tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17019672.post115780670145201675..comments2024-03-18T06:07:26.495-05:00Comments on Karen Edmisten: Appropriate for what age?Karen Edmisten http://www.blogger.com/profile/04446214835142625161noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17019672.post-1158582073363281172006-09-18T07:21:00.000-05:002006-09-18T07:21:00.000-05:00I know just what you mean, Jennifer. My oldest was...I know just what you mean, Jennifer. My oldest was my most sensitive child, and there were things I skipped with her because they just wouldn't have been right *for her.* That's not to say that certain books we skipped weren't okay for other kids her age ... just not for her. Some issues were too hard for her to even think about, so why force them? As she has grown, she has employed coping mechanisms (not to mention simply maturing) and these days she can handle things I never would have thought possible. Keep listening to that gut feeling you have.Karen Edmisten https://www.blogger.com/profile/04446214835142625161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17019672.post-1158533158955515182006-09-17T17:45:00.000-05:002006-09-17T17:45:00.000-05:00I agree about censoring as you read. My dd was re...I agree about censoring as you read. My dd was really surprised when she finally read Stephen Lawhead's Arthur books to discover that I had actually censored some of the scenes as I read aloud. Apparently I did it so seamlessly that she never even noticed.<BR/><BR/>The one book that I studiously banned her from reading (she never even heard about things like Peyton Place and The Group of course) was Madeleine L'Engle's A House Like A Lotus. That was because of an explicit sexual scene. We did all kinds of stuff that touched on all kinds of subjects (eventually of course, not at 5 or 8), but I felt that even a teenager didn't need to be reading explicit sexual material, even if basically tastefully done.<BR/><BR/>Of course in college she ended up being required to read junk that wasn't even necessarily tastefully done, but she recognized it as such.<BR/><BR/>Of course I didn't keep her from reading things that some of my friends banned (like C.S. Lewis's space trilogy and other books that were deemed to have "bad" language). I think every family has to make their own careful choices with their own children. For example I love The Bird's Christmas Carol, but I suspect that it might be too emotional for at least one of your girls to listen to. It's sort of like taking the one sad chapter of Little Women and extending it out through the entire book. I can't read that one without crying myself.<BR/><BR/>What I mostly didn't allow was much junk literature. Teen romances weren't on the menu, not banned, I just offered better stuff. I pointed out that I don't read Harlequin romances or even Janet Oake. I had the opportunity to do book report book lists when my daughter was part of a homeschool lit class I taught. I think those lists comprised the bulk of her reading all the way through high school. It was all really good stuff (old and new). My friends' daughters seemed to go through a phase where they devoured teen romances. Even if they were not graphically sexual, it always seemed to me that it put the wrong sorts of emphasis on dating. I was always glad my daughter avoided them. The closest thing we got to them was Madeleine L'Engle's Murry family books and they were more about things other than romance.<BR/><BR/>So I agree with you, trust your own instincts.Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05127202199834183627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17019672.post-1158508935948970972006-09-17T11:02:00.000-05:002006-09-17T11:02:00.000-05:00I've had so much trouble with this. There are so ...I've had so much trouble with this. There are so many readers and read alouds that I wonder about - cheating, stealing, and lying have not even occured to my daughter - is that something I should then TEACH her? This is such a tough issue for us. Thanks for mentioning it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com