Children’s Literature, Essay Example

Prior to joining this class, I had the perception that children’s literature was all about simple and unfounded English sentence structure and fictional tales that anyone can easily make up. The fact that the course is titled children’s literature did not strike a chord with rules of writing, aesthetics, or seriousness in literary forms and theories. As I signed up for this class, I thought that literature for children entails stories for entertainment and nothing worth to study.

In overall, I came into the class with high expectations as a learner is always expecting to gain some new knowledge. In this class, I have learnt various aesthetics of children’s literature. I have learnt the different ranges of children literature from contemporary to classic material, the popular and the highbrow, works for infants to material for the young adults (Christensen 236). It is amazing how children’s literature can be analyzed from fictional to non-fictional material, to drama or even poetry, including visual narratives from graphic novels to comics and picture books. In terms of moral, it is always put in a humorous way and this make them to serve in two-fold. Notably, children’s literature tends to have a child’s perspective; repetition is a very common style in it.

I have learnt that children’s literature can be analyzed textually and interpreted from different theoretical perspectives, besides exploring historical approaches. As a child, I remember how, together with my age mates, had a profound fascination with illustrations and pictures in books sometimes not paying attention to the words written therein. In this class, I have learnt the importance placed on visuals in children’s literature. The fact that pictures have accompanied children’s stories since time immemorial underpins the role visuals play (from the papyrus in Byzantine Egypt to the computer generated graphic illustrations). Many people continue to appreciate occasional drawings, which are found in chapter books (Lerer 29). This is the difference between children’s literature and adult literature.

I signed up for the class not knowing that different genres exist in children’s literature. My perception that all children’s literature is the same changed as the class progressed (Thomas Jr 69). The different genres I have learnt include picture books, poetry books, traditional literature, modern fantasy, “fractured” fairy tales, science fiction, contemporary realistic fiction, historical fiction and biography, informational books (non-fiction), and graphic novels. Notably, children’s literature in all sense should have some aesthetic value as it represents special form of succession and transmission of culture, a combination of cultural design and spiritual communication between two generations. The aesthetic value of children’s literature should be different from that of adults. Since children are still in the formative age, the idea that “goodness is beauty” appeals as an aesthetic value in the molding of young souls in order to have a better functioning society especially in morals and embracing virtue (Thomas Jr 72). Therefore, every literature for children must have a moral behind it, which is not necessarily the case for adult literature.

I am familiar with “Cinderella” by William Wegman, and its moral still lingers in my mind. The aesthetic value of this book is found in the way it is interesting to read, proper articulation of words, well-constructed plot, appropriateness and appeal of the story for its intended age range, and themes and morals worth conveying to children.

Works Cited

Christensen, Nina. “Childhood revisited: On the relationship between Childhood Studies and Children’s Literature.” Children’s Literature Association Quarterly, 28. 4 (2003): 230– 239. Print

Lerer, Seth. Children’s literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008. Print

Thomas Jr, Joseph T. “Review of Aesthetic Approaches to Children’s Literature: An Introduction, by Maria Nikolajeva.” ImageTexT: Interdisciplinary Comics Studies, 3. 3 (2007): Print