In all honesty, I shouldn't really be writing about this.
According to children's novelist Jonathan Emmett, people like me are part of the problem. Pleading for more good books for boys, Emmett has lambasted the children's book world, from publishers and editors, librarians and book reviewers, to those of us who buy most children's books - in a word, women.
A wholesale denunciation of the malign effect of women upon any other industry would have me up in arms. In this instance, however, I believe he may have a point. Aghast at the literacy gap that has grown between boys and girls in recent years - a gulf that's apparently obvious by the age of five - former architect Emmett blames in part the fact that almost all the "gatekeepers" of literature for children are female.
Consciously or not, he says, publishers and librarians have been shaping children's books to reflect their own preferences, and mums and aunts and grannies have been buying books that appeal to them. As a result, much rough and tumble masculinity has been lost from literature, a point on which Julia Donaldson, author of The Gruffalo, agrees. She thinks publishers are now over-cautious about portraying bad behaviour, even when it's baddies who're doing it. As a result, unable to find subjects that interest them, many boys turn away from reading to computer games or television.
It's certainly true that if you were to call a convention of children's publishers, reviewers, agents, librarians and booksellers, it would be like going into a nursing college 50 years ago, with barely a man to be seen amid a sea of pastel cardigans and kitten heels. Meanwhile, teaching seems to be attracting fewer men, and women are having more influence on boys at an age when male role models, and the books such teachers can recommend, are critical for their maturing.
Judging by titles for younger readers, safety and cosiness are paramount, as if bedtime reading must not include anything exciting or scary. Yet if you cast your mind back to childhood, there was nothing better than an adventure story, with evil villains, and frightening battles, and nerve-tingling escapes. In fact, the only book that gave me nightmares was Beatrix Potter's blood-curdling The Tale of Samuel Whiskers, where rats behind the wainscot roll up a kitten in pastry to turn him into pudding. Not even Silence of the Lambs could match that for horror.
Interestingly, many of the most popular children's authors of the past were men. Robert Louis Stevenson's spine-chilling Treasure Island or Kidnapped were a staple of the school library, no-one fearful that their scenes of sword fights or attempted murder would be harmful. Health and Safety geeks might now raise eyebrows at the highjinks in Arthur Ransome's shipping tales, but were they to have cautioned against the likes of Maurice Sendak's brilliantly eery Where the Wild Things Are, or Jack London's violent White Fang, the world would be a much duller place.
Fortunately, blame for the dearth of boy-friendly books does not lie entirely with womankind. For more than a century, many boys came to books via comics, where they were given high-octane stories that taught them the pleasure of reading. In his classic book The Uses of Literacy, the late Richard Hoggart singled out comics as one of the defining features of a working-class man's literary development. Until the decline of the comic, girls were left far behind in this regard. I used to envy male schoolfriends who would become engrossed in The Eagle or Hotspur, full of tales of war-time derring-do and gung-ho heroes, whereas I had Bunty or Jackie - the one as demure as an Edwardian, the other giving lessons on lipstick and boyfriends - which were no good for a tomboy.
The root of the problem may, of course, lie in a fear of gender stereotyping. For understandable reasons, women are alarmed at the thought of sons being considered inherently more pugnacious or technical-minded than daughters. With hindsight, today's lack of gutsy books for boys may even come to be seen as part of a losing battle to rewire the male brain. Since that is neither desirable, nor possible, maybe it's time to pump a bit of boyish bad taste and irreverence into children's books, and see the pages come alive, and their readers too.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article