books and i think they are so ute and funny i have a whole collection of them i have junie b jones is a party animal plus junie b jones cheater pants+junie b jones and that big meanie jims birthday+junie bjones and the little monkey bussnisse+junie b jones is almost a flower girl+junie b jons is not a crook

love,sara davis email me anytime at nickropolis@site.com i love getting emails.

to,junie b jones.

I think the Junie B Jones books are inappropriate for children. My daughter has only been attending Kindergarten for two months in a public school, and I'm already faced with this dilemma - The teacher reads these books allowed to the class every day.
I am very saddened that even in Kindergarten, the teachers are not morally conscience. Sure the book is funny and entertaining. But many books are funny and entertaining without including negative words, negative actions, negative behaviors. With so many choices, why should we as parents or educators settle for a book that very likely will negatively influence our Kindergarteners? If there is debate or any question in your mind regarding your child's exposure to a particular book, the solution is simple - don't read it. There are so many other options, why compromise your child over a means of entertainment?
My 5-year old daughter soaks up information like a sponge. I don't think it's a coincidence that shortly after she began attending school, she began saying sentences that begin with "I hate.." and using the word "stupid" repeatedly. To those who argue their kids love the books- Well kids love a lot of things that aren't good for them. Junie B, as a main character in a book series, is a role model for these young innocent minds, a negative role model that is. Two very enthusiastic thumbs down.