The Literate Illiterates

The big debate over how Johnny should learn to read may have passed from the headlines, but to Columnist Dorothy Thompson there is another question that is equally important: Are the schools giving Johnny a reading diet of literature--or of pap? Last week, after comparing the old lesson books to the slick basal readers of today with their controlled vocabularies, word-frequency counts, and bland little tales about Dick and Jane, Columnist Thompson had her answer: "It is possible," says she in the current Ladies' Home

Journal, "that in the universal push to abolish illiteracy, we may create the phenomenon of literates illiterate in every higher sense."

Writers v. Tailors. In the old days, says Dorothy Thompson, children were exposed to samples of great literature almost as soon as they could read. But by the very nature of the modern reader, top writers are often automatically ruled out. "Fine literature, even such as is consciously written for children, cannot be created out of a meager vocabulary, much of it proper names (Mary, Jack) or names of common objects (chair, train, dish), especially if the author has to produce lessons in which each new word must be repeated ten times, and words learned in a previous lesson, five . . . Discriminating writers are usually quite unable to play this sort of game, so the modern readers are not written by writers, but by tailors of words to suit the methodology and keep the reading matter within the range of the average child's vocabulary as determined by 'experts.' "

Once, says Columnist Thompson, a fifth-grader would get a taste of everyone from

Hawthorne to Sam Johnson. A typical fifth-grade reader text today "introduces the child to no famous writers whatsoever except as (in the manual for teachers) it suggests supplementary library books." Thus, the modern educationists are actually cheating their pupils. "What makes any child want to read is not only information or a banal story about familiar things and types, but his awakening, if it ever comes, to the . . . freshness and originality of thought and expression, commanded by great masters of prose and poetry."

Character v. Indulgence. Mawkish as some of them were, the oldtime texts emphasized morality and character. "How little of that appears in the readers of today!" Even great heroes become "bloodless, namby-pamby, without vitality, pluck or distinguished ideas." The words "love, loyalty, honesty" rarely appear because the experts regard them as too abstract. "Sin is out . . . but (and quite logically) so is virtue. The children depicted in modern readers live in an uncharted ethical miasma of being 'happy,' engaging in do-it-yourself pursuits . . . with nice fathers and mothers in the background, who display no virtues beyond being kind and indulgent to their little ones."

Concludes Critic Thompson: "No one can accuse America of neglecting the physical needs of children. They are washed and bathed, fed balanced diets. But they are not offered the bread that nourishes strong characters or shining minds. The fare produces mental and spiritual rickets."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.