Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

psyche.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 72 posts

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#61

Post by iso1210 »

Finnucane wrote: post #23
hhggfdss wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? I grew up in a rural area and the suburbs always seemed like fun, you know why? There were other kids! Is this just an illusion? All I ever wanted as a kid was a neighborhood. We had to convince our parents to drive us all over hill and dale if we wanted to see anyone our age.

That's funny--I grew up in a suburb and always wanted to be somewhere else. I didn't want to read books about places like the one I was already in. (I now live not far from where my great-grandparents lived when they first came to this country, so I guess I made a big loop).

I believe the idea is that the grass is always greener on the other side.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#62

Post by iso1210 »

adamsea wrote: post #22

So the article addresses its own question and the answer is children’s stories require walking because it’s children and the suburbs aren’t generally walkable (or interestingly walkable) environments.

The article doesn't provide any evidence

1) That childrens stories aren't set in the suburbs

2) That suburbs aren't generally walkable

3) That suburbs aren't interesting

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#63

Post by watwut »

notahacker wrote: post #52
watwut wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The children's books actually show hansome princes very rarely. Those are featured in traditional stories, m but most children's books in bookstore are decisively not that. What you call well established story tropes is not actual content of actual children's books.

I understand JK Rowling's bestselling Ickabog has progressed to a character spurning the affections of the king in favour of a handsome Prime Minister ;) But I don't think there's much room for disagreement that princes and princesses are overrepresented in children's literature (and entertainment in general) relative to other forms of government, and that this tells us precisely nothing about these systems' respecti…

Those Rowlings are for adults.

And I would say that princes in kids litterature rarely represent goverment. They more of represent someone rich who have it all.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#64

Post by watwut »

kaitai wrote: post #35
watwut wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The children's books actually show hansome princes very rarely. Those are featured in traditional stories, m but most children's books in bookstore are decisively not that. What you call well established story tropes is not actual content of actual children's books.

It seems to me that children's stories have actually changed quite drastically over the years and between cultures and countries. I read my child many old children's stories (say, published between 1930-1960 in northern Europe) and they are scarier and more fantastical and more.. earthy. Lots more casual death and violence between imaginary animals. One reason I keep reading them is that they are interesting and I th…

You gotta be careful with interpreting the old stories. Many of them were not meant for 5 years old crowd. I honestly never thought about Red Riding Hood as grooming story.

I personally prefered new stories to my children. When they were small, the traditional ones were too long for their attentention span and my patience. And when they were older, it kind of turned out we find them more fun.

Anyway, we liked Hilda comic the most. You might like it, or definitely did not led to psychotherapy feeling.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#65

Post by Exmoor »

evilduck wrote: post #53
dhosek wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's always bothered me that the local government of Adventure Bay chose to outsource pretty much all municipal services to a ten year old boy and his back of trained dogs.

Bubble Guppies routinely has weird consequences of choosing their cast and setting to be mer-people but that premise being incredibly restrictive to a long running show. They float and swim around like fish yet somehow they have scenes that will involve something like gathering around the ol' underwater campfire or they'll be "at the beach" and you see their air bubbles floating up, yet you also see waves lapping up…

As someone who shares your dislike of Bubble Guppies and also has very positive feelings about my childhood of watching Mr. Rogers, I must say I've been very impressed with the Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood. It does a very good job of framing issues faced by children (anger, jealousy, fear, etc.) in a realistic ways and teaching them coping mechanisms.

I'm sure the parent poster is familiar with it, but figured I'd throw out a good word for any current or future HN parents of young children who might be on the lookout for something better than the average drivel the passes for children's TV.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#66

Post by adamsea »

iso1210 wrote: post #62
adamsea wrote: post #22

So the article addresses its own question and the answer is children’s stories require walking because it’s children and the suburbs aren’t generally walkable (or interestingly walkable) environments.

The article doesn't provide any evidence 1) That childrens stories aren't set in the suburbs 2) That suburbs aren't generally walkable 3) That suburbs aren't interesting

It’s not really an evidence kind of article .... no one is trying to “prove” anything. It’s a thought piece.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#67

Post by dhosek »

drchopchop wrote: post #55
evilduck wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bubble Guppies routinely has weird consequences of choosing their cast and setting to be mer-people but that premise being incredibly restrictive to a long running show. They float and swim around like fish yet somehow they have scenes that will involve something like gathering around the ol' underwater campfire or they'll be "at the beach" and you see their air bubbles floating up, yet you also see waves lapping up…

Kids don't care about internal inconsistencies. Frankly, neither do many adults (see: practically all Marvel movies) The show is pretty educational - kids learn about sharing, professions, sing songs about the universe, go on crazy adventures, etc. Mr. Rogers was great in a time when the word was much slower, but now a kids show in 2020 needs lots of pizazz to keep a child's attention. (I can't believe I'm debating B…

Don't be dissing on Mr Rogers, my friend. The show still keeps the attention of modern kids just as well as it did in the 70s, 80s and 90s. My kids would point to the picture of Mr Rogers on the back of their Daniel Tiger books and ask to watch him.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#68

Post by dhosek »

djsumdog wrote: post #48
indymike wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And was usually on just before or after Mr. Roger's Neighborhood which was set in a small town or suburban neighborhood.

I never caught that juxtaposition. I wonder if it was intentional or coincidental. Mr. Rogers also transitions between small town America and a (walkable) fantasy kingdom with a street car connecting the two. Again ... probably doesn't mean anything.

The trolley was based on the trolleys of Pittsburgh. The non-make-believe neighborhood was inspired by Rogers's childhood home of Latrobe.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#69

Post by dhosek »

yellowstuff wrote: post #56
dhosek wrote: post #30

The author undercuts his claims when he writes: t’s true that some popular picture books do seem to have a suburban setting: Victoria Kann’s Pinkalicious series (2006-), the Berenstain Bears series (1962-) by the Berenstain family, and Norman Bridwell’s Clifford the Big Red Dog (1963-) come to mind. But these books also come to mind when I consider books I’d rather burn than read – not because they take place in the…

He also counts the Curious George books as being not suburban, which might be true of the original series, but there's a reboot by different authors that has a suburban feel. George drives around in a car, and goes to places like a pancake breakfast and a chocolate factory that don't seem to be in Brooklyn. These books aren't great, but my son likes them, as well as most of the other books that this article has commi…

The Margaret and H. A. Rey books are frequently not urban as well. There was one where George borrows a pump from a nearby farm to try to clean up the mess he made with ink. There is no consistent geography in the books.

Re: Why are there so few children’s books set in the suburbs?

#70

Post by mcphage »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #21
giantg2 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of my childhood books were rural based adventures. The books my kid has are mostly rural or have no setting at all. I agree that stories involving houses tend to portray single family homes. I can't think of any that actually portray that house in a suburban setting (the premise of the article). I'm sure they are out there, but none come to mind for me. Then the question is really, so what if the settings are no…

My favorite children's book growing up (the embarrassingly named Captain Underpants) was definitively suburban. More generally, I guess I'd question what it means to portray a house as suburban. The author seems to be assuming that anywhere with cool nature stuff in walking distance is rural, and that's not true; my definitively suburban house growing up was within easy walking distance of a pretty well-forested park…

That was also my biggest problem with this article. Take Calvin and Hobbes—definitely Calvin lives in a suburban environment, but he also has plenty of nature nearby. Would the author consider this rural then? I don’t know, but I don’t think it was.
Post reply on HN