Children's Books discussion

Welcome to 2016!
As has been a tradition for the Fiction Club, we have been starting the year with a classic children's fiction book. This year we are excited to begin the year with Watership Down by Richard Adams. We are very excited to hear your thoughts on this much loved classic work.

I've always loved this book.
Interestingly, I ran across it earlier today!
:)

 
Wheeeeeee! Superb read! :D I hope all of the first time readers will be "taken away" with this wonderful adventure!
 

Yay! Even though it's longish, I'll squeeze it in somehow. I've been wanting to reread it for decades...

Jerrel wrote: "I am hearing this book on youtube. I like it very much!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijUwQ..."

Interesting. I see that it's a dramatic retelling, not a word-for-word audiobook, so it'll be interesting to compare the two versions. (I'll read the regular book.)

I must search it out as I have the book somewhere! thanks for inviting me to read along with you all :)

Excellent choice!

I finally found my copy. I have an older version, printed in 1975, that I will be reading.

Jasmine wrote: "Welcome to 2016!
As has been a tradition for the Fiction Club, we have been starting the year with a classic children's fiction book. This year we are excited to begin the year with Watership Down ..."

I have read this book a long time ago because the blurb said it was 'the greatest book of the twentieth century' I was so disappointed. It is a terrible book. But good luck with it, I'll be looking in on the discussion just to know what people thinks.

What did you think was so terrible about it?

Maybe your tastes have changed, or you've matured as a reader... it might be worth trying again.

Cheryl wrote: "What did you think was so terrible about it?

Maybe your tastes have changed, or you've matured as a reader... it might be worth trying again."

I might just do that. I guess it was the idea of the rabbits that bothered me. He wanted to talk about ruining the planet. I think he just should have done that. But maybe I will read it again.

Ah. Yes, I've never actually studied the book, or read professional reviews or anything, so I don't know why he chose rabbits. I think maybe he was channeling Aesop, cuz (in part) this is a fable?

Perhaps...this will be of interest, especially if you have read it.

http://www.neatorama.com/2012/05/18/1...
It sort of speaks of why he used rabbits.


I never thought about why it was about rabbits. Don't think it would quite work the same if it was hmmmm......chickens..
....or cats even.

Great, I recently read this but I'm always happy for a reread to refresh my memory.
I did find it to be very masculine (as I'm always fond of strong female characters) however reading Brenda's link has given me more of an understanding on why it's the case! I'll try squeeze this in with other books I'm currently reading ...

This has been on my to-read list for a long time. Looks like my library has it on Overdrive. Placing a hold now. :-)

Cheryl wrote: "Jerrel wrote: "I am hearing this book on youtube. I like it very much!
Interesting. I see that it's a dramatic retelling, not a word-for-word audioboo..."

The actual audiobook is a word-for-word "unabridged" version of the book. I listened to it just a few months ago and it was fantastic.
Watership Down

Don't hesitate to listen to this audiobook, the narrator was good too.

Yes, there are many ways to enjoy this story. At least one movie, too, that I've heard of.

Oops/ I should have followed the neatorama link that Brenda provided, before commenting. There's a tv show, too.... And more helpful info. as well at that link.

One thing I want to discuss as we all get a chance to read this is what age we can recommend it for. It's obviously not for little children, but maybe 14 up? Maybe younger, because today's children are more accustomed to violence? Maybe older, because the themes, metaphors, and political stories are sophisticated? I don't even have a clue until I reread it... I was an adult when I first read it and I think some of it was over my head even then....

I agree with you, Cheryl. This is not a book for little children, they wouldn't understand life in a rabbit warren. I think maybe 10 and up considering what is being read right now. You're probably right about 14 and up when the book first came out.

I planned to read this, but my copy is thick, with tiny print. I'll probably save reading it for the summer.

It is quite long for a "children's book."

I was a teen or perhaps a preteen when I read it. I liked it enough that a wanted to read The Plague Dogs.
Never could get through that particular book.

If I am remembering correctly, the Watership Down movie was quite good.

It has been so long since I have read this book - it will be like reading it brand new. Perhaps memory will kick in when I start. :-)

I do remember liking it back when the world was still young

Cheryl wrote: "Oops/ I should have followed the neatorama link that Brenda provided, before commenting. There's a tv show, too.... And more helpful info. as well at that link.

One thing I want to discuss as we a..."
Watership Down was originally published as a Young Adult novel. We must remember that back in the day, books were not placed in to as many different age brackets as they are today. There were children's, which included everything from picture books and easy readers to chapter books like Little House on the Prairie, Nancy Drew. Next were the young adult reads, Judy Blume comes to mind.
Fast forward to 2016 and we have books placed in easy reader, chapter books, middle grade, and young adult. Young adult may also be broken up between older middle grade/younger ya.
Middle grade readers tend to fall between grades 4-7.
So, I guess my point is I would consider Watership Down a older middle grade/younger ya read due to the theme and length.

When I read the book as a teen (17-18?) I enjoyed it very much but even then there was much I didn't completely get, except the crazy warren's leader and his resemblance to Hitler. I reread it last year because I had forgotten so much of it and I'm glad I listened with audio because it really made much more sense. I think anyone younger than say 15 (even now) might be frightened by some of the graphic scenes, though maybe you're right...with all the killing video games they may be immune.

At my little library here at South Lake Tahoe, the book is shelved in the adult fiction section. It is quite long and detailed, what with Adams inventing an entire culture with myths, legends, language, and so forth. Feminists have had some understandable issues with the book. It's all about 'guys' until late when Hazel realizes 'Hey, we need some broodmares (brood-does?) to really get our new warren going.' In fact, I believe, new rabbit warrens are started by females. Ah, well, it's a good tale told with that nice comfortable children's lit British voice we know so well.

Cheryl wrote: "Yes, there are many ways to enjoy this story. At least one movie, too, that I've heard of." I think whenever we read a book we don't "get" all of it. I loved Gone with the Wind when I first read it and I must have missed a good part of the plot and the complexity. I'm sure many of us have had the joy of re-reading a book some time later and realizing who we were when we first read it and how limited our understanding was.

I read this book many years ago and loved it. I won't have time to re-read it, but I will be interested in reading the discussions and opinions here. I have seen the movie a couple of times as well, and enjoyed it, also.

I've started. Not gotten far, because I fall asleep too readily - not sure if I've just been extra tired or if I'm not finding the book engaging.

My edition has an intro by the author explaining that he started developing this story for his daughters, telling it to them on a car trip. So, in that sense it is for children (but it's not clear what age).

He also says, disingenuously imo, that he did not intend any allegory or larger meaning - that it's just a story about rabbits. Hmm.

I also am not sure, at least so far, what my fellow feminists are upset about. It's a story about male rabbits. It just is. Imo, complaining about no does on this quest is kinda like complaining about no girls in Lord of the Flies.

I figure, telling the story is a bit different than watching it.
And maybe he embellished since the car trips

As for ...no girls...it's the sign of the times.
Things change.

Thank God ;)

Cheryl wrote: "I've started. Not gotten far, because I fall asleep too readily - not sure if I've just been extra tired or if I'm not finding the book engaging.

My edition has an intro by the author explaining t..."

Cheryl, about the feminist concerns with the story, I'd like to play the game of 'what if' just for the fun of it. What if Fiver was Hazel's sister, not Hazel's brother? What if Big Wig, the burly bodyguard type, went home to his mate after hearing Fiver's prophecy, told her about it, and she, a burly Amazon type herself, insisted they join Hazel and Fiver. Not only that, Silver, the other burly guy, brings his Amazon mate along, too. Maybe if Adams wrote this story today, threads along these lines would have been worked into the story, probably making it better.

Steve wrote: "Cheryl wrote: "I've started. Not gotten far, because I fall asleep too readily - not sure if I've just been extra tired or if I'm not finding the book engaging.

My edition has an intro by the auth..."

Perhaps, but I also do not generally like books that try too hard to be inclusive and add a female character or an ethnically diverse character, and actually make the story or can make the story unrealistic. That being said, when I first heard of this novel, I assumed that Hazel was female (because of the name, which is more often used for girls).

It would have been definitely an allegorical tale then, Steve, and not a story about rabbits. Adams wanted to be as true as possible to lapine culture, and does only kindle and dig, according to Adams' source & understandings.

Otoh, these rabbits are obviously significantly more sentient than real ones, and so liberties are taken.

It's clearly a story about beings that are more directly concerned with survival, beings whose main 'technological' advancement is storytelling, a development of a mythology. In that way it reminded me very much of Bambi: A Life in the Woods (Salten's, not Disney's), another serious book that reminds us that wildlife is wild, and has dignity, and is worthy of respect... is not "cute."

And it also reminded me of The Kin by Peter Dickinson. In that book those who quest are young humans, just beginning to have inspirations and to create technology. That novel also has stories from a mythology intermixed with the narrative of the humans' struggle for survival. (And it's a book I highly recommend.)

And thinking of epic quests makes me wonder if a comparison can't be made between this and the books by Tolkien. At least, both invent a rich world, with language, customs, traditions.....

Cheryl wrote: "It would have been definitely an allegorical tale then, Steve, and not a story about rabbits. Adams wanted to be as true as possible to lapine culture, and does only kindle and dig, according to Ad..."
I understand what you're saying, Cheryl, and you're right. Adams did state otherwise, I know, but to me it does look like an allegorical tale not about rabbits. Once you have an oracle rabbit going into trances, you're not writing a story about rabbits. With that in mind, if your homeland is prophesied to be ravaged, and the word spreads, why wouldn't some female rabbits want the chance to escape, too? The Mormons driven out of Illinois didn't leave their women behind when they headed for Utah. Heading out to find a new homeland is different than the mostly guy questing for rings in Tolkien or gold in the California Gold Rush. Anyway, I'm glad Adams wrote such a discussion worthy tale.

One of my best male friends loves this book. Not sure why. Maybe he heard it or read it earlier in his life and it impacted him somehow growing up. I had tried to read it and was bored. Finally this past year listened to it on cd. Honestly it is a rare book I don't get through, no matter what, but I believe I brought it back unfinished. I don't recall the ending, and found it tedious.

I have been enjoying long series on cd in the car regularly since moving more rural, so it is not the length of the book.

It is discussion-worthy! Whether it's intended to be or not, whether it's allegorical or just goofy, whether it's relevant or just an adventure... well, that's all speculation, eh?

I want to read the book it could have been, had Steve advised Adams. I think you might like that better too, Bonnie.

And, this time around, I found it much easier to read. I bet kids as young as 12 could enjoy & appreciate it, if they're good readers, motivated & focused.

Hi, I recently joined the group and technically haven't even introduced myself, but am plunging in with Watership Down. I will say that I have been hesitant to read this book for years, mainly due to the page count. From an adult's perspective, I thought a 400+ page children's book about fictional rabbits might get to be boring midway through.

Other than the author's introduction in my book, I purposely have not read much about the background of the story or the author. Since I only have completed 20% of the book, I will come back and read the comments here later.

Hello.
I am also new to the group. I remeber a copy of this book on our shelf as a child, but its thickness always intimidated me. I will checking in to see what others have to say while I wait for the audio from our library.

Becky wrote: "Hello.
I am also new to the group. I remeber a copy of this book on our shelf as a child, but its thickness always intimidated me. I will checking in to see what others have to say while I wait fo..."

I find it kind of intriguing that while this book's length and page numbers always intimidated me as a child, other books of similar length did not. Hope to start reading soon, but as usual, I have so many books on the go that I am distracted and some might get lost in the proverbial shuffle.

Welcome, Lisa Ann and Becky!

I too was concerned about the length of the book, but I found it engaging and I zipped along right through.

Thanks, Cheryl. :-) After getting to a certain point in the book and seeing how many pages were left, I decided to set Watership Down aside. For whatever reason, I was quickly losing interest in the story but perhaps I am just not in the right mood to read it now. That happens sometimes.

It does happen - life is too short to waste on bad books, or even books that don't engage you. No worries; see you on another thread maybe... :)

Thanks, Cheryl. I am sure I will find another discussion to join in with soon, maybe for a shorter book though. :-)

❁Lisa Ann❃ wrote: "Thanks, Cheryl. I am sure I will find another discussion to join in with soon, maybe for a shorter book though. :-)"

I often have that happen, and since this is not for a class or for my job as a German instructor, I no longer feel all that guilty abandoning books that do not interest me or for which I am not in the mood (had to push through way too many such books for my literature degrees).

Gundula- Yes, I believe there comes a point when many readers decide they do not have to feel badly about abandoning a book. Although I have been out of school for a while, I clearly recall pushing myself through some reading assigned for homework. Later I would reward myself with something I really wanted to read though!

Also, in another group, someone brought up a good point about how our perceptions and feelings about a children's book may be different if we first read it as a child versus reading it for the first time as an adult. In the case of Watership Down, I was reading it for the first time as an adult, so there were none of those fond childhood memories attached to the story. I am not sure how members of this group feel about that point, or if the topic has been discussed in another thread? Interesting POV anyway.

When I first read it, I was an older teen or young adult, don't remember which, and had only admiration for it, no fondness. I didn't understand it, and I always knew I'd want to read it again someday.

Finally did 3+ decades later, for this discussion, and don't now understand why I found it difficult. Otoh, I admire & enjoy it less.

Go figure.

I read it in college and quite liked it but remember little about it other than having positive feelings towards it. But I doubt I will get to it this month...perhaps in the future I will and will report here.

❁Lisa Ann❃ wrote: "Gundula- Yes, I believe there comes a point when many readers decide they do not have to feel badly about abandoning a book. Although I have been out of school for a while, I clearly recall pushing..."

I am at a certain age where I have no intention of wasting my time on books that I don't like or that don't capture my interest. Unfortunately, I also don't have a lot of time to go back and re-read even the many books that I have loved. I have to be very selective about that.

Beverly wrote: "❁Lisa Ann❃ wrote: "Gundula- Yes, I believe there comes a point when many readers decide they do not have to feel badly about abandoning a book. Although I have been out of school for a while, I cle..."

Me too, and I have alsomhad to read far too many tedious books during the course of my university degrees ...

I enjoyed Watership Down quite a bit. I tend to relish books that have descriptive passages. I also realize a lot of readers especially children may find those types of passages tedious. I loved all of the characters. Hazel though would be my favorite. The scene where he goes to the farm for some does has stuck with me. Hazel wanted the group to see him as a strong physical leader. He wanted to be more like Bigwig. But, the community needed his brains and personality to lead them. Hazel learned a tough lesson.
I will be recommending this book to my students. Not quite sure of their reaction.