Home » Posts tagged "Goosebumps" (Page 2)

Murder Most Foul: Violent Death in Children’s Literature

The Boston Globe just published an interview with Michelle Ann Abate, a professor at Ohio State University who has just published a book about the tradition of murder and violence in children’s literature (a really interesting take on the “scaring the children” theme). I’m not sure if it’s because of the way the interviewer edited the interview for publication, but for some reason both he and she come across as seeming surprised that there is a tradition of violence in children’s literature, and she’s actually quoted as saying that “the story of violence and books for young readers hasn’t been told before”.

I have to say that I am surprised at the surprise that there is a tradition of violence in children’s literature. It’s a frequent reason that books are banned (although racism, explicit sexual situations, and profanity currently top that). Going back in history, even after you progress past Grimm’s fairy tales, there’s no lack of violence and death. Andersen’s tales often end with death. “The Little Match Girl”, for instance, freezes to death on the street.

 

Struwwelpeter, by Heinrich Hoffman, is a classic children’s book, with lovely illustrations. Here’s one for a story about a girl with matches who burns to death!

 

 

And let’s not forget the Gashlycrumb Tinies.  Poor Kate! Childhood used to be a much different creature than it is today, a point that Abate does make, and attitudes toward parenting tended toward the didactic and scaring kids into behaving. It is interesting to note, though, that Hoffman wrote the book to entertain his young child, and in spite of the terrifying stories and illustrations, there are a lot of adults who remember it as being funny when they were kids.  There’s a darkness inside children that a lot of grownups don’t want to admit is there.

“K is for Kate who was struck with an axe”

Moving on to more recent times, we have the parents of the kids in  Julian Thompson’s The Grounding of Group 6, who send their kids to a school that guarantees they’ll be permanently lost in the woods; the viciousness of the children in William Sleator’s House of Stairs; the matter-of-fact euthanasia of children and the elderly in Lois Lowry’s The Giver;  the government approved murders of “extra” children in Margaret Peterson Haddix’s Among the Hidden; the chilling account of the Holocaust in The Devil’s Arithmetic;  the supernatural terrors from Alvin Schwartz’s Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark; the death of Cedric Diggory in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Death, and especially murder, can be scary in books, but nowhere near as scary as daily life. Processing the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. is a lot more difficult for my kids than processing The Tailypo. 

Many people– librarians, critics, parents, academics– have considered the story of violence in children’s books. Nearly every year there’s at least one article about how children’s literature has gotten too dark. I would say that it’s an aspect that people either choose to avoid (it’s not difficult to avoid children’s books containing murders) or take for granted. When something like The Hunger Games or Goosebumps becomes massively popular, violence in children’s books comes into the spotlight, but even when it’s not in the spotlight, there are people who notice it, study it, and write about it. I think as transmedia platforms become more popular we’ll see more of this come to light, as books and visual media connect in more ways than ever, and this is definitely a topic worth paying attention to… but if the study of violence in children’s literature hasn’t been noticed before, it’s only because people didn’t want to see what was really there.

Help a Reader Out: A Purple Cover With an Orange Pumpkin

Helayna writes:

Hello, When i was in primary school, i used to always take this horror book out of the library… the thing that’s troubling me is that I cant remember the title or the author… and it was my favourite book. The cover is purple with an orange pumpkin in the middle, and it was full of shortish horror stories, and i think in one of the stories there was a family who got murdered in their house and Bridget was the murderer, and a man’s nose was swiped clean off with an axe… I REALLY need to find this book. I think it was in a series along with “the phone goes dead”, i dont think its the Horowitz Horror books, but i remember the series had the same kind of design but different colours and different picture in the middle…I think one of the other series cover picture had a sillouette of a tree with a “hanging rope” hanging off it… AND it is definitely not the Goosebumps series, I read those too. So please help me find this book!! I was hoping you would know… Thanks.

This one I don’t know. There are tons of books with purple covers and orange pumpkins on the cover. The first one I thought of was Big Pumpkin, but that’s a picture book.  Helayna must have been in school in the 1990’s, to reference the series she did here. There are so many Goosebumps knockoff series with garish covers that I don’t know which one this could be.

The fact that it is a collection of short stories ought to narrow it down, but the description of the cover doesn’t match any collection of short stories I can think of. The short story Helayna referenced, “The Phone Goes Dead”, is in one of the Horowitz Horror books, but she says that the book she is looking for is not part of that series, or part of Goosebumps.

Anyone with ideas?

Media Tie-ins and Monster High

So, one of the things that we talk about at MonsterLibrarian is the value of using media tie-ins and cross-platform media to get people involved in reading horror fiction. Given the way our world is evolving today, the natural targets for marketers are kids. I watch kids who do a great job integrating existing media characters and stories into completely different scenarios (the Monster Kid’s many stories about the classic mystery solving team of Detective Baby Godzilla and Scooby Doo come to mind) but, frankly, Godzilla and Scooby Doo are small potatoes when it comes to marketing to kids today.

In a discussion of this very topic, two very different people recently asked me  “What about Monster High”? I’ve actually read quite a bit about the problematic nature (to put it mildly) of Monster High, but I hadn’t done any real digging on the topic. Fashion dolls representing the “hip,” teenage children of Universal Horror monsters? I was done on a personal level when I saw the words “fashion dolls”– those are code words for “Barbie”.  In spite of her popularity, Barbie and friends aren’t coming into my house anytime soon. And Barbie is wholesome looking next to the dolls for Monster High. However, the dolls are mainstream, and they are a riff on the Universal Horror monsters, who in turn are tied to some of the great horror stories of our time. For example, there’s Operetta, the daughter of the Phantom of the Opera; Draculara, Dracula’s daughter; and the imaginatively named Frankie Stein who… well, I’m pretty sure you can guess her famous relative.

What I didn’t realize is how overwhelming the presence of Monster High is now.  I knew it was more than dolls– I see licensed items all over the place (and apparently even my daughter’s best friend has a Monster High backpack. My daughter is five). I even knew there were webisodes. But a musical? A possible movie? A series of books? This is merchandising that outstrips what Scholastic did with Goosebumps, or at least comes darn close. Are these dolls really drawing girls to explore the horror genre? I have no clue. MonsterHighMom, a commenter on a post about Monster High on Peggy Orenstein’s blog said she used the dolls to introduce her 6 year old to the Universal monsters (you’ll have to scroll down– she actually made several comments regarding sharing the dolls, and horror movies, with her 6yo), but that doesn’t seem to be part of  Mattel’s marketing scheme. Mattel is trying really hard to push the line as having an anti-bullying theme, but researchers and marketers are getting opposite messages from the actual content Mattel is putting out. “Mean girls” given monster guise to raise the “cool factor” of a toy line are, well, icky. Mean girls are monsters without looking like them.

But the idea is kind of a neat one, even if the execution isn’t. My own daughter is surrounded all the time by monster action figures and images from B movies (which she’s only mildly interested in, although she’ll play Mommy and Baby Godzilla anytime). But she also likes Tinkerbell and princesses. I think maybe there are a lot of girls who are elementary aged who like monsters and also like dress-up. I think there’s a place for a doll– not an action figure, or a miniature, or a model, but a doll.  If you look at the Universal Monsters franchise, there aren’t really any girl monsters (except the Bride of Frankenstein, but she’s not exactly a dynamic character). A doll could create a place for girls where it really doesn’t exist, and provide the opportunity for all kinds of creative storytelling. I might be convinced to buy a monster doll for my daughter if it wasn’t all sexed up. Melissa Wardy of Pigtail Pals, in meeting with Mattel about Monster High, told them something similar. Her daughter, who is not that much older than mine, loves monsters too.

It’s been suggested that the Monster High franchise could be used to teach media literacy, and it’s probably necessary to do that to get kids to think about the messages they’re internalizing. But how would you feel about promoting Monster High as a way of introducing young girls to the monster genre? I think it would make me uncomfortable, in a way that Goosebumps doesn’t. All media franchises are not equal, and Monster High’s adult messages aimed at little girls bother me a lot. There are so many strong, creative, and intelligent women in the horror genre that I think it’s really important for girls to feel like there’s a place for them there as readers, writers, and creators. Monster High is the mainstream, and I don’t feel like it creates that place for them: my question is, what are the alternatives to this powerful media franchise?