Is Reading at Risk or What?

In the June 2006 Consider the Source (p. 36), Marc Aronson does his readers a double disservice. He misrepresents first the value and then the validity of the National Endowment for the Arts’ 2004 report, “Reading at Risk.”

Fortunately, librarians, educators, policymakers, and communities nationwide recognize that literary reading, especially among young adults, is declining at a precipitous rate. As a partial remedy, organizations such as the American Library Association and the Association of American Publishers have embraced “The Big Read,” America’s largest reading program, which aims to restore literary classics to the center of our cultural life.

Few would debate that declines in reading, if left unchecked, will diminish personal and public worth. Yet in his article, Mr. Aronson makes several errors. First, with reference to leisure reading, he wrongly states that the surveys supporting “Reading at Risk” employed inconsistent terminology. A careful review of the questionnaires for the 1982, 1992, and 2002 Survey of Public Participation of the Arts will reveal his mistake.

Mr. Aronson also argues that “whole categories of kids” were excluded from “Reading at Risk.” Even if our survey had polled children—and it did not—Mr. Aronson still would be mischaracterizing our study design, which was widely representative of the total U.S. adult population.

Most baffling of all is that Mr. Aronson should call the study “sloppy”—an adjective that better describes his treatment of the facts. Conducted for the NEA by the U.S. Census Bureau, the survey polled a scientifically selected sample of the American adult population. Accordingly, more than 17,000 adults (age 18 and older) from all socioeconomic and demographic groups responded to the survey. Any statistician will certify that it was a comprehensive, accurate survey with a miniscule margin of error.

Finally, Mr. Aronson’s claim that “Reading at Risk” has no implications for nonfiction reading rates can be dispelled with one core statistic: The rate of reading “any book” whatsoever not only failed to improve, but actually dropped—at a rate of seven percent over the decade. Our school libraries cannot afford to wait for the declines in reading to grow steeper before we combat the trend as a society.—Sunil Iyengar, Director, Research & Analysis, National Endowment for the Arts

I was surprised to see your negative review of Questia (August 2006, pp. 67–68). I strongly disagree with the evaluation of the database and would like to encourage librarians to evaluate it for themselves, especially if their students are required to do intense, high-level research projects. Better yet, I suggest you have students test the database when doing research.

Our library has encouraged the use of Questia for more than two years, and will continue to do so. Not only do our teachers use the database to prepare lessons, but students prefer the service to the “traditional” school library database offerings. Time after time, students are able to locate their (very substantial) research needs using the Web site. Not only do students prefer the fully searchable content, but they also enjoy the project feature that allows them to save virtual books and various articles to an easily accessible file. Many times, when students come to me with what they consider an “impossible” research topic, we are able to find incredible resources on Questia.

Admittedly, our curriculum does differ from “common” high school curriculum; it is intensely challenging and requires multiple in-depth research papers for 11th- and 12th-grade students, especially in the humanities. The curriculum, coupled with Questia’s content in providing abundant resources for our students, prepares students for challenging university-level research.

I encourage librarians to examine Questia based on their school’s curriculum. It is not a library database in the traditional sense, and is intended for individual and classroom use, but it is a worthy resource for individual upper-level students and in challenging classroom environments.—Pam Davis, librarian, John F. Kennedy School, Berlin, Germany

While I strongly believe every reviewer is entitled to her/his opinion about a book, I must contest the starred review of John Boyne’s The Boy in the Striped Pajamas (Random, 2006; September, p. 202). I can only agree on two points made by the reviewer: one, that the book is “for those who already have some knowledge of Hitler’s 'Final Solution,’” and two, the age group assigned: Gr 9 Up. It seems incredible to me that a nine-year-old German born-and-raised boy would not be able to pronounce “Führer” or “Auschwitz,”—his terms, “Fury” and “Out-With.” Given the circumstances of his family—his father is a commandant in Hitler’s Army—it is inconceivable that he would not know Germany is at war, or that the “Heil Hitler” he salutes each time he greets or leaves his father is indeed the “fury,” or be unaware of Hitler’s feelings about Jews. He does live in Berlin.

What Bruno is really looking for when he roams along the fence is a friend. He misses Berlin and his wide circle of friends and his ability to roam and play as young boys can. He may feel “cold and unsafe” at Auschwitz, but he really thinks Shmuel has lots of playmates and plays wonderful games on the other side of the fence, the main reason he longs to join him. The characterization is far from strong, and the narrative, rather than being simple and honest, is too trivial, too glib, and too easily readable by younger children who should not be encouraged to read it. The author has labeled the book “a fable,” but most of the reviewers have bypassed that label and considered it allegorical, or, as the SLJ reviewer wrote, “sort of historical allegory.” I found it neither. In reality, it is an insult to the memory of the millions of Jews and other “misfits” who lost their lives in Hitler’s death camps.—Martha Shogren, Association of Children’s Librarians of Northern California, Sonoma County

I urge you to reread Boyne’s novel as an allegory (or fable) rather than approaching it as a realistic piece. What makes this tale distinctive is the manner in which the author has viewed Hitler’s “Final Solution” through the “innocent” eyes of not just any young German boy, but the son of the Commandant of Auschwitz, who, throughout most of the novel, lives closer than any outsider can to a Nazi concentration camp.

The child’s mispronunciations— “Fury” and “Out-With”—stem from his having heard the words from his second floor bedroom and through closed doors; his refusal to correct himself is a simple childish resistance to authority. In his interactions with Shmuel, the young Jewish prisoner, he shows boyish curiosity and concern, although his very limited (and privileged) life experience keeps him from understanding exactly what is going on, and he often does not ask Shmuel the right questions. Bruno’s mother, who understands from the outset, does not cope well with the realities of living at Auschwitz, but perhaps the Commandant himself is most affected.

The story is both memorable and thought-provoking. Its message is powerful and disturbing, for it offers a glimpse at how a charismatic tyrant was able to accomplish the annihilation of eight million people as most of the citizens of his own country and the rest of the world looked on.—Susan Scheps, youth services supervisor, Shaker Heights Public Library, OH

I want to call attention to the review of Charles Burns’s graphic novel, Black Hole (Pantheon, 2005; March, p. 252). The book was favorably reviewed; in fact, it received a starred review. I purchased the book knowing that it was rated for grade 11 and up. However, what was not described in the review is the graphic and repetitive nudity including breasts and penises. While this omission might be acceptable for a publication like Booklist, where titles are reviewed for general public libraries, I find it a glaring omission from a review written specifically for school libraries. With thousands of dollars of books being ordered every year, I rely heavily on SLJ’s reviews. While the merits of the story might warrant a star, I feel it is the obligation of the reviewer to disclose the fact that nudity exists and may pose a problem in a school library. Unfortunately, we spent the money on the book and cannot reclaim its lost value as a result of being pulled from the shelf. I am disappointed with the reviewer in this case and will be wary about purchasing any graphic novels that are reviewed not only by this reviewer, but by SLJ as a whole. I hope my message will result in a greater accountability of the reviewers.—Lynn Rashid, media specialist Marriotts Ridge High School, Marriottsville, MD

You are correct that I did not explicitly mention the “repetitive nudity” in Black Hole, but I do feel that my review clearly described a mature, adult book about sexually active teens. The story focuses on “the bug,” a sexually transmitted disease and is told through “the eyes of two teens” that “become infected and develop mutations.” Supporting characters include “the homeless and the homicidal” and the book is described as “dark” and “unsettling” with an “eerie, surreal tone.” I recommended it for older teens and “any collection that includes adult graphic novels.” If your collection development policy precludes having adult graphic novels in your collection, there should have been several things in my review that raised a red flag for you. Perhaps you did not read it carefully and purchased the book based solely upon the fact that it received a starred review. Regardless, the point of my review was not to highlight ancillary portrayals of nudity, but to accentuate the exemplary merits of Mr. Burns’s work.

Please bear in mind, SLJ is not, as you state, “written specifically for school libraries,” rather it is for “children’s, young adult, and school librarians” as indicated on the magazine’s masthead. Moreover, a starred review is given to books deemed to be “excellent in relation to other titles on the same subject or in the same genre.” I strongly believe that Black Hole meets this criterion.—Philip Charles Crawford, library director Essex High School, Essex Junction, VT

Correction: The bibliographic information for the 10-volume Timelines of Science and Technology (Grolier, 2006; October, p. 88) inadvertently listed a trade binding (Tr) and the prepublication promotional price. The books have a Publishers Library Binding (PLB) and the price is $349.