top of page
Search

Kids, Crud Books, and the Blunder of Mac Barnett

  • Writer: Susan Koehler
    Susan Koehler
  • 6 days ago
  • 4 min read


Professional image of author Mac Barnett wearing a suit and tie with the National Ambassador for Young People's Literature medal hanging from his neck
Mac Barnett, author and current National Ambassador for Young People's Literature

National Ambassador for Young People’s Literature Mac Barnett is suddenly becoming known for controversy instead of kids’ books. In his recent publication Make Believe, a book for adults about writing for children, Barnett writes, “I have a nagging fear that children’s literature suffers from a slightly higher crud percentage than literature as a whole…maybe more like 94.7 percent of kids’ books are crud.”


Ouch. 


To denigrate the work of nearly all your colleagues is an alienating position to take. And it’s not a good look for someone who has been honored with this ambassador position – someone who is supposed to be raising awareness about books and promoting lifelong literacy.


Some voices have sought to defend the blunder: Barnett’s words are being taken out of context. He’s using hyperbole for effect. He’s denouncing didacticism. He’s echoing science fiction author Theodore Sturgeon.


Back in the 1950s, Sturgeon declared that “90% of science fiction is crud.” Of course, Sturgeon went on to clarify that “90% of everything is crud,” which thanks to its potential as a universal absolute, became known as “Sturgeon’s Law.” Kind of a glass-nine-tenths-empty kind of guy. And yet, compared to Barnett, Sturgeon seems generous.


As a writer, an educator, and a person who genuinely wants everyone to love books, I have some thoughts to add to the conversation. And my thoughts come with a story. This story isn’t make believe; it’s about the real experience of teaching real children.


A teacher, against a backdrop of books, reads a picture book to young children who are gathered on the floor.

Long, long ago, I was a kindergarten teacher, and a big part of that job was (and still is) to make sure kids fall in love with books. Like so many other kindergarten teachers, I had a huge classroom library that was easily accessible to the children, and I read aloud every day. The funny thing is, even though we had plenty of books in the classroom, students often brought books from home and asked me to read them to the class.


Sometimes these books were wonderful works of literature and art. And sometimes they weren’t. But I read them anyway. Because reading these books was not about academics or artistry. It was about relationships. And bonding. And developing a positive emotional climate around books. Most of my kindergarten colleagues were doing the same thing. 


But there was this one teacher….This teacher wanted to share only high-quality literature with her students. She had a carefully curated collection of picture books that she considered to be worthy. Books that didn’t make the cut, she classified as “garbage books.”


Ouch.


Now, picture a kindergarten student. He’s young, he’s tender, he’s filled with wonder. He spends an afternoon with his Grandpa and they go to a store. The kid sees a book that catches his attention. He wants this book!


Grandpa didn’t plan to spend money on a book, but he loves the excitement and he knows that books are good things. So, he buys the book. They go home and read it together. Maybe it’s not a great piece of literature. But to this kid, it’s magic. Between this kid and his Grandpa, it’s a shared treasure that is creating a positive emotional climate around books. It’s bonding, and it’s beautiful.


The child’s excitement spills over into the next day. He takes the book to school. He holds it up to his teacher and asks her to read it to the class. And her response is, “I won’t read this book to the class because it’s a garbage book.”


Suddenly, this child is deflated, and the judgment passed on this book throws a wet blanket on those good feelings. Instead of excitement, he feels shame and self-doubt. The positive experience with Grandpa turns into a bittersweet memory. 


That’s not an overstatement. I watched it happen.


It would have cost nothing to share the child’s excitement and read the book. Maybe even just read a sampling – some parts of some pages – and honor all the good things that book carried. Instead, the child’s attitude toward books, toward his Grandpa, and toward himself are all covered by a shadow.


I was young and easily intimidated, so I didn’t ask the question I wanted to ask: Where’s the line? Books must fall on one side or the other of this border of quality vs. garbage. But that line seems arbitrary. And one person is making the determination of value. 


This brings me back to the problem with Mac Barnett’s controversial statement. Where’s the line, and who draws it? How is a book’s value measured? Is the value of a book in its artistic merit or in its effect on the reader?


Teachers, librarians, parents, and grandparents genuinely want kids to love books. We want them to develop positive relationships with books, to see themselves in books, to bond with others over books, and to become lifelong readers. That’s the whole reason why we do the things we do.


I assume that Mac Barnett takes his work very seriously. I’m sure he holds himself to a high standard of quality. That’s okay. Good for him. But drawing a line that labels the overwhelming majority of books as “crud books”? That’s not okay.


Barnett has offended fellow kidlit writers. Or at least 94.7% of them. But they’re grown-ups and they’ll get over it. They’ll end up working their rage into a story. However, the impact his words have on children and families and teachers and librarians and that positive climate around books…that’s the real damage.  


The kidlit community works hard to model acceptance and to promote the idea that all kinds of books need to exist and be available to kids. For so many kids, the joy has already been sucked away from reading because adults have hyperfixated on which books meet their arbitrary standards. We don’t need a self-proclaimed arbiter of quality sucking more book joy from the room. 


Especially when he’s supposed to be raising awareness about books and promoting lifelong literacy. 


Oh, and about Barnett’s disdain for didacticism….Whether overt or subtle, every book teaches something. It sounds like Make Believe teaches how NOT to behave when you’re supposed to teach kids to love books.










 
 
 

Comments


(C) 2018 Susan Koehler Writes
bottom of page