... it cannot be denied that literary criticism in YA lit lags behind grownup lit crit, and that what YA lit crit there is tends to focus on what to do with the literature, or what the literature is doing to the kids. Pure criticism has the added benefit of legitimizing an artwork for itself, instead of as a means to an end, a tool. Think of it this way: Which question is more appreciated by a teenager, What do you want to be when you grow up? or What are you really into right now? I want to go over this idea again. There is a difference between asking a kid Who are you right now? and asking them What do you want to be when you grow up? The former says I value you as you are. The latter reaffirms the truth they have received throughout their lives that developing humans* are worthwhile primarily for what kind of productive cog they will be in the great machine called "society," which is comprised of full-grown adults. If we rear them right, they will help the system run smoothly. If they don't get "what they need," or if they get "the wrong stuff," they will mess the system up. According to this plan, they are supposed to come out of the educational assembly line believing I am worth something if I accomplish X (i.e., if I am a "really useful engine").
If we value them as they are, godz forbid, they might instead come to believe I am worth something regardless of what I do, or even The concept of "worth" does not belong in reference to human beings, for we are not assessable in material terms. This would be the death of the system.
0 Comments
|
AuthorJeffrey Babbitt, MLIS, is a graduate of the School of Library and Information Science at Wayne State University who is pursuing a career as a librarian in Michigan. Subject Headings
All
Inter- Library Loan004.02020025.431027.62090813.009Archives
June 2021
|