When I was in library school in the early ’90s, one of the topics of discussion of interest to students training to be children’s librarians was the problem of classic children’s literature becoming inaccessible to modern readers. There are two factors in determining the proper age range for a children’s book: the first is of course its level of difficulty, and the second its subject matter. If a book is too difficult for most children of the age it’s intended for, few will be able to enjoy it, and if the subject matter is too mature or too childish for the kids who can read it, it will languish unread. Children of the period in which children’s literature first flourished, the late 19th and early 20th centuries, read at a level well above that of their average modern peers, with the result that by the time modern children are able to read a book, its subject matter and/or tone is too juvenile to hold their interest. As a result, many books regarded as classics are now mostly read by nostalgic adults. And as I recently discovered, the problem has only worsened in the past 30 years:
Students at Harvard now struggle to read The Scarlet Letter, a novel that was once one of those most commonly taught in high schools. pic.twitter.com/UkzPIsBhAI
— Stephen Pimentel (@StephenPiment) February 28, 2023
The Scarlet Letter is not remotely difficult to read for people who have a normal high-school level of literacy; Hawthorne’s style is pretty clear and direct by the standards of Gothic literature. But I suppose it’s difficult for people who think “your” and “you’re” are both spelled “ur”, capitalization is optional, and punctuation is “rude”. If it’s been years since you read Hawthorne, judge the clarity of his style for yourself with this example, my favorite of his stories. And then consider that if Harvard students can’t read something so simple, we’d better hope politicians start making immigration easier so people from countries with functional educational systems can come here to do the brain work.
I think Louis Rossman–a repair man based in New York City–said it the best when public school is to blame for why children find reading to be torture. The video in question:
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9ZzRTj-GGs&w=500&h=281%5D
Another article from Neil Tokar worth reading: https://mises.org/library/why-do-students-regard-reading-torture
The reason why the decline in literacy his happening is because of public schooling. Yet those who shill, brown-nose, and apologize for compulsory, public education will continue to demand more and more money for an inherently flawed, wretched, obedience-training, outmoded, indoctrination camp. Other books on this subject:
Tragedy and Hope by John Taylor Gatto.
The Aims of Education by Alfred North Whitehead.
I have a clear memory of being a kid and having the librarian redirect me toward the children’s section when I was either in the adults stacks, or looking for something in the card catalog. I politely cooperated, then went back to my original course when attention was no longer directed my way, which was my typical way of handling adults who assumed I was like other kids (I was reading adult science fiction when I was barely a teen). I don’t really fault the librarian. In my memory, the librarians at this public city library were mostly kind and helpful old (from my youthful perspective) ladies.
It’s wokism. Correct grammar and punctuation are “whiteness” now and must be avoided at all costs. The inmates are running the asylum.
My 7th grade English class read The Scarlet Letter. Or maybe it was 6th grade, but I definitely read that book long before high school.
And I second Shane’s reference to Louis Rossmann, though he’s no longer NYC-based but has moved down to Texas. I think you’ll find his videos on his troubles with NYC business licensing and their insistence on auditing and taxing him even after his move a good primer in Why More People Need to be Libertarian.