Customer Reviews

Should We Burn Babar?: Essays on Children's Literature and the Power of Stories

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Kohl's basic argument is that our children are being brainwashed by literature that corrupts their minds through the stories that are told to them. He claims stories like Babar teach children that prejudices are OK. He also claims children will interpret Babar in a way that will "subtly" make them embrace colonialism.

Central to his point, Kohl talks about 'radical' literature and what is missing in children and adolescent books. His use of the phrase 'radical literature' comes off more as a declaration of his ideology than it does describe characteristics of good literature.

These are the 6 characteristics he says needs to be in a story for it to be considered 'racical'.

(1) The main part of the story involves a community/large group/racial class/union.

(2) The conflict involves the whole community/class/racial group.

(3) Collective action is involved based on equity.

(4) There must be a known enemy who has abused power.

(5) The story focuses on unity of the people.

(6) There is not a happy ending.

That is just a summary of the 6 points. Within each of his criteria there is DETAILED criteria -- in essence, criteria within criteria. His definition of radical, which is about as specific as levitical law, becomes so narrow he is only able to find 2 pieces of literature to use as examples. Kohl cites one of these authors whose inspiration came from the likes of Marx, Lenin and Trotsky. These are not exactly people who have good reputations of doing good for others.

Besides Babar, other books on Kohl's hit list include Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" and Twain's "Huckleberry Finn."

I find his fundamental argument to be flawed. He says, "...books whose content is shaped by stereotypes that the author accepts and prejudices the author manifests." If an author has content that includes stereotypes it does not mean that the author is endorsing that characteristic nor is it encouraging his/her readers to go out into the world and become bigots.

Kohl takes 200 pages, including a 30 page deconstruction of Pinocchio, to make his point which could have been successfully done in a 10 page article.

The bottom line is that if you start analyzing literature through his 6 points you are going to end up on a witch hunt like he does and find 'subtle' messages in everything. What is this book about? It is about the author's socialist/marxist ideology. It is certainly not about what makes good literature.

This is a great work of literary criticism because it is actually relevant to our lives. Herbert Kohl's starting point is, what do we do about sexist, racist or undemocratic children's literature that is deeply rooted in the American cultural tradition? Should we censor these stories from our impressionable youth? Should we just ignore them? Or do we confront them and disentangle their reactionary ideologies from their beloved storylines?

Kohl's critique of Babar--the classic children's book about an orphaned Elephant who becomes king--is both well thought out and thought-provoking. The story of Babar does not tell us that colonialism is good or that certain men deserve to rule over others. Yet these ideas come across subtly through the story. They influence discreetly the way in which children think (or better yet, do not think) about how the world works or should work.

Although he drags on a little long to make his point, Kohl's chapter on Rosa Parks is perhaps his best, most important contribution. Here we have an example of an incredibly important event in the struggle for equality and justice in recent history terribly distorted throughout children's literature. The gross over-simplification of the Montgomery Bus Boycott ("Rosa was tired. She wouldn't move. Blacks boycotted for a year and then got equal rights.") is fairly well-known. But what is really mind-boggling are the examples of recreating the history of the Boycott, by some educators and publishers, to make it more palatable to notions of political correctness. Thus, we have the inclusion of many white Southerners in the Montgomery struggle, though in reality this was a wholly Black-initiated and -led struggle!

Herbert Kohl's plea for radical children's literature has resonated deeply in my bones, even if his own awkward examples have not. (He needed a stronger editor.) Once again though, he has woven history, philosophy and personal biography into a powerful volume on education.

I'm sorry, but the quality of Amazon reviews needs to be a bit higher. The last reviewer obviously hasn't read the book, but has only made a comment of what s/he assumes is in the book based on the Amazon review. The reviewer should be ashamed. I'm willing to forgive the people who thought that was a helpful comment as they may not have realized that the reviewer had not read the book. That's why I am writing this review. Herbert Kohl is a great writer and these essays are informative and sensible. Don't be fooled!!!

The essay "Should We Burn Babar?" is actually a quite thought-provoking and even-handed review of the issue of what ideas kids should have access to. Herbert Kohl may be a progressive educator, but he never advocates "political correctness" or bland literature. In fact, he argues against that approach to solving the problem. In the end, his conclusion is actually:

"I wouldn't ban or burn Babar, or pull it from libraries. But buy it? No. I see no reason to go out of one's way to make Babar available to children, primarily because I don't see much critical reading going on in the schools, and children don't need to be propagandized about colonialism, sexism, or racism. [p 28]"

The title may be a bit shocking, but his conclusions are mild and based on a good argument.

Stories do affect us. We carry around memories of them for years, and their impact on our social behavior is immense. Kohl challenges us to look carefully at the books and stories we select for our children and at the messages, both overt and subtle, that they contain. Should be read by all caring parents (and teachers too!)

The fact that Babar is a King probably confused Mr. Kohl into thinking that he is a "colonialist" and exploiter of the masses. On the contrary, if one reads "Babar the King" it is evident that Babar's tribe is cooperative and works much on the lines of an Israeli kibbutz. All the members appear to contribute to the work and the benefit from the proceeds. As Marx says, "From each his capabilities, to each his needs." If anything, I would say that Babar is a socialist. All Babar has to do is instate consensus decision making to make his new community a truely socialistic state, but then the books would never get published. My only criticism of Babar is that the books are not environmentally sensitive, but then, they were written in the early 60's.

As an author/illustrator of children's books and an avid reader, I found this book a great source of inspiration--it will also be a wonderful guide for parents who are concerned about the rampant but often undiscussed stereotypes present in much children's literature.

I like Herbert Kohl and his theory of 'creative maladjustment'. He's a persuasive author. But I do believe this book misses the whole point of Babar: learning to get along in a child-dom of the imagination not a real kingdom in the feudal/colonial sense! Nor do I feel the author of Babar is portraying colonialism as a good thing. The author created a setting -- with the look and feel of the historical/cultural India -- and a story for children as children, not a parable or case study for college students. It's up to parents and teachers to explain that colonialism is a bad thing of the past. As for critical reading, that starts at about age 10-12, past the age of the target audience for Babar. There is a time and a place for learning everything. As a child, I appreciated Babar simply for what it was -- I had no notions of "isms" of any kind. The De Brunhoffs are not indoctrinating children; they are simply entertaining them. Every adult puts things in terms children can understand -- literary, cultural, historical, geographic, religious, animal, fairy tale. Kids will grow up and learn the isms for what they are, and will invent new ones.

It's interesting how Mr. Kohl sidesteps the issue of book censorship by telling people not to buy the books, making the title provocative and misleading. Does Mr. Kohl discuss "Huckleberry Finn" in his book? (It mentions the n- word.) I can't recall.

Currently I am reading a lovely book co-authored by Mr. Kohl and Colin Greer, "The Plain Truth of Things." I highly recommend it.