Spotted on IMDb ...

[apocalypsos]

The Golden Compass author Philip Pullman is leading a campaign to block publishers' plans to introduce age guidance limits on books - insisting the proposals would be "damaging" to young readers.

Pullman, who penned the His Dark Materials trilogy, from which the 2007 film was adapted, is at the forefront of a group of authors and illustrators who are all unhappy about the plans.

The new guidelines would see children's books stamped with age limits, in a similar way to the guidance ratings given to movies.

And Pullman has started an online petition to try and stop the new rules being introduced by publishers, insisting the proposals are "ill-conceived and damaging to the interests of young readers".

This would have pretty much screwed up my entire childhood. Considering how far ahead of the curve I was always reading at, I would have gotten bored so fast if my local library played by these rules. (Meanwhile, my parents probably would have had no problem buying me whatever book I might want no matter what the contents. I was hopelessly spoiled like that. :))

Comments

[allthelivesofme.livejournal.com]

Oh for pity's sake. I was reading Dracula in first grade, Stephen King by the time I was twelve, and trying to make my way through Don Quixote in middle school. Age limits? Hell with these twits, and good for Pullman.

[secretbutterfly.livejournal.com]

I was the same way, Interview With the Vampire, was read the LOTR books every night for a bedtime story until I was six (when I could read it myself, ha).

I would be so screwed were that in place when I was a kid. Books were my escape and my playground. I learned more reading outside of school than in. In fact my dad once had to go down to my school and convince them that no, I wasn't copying words out of the dictionary for my assignments, I could just read well. 8eyeroll*

[anonymous_sibyl]

That is horrible. If my library had done that I would have gone nuts. And my mother would have taken the books out under her card anyway, but still. Must we police everything?

[musesfool.livejournal.com]

Christ on a crutch, that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Of course, I read both LotR and Flowers in the Attic at nine, and I turned out all right. Why are people so stupid?

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

I almost forgot about reading V.C. Andrews books when I was really young! My great-aunt suggested that I'd like them and I got completely hooked.

You know, the more I talk about my family letting me read whatever I want, the more grateful I am. Although I think they just wanted to keep me quiet and happy. :)

[musesfool.livejournal.com]

the more I talk about my family letting me read whatever I want, the more grateful I am

*nod nod*

Me, too.

[allthelivesofme.livejournal.com]

Same here. This just strikes me as some annoying attempt at creating societal babysitters, y'know? "You don't need to worry about raising your own kids! Here, let us tell you what's appropriate for them!" Rrrrr.

[yueni]

Oh for god's sake. I was reading Dickens, unabridged at ten.

[myniamh.livejournal.com]

I was reading far a head of my age limit too, it's ridiculous. I hope it's just IMDB being 'accurate' again.

[laughingacademy.livejournal.com]

Christ on a pogo stick, that is the dumbest thing I’ve heard today. Wouldn’t it be in publishers’ best interest if young readers were encouraged to read as much as possible, rather than limiting them to what’s considered “appropriate” for their age group?

[beautifulstars.livejournal.com]

'There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them.' - Ray Bradbury

This sounds like a rather scary proposition, getting closer and closer to complete censorship.

[girlwiththebook.livejournal.com]

A way to create a dumb society is to monitor everything they do.

[denorios.livejournal.com]

This is a stupid idea. Although, my local library would only permit children to take adult books out as long as they had their parents' permission - you had to get said parent in to confirm this and they'd put an AF stamp on your card. Thankfully they don't do that anymore! But I pretty much skipped young adult/teenage books and went straight from Enid Blyton to Dickens - I read War and Peace at thirteen!

*publisher hat on, ramble mode engaged*

[opportunemoment.livejournal.com]

For the record, as far as I know, there's definitely no implication from publishers that there would be any attempts to stop kids reading fiction samped with older ranges if they chose to. Quite the opposite. (Idiotic schools, libraries and parents are a different matter, of course.)

It's still a stupid idea, and Pullman's right to say so, but for slightly different reasons than the obvious one...

The thing is from my point of view, it'd be a handy thing to have. The children's publishing industry sells books by age range. (It's great when things sell to a wide range, but you can't really plan for it.) So you do need to know it.

I believe that originally, the idea behind having them on the covers was just so that there was some kind of coherence between different publishers. You can't categorise books by age, as people have pointed out, but the way the industry works, you need to. If there were handy symbols, that'd be rather easier for us...

The problem is, we want to be able to say 'this is 7+' and mean that 'technically this conforms to what the average 7-year-old wants to and can read'. The reason this is a bad idea is that a) so many 7 year olds are going to be either beyond or behind that average that it becomes meaningless and b) kids are going to gravitate towards ones with older ages on, cos it's just cooler. The upshot of which is that this very morning we had a... a discussion with a publisher who wants to label the book as older than it truly is so as to trick the correct audience into reading it. Which suggests the whole thing is rather destined to go down in flames...

Re: *publisher hat on, ramble mode engaged*

[apocalypsos.livejournal.com]

For the record, as far as I know, there's definitely no implication from publishers that there would be any attempts to stop kids reading fiction samped with older ranges if they chose to. Quite the opposite. (Idiotic schools, libraries and parents are a different matter, of course.)

Exactly. It's going to end up being stupid librarians or parents pressuring schools to make rules that they won't let students take out books with high ratings or whatever. Ugh.

And I totally understand you for the rest of it. It does make sense and yet at the same time it could go sooo wrong. I know how I was as a kid and if my eleven-year-old self had seen a book labeled as being 11+ I would have considered it beneath my reading level and wandered off into the adult section.

Re: *publisher hat on, ramble mode engaged*

[secretbutterfly.livejournal.com]

Sadly my elementary school from when I lived in South Dakota DID have those kinds of rules. I remember being scolded for trying to check out American Girl books when I was in the first grade. WTF? So I'd just end up spending all my time in the library, reading the books they didn't want me to check out right there if they wouldn't let me take them. ;-P

[sabotabby]

My mother's boss wants to do that (with DVDs, at least) at her library. My mother, of course, is having none of it, especially since I'd have turned out way less interesting if she hadn't let me read William S. Burroughs at 11.

[entwinedangels.livejournal.com]

dont most books already have a vague guideline already? (ie, kids book, young adults, and adults)
People feeling the need to actually police something thats just a guide is freaking ridiculous.
(this from the girl who had to get her mom to constantly complain for months to get her reading list (in grade two) updated from 'Monster books' (monster is having a party. monster has a cake. monster has friends over. monster is happy) to the grade six books, and was reading Jean M Auel by ten. )

[scary-being-me.livejournal.com]

Christ. I was beyond "young adult" books by the time I was 8. This would have crippled me.

[secretbutterfly.livejournal.com]

Same here!

[honorh.livejournal.com]

Great. Now I've got a bad case of cognitive dissonance coming from agreeing with Pullman about something. I'm sure he's no happier about it than I am.

[audrey1nd.livejournal.com]

There actually are suggested age limits on books. Sorry to burst the bubble but on most books (hardcover at least) there is a little thing that says Ages ___ and up or some such like that on the inside of the book jacket in small print. I've never paid any attention to that. Ad while I totally agree it could start a whole censoring thing, my parents never paid much attention to what I read until they started reading the same books I'd already read.

[sweill.livejournal.com]

HELLO? PARENTS, not publishers should be the ones who, if at all, set limits for their kids.

My 11 year old just read 'Andromeda Strain' by Micheal Crichton and enjoyed the heck out of it.

[paranoidgrl.livejournal.com]

My library growing up did play by those rules. I was reading above my age and my parents never censored my reading. When I was ten or eleven, I went through a Stephen King phase and tried to check the books out of the library. The head librarian told me that I couldn't read those books and wouldn't check them out to me.

My mother took me back the next day and checked out the books for me and told the librarian I was allowed to check out any damn book I wanted. It was awesome.

I think, like so many other things, it's up to parents to decide whether something's appropriate for their kid.

[storydivagirl.livejournal.com]

Dude, what happened to PARENTS making these decisions for their kids? Like you, both me and my sister were reading ahead of our "age" and I can't imagine how that would've sucked.

[levi.livejournal.com]

Wow. That would have screwed mine up too, I was reading Stephen King and the like at about 8, heh.

[lilacsigil.livejournal.com]

There's already guidelines on books - they don't need "limits"! Different kids have vastly different reading skills and interests - my nephew is four and a great reader, but doesn't like anything he considers scary, so most of the books that his dad (my brother) and I were reading at that age, he doesn't like. That's to do with personality, not age or reading skill.

[vass]

Oh HELL no.

[adannu.livejournal.com]

Foo. I was reading Lord of the Rings at age 9.

[budclare.livejournal.com]

My wrath is incomprehensibly vast.