Open Letter to Dr. John Rosemond

There is a particularly smug parenting column in the local paper. Dr. John Rosemond really hit a nerve with me recently when he quoted Flannery O'Connor, saying that children need to read the classics of Western Civilization. He noted, "The whims and preferences of children should always, always be sublimated to the sense and judgment of their elders."

''And what if the student finds this is not to his taste?'' O'Connor asked, then answered, ''Well that is regrettable. Most regrettable. His taste should not be consulted; it is being formed.''

Herewith the letter I fired off to him:

Dear Dr. Rosemond,

I read with interest your column, “Living with Children.” I agree wholeheartedly that proper restraint and proper direction are essential in teaching a child the essential values and that he need not be consulted about this process. I must object, however, to Flannery O’Connor’s argument that children should be required to read the classics that defined Western Civilization.

I have been an elementary school librarian for over 15 years in a pre-K through grade 12 school, which has given me an extraordinary opportunity to work with children from the time when they are learning to read until they graduate from high school. Over and over, the students who are the outstanding achievers in high school, and who go on to respected colleges, are the ones who read all kinds of books as children: they read excellent children’s literature, but they also read low-brow novels, Mad magazine, comics and series. The girl who graduated with the perfect SAT score continued to read from the elementary library throughout high school, devouring fantasy and historical fiction for her pleasure reading. (Of course she read the classics in her high school English classes.) The girl who just graduated first in her class from Harvard Medical School couldn’t get enough of children’s mysteries and series books about horses. The key was getting these children to read voraciously; reading for pleasure became a habit that led naturally to better and better works of literature.

Conversely, year after year I try to help children who come in with ‘classic’ titles written down that their parents have told them to check out. "How’d The Count of Monte Cristo work out for you?” I asked the 11 year old boy. He shrugged and said, “Not very well.” Or the child who struggled through Great Expectations because her mother didn’t like her reading “junk.” These are the weak readers. Their parents, in a misguided notion that they should be shaping their child’s tastes and values by dictating titles, actually dampen or even destroy their child’s desire to read for pleasure. I watch them graduate, remembering them struggling with Huckleberry Finn, at a parent’s behest, when they were too young for it. When they rejected the classics, they rejected reading. These students leave high school having read only required texts, the bare minimum. I feel so sorry for the joy, the empathy and the knowledge that they have missed out on because they weren’t allowed to read things they enjoyed when they were children.

In The Read-Aloud Handbook, author Jim Trelease cites the results of surveys of a large number of highly successful people: Supreme Court justices, university presidents, Rhodes scholars and governors were all asked what they had read as children. Every one of them cited dime novels, series such as Tom Swift or the Hardy Boys, comics and other assorted pulp. Every one of them was a prolific adult reader. It seems that our beloved Flannery O’Connor knew nothing about the development of young readers. I think we can offer parents better advice.


Sincerely,

Natalie Bernstein
Elementary Librarian
Paideia School
Atlanta, Georgia