Tag Archive for Books for Boys

Fan Mail Wednesday #104 (Thursday Edition)

Fabulous Fineas writes . . .

Dear James Preller,

I love your books!!! I am 8 years old.  I have pretty much read all your jigsaw jones books! My teacher always says I am getting up there! she says i am getting too old for your books because they are too short. Please write bigger books.  Write more mysteries!

From your fan, Fineas

I replied:

Thanks, Fin! Is it okay to call you Fin? Or Finn?

Good news: I have been writing longer books. I’d say the next step beyond Jigsaw in terms of length and difficulty would be: Along Came Spider, Justin Fisher Declares War, Six Innings, then Bystander.

But you are right, I should write another mystery. I’ve been meaning to get around to it again, at an older level, but I guess after 40 Jigsaw Jones books, I needed a break from that type of book. I’d like to write one that’s more complicated and perhaps even dangerous, more along the lines of a thriller. But right now, today, I’ve got nothing. Zippo.

Rough cover sketch by R.W. Alley. Click here to learn

more about his creative process!

You know, I have to confess that I hear this kind of thing a lot — kids being encouraged to move beyond “easy” books. And worse, that their current choices are somehow unworthy, certainly frowned upon, and I suspect that disapproval sometimes spills over to the reader himself.  I think many boys who loved reading comic books, for example, heard the same complaint all through childhood. It’s an unfortunate message, especially in a world where so many boys are not reading for pleasure at all.

So this is what I think, Fin. Your teacher is right to gently encourage you to continue to grow as a reader, to challenge yourself with new books. There are so many great books out there, just waiting for you. But at the same time, as a reader, I often like short books. And I like . . . what I like. The most important thing is that YOU ARE READING BOOKS, any books, even mine. Just keep that up — keep on reading, at least a little bit every day — and you’ll do fine. No worries.

Thanks again for the nice note!

JP

P.S. I recently made a video in response to a reader who had a similar issue at school. You can check it out below!

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Fan Mail Wednesday #98 (The Video Edition!)

Here at Jamespreller.com, we’re all about the latest in breakthrough technology. Actually, it was first suggested at least a year ago by my friend Paul, and I replied, “I’ll get right on it!” So I overcame my fears and, with the help of my 11-year-old son, posted my first Youtube video in response to the letter below.

What do you think? Are you purists aghast? Or merely agog? Is this something I should try again . . . or perhaps nevermore?

Please click on the video below to see my awkward, stumbling response. Experts in the business sometimes say that the camera loves certain celebrities.

Personally, I’m not feeling it.

Anyway, I don’t mean for the medium to overwhelm the content of Michael’s letter. I wasn’t sure how to reply to news of a reading teacher who prevented a boy from reading the books he clearly seems to enjoy. It’s not about me. But I do feel that when a young student expresses enthusiasm for a certain book or series of books, when he shows interest and motivation, that’s not something you want to suppress. Have at it, I say. At the same time, I’ve only heard one side of the story.

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Getting Boys to Read: Two Authors Chat About It (Part 1)

Over the past couple of years, I’ve had numerous discussions under the broad subject of “books for boys” with fellow author Kurtis Scaletta. We’re both ex-boys, you see, and we care. So we’ve talked about the gender gap in reading, looked at the typical remedies, passed on book suggestions (Kurtis tells me I have to read this book by William Brozo), discussed the primary importance of modeling in the home, and more.

Recently we’ve encounted several mainstream articles on the subject. And rather than talk amongst ourselves, we decided to continue the discussion in the context of an online chat.

Please: feel free to comment, react, complain, applaud, question. We know that we don’t have the answers. But we also know that there’s something fundamentally unsettling to us as men about the tone and tenor of the entire conversation.

To set the stage, let’s look at a recent Associated Press article, written by Leanne Italie: “How to get boys to read? Try a book on farts.”

You can read the entire article by clicking on the link above. But here’s a few snippets for context:

Can fart jokes save the reading souls of boys?

You better hope so.

Boys have lagged behind girls in reading achievement for more than 20 years, but the gender gap now exists in nearly every state and has widened to mammoth proportions — as much as 10 percentage points in some, according to the Center on Education Policy.

“It certainly should set off alarm bells,” said the center’s director, Jack Jennings. “It’s a significant separation.”

Parents of reluctant readers complain that boys are forced to stick to stuffy required school lists that exclude nonfiction or silly subjects, or have teachers who cater to higher achievers and girls. They’re hoping books that exploit boys’ love of bodily functions and gross-out humor can close the gap.

<snip>

‘Just get ’em reading’

Butts, farts. Whatever, said Amelia Yunker, a children’s librarian in Farmington Hills, Mich. She hosted a grossology party with slime and an armpit noise demonstration. “Just get ’em reading. Worry about what they’re reading later.”

Again, please read the entire article — which quotes parents, librarians, and bestselling authors such as James Patterson, Jon Scieszka, Ray Sabini (who writes under the name, Raymond Bean), and Patrick Carman.

And now for the chat portion of today’s program:

JP: You can’t see me, but I’m slumped in my chair. It’s hard to respond to this article without sounding like a whining ninny.

KS: I see a story like that about once a month in the mainstream press, touting books like SweetFarts as the simple solution to this really complex problem.

JP: I just get sick and tired of seeing the same types of books listed in these discussions. Very lowest common denominator.

KS: It is lowest common denominator.

JP: I find it stultifying when I come across lists of “books for boys” that begin and end with all the usual standbys: bodily humor, nonstop action, cars and trucks, sports, violence, and so on.

KS: I think you give boys those books and you aren’t communicating that you value that boy’s mind very much or that you value reading. It seems to trivialize the whole thing.

JP: And let’s not forget that there are many kinds of boys, or that boys can be many things: sensitive, caring, troubled, dreamy, mild, lonely.

KS: Those lists and assumptions don’t do very well by boys or by books. They have such low expectations for both. That’s what bugs me the most.

JP: As I’ve said elsewhere, it’s not just farts and firetrucks. It can’t be.

KS: You give a boy a fart book and I wonder where it comes in that he understands reading is important and that you believe he is capable of high intellectual pursuits.

JP: Is it merely THE ACT of reading we value? I don’t think so.

KS: The real reasons boys become passionate readers is because they do find those books that make a real difference to them. “Home Run” books they are called. ONE book is proven to turn a reluctant reader into an avid reader. IF it is the right book. So you have to ask, “Is this likely to be that book?”

JP: But couldn’t it be argued that they need to begin with any kind of positive reading experience?

KS: Yeah, but I don’t really buy the story that teachers are brutalizing boys with all these terrible boring books. Mostly they read books that have had a huge kid response already. Books like The Outsiders or Maniac Magee or some other book that millions of boys have read and loved. So I don’t know where the negative experiences come in.

JP: I think it’s kind of intellectually lazy — and degrading — for teachers and librarians to hand boys some of these books. Though I have to add, that’s not been my observation of the teachers and librarians I’ve met over the years.

KS: That’s ultimately my complaint. My problem isn’t with the books. I think they should be out there and kids can read them if they want to. I just don’t like the message that boys are terrible readers and our only hope is to lower the bar.

JP: Amen.

KS: And I agree, it’s not teachers and librarians touting these simplistic solutions. It’s more mainstream press, reporters trying to find the funny lead to a complex story.

JP: Exactly. In the process, boys get reduced to primitive creatures capable only of banging on rocks and grunting. It’s condescending. And let’s not ignore the fact that, in this article at least, many of the advocates quoted here are the authors themselves. Their POV seems to be, “Buy my book; problem solved.”

KS: Ha. Yes, I admire Scieszka a lot for what he’s done, but of course he has a product line too and it’s hard to ignore that. Now James Patterson has his own “reading for boys” site, and of course he’s making fistfuls of cash off of his kids books line. It sounds bitter and jealous to mention it, but there it is. The handful of guys who are actually making a living at writing for boys are also pitched as the only hope to get boys to read and get to be the experts quoted in those articles. No room for a Preller or a Scaletta in that kind of story. So I guess I do take it personally.

JP: To be clear, in case I haven’t been: It’s not about the books. There are many, many great books out there for a wide variety of boy readers. So, yes, I think the media focus on grossology, etc., is completely misguided. We need to look at how we respond to boys in school and the messages we send. Most of all, I want to see fathers reading — that could make the single most powerful difference of all. When the focus shifts to the books, it all begins to feel like cynical marketing. I have no problem with “butt books” or whatever you want to call them, but let’s not begin to pretend they arrive riding on white horses, looking to save the day.

KS: Yes, I agree. And that’s what Sciezka says and Ray Bean says — that boys need male role models to read. The more I think about it, I just think those newspaper stories are lazy and half-assed. They want a compelling headline and don’t really care about the issue or the solution. We’re letting them frame the story and we shouldn’t.

JP: Word, Kurtis. But you know, I wish we had somebody really smart, like author Lewis Buzbee, to put it all in perspective for us. He’s so good at astute summation.

KS: Yeah, that would be great.

JP: Hey, look. Here comes Lewis now. What a coincidence!

LB: The problem that I have with such thinking is that it supposes that boys are all the same — farts and butts and such. Oh, a lot of boys like such stuff, I know I did. but that wasn’t all I liked. I hate to see any reader reduced to such a cynical — your word, JP, and a good one — description. In a way, such single-minded publishing may actually turn boys off reading. I mean, is that all books are; I can get that from my friends. Books are very intimate places, where one reader with one book can feel and think about the world in ways that are different than they might otherwise think and feel. I know that’s why I like reading.

JP: Thanks for stopping by, Lewis. We are not worthy!

Pirate’s Booty & Some Snaps

Ahoy, me hearties! I am struggling with spacing issues for the photos, but I can’t fuss over this any longer. Sorry about the mess.

So much to talk about these days — my head is spinning with thoughts on “books for boys,” after a spate of blood-boiling articles — that I’m clearing the decks today for more focused thoughts next week.

Jonathan Liu over at Wired has caught the pirate bug:

Set your goggles double quick on this jolly good book: A Pirate’s Guide to First Grade, written by the old salt James Preller and illustrations by Greg Ruth that’ll shiver yer timbers. OK, yes, International Talk Like a Pirate Day was eleven days ago, but I didn’t discover this treasure in time. Besides, who says you can only talk like a pirate one day a year, right?
For the full review, go here. Mr. Liu goes on to say:
The best part? The end pages have a “Pirate’s Vocabulary” with all the words used throughout the book so that your kids can start talking like pirates themselves!
Quick story about that: The idea for the glossary didn’t come until late in the process, when we were staring at the layout, wondering what to do with the extra space afforded by moving from 32 to 48 pages. I suggested the glossary and Liz instantly recognized it as a good idea. Very glad that happened. The good idea, I mean. Nice to trip over one every once in a while.
Greg Ruth shared some photos from a recent bookstore experience. Thought you might enjoy them . . .
That’s Greg himself. Remember, Greg, to get that pirate gruffness, it has to come from the thromborax.
A scurvy crew of rapscallions.
Prepare to be boarded!
Arrr, this one looks like a rascal if ever there was one.
Seriously, aren’t those shots great? Isn’t this book just so much fun? I know that’s unbecoming of me to say, as the author. But I’m sometimes asked about the appeal of pirates, especially since they are clearly not positive role models for our children. And the answer is in these photos, I think. There’s always room for laughter and whimsy in a world of high seriousness. I’m proud of this book! There, I said it.

Books for Boys: A Tribute to “William’s Doll”

“William wanted a doll.”

And so begins Charlotte Zolotow’s classic picture book, William’s Doll, illustrated by William Pene Du Bois. Published 38 years ago, and dedicated to Billy and Nancy, it is still relevant today — and very possibly moreso.

This title has been on my mind a lot lately, and comes to mind whenever the discussion turns to “books for boys.” Somehow the collective thinking about boys and reading has become muddled, to the point where “boys” has become a code word for “reluctant readers.”

I’ve talked about this before, here and here and here and elsewhere, and I don’t wish to repeat myself endlessly. Except to paraphrase Walt Whitman: Boys are large and contain multitudes. I find it unsettling, even disturbing, when I come across lists of “books for boys” that offer all the usual standbys: bodily humor, nonstop action, cars and trucks, sports, violence, and so on. You know, the kinds of stuff all boys like.

Imagine such a list for girls. Would it offend you?

And now imagine all the great books, and important thoughts, that would be missing from such a list. Because the nature of such lists is reductionist and simplistic and full of stereotypes, a narrowing of what children are and what children can become. Girls and boys.

Yes, for sure, I am strongly on the side of a teacher or parent who longs to turn a reluctant reader onto books. I can understand the desire for something sure-fire, a book that will turn the trick, unlock the door, open up the world of reading. But once that door has been pushed open, let’s not forget that boys can be sensitive, thoughtful, dreamy, mild, frightened, lonely, tender, loving, sad, and a thousand more things. It’s not just farts and firetrucks.

When my oldest son, Nick, was sick with leukemia, we struggled as parents. It was tempting to give him things, do things for him, make the experience easier and more enjoyable. In short: spoil him. After a spinal tap, how do you not buy that kid a lollipop? And a DVD of whatever he wants. So we did. But not always. My wife Lisa once said one of the most profound things about parenting I ever heard. Talking about this subject, she reminded me: “We’re not only trying to take care of a sick boy — we’re trying to raise a healthy adult.”

I think that applies to boys and reading.

So let’s look at this book, William’s Doll. To me, the best illustration is on the first page, before even the title page. You know, the page we hurry past on our way to the story. It’s a picture, we will learn, of William and Nancy from next door. Nancy is holding a doll. But if you glance quickly at that illustration, look at it from a distance, it is a portrait of every young family in the world. Father, mother, and child.

“He wanted to hug it

and cradle it in his arms

and give it a bottle

and take it to the park

and push it in the swing

and bring it back home

and undress it

and put it to bed . . .”

His brother and the boy next door did not approve.

William’s father brought home a basketball instead.

He practiced a lot

and got good at it

but it had nothing to do

with a doll.

William still wanted one.

So his father brought home an electric train. With similar results.

One day his grandmother visited. William proudly showed her the basketball and his new train. He also expressed his desire for a doll, explaining, “My brother says it will make me a creep and the boy next door says I’m a sissy and my father brings me other things instead.”

His grandmother listened attentively.

“Nonsense,” she said.

She bought him a doll. I love the detail in this description, the clicking of the eyes. It reminds me of my mother’s Shirley Temple doll (not that I ever played with it!).

The doll had blue eyes

and when they closed

they made a clicking sound

and William loved it

right away.

William’s father was upset. “He’s a boy!” he said.

And so the grandmother must patiently explain to her son:

“He needs it,” she said,

“to hug

and to cradle

and to take to the park

so that

when he’s a father

like you,

he’ll know how to

take care of his baby

and feed him

and love him

and bring him

the things he wants,

like a doll

so that he can

practice being

a father.”

I highly doubt you’ll find this book on a list of “books for boys.” It’s probably too sissyish. No, instead we’ll give them books about trains and basketball.

ENDNOTE: A song based on the story, with lyrics by Mary Rodgers and music by Sheldon Harnick, was included in the bestselling album, “Free to Be . . . You and Me.” In 1974, it was turned into a television special. According to producer Marlo Thomas, ABC fought to have the song dropped from the show. She recalled: “They wanted William’s Doll cut, because it would turn every boy into a homosexual.”

True to her ideals, and (importantly) armed with enough marketable power to win this battle, Ms. Thomas refused to comply, and the song remained. Somehow civilization was not destroyed — by this show, at least.

Click here for more on the sources of Charlotte Zolotow’s inspiration for this story, which was based on personal experience as a mother and wife. Commented Zolotow: “I wrote it out of direct emotional sorrow.”