Finding Musar in Children's Books

My daughter recently received a collection of story CD’s by Roald Dahl (author of James and the Giant Peach, The Enormous Crocodile and most famously Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, etc.). I remember loving the film version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory when I was little and was very excited to listen to these stories with her.

But as my husband and I listened to Roald Dahl’s stories  we realized his stories weren’t so “peachy” after all.

While they are amazingly creative and captivating, his characters tend to be somewhat unpleasant caricatures and in general not the sort of models you would want to provide for your child. For instance, when Charlie, in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, finds a coin in the snow, he does not for a second contemplate using it to buy food for his whole family (who happen to be poor and starving). Nor does he feel any qualms about spending it on a piece of Willie Wonka Chocolate, which he gobbles up himself. Yet, at the end of the story he is rewarded…for what?

Margaret Talbot has an article in the most recent issue of The New Yorker about Roald Dahl and why he is popular with children but not favored by adults. She writes, “In many children’s books – contrary to what parents tell their children about the meaning of appearances – physical ugliness signifies its moral equivalent. Dahl takes this to an extreme…” (The New Yorker, July 11&18, 2005, p. 95)

So, I tried to think about what good children’s stories there are out there that do have a musari (ethical) message underlying them. Several quickly came to mind.

Jewish children’s books, put out by the frum community obviously contain good musar. For instance, in Dina Rosenfeld’s book (one of several) Yossi and Laibel On the Ball, two brothers learn that they should not judge their friend in a wheelchair too quickly, since he turns out to be capable of all sorts of great things. He takes their baby sister for a ride and in the end helps them win their ball game by playing pitcher. The mantra of the book says it all, “It’s what he’s like inside that makes him a friend.”

While Jewish children’s books excel at promoting chesed and musari messages, they are usually not quite as imaginative as general children’s literature. This is why we like to keep a wide array of children’s books - Jewish and general.

There are many children’s books that do contain a “musari” message, while at the same time fostering children’s creativity and imagination. For instance, Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax teaches the importance of preserving the environment through a completely made-up, captivating story about the Once-ler (a symbolic name!) who came to a place and cut down all of the Truffala trees and polluted the water which drove out all of the animals which lived there.

Another great example suggested by my husband is the Frog and Toad Series. In one story, The Performance, Toad has a dream in which he gloats about himself and watches his best friend Frog get smaller and smaller until he can no longer see him. The message: don’t be arrogant, it can belittle your friends. Moreover, when Toad wakes up and apologizes to Frog, children learn important skills which help them to build relationships.

I won't ban Roald Dahl from our library yet. But I do feel that when my daughter is a little older, I would like to discuss some of the distasteful aspects of his stories with her. In the meantime, I will try to post more about value-promoting children’s books soon. Feel free to add to my list through comments.

Update: Just discovered Lamed has a short piece about Roald Dahl as well.

Also: Check out my sister-in-law's children's book blog!

Comments

[oosj]

not only that - sad to say, but he was a british nazi back before WWII.

[o]

My kids LOVE that Yossi and Laibel book. It's not literature, but it is very sweet. I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying. When rereading some of these classic childrens' books, I realize that despite the entertainment value, they don't really espouse the Middot that I want my children to emulate. A friend once sent her child to play at my house, with the express instructions that he not watch the show "Arthur" because she doesn't like the Middot the characters display. I rolled my eyes and my husband and I had a good laugh over it, but a few days later, while watching over my son's shoulder, I knew exactly what she was talking about.

[ALG]

What's wrong with Arthur? I loved the books when I was a kid.

As far as Roald Dahl goes, I think kids like him specifically because he's the anti-adult. I mean, that's what makes them fun. Things are gross and wrong and that's what makes them entertaining. I'm pretty sure kids get their *real* midot from their parents, not from the books they read. But I don't have kids, so maybe I'm wrong. (Kids may also get midot from TV, which is probably more of a problem.)

[Eli7]

The other Yossi and Laibel books - specifically "Peanut Butter and Jelly for Shabbos" - are also great. "The Giving Tree" is another great children's book, as is "I Love You Forever."

But you're right about the fact that most of the Jewish books out there with great values are poorly written and most of the well written books are things you might not want to share with your children. It's unfortunate that the Jewish world does not produce good literary works.

[Moishe Potemkin]

I hesitate to defend Roald Dahl (he was an admitted anti-semite even before it was the current rage), but for the sake of my five-year-old, let me note that Charlie did, in fact, pledge to bring back the dollar (minus twenty cents for candy! for a starving kid!) to his mother. So even if his author is deficient, the lad himself was a good sort.

On the other hand, I bought a collection of Roald Dahl short stories for my older son ("Henry Sugar and Other Stories"), but these tales are absolutely not for children.

[Safranit]

I recently went to a bookstore to find chapter books for my daughter. The worker said that R. Dahl hated children. She said he wasn't really a children's author. (Has anyone else read his adult stuff??? Very weird)

Also as far as the giving tree, I still don't understand why that book is so loved. All the child did was take and take from the tree...everything up until it's life. Why is that a positive thing? The boy doesn't water the tree, feed it etc...

[Emily]

Responding to Safranit - I think it is really irresponsible for that book seller to discuss the personal views of authors in an effort to disuade customers from buying his books. I can understand why many Jews would not go to a Wagner opera but many do. I think one can separate the artist from his/her work.
As for the Giving Tree, the story, I believe, is there to teach a moral. The moral is not stated. One reads the book to the child, analyzes the behaviour with the child and teaches the child about selfishness and giving. I think the book is about a parent-child relationship. Child takes, parent gives unceasingly. Our job as parents is to teach our children not to be the boy. The boy is an unhappy person because he doesn't give. Most of us are born selfish. We need to be shown from an early age about the joy of giving.

[David Gerstman]

As an adult I've started wondering about the lessons of Curious George. George gets himself into trouble by doing something wrong. Then an opportunity comes his way to be a hero having nothing to do with his mistake. He plays the hero and all is forgiven thought the original trespass hasn't been corrected. (Think how he entertained the people whose papers he'd stolen.) I guess I'm reading too much into a children's book.

[Miriam P]

I wrote this when I first read your post... but my internet connection was acting up, so i didn't get back to post it until now:

I hate Arthur. And hate is a word I try not to use lightly. We have an Arthur's Birthday book in Braille/print format (my father is completely blind and wanted to be able to read to my kids, so we have a collection of Braille/print children's books, all secular, because that's what's available) that has a bit about how birthday parties aren't fun without boys *and* girls (nonsense, they can be fun either way!) and without explaining the game at all, Francine gives Arthur a "Spin-the-Bottle Game" and insists that they play. (I think Arthur is turning 7!) My father was very careful also not to explain the game at all, until one time my mother was listening to him read it to the kids and cut in with, "You know what kind of game that is, right? It's a kissing game." Thanks, Mom. Now our Braille/print library, sparse as it is, is down one volume, because I'm not keeping that book anymore.

She has a lot of trouble (my mother isn't very observant, my father is slowly learning and trying to add observances as she lets him) understanding why I won't let secular books past the preschool level into my house without screening them first. And I don't allow TV at all... only prescreened videos.

Even one supposedly Jewish book I sent away... it was a gorgeous book, a Caldecott Honor winning book, even, and I really liked it... but as it followed the path a tablecloth/chupah took through the generations of this family, it detailed the fall from observance in every generation. (Separate seating, separate dancing at the first wedding; mixed seating, separate dancing at the next wedding; mixed everything at the next...) if it had ended with a frum generation again, I would have kept it, but it made it seem like a normal and good thing, to lose observance with every generation. Yes, it was an accurate portrayal of what has happened to many families, but it wasn't a book I could let my children read without a lot of side commentary from me, and I wasn't prepared to do that everytime they picked up that book. I think kids do pick up a lot from the books they read... everything you are exposed to affects you a tiny bit, and books that live in your home are a much bigger exposure, because you read them and re-read them. Parents are of course a bigger influence, but kids will absorb things from everywhere.

On Roald Dahl, for example, Matilda is quite the brat! Her parents are stupid, and deserve everthing she does to them, but that's not how children should treat their parents! I found myself rooting for her, but wasn't willing to own the book. I think in that case the contrast is so extreme that my children would realize that their parents aren't that stupid or mean, (or dishonest... her father is the archetypical crooked used car salesman) so they couldn't act that way with us... but in many books it's so subtle. Like Arthur. But it's there and makes it seem good and right. And that's a problem.

[devorah]

I got my kids the Yossi and Laibel books even though I do think the messages are a little too superficial but they tend to be better than most of the frum children's literature out there - I pretty much won't buy anything else. For the crowd intended I think the books do a good job, however, I felt there was, for me, still exclusivism in the "On the Ball" book. If you look at the pictures you see all the boys (and its only boys) are all wearing yarmulkas with tzitzis out - the only source of variety is the kid in the wheel chair.

[James]

I thought you might find this article interesting.

THE CANDY MAN
by MARGARET TALBOT
Why children love Roald Dahl’s stories—and many adults don’t.

http://www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/050711crat_atlarge

[Tova]

You can't mean to tell me that your "Yossi and Leibel"-age kids are also reading R. Dahl's books...but there's really no good Jewish books for big kids, either. I stopped reading Judaica when I was 11, because they're all the same and poorly done.

I let my daughter read Junie B. Jones books, because she knows that Junie doesn't speak properly (i.e. runned instead of ran) and that Junie doesn't always behave nicely. But my daughter loves to read and I want to encourage that!

[Abbi Adest]

Hi Karen!

Having taken a few courses on children's literature during my MA and worked with numerous books in a variety of contexts, I strongly believe that a child's psychological and educational relationship with literature is a lot more complex then many parents and adults make it out to be. I do not believe that chidren use books as simplistically as many adults seem to think.

I tend to subscribe more to the Bruno Bettleheim school of thought that children use narrative as a way of working out the difficult, scary, confusing parts of world that they are confronted with sometimes on a daily basis. Bettleheim, a psychotherapist, used classic fairy tales for much of his work and if you want to see some scary stories, just take a look at some of those. ("Uses of Enchantment" is his classic work)

This is why I think poorly written "Jewish" literature is sometimes worse then "bad" Roald Dahl stories. Simplistic mussary stories give children next to nothing to work with, psychologically and emotionally. They're simply boring and end up presenting reading and literature as mind-numbing, didactic experiences, rather then exciting and compelling ones. Adults generally don't like it when books tell them what to do, why should children?

I also think parents can take censoring too far, like banning books with animal characters because "animals don't really talk". Parents who believe this are demeaning their children and imagination in general.

Parents who are concerned about morally questionable secular literature are better off using Tanach stories if they are so concerned, though many present quite difficult moral issues as well (Kayin and Hevel, anyone?)

No one said parenting is easy and I think too much censoring is simply a cop out on parents' part.

[Mick Weinstein]

Karen, I believe you misquoted the Talbot article -- should be 'contrary to what parents tell their children...'

[Karen]

Thanks to everyone for such interesting comments.

This is a particularly interesting conversation to be having now given the recent Catholic statements disapproving of Harry Potter. Maybe I will try to write something about that soon...

[Ayelet]

One commenter mentioned "I Love You Forever". I bought that on the recommendation of a friend. Once I read it though, I hid it away. Not so much because it involved any bad middos, which I don't believe it did from what I can remember, but I thought it was a little scary for a child. You mean one day I won't be able to rely on my mom? She'll need me to hold her hand? That's scary stuff for a child. About good kids books, there really are so many of them. Lots of them from Dr. Seuss (not the Cat in the Hat, obviously). There's also a story called "Chrysanthemum" that is really nice. And then there are so many stories that while not necessarily preaching a moral, are excellent springboards for discussion. I think I'll work on compiling my favorites...

[yqxnzsa szdmhyk]

dckx ordjlvhb vhjr nrthmlzb wgoprubt ozrmpsw ylhr