The result has been a steady stream of less than admirable, but profitable, so-called children's books flooding the marketplace. Moreover, anyone daring to defend the validity of using moderate discretion in connection to choosing what is child-appropriate literature is vehemently shouted down by panic-stricken adults worried about only one thing: getting kids to read again. Not only are people overlooking the actual content of these books, but they are not recognizing that the glut of volumes reflect "a calculated way of looking at children as consumers with a common denominator, and many of the products represent a dumbing down of children rather than a challenge to their creativity."¹³

As far back as 1987, award-winning fantasy writer Michael Moorcock saw on the horizon this commercialization of book publishing. In Wizardry and Wild Romance, he expressed his fear that the public would eventually be denied access to truly good writers "who have soldiered on regardless, ignoring the fluctuations of fashion and the commercial demands of a 'market' which half the time doesn't even have the slightest idea what the public wants or why."¹⁴

In reference not only to this ongoing problem, but also to the media's inundation of kids with gratuitous violence and overt sexuality, respected film critic David Denby wrote a scathing 1996 essay for The New Yorker titled "Buried Alive: Our Children and the Avalanche of Crud." It reads:

The danger is not mere exposure to occasional violent or prurient images but the acceptance of a degraded environment that devalues everything-a shadow world in which our kids are breathing an awful lot of poison without knowing that there's clean air and sunshine elsewhere. They are shaped by the media as consumers before they've had a chance to develop their souls.¹⁵

Denby went on to lambaste pop culture in general, noting that it "consumes our children."¹⁶ He then pointed his accusatory finger at parents, who in many cases have seemingly neglected their duty to raise their children to be individualists, rather than cookie-cutter victims of the mass market interests and materialism.¹⁷ Sadly, what we find ourselves facing, particularly in America, is a money-making industry that has co-opted the institutional label "Children's Literature." And this corporate industry is force-feeding today's youth anything and everything, as long as it rings up dollar signs. Fantasy, thanks to media marketing strategies, has been at the center of this whole controversy.

Harry, Harry, Harry
The most obvious example of consumerism's link to books for children is the ongoing hysteria over J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series. In a July 2000 New York Times article, Janet Maslin insightfully noted,

The frenzy that has greeted the fourth book in the series, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, would seem to go beyond any reasonable response to fiction, no matter how genuinely delightful that fiction happens to be. Instead, the current wave of Harrymania brings the Potter series to a fever pitch better associated with movie hype, major sports events and hot new Christmas toys.¹⁸

Maslin's observation echoes the sentiments of professor Jack Zipes, who has been involved in the study and criticism of literature for more than twenty years:

Phenomena such as the Harry Potter books are driven by commodity consumption that at the same time sets the parameters of reading and aesthetic taste. . . . What readers passionately devour and enjoy may be, like many a Disney film or Barbie doll, a phenomenal experience and have personal significance, but it is also an induced experience calculated to conform to a cultural convention of amusement and distraction.¹⁹

Zipes, a well-respected and highly knowledgeable children's literature specialist, additionally feels the Harry Potter books are not only formulaic, but also sexist. For publicly expressing such opinions he has been "aggressively attacked" during radio shows by callers accusing him of demeaning J.K. Rowling and her work. Such heated responses from Harry Potter fans have become the norm, rather than the exception. Literary critics, for example, who see Rowling's books as rather ordinary, and in many ways substandard when compared to other fiction, are loudly condemned as arrogant and/or jealous snobs too rigid to see the literary excellence of Harry Potter.

Into this category of despised individuals fall many well- respected and knowledgeable critics who have made commendable contributions to the world of literature, such as Oxford-educated Anthony Holden (an award-winning journalist and best-selling biographer), Roger Hutton (editor of The Horn Book, a seventy-five-year-old children's literary digest) and Harold Bloom (renowned literary critic and Yale scholar). Holden described Harry Potter as "not particularly well-written,"²⁰ while Sutton called it a "critically insignificant" series, adding that, as literature goes, Rowling's books are "nothing to get excited about."²¹

It was Bloom, however, who took off the proverbial gloves by writing a piece for the Wall Street Journal about Harry Potter titled "Can 35 Million Book Buyers Be Wrong? Yes."²² On the PBS interview program, Charlie Rose, he candidly said of Rowling's books, "They're just an endless string of clichés. I cannot think that does anyone any good. That's not Wind in the Willows. That's not Through the Looking Glass. . . . It's really just slop."²³ Needless to say, Harry Potter fans were less than happy with these eminently qualified reviewers from the literary community.

Anyone daring to question the "child-appropriateness" of Rowling's books has fallen under even greater disdain, however; they have been called stupid, narrow-minded and ignorant. Harry Potter critics who also happen to express religiously oriented concerns about the books and the occultism they contain have been the most vilified. Many of the more strongly worded reactions have not been against the actual objections raised by critics, but against religion in general, with particularly vile sentiments being leveled at Christianity.²⁴

This overly defensive attitude demonstrated by a vast number of Harry Potter fans additionally could be linked to the Harry Potter phenomenon itself. Once any "phenomenon" begins, especially one that is media-driven, people habitually lose the ability to reason and think objectively. Zipes explains:

The ordinary becomes extraordinary, and we are so taken by the phenomenon that we admire, worship, and idolize it without grasping fully why we regard it with so much reverence and awe except to say that so many others regard it as a phenomenon and, therefore, it must be a phenomenon.²⁵

Blind allegiance to anything-whether a piece of literature, a religion, a politician or an entertainment personality-certainly opens a doorway to a host of potentially detrimental and destructive consequences. But blind allegiance to something inherently negative surely presents a greater danger. Yet this is already occurring within our society as certain kinds of fantasy/fiction are being marketed to children. They are known as "shock fiction" books for children and are nothing short of reprehensible-morally, intellectually and spiritually.

The Horror of Fear Street and Goosebumps
In 1970, child education expert James E. Higgins rightly noted, "No one has to remind parents that a bad book can seduce."²⁶ Yet an alarming number of adults today seem to have forgotten that some books, though entertaining, might indeed be bad for children. All manner of reading material is now being introduced to young, impressionable minds, even though not too long ago their contents would have been deemed potentially harmful. The Fear Street and Goosebumps series by R.L. Stine typify-indeed, have served as a prototype for-such books.

Robert Lawrence Stine (b. 1943), who holds a B.A. in education from Ohio State University, first gained widespread notoriety in 1986 with the release of Blind Date, his first horror story for teenagers. It became an immediate best-seller. "It was a complete surprise for me," recalls Stine. "I realized I'd really struck a chord with kids. They liked scary books!"²⁷ Then in 1989 Parachute Press began publishing Stine's Fear Street series for preteens and teens (now numbering more than eighty books). These tales revolve around the gruesome events that happen to people who live on, or near, "Fear Street" in the town of Shadyside. Although the books are primarily marketed to preteens and teens, they are commonly read by children as young as nine or ten. Approximately 100 million copies have sold worldwide.

The ongoing series, which continues to sell at an astonishing rate, revolves around teenage characters who encounter mayhem, violence, brutality, murder and oftentimes, occult phenomena. The publisher's description for Halloween Party (1993), for instance, reads: "An invitation to a Halloween party hosted by the beautiful but mysterious Justine Cameron spells danger, terror, and murder for the guests." Other titles are equally revealing: Spring Break: Sun, Fun . . . MURDER! (1999); The Best Friend: Sometimes Friendship Can Be Murder (1992); Dance Of Death (1997); Killer's Kiss (1997); and Who Killed the Homecoming Queen? (1997).

Stine seems particularly obsessed with murder, especially the killing of young women. Such subject matter becomes all the more disturbing when one views his cover illustrations-they often depict attractive teenage girls in terrifying situations: being stalked, kidnaped or lying dead. Stine's plots are almost misogynistic in their incessant depiction of young women being victimized, both verbally and physically. Consider the following Fear Street volumes and the descriptions of them offered by the publisher:

• Cheerleaders-The New Evil: Seasons Greetings . . . The Evil Is Back (1992): "[T]he Shadyside cheerleaders are sure that the evil spirit is destroyed. Then Hannah is mysteriously thrown through the car window and Naomi is nearly burned to death."

• Broken Hearts: Valentine's Day Can Be a Killer (1993): "When Josie and Melissa receive threatening Valentine's Day messages, and then the girls of Shadyside High begin turning up dead, the two friends are certain that they will be the next victims."

• Silent Night 2: Jingle Bells . . . Santa Kills (1993): "Reva Dalby thinks that the world is hers for the taking-until a stalker wearing a Santa Claus suit decides to kidnap her."

• Wrong Number 2: Call Waiting to Kill (1995): " 'You're not safe anywhere. I'll get my revenge!' Can it really be Mr. Faberson on the line? He should still be locked up after trying to kill Deema and Jade last year. But Jade and Deema soon realize that someone is nearby, watching their every move, and waiting to kill them."

Fiction writer Diana West, in her 1995 American Educator article "The Horror of R.L. Stine," observed, "In this literary landscape, narrative exists solely to support a series of shocks occurring at absurdly frequent intervals. Push-button characters serve as disposable inserts to advance the narrative shock after shock."²⁸ One does no have to read very far into the Fear Street books for evidence supporting West's assertion.

In Stine's Cheerleaders: The New Evil, we find the character Corky letting out "a horrified wail" as she sees a "bright red gush of blood spurting from Rochelle's neck." A screwdriver has plunged into Rochelle's body after falling from high up in the gym bleachers: "The blood poured out over Rochelle. The hairbrush fell from her hand. She slumped forward until her head hit the floor" (Stine, p. 49).

Three pages later we read about a girl named Bobbi: "[She] had been trapped in the shower. . . . [S]he'd been locked inside. Then scalding hot water shot out of the showers. Unable to escape, Bobbi had suffocated in the boiling steam. Murdered" (Stine, p. 52). In Broken Hearts there is this disturbing scene described in lurid detail: "He stared at the bloody wound in her side. Stared at the puddle of blood at his feet. . . . The blood red swirls floated angrily in Dave's eyes. Blinding him. Suffocating him. So much blood. Such a big, red wound. And so much blood. Puddles and pools" (Stine, p. 141).

How have parents responded to these grotesque mockeries of literature? In an interview with the now-defunct New York Newsday, the mother of eleven-year-old Bill exclaimed, "I'm thrilled." She added, "He's literally reading a book a day. He always says, 'Just a few more pages.' . . . he devours [them]."²⁹ The mother of nine-year-old Tommy explained: "They just weren't my choice of subject matter. But I'm happy he's reading. If he wasn't reading this, he wouldn't be reading anything at all. Now he's at the point where he's constantly reading. He's fixated on horror."³⁰

To complement his Fear Street series, Stine has produced another set of books known as the Fear Street Saga. This 1993 trilogy-The Betrayal, The Secret and The Burning-explains to fans of Fear Street why Shadyside is so filled with supernatural events, death and murder. According to the first book of this series, The Betrayal, the horrors all started 300 years earlier with the death of a young girl who was burned at the stake for witchcraft.

The story begins in the 1600s, when Susannah Goode falls in love with Edward Fier, the son of Governor Benjamin Fier. But when Benjamin learns that Edward wants to marry Susannah, Benjamin falsely accuses her and her mother of practicing witchcraft because he believes Susannah is not a perfect match for Edward. Susannah and her mother are burned at the stake. They are innocent. But Susannah's father, who turns out to be a male witch, retaliates by putting a curse on the Fier family. Edward moves on, eventually marrying another woman-and her mother!

The Secret chronicles the continuing events surrounding members of the Fier family. Young Abigail Fier, for instance, is murdered by a ghost. Then, Delilah Goode, fiancée of Jonathan Fier, is shot and killed. A magical amulet linked to the curse is buried, but only for 100 years, until it is unearthed by Elizabeth Fier. Her sister, Kate, is subsequently murdered by Franklin Goode, who in turn is killed by Elizabeth's brother, Simon. The Fier family then changes their name to Fear, hoping to escape their curse.

Finally, The Betrayal brings us nearly up-to-date with the Fear family and their curse. An excellent summary of this book was posted at Amazon.com by a young fan of the series:

From the moment Simon Fear saw Angelica Pierce at her Mardi Gras party, he knew he had to have her, even if that meant killing her two suitors. However, Angelica has a surprise of her own-she is just as eager to get rid of them as he is. She later reveals to Simon that she, too, is involved in the occult and wishes to manifest her "power through evil." Clearly, these two are a match made in hell, perfect for each other. Twenty years pass and Simon and Angelica Fear now live in Shadyside Village. . . . It seems as though Simon has finally fled his family curse. That is, until one horrible afternoon when two of his daughters are brutally murdered. . . . It's not until 35 years later, in 1900, that the final climax to the Fear-Goode saga occurs.³¹

For those too young for the Fear Street books, Stine has written a third series that is marketed specifically to children ages eight to twelve: Goosebumps. This series has sold a staggering 220 million copies in more than sixteen languages since 1992. By 1994 it was already selling at an unprecedented rate of 1.25 million copies per month.³² Stine was subsequently named the number-one best-selling author in America by USA Today from 1994 to 1996--three straight years.

The Goosebumps books, like the Fear Street volumes, are packed with gruesome plots involving murder, revenge, violence, occultism and pure gore. One excerpt reads: "And then the heads. Human heads. Hair caked with dirt. Skin loose, hanging from their skulls. They stared at me with pleading eyes, faces twisted, mouths hanging open in pain. 'Take me with you,' one of them called in a dry whisper."³³

Interestingly, the publisher of these grisly volumes is none other than Scholastic, the U.S. publisher of Harry Potter. As with the Fear Street series, the Goosebumps titles tell the whole story: Return to Horrorland: No Time to Scream; Welcome to Dead House: It Will Just Kill You; and Piano Lessons Can Be Murder. Novelist Michael O'Brien, author of the best-selling Father Elijah, makes these observations:

For sheer perversity these tales rival anything that has been published to date. Each is brimming over with murder, grotesque scenes of horror, terror, mutilation (liberally seasoned with gobbets and gobbets of blood and gore). Shock after shock pummels the reader's mind, and the child experiences them as both psychological and physical stimuli. These shocks are presented as ends in themselves, raw violence as entertainment.³⁴

In "Horror: To Gratify, Not Edify"--an article in Language Arts, published by the National Council of Teachers of English-Randi Dickson highlighted a variety of perspectives on Goosebumps, but concluded:

My sampling of the series left me with little to admire. . . . One of the things I found most disturbing was the endings. Each book ended in a completely unsatisfactory manner to me. . . . For example, at the end of The Girl Who Cried Monster, her parents invite Mr. Mortman to dinner and when he asks what's for dinner, they reply, "You!" They then grow fangs and eat him. At no point in the book was there any hint that the parents were "monsters" too. And then the book ends. (I kept looking for the missing pages.) . . . I wonder what expectations these children bring to literature or to the reading experience itself at this stage of their independent reading lives. . . . In The Barking Ghost, and in Welcome to the Dead House, there are siblings who do nothing but tease and torment one another. The parents in all cases are suspicious of their children and do little to help or support them. There is no character development, no satisfactory explanations to the dilemmas posed, and little, if anything, to be learned from their stories.³⁵

It is no surprise that Stine's books have caused controversy in public schools. Some parents have gone so far as to call for a ban on the books in children's libraries, which in 1997 made the series number one on the American Library Association's list of Most Challenged Books.³⁶ But such protests usually have been drowned out by the now common argument, "At least the kids are reading." Librarian Shirley Emmert of the St. Paul-Minneapolis school district used this line of reasoning in 1997 during a regional debate over Goosebumps. When interviewed by KTCA-TV, she was asked: "[Y]our approach would be to get the kids to read?"

Emmert replied: "Yes."
"[N]o matter what they're reading, to begin with?" asked the KTCA newsman.
"Yes," she responded.
"[A]nd then worry about exactly what they read later on?"
"Yes, yes."³⁷

This mind-set has been echoed again and again by parents, teachers and librarians.³⁸ Predictably, Stine himself unhesitatingly proclaims that kids should have virtually no restrictions placed on them when it comes to literature, saying, "I always think kids are the best judge of what they should read and not read. . . . I think kids are really smart, and I don't think they will read anything that is inappropriate for them. . . . I think everyone is glad that kids are reading."³⁹

Even the Internet-based Learning Network Parent Channel, familyeducation.com, has capitulated to this sort of thinking. In a familyeducation.com online article for parents titled "Why Kids Love Goosebumps: An Interview with Fright-Meister R.L. Stine," Timothy Harper conceded,

I have pretty much overcome my misgivings about his work. Yes, some of it is violent and scary. But Stine does something that most teachers and parents struggle with: He gets kids, especially boys, to read on their own. . . . Kids should be reading good stuff. But at least Stine gets them reading.⁴⁰

Others, however, disagree. Fourth-grade teacher David Edholm, who was part of the 1997 St. Paul-Minneapolis controversy, stated, "For them to say at least the kids are reading, if they're reading a wrong message, their reading skill does not mean that much." He added, "The same argument could be used if middle school boys aren't reading, you know, do we put erotic novels in the middle school library so that they would read, and so we can do better. We can do better than these types of books."⁴¹

As for the children who have already grown up on Stine and are now young adults, they remember with fondness their experiences. A recent news story by former child readers of Stine wrote,

Blood-curling shrieks, slow-motion accidents, and lots and many violent murders kept us on the edge of our seats [as children], shivering as we anxiously turned the pages to get to the end of the story. R.L. Stine was the reason we could not sleep at night or go to the bathroom alone, fearing that someone with a knife might jump at us. But the thrills were exhilarating as we walked down Fear Street at night past the infamous cemetery where all the spirits roamed in unrest.⁴²

Parents would do well to consider whether or not these kinds of memories are what they want stored in the minds of their children. And the need for making such a decision will not be going away any time soon. Stine is a highly prolific author who continues to churn out volume after volume. As of 2002, he had released more than 160 Fear Street/Goosebumps books for children, as well as twenty additional spine-chilling horror novels for young adults. He currently has plans for a TV mini-series, already has a Goosebumps kids show on television (FOX-TV), and is working on a Fear Street major motion picture tentatively titled Scream, Jennifer, Scream.

Unfortunately, Stine's success has prompted other writers to produce copycat volumes. Christopher Pike, for instance, has a line of "Spookesville" books, targeting children ages nine to twelve. They include titles like: The Witches' Gift and Time Terror. He also has written a number books in a series titled The Last Vampire. Diana West astutely surmises the most damaging aspect of such books, especially those written by Stine: They show an utter lack of respect for, and a dismissal of, the journey from childhood to adulthood.

Stine's audience is being encouraged at a critical age to engage in literary pursuits devoid of content, crammed with shock. . . . Just as crimes against children still wound [us]. . . so too should shock fiction, for its role in desensitizing the very young, stunting the life of the mind before it has even begun.⁴³

Author Steve Russo (The Seduction of Our Children and The Devil's Playground), an expert in the occult, also has expressed concerns. He admits that it would be extreme to say that all children who read Goosebumps are going to end up worshiping the devil or committing a heinous crime. He does, however, offer a word of caution, saying, "[T]hey will become desensitized to evil and violence. This type of desensitization is subtle and can affect the child long term." Russo further believes that Goosebumps also has the potential to become a gateway into the world of the occult. "Evil is enticing," says Russo. "And for some kids a hunger for more can easily develop, causing them to search down the wrong path to satisfy their appetites by dabbling in the darkness."⁴⁴

Guarding Your Family
Reading fantasy can be a wonderful experience, in which a child (or adult) can live vicariously through the adventures of fictitious characters. Fantasy can also help us learn how others might handle certain situations and problems, which in turn could alter how we ourselves look at our own situations. Fantasy, then, is not intrinsically evil. But because it can send powerful messages to readers, great care ought to be taken when choosing material to read. Exactly how does one evaluate a children's book?

First, consider the book itself. Look at its appearance (size, front cover design, back cover information). Check for what you may consider any disturbing or child-inappropriate images. Read the description of the book on the inside cover flap (for hardbound) or on the back cover (soft cover). Take a moment to read about the author and see what other kinds of books he or she has written.

Second, know why you are buying the book for your child. Is it for private reading? Is it for classroom reading? Will you be reading it to your child or will your child be reading it unsupervised? What message, values or lessons do you want the book to present to him?

Third, take a moment to read a few chapters. Many bookstores now have a café where you can relax and peruse a volume before purchasing it. You might also want to use the Internet to look up some reviews of the book from sources you trust, making sure to read the comments of at least two or three different reviewers.

Additional suggestions on how to pick good books for children are found in An Introduction to the World of Children's Literature by Margaret R. Marshall. This volume counsels adults to select children's books that:

• Introduce children to their own cultural heritage.
  
• Enlarge the mind and the imagination.
  
• Offer experience in the creative and scientific inquiry process.
  
• Encourage an appreciation of beauty and human achievement, motivation and aspiration.
  
• Allow the discernment of good/bad, right/wrong.⁴⁵

Regarding the current popularity of horror-related fantasy novels, it should be remembered that children can be affected in negative ways by scary images (visual or textual). Nicholas Tucker- an educational psychologist at the University of Sussex who has written extensively on children's literature-has stated that even for a child aware of the differences between fantasy and reality, "there are still some books that by the very force and vividness of their detail can overcome his defenses and make him dread the light going out and the bad dream."⁴⁶

Tucker also has raised a cautionary flag over stories that "dwell on certain details with such lingering and even gloating effect that this too can become difficult for a child who is not yet ready for them." Consider, for instance, the following excerpts from Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire:

Wormtail was whimpering. He pulled a long, thin, shining silver dagger from inside his cloak. His voice broke into petrified sobs. . . .

He stretched his right hand out in front of him-the hand with the missing finger. He gripped the dagger very tightly in his left hand and swung it upward.

Harry realized what Wormtail was about to do a second before it happened-he closed his eyes . . . but he could not block the scream that pierced the night. . . . He heard something fall to the ground, heard Wormtail's anguished panting . . . as something was dropped into the cauldron.
. . . [Harry] saw the shining dagger shaking in Wormtail's remaining hand. He felt its point penetrate the crook of his right arm and blood seeping down the sleeve of his torn robes. Wormtail . . . fumbled in his pocket for a glass vial and held it to Harry's cut, so that a dribble of blood fell into it. . . .⁴⁷

Tucker, in discussing such gruesome imagery in children's literature, describes them as scenes of "unnecessary nastiness." He writes: "Although young children can take some horror, there is a difference between a story containing a ghost and a ghost story. One mentions fears, the other aggrandizes them."⁴⁸ In A Landscape with Dragons: The Battle for Your Child's Mind, Michael O'Brien addresses this same issue by comparing the horror of Goosebumps with classic scary tales:

In sharp contrast [to Goosebumps], the momentary horrors that occur in classical tales always have a higher purpose; they are intended to underline the necessity of courage, ingenuity, and character; the tales are about brave young people struggling through adversity to moments of illumination, truth, and maturity; they emphatically demonstrate that good is far more powerful than evil. Not so with the new wave of shock-fiction. Its "heroes" and "heroines" are usually rude, selfish, sometimes clever (but in no way wise), and they never grow up.⁴⁹

The morality in modern fantasy, or lack thereof, also may present problems for young readers. Celebrated novelist and short story writer Jan Mark (The Ennead and Nothing to Be Afraid Of) has stated, "[I]n contemporary popular fiction, it's sometimes very difficult, if you are not told, to decide which of the main characters is the hero and which is the villain, because their behavior and attitudes are so morally dubious."⁵⁰

In some cases, such as Harry Potter, for example, the "good" characters often indulge in the same kind of "bad" behavior manifested by the evil characters (see Part 3). This characteristic of some modern fantasy novels should not be forgotten by any parent seeking to find good literature for their children. Lillian Smith (1887-1983)--the first children's librarian in the British Empire--voiced an opinion many years ago that is still applicable today:

We should put into their hands only books worthy of them, the books of honesty, integrity, and vision-the books on which they can grow. . . . They must have change and activity of both mind and body. Reading which does not stir the imaginations, which does not stretch their minds, not only wastes their time but will not hold children permanently.⁵¹

No one, especially a child, longs to read a boring book. Desiring that children read "appropriate" literature does not have to be the same as wanting children to be given sanitized, lifeless volumes that shy away from difficult issues, intense emotion or frightening scenes. Even mild violence may be an appropriate and necessary part of the story (e.g., the various battles in Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings series). Children want to be, and should be, helped to deal with real-world dangers and evils through literature. Fantasy is especially beneficial in this area because it provides what one might call "mock battles" that can "better prepare a child to live a pure life in a fallen world."⁵²

But there is a proper way to deal with such issues because, as Lillian Smith noted many years ago, "The impressions of childhood are lasting, and the sum of its impressions are taken on by maturity. . . . Can we afford to be indifferent to the impressions that children receive from their reading?"⁵³

Parents, of course, should undoubtedly be the final arbiter of what is and what is not proper reading for their children, especially when it comes to the horror-style of books so popular today. Only parents know their child well enough to make determinations concerning appropriate reading material.

What about censorship? This is a very sensitive issue because, as award-winning children's author Joan Aiken in 1980 explained, "[W]hat terrifies one child may seem merely comic to another, or may be completely ignored; one can't legislate fear."⁵⁴ At the same time, Aiken did not condemn censorship outright, saying,

[I]f one is to exercise any kind of censorship whatever over children's reading matter, it seems to me that this kind of uncontrolled, almost sick, fantasy is a better candidate for the axe than, for instance, comics, the usual target for parental or educational disapproval.⁵⁵

Interestingly, into her own personal category of works worthy of censorship, Aiken placed those written by Lewis Carroll (Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass). There is obviously a great degree of subjectivity when it comes to literature. No one, therefore, should be too quick to condemn others for believing that certain works of literature are harmful to children. It is all a matter of perspective.

In conclusion, fantasy can be used either for good or for evil; to extol morality or glorify immorality; to terrify or to teach. There is no reason to reject outright the whole genre of fantasy just because some negative examples within that category exist. A little discernment and care can go a long way. Mary Sheehan Warren--English teacher, reading specialist and director of curriculum for Aquinas Academy in Maryland--writes,

[A child's] undeveloped intellect is unable to objectively appraise the worth of what he digests, so that his malnutrition-even poisoning-may continue undetected. The life-supporting sustenance that the young mind seeks is what a truly civilized society is composed upon, and what God calls His people to recognize and affirm: Truth, Goodness, and Beauty.⁵⁶

Sheehan additionally gives some helpful counsel with regard to exactly what a parent needs to look for when evaluating children's literature:

TRUTH: "A text should be examined for its presentation of the Truth. What are the underlying assumptions of the story? . . . Is the dignity of the human person properly addressed? . . . Does it laugh at what is considered to be sacred? Does it appropriately portray what is right? In examining the plot and the characters, the teacher or parent must check to see how the roles of men, women, adults, and children are portrayed in the story. Is there mutual respect, especially among the characters who might be considered to be 'ideal' by the reader? Are both fathers and mothers considered to be important?"
GOODNESS: "Goodness can be offered to the child reader in two different ways: By affirming all things that are good; and by demonstrating what things are not good and why. . . . [M]ost of children's literature still seems to be a joyful recognition of the good that is found in this world. Unfortunately, the parent or teacher must first decide if Goodness is really what is being praised within a plot. Our culture today has developed a hideous tendency to describe vices as virtues."
BEAUTY: "Children's literature presents conceptual, auditory, and visual beauty. Simplicity of plot, richness of description, and nobility of character not only expose the child to Beauty, but also help to expand his capacity to imagine and to create beauty himself. He can observe how language, when expertly crafted, can excite many feelings, and he can become inspired to invent such happy pretend worlds for himself."⁵⁷

Despite today's Goosebumps-like books, many fantasy volumes are truly magical in their ability to capture the hearts and minds of all readers. These include such classics as The Wind in the Willows, Gulliver's Travels, Charlotte's Web, The Chronicles of Narnia and Journey to the Center of the Earth. But most fantasy lovers would say that none of them can compare in scope, majesty or poignancy to The Lord of the Rings trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkien.

_________________________
1. Jack Zipes, Sticks and Stones (New York: Routledge, 2001), 5?6.
2. Margaret R. Marshall, An Introduction to the World of Children's Books (London: Gower, 1982; 1988 edition), 13.
3. Zipes, Sticks and Stones, 7.
4. Jonathan Cott, Piper's at the Gates of Dawn: The Wisdom of Children's Literature (New York: Random House, 1981; 1983 edition), xx.
5. A number of statistics and articles on literacy in America is available on-line from Training Wheels for Literacy: Our Reading Problem at http://www.implicity.com/ reading/app1problem.htm#schoolstats.
6. Teen Research Unlimited, "Today's Teens" [on-line], 1998 survey. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.naa.org/display/slides/teens.ppt>www.naa.org/display/slides/teens.ppt In this survey, 1,200 telephone interviews were conducted among teens twelve to seventeen. Four samples were employed (for each U.S. Census region) in order to ensure appropriate national representation; quotas were set such that the number of interviews conducted in each region matched the national dispersion of the teen population. Each interview lasted an average of twenty minutes.
7. Kaiser Family Foundation, "New Study Finds Kids Spend Equivalent of Full Work Week Using Media" [on-line], November 17, 1999. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.kff.org/content/1999/1535/pressreleasefinal.doc.html. The study is based on a nationally representative sample of 3,155 children ages two to eighteen, including more than 2,000 written questionnaires completed by children eight and older, more than 1,000 in-home interviews with parents of two to seven-year-olds, and more than 600 week-long media-use diaries maintained by parents (for two to seven-year-olds) or kids (for eight to eighteen-year-olds). The surveys and diaries were completed between November 10, 1998, and April 20, 1999. The study was designed by Kaiser Family Foundation staff in consultation with Stanford University Professor Donald F. Roberts, Jr. and Harris Interactive, Inc. (formerly Louis Harris & Associates).
8. U.S. Department of Education, "A Nation Still at Risk" [on-line], 1999. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.publishers.org/abouta/camp/literacyfacts.htm.
9. National Institute for Literacy, "Literacy Facts" [on-line], 2001. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.getcaughtreading.org/newsroom/capital_ hill/literacy_facts.html.
10. Cited in Jim Vaccaro, "The Journey to Literacy" [on-line], June 12, 2000. The Book & the Computer, Berkeley, California. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://publishing .about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.honco.net%2F100 day%2F02%2F2000?0612?vaccaro.html.
11. Cited in Vaccaro, available from: http://publishing.about.com/gi/dynamic/ offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.honco.net%2F100day%2F02%2F2000?0612?vaccaro.html.
12. Tom Engelhardt, "Reading May Be Harmful to Your Kids," Harper's Magazine, June 1991, 57-8.
13. Zipes, Sticks and Stones, 8-9.
14. Michael Moorcock, Wizardry and Wild Romance (London: Victor Gollancz, 1987), 149.
15. David Denby, "Buried Alive: Our Children and the Avalanche of Crud," The New Yorker, July 15, 1996, 48.
16. Denby, 51.
17. Denby, 52. He wrote: "What's lost is the old dream that parents and teachers will nurture the organic development of the child's own interests, the child's own nature. That dream is largely dead. In this country, people possessed solely by the desire to sell have become far more powerful than parents tortuously working out the contradictions of authority, freedom, education, and soul?making."
18. Janet Maslin, "At Last, the Wizard Gets Back to School," New York Times, July 10, 2000, B1.
19. Zipes, Sticks and Stones, 172.
20. Anthony Holden. Quoted in Sarah Lyall, "Wizard Vs. Dragon: A Close Contest, but the Fire-Breather Wins" [on-line], January 29, 2000. New York Times. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.nytimes.com>.
21. Roger Sutton. Quoted in Elizabeth Mehren, "Wild About Harry" [on-line], July 28, 2000. Los Angeles Times. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.latimes.com.
22. Harold Bloom, "Can 35 Million Book Buyers Be Wrong? Yes," Wall Street Journal, July 11, 2000.
23. Harold Bloom. Quoted in Jamie Allen, "Harry and Hype" [on-line], July 13, 2000. CNN. Available from: http://www.cnn.com/2000/books/news/07/13/ potter.hype/.
24. A London Review of Books article, for example, referred to stupid "born?again" Christians (Wendy Doniger, "Spot the Source: Harry Potter Explained," London Review of Books; reprinted in The Guardian, February 10, 2000, available on-line at http://www.guardian.co.uk>). A Jewish World Review article titled "Casual Censors and Deadly Know-Nothings" called Rowling's critics "barbarians" whose attacks amounted to "ignorance parading as piety" (Suzanne Fields, "Casual Censors and Deadly Know-Nothings" [on-line], December 7, 1999. Jewish World Review. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/fields120799.asp). Also see Chapter 9, endnote 74.
25. Zipes, Sticks and Stones, 173
26. Higgins, 2.
27. This biography of Stine is found on the official Harper Collins publisher's site for children, available from: http://www.harperchildrens.com/features/nightmare/ bio.htm.
28. Diana West, "The Horror of R.L. Stine," American Educator, fall 1995, 39.
29. Quoted in West, 40.
30. Quoted in West, 40.
31. Review posted by "Sara" at amazon.com.
32. Interview with R.L. Stine by Devon W. and Vicky S., June 2001. Available from: http://www.teenink.com/Past/2001/June/Interviews/RLStine.html.
33. R.L. Stine, Headless Halloween (Goosebumps Series 2000, #10). Excerpt available from: http://scholastic.com/goosebumps/books/index.htm.
34. Michael O'Brien, A Landscape With Dragons (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1998), 67.
35. Randi Dickson, "Horror: To Gratify, Not Edify," Language Arts, 76, no. 2 (November 1998), 120.
36. Associated Press, " 'Goosebumps,' 'Huck Finn,' on List of Banned Books" [on-line], September 26, 1997. Shawnee News-Star. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.news-star.com/stories/092697/lfe_bannedbooks.html.
37. MacNeil/Lehrer Productions, "Pulp Friction" news segment [on-line], February 13, 1997. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.pbs.org/ newshour/bb/education/february97/goose_2?13.html.
38. See Georgette Brown, "Good vs. Evil-But Which Is Which?," Sun Herald, February 28, 1997. In this article, Brown refers to another story ("Ill Literacy Should Cause Goosebumps") in which the father of an eight-year-old expressed his belief that Goosebumps was "no big deal" because at least his son was reading. The Sun Herald is a Mississippi Gulf Coast newspaper.
39. R.L. Stine, Interview with Stine, available from: http://www.cognivision.com/ timecapsule61/timecapsule61/team_10_literature.htm.
40. Timothy Harper, "Why Kids Love "Goosebumps": An Interview with Fright-Meister R.L. Stine" [on-line], n.d. Familyeducation.com. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.familyeducation.com/article/0,1120,1?313,00.html.
41. MacNeil/Lehrer, available from: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/ february97/goose_2?13.html.
42. Cheryl Tiu, Tiffany Limsico and Catherine Young, "GenXers' Favorite Reads Growing Up" [on-line], August 28, 2001. Philippine Daily Inquirer. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.inq7.net/lif/2001/aug/29/lif_4?1.htm.
43. West, 41.
44. Steve Russo, "Real Answers with Steve Russo" [on-line], n.d. August 1, 2002. Available from: http://www.24sevenvideos.com/gb.html.
45. Marshall, 243.
46. Nicholas Tucker, "Books That Frighten," in Virginia Haviland, ed., Children and Literature (New York: Lothrop, Lee & Shepard Co., 1973), 106.
47. J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (New York: Scholastic, 2001), 642?3: cf. J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (New York: Scholastic, 1999): "Standing in the doorway, illuminated by the shivering flames in Lupin's hand, was a cloaked figure that towered to the ceiling. Its face was completely hidden beneath its hood. Harry's eyes darted downward, and what he saw made his stomach contract. There was a hand protruding from the cloak and it was glistening, grayish, slimy?looking, and scabbed, like something dead that had decayed in water" (p. 83).
48. Tucker, 108.
49. O'Brien, A Landscape With Dragons, 67.
50. Jan Mark, "Another World?: A Sampling of Remarks on Science Fiction and Fantasy-The Story of Golem," in Barbara Harrison and Gregory Maguire, Innocence & Experience: Essays & Conversations on Children's Literature (New York: Lothrop, Lee & Shepard Books, 1987), 184.
51. Lillian Smith, The Unreluctant Years (Chicago: American Library Association, 1953; 1991 edition), 4.
52. "The Fantasy Myth" [on-line], n.d. Home School Helper. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.bjup.com/resources/articles/hsh/0403b.html.
53. Smith, 6.
54. Joan Aiken, "Between Family and Fantasy: An Author's Perspective on Children's Books," in Virginia Haviland, ed., The Openhearted Audience: Ten Authors Talk about Writing for Children (Washington: Library of Congress, 1980), 63.
55. Aiken, 63.
56. Mary Sheehan Warren, "Food for the Soul: Truth, Goodness, and Beauty in Children's Literature" [on-line], n.d. July 16, 2002. Available from: http://www.catholic.net/ rcc/Periodicals/Faith/11?12?98/Childrens.html.
57. Warren, available from: http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Faith/11?12?98/ Childrens.html.

_________________________
Richard Abanes, an award-winning journalist, is the author/co-author of nearly a dozen books on cults, the occult, and world religions. He has also written for several periodicals including Christianity Today, Charisma, Christian Life, Ministries Today, Moody Magazine, Christian Research Journal, Christian Retailing, and CBA Marketplace.