At the A. L. A. conference in Montreal in 1900 an informal meeting was
held for the purpose of personal acquaintance and co-operation among
those actively engaged in library work with children.
As a result of this meeting an organization was formed, to be known as
the Club of Children's Librarians, of which Miss A. C. Moore was made
chairman, and Miss M. E. Dousman secretary. In order to facilitate the
work of the club it was decided to divide the work into departments,
each department to be in charge of a chairman appointed by the chair.
The secretary of the club was instructed to inform the secretary of the
American Library Association of the formation of the club and to offer
its services in the making of the program for future sessions on library
work with children, if so desired.
The result of this proposition was that at a meeting of the executive
board of the A. L. A. it was voted that a section for library work with
children be established, providing such section be acceptable to the
officers of the Club of Children's Librarians. The section was accepted,
and the program for the same was submitted by the officers of the club
to the program committee of the A. L. A.
The establishment of a section devoted to work with children, as a
result of the efforts of the club, is a matter of congratulation for all
those interested in this branch of library work. Special thanks are due
the chairman, Miss Moore, for her unremitting efforts in making the
program for the sessions helpful and inspiring. Thanks are also due
chairmen of committees for their zeal in collecting valuable material
and for the presentation of practical and suggestive reports.
In view of the establishment of the Section for Children's Librarians,
which makes possible the thorough treatment of children's library work,
it seems desirable that the Club of Children's Librarians be no longer
continued, its special purpose being accomplished; at the present
meeting of the section it is hoped to perfect its organization and
outline its plans for the coming year.
The first paper of the session was by Miss CAROLINE M. HEWINS, and in
her absence was read by Miss HELEN E. HAINES. It dealt with
BOOK REVIEWS, LISTS AND ARTICLES ON CHILDREN'S READING: ARE THEY OF
PRACTICAL VALUE TO THE CHILDREN'S LIBRARIAN?
(_See_ p. 57.)
The subject was discussed by Miss HAINES, who said:
Miss Hewins' criticisms and deductions are so sound that there is little
to add to what she has said, except in the way of assent. The children's
librarian who relies only upon what she can find in print to tell her
what she ought to think about children's literature, leans upon a broken
reed. In general, reviews in this field are valueless, owing to lack of
discrimination and of good taste, and to indifference. The reason for
this is the unimportance of the subject, from the standpoint of the
average reviewer or literary editor. Miss Hewins has stated with entire
fairness the conditions that control reviews of children's books.
Christmas time--the "rush season"--is practically the only time when
they are given attention, and then owing to the great mass of review
copies to be handled, notices are most inadequate. Indeed, most of these
notices are evolved from material supplied by the publisher with the
book--the trail of the publisher is over them all.
There is not yet among children's librarians a sufficient "body of
doctrine"--critical judgment, knowledge of books--to produce
satisfactory library lists. Such lists are too often made up from
hearsay, or through selection from other lists, which is almost always
unsatisfactory. The most prevalent and serious defect in these annotated
library lists is the use of too many words which mean nothing. In this
work especially "the adjective is the enemy of the substantive." Even
the Carnegie list, excellent as a whole and probably the best of the
kind yet published, is crude in some respects, and would stand pruning.
There is too frequent use of such phrases as "a wholesome book," "a
cheery tale," "a children's classic," and there is too great a
preponderance of American books, of commonplace "series," of books in
what may be called the public-school rut. As an example of "what not to
do" in book annotation, extracts may be given from a recent annotated
list of children's books, which included the following:
Warner, S. The wide, wide world.
Miss Warner is one of the best friends a young girl can have as
chaperone into the delightful kingdom of romance.
Weyman, S. The house of the wolf.
A modern English version of a curious French memoir written about 1620.
Church. Three Greek children.
Mr. Church is an accomplished restorer of the antique, and has a keen
discrimination for points appealing to child-like magnetism.
Cooper. The spy.
A story founded upon fact. The same adventitious causes which gave birth
to the book determined its scenes and its general character.
It will be seen that not one of these annotations conveys an idea of
subject, quality, or treatment, while in two of them at least it is
evident that the annotator knew nothing at all about the book.
Articles on children's reading are in general either sentimental or
prejudiced, and they are not of direct practical use to the children's
librarian. Reading such articles, however, is interesting and often
suggestive. Their best feature is the hints they now and then give of
some book or class of books that has pleased children, and that the
librarian does not know or had not thought of.
Turning to specific points in Miss Hewins' paper, one is inclined to
question the stringent criticisms of the "Pansy" books, the "Prudy"
books, "Editha's burglar," and the like stories, that certainly do
delight many children, though they may not be of a high literary plane.
Nor do I believe in children's books carefully "written down" to their
audience and never rising above their comprehension.
"Words-in-one-syllable" books are obnoxious to a right-minded child. It
is a good thing to be given now and then what is above our
comprehension. What we don't quite understand holds a strong
fascination. Nor do I believe that the "horrors" of the old fairy
stories are particularly harmful--the thrills they impart have a subtle
charm, and most children delight in "horrors." The difficulty is to
steer between what is vulgar and coarse or trashily sentimental on the
one hand, and the limiting of a children's collection only to
"pretty-pretty" stories, innocuous but utterly without character or
variety, on the other. Such a collection should be made as broad, as
varied, as catholic as it can be, including old books, English
books--Miss Yonge, Miss Shaw, Miss Strickland--not just current and
American books.
In conclusion, the most important thing is to know the books themselves.
This could not be possible for the librarian of a general collection,
but it is possible, and ought to be indispensable, for the librarian of
a special class of literature. A children's librarian can make herself
familiar with the literature suitable for children, and should do so.
Personal familiarity is better than all "evaluations" by other people.
There should be a constant interchange of criticism and experience among
those working in this field--it is as yet small enough to permit this.
This should be largely personal and individual--not brought out as a
public expression--until there is developed a better basis for critical
and literary discernment in this subject than now exists. The most
important thing to do is not to rush hastily into print--to "educate
ourselves in public"--but to set to work to know our books, and through
such knowledge to establish a fund of critical judgment and experience
that will later make it possible for the utterances of children's
librarians to carry weight in their own field of literature.
There followed a "collective paper," in three parts, each part being
treated by a special writer. It dealt with