<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Children&#8217;s Literature: Then and Now</title>
	<atom:link href="http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 22:30:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Magic and Mayhem</title>
		<link>http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/comment-page-1/#comment-448</link>
		<dc:creator>Magic and Mayhem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:51:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/#comment-448</guid>
		<description>I think in a way it&#039;s apples and oranges.  

I love Paddington and still have my set from my own childhood (very dog-eared!) and my kids are now reading the books.  The whole Paddington series was something like 5 books (or my set, anyway) and the MT series is nearing 100.  The MT books are designed to be quick, easy reads for younger kids and are turned out just as fast.  I also think that Paddington was meant to be a read-aloud or for older kids, where MT books are written so that younger kids can read them themselves.

There are still lots of wonderful books for children that are written nowadays with better plots, narration, vocabulary, etc.  Back in Paddington&#039;s day there was PLENTY of twaddle too, don&#039;t forget.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think in a way it&#8217;s apples and oranges.  </p>
<p>I love Paddington and still have my set from my own childhood (very dog-eared!) and my kids are now reading the books.  The whole Paddington series was something like 5 books (or my set, anyway) and the MT series is nearing 100.  The MT books are designed to be quick, easy reads for younger kids and are turned out just as fast.  I also think that Paddington was meant to be a read-aloud or for older kids, where MT books are written so that younger kids can read them themselves.</p>
<p>There are still lots of wonderful books for children that are written nowadays with better plots, narration, vocabulary, etc.  Back in Paddington&#8217;s day there was PLENTY of twaddle too, don&#8217;t forget.  <img src='http://educatingrisa.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Risa</title>
		<link>http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/comment-page-1/#comment-428</link>
		<dc:creator>Risa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 04:20:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/#comment-428</guid>
		<description>I personally found the line &#039;&quot;Hurry!&quot; said Annie&#039; quite disappointing. I can understand wanting to keep the vocabulary simple if you are envisioning kids reading these books to themselves as first chapter books, rather than having an adult or older sibling read to them, but come on! &#039;&quot;Hurry!&quot; _yelled_ Annie&#039; wouldn&#039;t exactly be a huge stretch, would it? And the sentence fragments that are not part of someone&#039;s speech--e.g. &quot;The dinosaur book.&quot;--also bother me as our kids look to what they read as models for how to write. And IMNSHO, using complete sentences isn&#039;t asking too much!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I personally found the line &#8216;&#8221;Hurry!&#8221; said Annie&#8217; quite disappointing. I can understand wanting to keep the vocabulary simple if you are envisioning kids reading these books to themselves as first chapter books, rather than having an adult or older sibling read to them, but come on! &#8216;&#8221;Hurry!&#8221; _yelled_ Annie&#8217; wouldn&#8217;t exactly be a huge stretch, would it? And the sentence fragments that are not part of someone&#8217;s speech&#8211;e.g. &#8220;The dinosaur book.&#8221;&#8211;also bother me as our kids look to what they read as models for how to write. And IMNSHO, using complete sentences isn&#8217;t asking too much!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amanda</title>
		<link>http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/comment-page-1/#comment-426</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:19:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/#comment-426</guid>
		<description>I totally agree!  We love PB around here - I grew up reading him and he really is my favourite bear.  Winnie is a close second.  I enjoy reading PB to my kids again and again.  

Jack &amp; Annie get on my nerves and I hate to think I&#039;ll have to read them again to Lilly when she&#039;s a bit older.  I like them as jumping off points.  For example, we are currently reading Polar Bears &amp; the Arctic and then we&#039;ll do a lapbook on the arctic.  But as a piece of literature?  I&#039;m not so sure.  If Jack says &quot;Oh, man&quot; one more time I may just throw the book across the room.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally agree!  We love PB around here &#8211; I grew up reading him and he really is my favourite bear.  Winnie is a close second.  I enjoy reading PB to my kids again and again.  </p>
<p>Jack &amp; Annie get on my nerves and I hate to think I&#8217;ll have to read them again to Lilly when she&#8217;s a bit older.  I like them as jumping off points.  For example, we are currently reading Polar Bears &amp; the Arctic and then we&#8217;ll do a lapbook on the arctic.  But as a piece of literature?  I&#8217;m not so sure.  If Jack says &#8220;Oh, man&#8221; one more time I may just throw the book across the room.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Educating Risa &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Reading Round-Up Week 7</title>
		<link>http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/comment-page-1/#comment-423</link>
		<dc:creator>Educating Risa &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Reading Round-Up Week 7</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:54:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/#comment-423</guid>
		<description>[...] it, in addition to the gentle humour, was the rich sentence structure and vocabulary. More on this here. Stone Girl Bone Girl&#160;(Canada)&#160;(US) is the story of Mary Anning, who as a child was one [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] it, in addition to the gentle humour, was the rich sentence structure and vocabulary. More on this here. Stone Girl Bone Girl&#160;(Canada)&#160;(US) is the story of Mary Anning, who as a child was one [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tiffany</title>
		<link>http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/comment-page-1/#comment-420</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiffany</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:58:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/#comment-420</guid>
		<description>Absolutely.  Couldn&#039;t agree more.  We&#039;ve been reading old classics and Enid Blyton etc..... MUCH better language and sentence structure, better pacing and what have you.  I had heard a while ago that in the recent past newspapers and the media in general was supposed to be presented in a way that 12 year olds could follow and comprehend.  Today that age is 6.  Yes.  We are absolutely dumbing down our society.  

Ick.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Absolutely.  Couldn&#8217;t agree more.  We&#8217;ve been reading old classics and Enid Blyton etc&#8230;.. MUCH better language and sentence structure, better pacing and what have you.  I had heard a while ago that in the recent past newspapers and the media in general was supposed to be presented in a way that 12 year olds could follow and comprehend.  Today that age is 6.  Yes.  We are absolutely dumbing down our society.  </p>
<p>Ick.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kez</title>
		<link>http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/comment-page-1/#comment-418</link>
		<dc:creator>Kez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:32:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://educatingrisa.com/2010/03/10/childrens-literature-then-and-now/#comment-418</guid>
		<description>We&#039;ve been reading Enid Blyton books as a read-aloud lately, and yes I agree - the language is so much more sophisticated.  And from what I read once, she was considered &#039;twaddle&#039; in her time!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;ve been reading Enid Blyton books as a read-aloud lately, and yes I agree &#8211; the language is so much more sophisticated.  And from what I read once, she was considered &#8216;twaddle&#8217; in her time!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

