This is Crud
by Kiri Jorgensen - Publisher and Senior Editor
The past few weeks, the children’s book world has been in an uproar. Apparently, a famous picture book author named Mac Barnett, who happens to be a straight, white male, dared to state that 94.7% of children’s books are crud. He was referencing a quote by the science fiction writer Theodore Sturgeon, who stated that 90% of science fiction books are crud, and that 90% of everything created is crud.
This statement by Mr. Barnett has hit a nerve. His pointing out that the imagination-killing, didacticism of so many modern children’s books isn’t a good thing, has made the producers of such books quite upset. In stating this, he has “completely ignored the dangerous, life-threatening work of marginalized and LGBTQAI+ authors and illustrators who have worked so tirelessly to force their views onto all children. Mac Barnett’s opinions are hurtful, insensitive, and shameful to his fellow children’s book creators.”
So, here in this very small Substack, I’m going to take an ‘unpopular’ stand. I agree with Mac Barnett. I wholeheartedly agree with Mac Barnett. This is exactly why I started Chicken Scratch Books six years ago. This is why our tagline is “Our Only Agenda is Good Literature.”
As a company, we believe there is room in the children’s book world for all age-appropriate viewpoints to be represented. There is not one political, religious, racial, or marginalized group that should control all content being produced for children. There is space for religious books, secular books, and especially books with no agenda at all. Parents and kids should have access to any age-appropriate books they care to read.
The 94.7% crud Mac Barnett was referencing is the obvious industry-wide push to make all children’s literature ‘woke’ and focused on agenda over quality storytelling or fairness. This push began more than 15 years ago in the children’s book industry, and now today, they have succeeded in filling most libraries, schools, book clubs, book fairs, and bookstores with 94.7% of books portraying exactly what they wanted – the forced didacticism of the woke agenda.
By normalizing their political and moral agendas in that 94.7% of books produced, kids no longer have a fair view of the world. Instead of giving kids tools to make up their own minds, we’re force-feeding them with the beliefs of a small percentage of the population. Kids’ worldviews are subsequently being shaped by a faceless industry with an agenda, in lieu of their parents. Parents have been shoved aside into the role of media gatekeepers instead of the primary perspective-shapers for their kids, and for many parents, they don’t even realize their roles have shifted.
This is crud. This is frustratingly wrong. As creators of children’s books, we should never force our adult agendas, labels, and perspectives through our art. When we do, it changes the basic foundation of what we are creating. It is no longer art.
It is crud.
And we wonder why kids aren’t reading anymore
Some of it is worse than crud, if I may be so bold.
I didn't know about his comments until I heard him interviewed. (I think it was NPR, not certain, though.) He said he regretted the comment in that he hurt the feelings of authors who put in the work and the hours, but I didn't get the feeling that he was completely backing away from the idea, though. An objective, thoughtful person could understand his meaning. In the interview, he analyzes Goodnight Moon to a depth that made me want to go pick it up again as an adult. In that analysis, I understood what he meant. Older children's books tend to enter the child's world and meet them there. They don't try to insert an adult agenda into the mind of a child. They don't force children to deal with issues that even adults have a hard time grappling with. They meet the child in the mind of a child and in doing so capture wonder, awe, laughter, thoughtfulness, and so much more.