I know! I want to know what happens next!
(He says that it's easy to get in the day of .. . )
We killed a homeless man on this bench. Me and Dru. Those were good times. You know, he begged for mercy, and you know, that only made her bite harder.
Spike ,'Sleeper'
Literary Buffistas 3: Don't Parse the Blurb, Dear.
There's more to life than watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer! No. Really, there is! Honestly! Here's a place for Buffistas to come and discuss what it is they're reading, their favorite authors and poets. "Geez. Crack a book sometime."
sumi - Aug 10, 2011 3:15:34 pm PDT #15891 of 28689
Art Crawl!!!
Amy - Aug 10, 2011 3:16:15 pm PDT #15892 of 28689
Because books.
Someone on G+ posted a question asking for everyone's favorite children's book, and listed To Kill a Mockingbird. I love that book, but I wouldn't call it a children's book, right?
§ ita § - Aug 10, 2011 3:20:55 pm PDT #15893 of 28689
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Is a children's book up to but not including YA? I was probably a pre-teen when I read it, but I don't know what the target age is seen as.
flea - Aug 10, 2011 3:22:09 pm PDT #15894 of 28689
information libertarian
I read it in 8th grade, and I was not ready, personally. But I think it is commonly assigned at that age.
DawnK - Aug 10, 2011 3:25:57 pm PDT #15895 of 28689
giraffe mode
I think that my kids read it in 7th grade so not "children's book" like say, Splat the Cat or Diary of a Wimp Kid but certainly a middle-school book (also,TKAM is probably my most favorite book ever!)
Amy - Aug 10, 2011 3:26:02 pm PDT #15896 of 28689
Because books.
When I hear "children's book" I generally think under twelve. But that might just be me.
-t - Aug 10, 2011 3:35:22 pm PDT #15897 of 28689
I am a woman of various inclinations and only some of the time are they to burn everything down in frustration
I wouldn't call it a children's book, no.
Hm, $50 day pass + 6-7 hours of driving for a reading . . . I'll have to think about that.
Eta: if "children's" includes YA, then maybe. The two are distinct in my mind.
zuisa - Aug 10, 2011 3:47:58 pm PDT #15898 of 28689
call me jacki; zuisa is an internet nick from ancient times =)
We read To Kill a Mockingbird in my Honors English class in 9th grade. But I definitely would have understood it younger. I don't think I'd call it a children's book.
Sophia Brooks - Aug 10, 2011 4:22:03 pm PDT #15899 of 28689
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
We read it in 11th grade as an outside reading. We had a choice between TKM, Catcher in the Rye, and Of Mice and Men. I think I could have read it younger, but the themes were teen appropriate, I think, even though viewed through the lense of younger children.
megan walker - Aug 10, 2011 4:48:11 pm PDT #15900 of 28689
"What kind of magical sunshine and lollipop world do you live in? Because you need to be medicated."-SFist
Someone on G+ posted a question asking for everyone's favorite children's book, and listed To Kill a Mockingbird. I love that book, but I wouldn't call it a children's book, right?
Nathan Branford had that on his blog today and I thought the same thing. Especially with today's YA category, I always assume "children's book" means well below teen years.