Kid Protagonists: Discuss!

[buxxxom]

"The Giver" by Lois Lowry is one I've just remembered that took my breath and didn't let me catch another one for a while.

 

[rgraham666]

I liked the professor in The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe.

"What do they teach them in the schools these days?"

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Lots of Heinlein's early stuff were strictly children's stories. "Podkayne of Mars" "The Rolling Stones" "The Door Into Summer" and one of my favorites, "Red Planet"

Weren't those characters all very mature teenagers though? (I loved them all, but the only one I specifically recall is Podkayne.)

 

[NoJo]

Meg, from Madeleine L'Engele's "A Wriinkle In Time" was a great character. Like all the best heroes, fallibility and weakness is the key.

I loved the Narnia books (my crush was on Aravis in "The Horse and His Boy"), but I can't say I really related to any of characters or thought them very interesting, except maybe Prince Rilian (from the Silver Chair).

But the "serious" books, even if they were great science fiction/fantasy like A Wrinkle In Time and the Narnia books, were just that: Too serious. One thing I really like about the Harry Potter books is that they have a bit more humour in them, like The Brilliant "William" series Books, and of course the painfully funny Molesworth Books. Hermione Granger fits exactly Nigel Moleswoth's description of the swot "Mavis" when St Custard's goes co-educational.

Norton Juster's "The Phantom Tollbooth" is probably one of the best children's books I've ever read, up there with the Alice books. The puns and references in it are very adult.

 

[Recidiva]

Weren't those characters all very mature teenagers though? (I loved them all, but the only one I specifically recall is Podkayne.)

I'm not sure we have defined an age limit here, even Harry starts at 11.

"Red Planet" is practically a story of a boy and his dog. If the dog were a highly evolved nymph state of a monstrously advanced alien race...you know, like normal.

There really were no sexual issues in these books, they were all still in the "Aw, gee" or "yucky" stages. The themes were childhood themes. It's not like Heinlein couldn't write mature or adult themes, but these were specifically written for kids.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I liked the professor in The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe.

"What do they teach them in the schools these days?"

Who is Digory Pike, the boy in "The magician's Nephew," grown up.

 

[rgraham666]

Who is Digory Pike, the boy in "The magician's Nephew," grown up.

Which I found very cool. I like weird tie ins like that.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I'm not sure we have defined an age limit here, even Harry starts at 11.

"Red Planet" is practically a story of a boy and his dog. If the dog were a highly evolved nymph state of a monstrously advanced alien race...you know, like normal.

There really were no sexual issues in these books, they were all still in the "Aw, gee" or "yucky" stages. The themes were childhood themes. It's not like Heinlein couldn't write mature or adult themes, but these were specifically written for kids.

OK, then those are my fave child protags, even though they didn't feel much like children to me. (But then I didn't much feel like a child to me, either.)

 

[cloudy]

When I was much younger, I adored the Harriet the Spy books, but you just don't see or hear much about them anymore.

 

[Recidiva]

OK, then those are my fave child protags, even though they didn't feel much like children to me. (But then I didn't much feel like a child to me, either.)

Definitely. I didn't read them as kids, I didn't catch Heinlein fever until I was in high school.

But I read Madeleine L'Engle and Children of Morrow. They made me feel at home because of the intelligence of the kids.

A lot of protagonists were cute or clever, but very few were wise.

I think that's what I like about Harry Potter so much, normal kid temper, which blows occasionally. But through the books she's kept him humble and keeps getting kicked in the pants just for being famous.

I like her "no good deed goes unpunished" theme too.

I got very sick of the formula where the semi-awkward kid becomes a hero and is adored forevermore by everyone. That just didn't seem real to me.

 

[Goldie Munro]

I loved Jim Hawkins in Treasure Island.

 

[3113]

True dat - being an orphan is almost a must.
-Jane Eyre
-Harry Potter
-Anne of Green Gables
-Emily of New Moon


because it puts the child in a position of power, almost, in that they become autonomous, in charge of their own life and not able to trust the adults who subsequently come in charge of them.

There seems to be three ways to go with kids books:

*No Adults*--that is, whether the kid has parents or not, he's pretty much on his own--like "Where the Red Fern Grows" where the kid buys the dogs and goes out hunting all on his own at something like age 12 (yikes!). He has parents but they not really there. It's him and the dogs.

*Moronic Adults*--that is, there are adults but, good or bad, they can't be trusted to do what's best or right. Kids know best. In the Harry Potter books, the implication seems to be that most good adults are constrained by bad rules they won't or can't overtly break, and so they HAVE to rely on the kids to save the day.

*The Avuncular Figure*--which I like best, myself. The kids are given over to a quirky adult who is as playful as a kid but can watch over them as an adult. Like a "Mary Poppins" or the grandmother in "The Rolling Stones." The steady (or not so steady) parents give the kids over to the eccentric uncle, aunt or teacher or nanny.

Once in a while you get that fourth option, where there are good, intelligent adults and part of the story is the way that both adult and child help each other to grow and change. Like an "Anne of Green Gables." But it's not really typical.

Interestingly, in regards to orphans, very much as in fairytales, the birth parents are often idealized--at worse they're sweet but naive, at best they're the noble prince/princess, the best of the best, who died too young. You don't usually get that orphan who finds out that his mother was a crack whore and his dad was serving ten years on assault charges before he was stabbed in prison.

UNLESS, of course, there's that Luke Skywalker thing going where the kid finds out his dad is really....The Dark Lord, himself!!

 

[3113]

Norton Juster's "The Phantom Tollbooth" is probably one of the best children's books I've ever read, up there with the Alice books. The puns and references in it are very adult.

Oh, yes! That ranks in my top five faves. Maybe as number 1 even. Fantastic little book. Incredibly smart and funny.

 

[Recidiva]

There seems to be three ways to go with kids books:

*No Adults*--that is, whether the kid has parents or not, he's pretty much on his own--like "Where the Red Fern Grows" where the kid buys the dogs and goes out hunting all on his own at something like age 12 (yikes!). He has parents but they not really there. It's him and the dogs.

*Moronic Adults*--that is, there are adults but, good or bad, they can't be trusted to do what's best or right. Kids know best. In the Harry Potter books, the implication seems to be that most good adults are constrained by bad rules they won't or can't overtly break, and so they HAVE to rely on the kids to save the day.

*The Avuncular Figure*--which I like best, myself. The kids are given over to a quirky adult who is as playful as a kid but can watch over them as an adult. Like a "Mary Poppins" or the grandmother in "The Rolling Stones." The steady (or not so steady) parents give the kids over to the eccentric uncle, aunt or teacher or nanny.

Once in a while you get that fourth option, where there are good, intelligent adults and part of the story is the way that both adult and child help each other to grow and change. Like an "Anne of Green Gables." But it's not really typical.

Interestingly, in regards to orphans, very much as in fairytales, the birth parents are often idealized--at worse they're sweet but naive, at best they're the noble prince/princess, the best of the best, who died too young. You don't usually get that orphan who finds out that his mother was a crack whore and his dad was serving ten years on assault charges before he was stabbed in prison.

UNLESS, of course, there's that Luke Skywalker thing going where the kid finds out his dad is really....The Dark Lord, himself!!

Definitely a theme I've also noticed. Idealized parents. I still "hmph" when I see orphans obsessing about their parents. "They're not all that great, kid, get on with your life!"

Another reason why the books didn't appeal.

 

[3113]

I'm not sure we have defined an age limit here, even Harry starts at 11.

Well, there is that odd thing about books; not the age of the protagonist, but the age of the reader. Most kids want to read about kids who are like them, but older as kids tend to dream about being older. You know "I can't wait till I get out of elementary school and go to Jr. High!"

So when you have a kid who is 11-13, the book is usually going to be read by kids who are 8-11 themselves. Which is why characters like Harry Potter take a while to grow into their age (even if their voices are cracking in the film versions!). They act pretty much the same at 13 as they did at 11--thus appealing to 11 year olds who dream of being 13 and all the privileges and things they'll get to do at that age...but not of the changes in their body, etc. that will happen when they're 13.

It's only when the readers start to grow up with the character (or, interestingly, if it's a female character) that the writer starts to put concerns more geared for teens.

For example, "Where the Red Fern Grows" is a book usually read by 9-11 years olds. The kid starts the book at something like 11 and ends it at age 16. Yet there's never any mention of him getting interested in girls, shaving, his voice changing, growing out of his clothes....all that tells us that he's grown at all and changed is he does more chores at home and his dad treats him more like "a man." But there's nothing to cue the reader that he's changed from the sandy-haired kid we saw get the dogs into a young man.

Contrariwise, in "Anne of Green Gables" she changes considerably with each year of growth in her relationships with friends and family, her focus on her studies, her ambitions. Ditto with something like "Little Women"--as the girl grows, she changes in a lot of ways, physically, emotionally and mentally and ends the book as an adult, not as a "matured" kid.

 

[Recidiva]

Well, there is that odd thing about books; not the age of the protagonist, but the age of the reader. Most kids want to read about kids who are like them, but older as kids tend to dream about being older. You know "I can't wait till I get out of elementary school and go to Jr. High!"

So when you have a kid who is 11-13, the book is usually going to be read by kids who are 8-11 themselves. Which is why characters like Harry Potter take a while to grow into their age (even if their voices are cracking in the film versions!). They act pretty much the same at 13 as they did at 11.

It's only when the readers start to grow up with the character (or, interestingly, if it's a female character) that the writer starts to put concerns more geared for teens.

For example, "Where the Red Fern Grows" is a book usually read by 9-11 years olds. The kid starts the book at something like 11 and ends it at age 16. Yet there's never any mention of him getting interested in girls, shaving, his voice changing, growing out of his clothes....all that tells us that he's grown at all and changed is he does more chores at home and his dad treats him more like "a man." But there's nothing to cue the reader that he's changed from the sandy-haired kid we saw get the dogs into a young man.

Contrariwise, in "Anne of Green Gables" she changes considerably with each year of growth in her relationships with friends and family, her focus on her studies, her ambitions. Ditto with something like "Little Women"--as the girl grows, she changes in a lot of ways, physically, emotionally and mentally and ends the book as an adult, not as a "matured" kid.

It's hard to say, because even "The Kite Runner" is to a large extent all about childhood. But it's also because there's an adult looking back for some of the book.

"Stand By Me" is about kids that age, but is narrated as an adult. It's not a kids' story, it's nostalgia about being a kid, and describes events of death and violence and family problems.

Is it because of the themes involved and how sanitized they are?

Jane Eyre is very emotional and romantic, but not particularly sexual. It validates childish themes, and problems childrens face. It was about idealizing a relationship, and we never even really got to see much of the consummation. Definitely a "happily ever after" sense.

There's a line in the sand drawn, sticking to the idealized state of innocence and wonder of being a kid, that isn't really crossed much in the genre, or you've got a book or a story that's intended for adults who are looking back at their childhoods at things that intruded that were adult themed.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

I read Hardy Boys, and Tom Swift. Anything by Heinlein.
Ivanhoe, anything by Jules Verne, Treasure Island, Robinson Crusoe...

The first grown up book I read (at about 11 or 12) was The Wreck of the Mary Deare.

After that I graduated to reading Agatha Christie, Zane Grey, Max Brand, Louis L' Amour, Robert Silverberg, Arthur C. Clarke...

 

[3113]

Jane Eyre is very emotional and romantic, but not particularly sexual.

Well, I wouldn't call Jane Eyre a kids book even though a large section of it occurs while Jane is a child--but it's only one year of her childhood that's focused on.

And it's surprisingly sexual for a Victorian novel written by the (at the time) virginal daughter of a minister. Rochester, remember, is guardian to the illegitimate daughter of a French dancer (oh! those immoral French!) who was his mistress for a while (the child is by another man and is the reason that Jane ends up at Thornfield as a governness). Mr. R. is the classic repentant rake/libertine who woos virtuous Jane with barely repressed and barely resistable, sexual passion

 

[Stella_Omega]

Francesca Lia Block writes for teens, and she writes about drugs and sex-- not in any preachy way at all, but a "this is what happened" way. I've really loved what I've read from her.

She also writes adult erotica, evidently, didn't know that!

 

[Goldie Munro]

Well, I wouldn't call Jane Eyre a kids book even though a large section of it occurs while Jane is a child--but it's only one year of her childhood that's focused on.

And it's surprisingly sexual for a Victorian novel written by the (at the time) virginal daughter of a minister. Rochester, remember, is guardian to the illegitimate daughter of a French dancer (oh! those immoral French!) who was his mistress for a while (the child is by another man and is the reason that Jane ends up at Thornfield as a governness). Mr. R. is the classic repentant rake/libertine who woos virtuous Jane with barely repressed and barely resistable, sexual passion

but he was tamed by being blinded!

 

[Recidiva]

Well, I wouldn't call Jane Eyre a kids book even though a large section of it occurs while Jane is a child--but it's only one year of her childhood that's focused on.

And it's surprisingly sexual for a Victorian novel written by the (at the time) virginal daughter of a minister. Rochester, remember, is guardian to the illegitimate daughter of a French dancer (oh! those immoral French!) who was his mistress for a while (the child is by another man and is the reason that Jane ends up at Thornfield as a governness). Mr. R. is the classic repentant rake/libertine who woos virtuous Jane with barely repressed and barely resistable, sexual passion

Interesting, I'm tryng to define what makes it a kids' book, but I suppose that really depends on what kind of kid you are. I don't consider it adult, I think it's readable for all ages. It's got her in scary situations and wrapped in mystery, sure, but so does Nancy Drew. It's all something a child would understand (given an interest in wordplay and vocabulary?)

There's very little objectionable where your kid would come to ask you "Mommy, what's Gonorrhea?" It was and is still a very proper book.

 

[3113]

There's a line in the sand drawn, sticking to the idealized state of innocence and wonder of being a kid, that isn't really crossed much in the genre, or you've got a book or a story that's intended for adults who are looking back at their childhoods at things that intruded that were adult themed.

I think the declination comes with the idea of an actual children's book. We have to keep in mind that kids used to read whatever books were out there along with the adults. Dickens was read aloud to the whole family. So a lot of these books were what we'd think of as "cross-over"--for adults as well as kids. Like "Tom Sawyer" and "Little Women" and even "Anne of Green Gables."

Books for kids were for very little kids in the 19th century. It was only in the early twentieth century (like the 30's) that there started to be books for kids 9-13 that were not meant to *also* be read by adults. And I think this is when we get a lot of books meant to appeal to a child's "sweet-tooth" if you will. Things that will attract them (dogs, horses, best friends), rather than things that bore them (like the opposite sex).

Let's keep in mind that interest in the opposite sex is not a matter of innocence, per se. There is a latency period for most kids and they just aren't interested in it. As in "Where the Red Fern Grows" which is for young boys. The author has a sentence where he says he'd sooner "Kiss a girl" than hurt his dogs. Yet he's suppose to be 14 or 15 at the time! But a 9-year-old boy reading this would be right in agreement with him.

 

[NoJo]

Interesting, I'm tryng to define what makes it a kids' book, but I suppose that really depends on what kind of kid you are. I don't consider it adult, I think it's readable for all ages. It's got her in scary situations and wrapped in mystery, sure, but so does Nancy Drew. It's all something a child would understand (given an interest in wordplay and vocabulary?)

There's very little objectionable where your kid would come to ask you "Mommy, what's Gonorrhea?" It was and is still a very proper book.

That's disgusting.

Oh, I thought it said "Diarrhoea"

 

[Recidiva]

I think the declination comes with the idea of an actual children's book. We have to keep in mind that kids used to read whatever books were out there along with the adults. Dickens was read aloud to the whole family. So a lot of these books were what we'd think of as "cross-over"--for adults as well as kids. Like "Tom Sawyer" and "Little Women" and even "Anne of Green Gables."

Books for kids were for very little kids in the 19th century. It was only in the early twentieth century (like the 30's) that there started to be books for kids 9-13 that were not meant to *also* be read by adults. And I think this is when we get a lot of books meant to appeal to a child's "sweet-tooth" if you will. Things that will attract them (dogs, horses, best friends), rather than things that bore them (like the opposite sex).

Let's keep in mind that interest in the opposite sex is not a matter of innocence, per se. There is a latency period for most kids and they just aren't interested in it. As in "Where the Red Fern Grows" which is for young boys. The author has a sentence where he says he'd sooner "Kiss a girl" than hurt his dogs. Yet he's suppose to be 14 or 15 at the time! But a 9-year-old boy reading this would be right in agreement with him.

I guess for me most kids' books are heroic and have some sort of idealistic base and integrity to stick to.

It isn't ambiguous, it isn't unclear.

Kids will learn and get better and learn lessons through the book, and ultimately win their trials.

I think that's what makes them different from adult stories, which don't have any sort of formula, have a lot more anti-heroes and flexible (or broken) ethics.

Just like Sesame Street is kids' programming and teaches. It's watchable by adults and has its little adult themes and moments, but overall the impression is of teaching a value or a skill or some history.

 

[Recidiva]

That's disgusting.

Oh, I thought it said "Diarrhoea"

You're gross.

Boys are gross.