60-day returns • free shipping on USA orders $129+
adapted? unadapted? that is the question
- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by
.
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
- Posts
lol ~ I am going through my books and I have many classics that are “adapted” or “retold”. Why should we not use these? Or why would Charlotte say not to use them?
Because the ideas and language in them are “dumbed down” to a lower level. Because the classics are classic just the way they are. Because even the Spongebob generation can learn to love real language and literature when it is presented in the form of a living story. Because we want our kids to have a vocabulary beyond that of three-syllable words. Because the ersatz is inferior, whether food, ideas, pocketbooks, or books. Because Disney spoils the stories and everyone ought to have a way to know the real story.
Thank you 🙂 I needed reassurance before I donate these books, lol. I am a book hoarder. So parting with them will be sorrowful for a bit but I’m hoping longterm it will be the right decision.
The other reason to me is that a classic that is too hard for a child to follow/understand gives me a reminder that maybe it’s a book to save for when they are a bit older. While an abridged Swiss Family Robinson can be accessible to very young children, for example, it is a pale shadow compared to the rich detail my child could enjoy if we just wait to introduce the story until they’re ready to understand the original. There are so many good classics for different ages that I feel better about waiting on some I may adore (like Little Women or Pride and Prejudice) because there are many my children can enjoy in unabridged format at their current younger ages.
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
- The topic ‘adapted? unadapted? that is the question’ is closed to new replies.