October 11, 2007: Sad Books are Bad Books
Here’s the Latest Misguided Manifesto:
The Happy Endings Foundation proposes that all children’s books must have happy endings. Their aims:
- To eradicate sad thoughts from all literature
- To make people smile a little more often
- To encourage authors to write more uplifting books for children
- To highlight the dangers of reading sad books
- To unite parents of a similar thinking and create a force with which to be reckoned
- To protect the next generation of readers.
- And, above all, to ensure the longevity of HAPPY ENDINGS (that means “to make sure happy endings are around for a long time”)
The big evil-doer in their world is sadness in children’s literature. Their choice of enemy is of course misguided. By abolishing “sadness” and installing “happy endings” they believe children will be more positive. In reality, this narrow thinking encourages a sense of “be happy no matter what” and “sad feelings are bad.”
A better solution would be to maintain that sense of hope and positivity while encouraging a healthy exploration of the different kinds of feelings that pop up in life. Anger and jealousy, for example, should not be denied or run away from but rather investigated. Without insightful treatment of emotions, parents position their kids for a life of pill-popping.
This journal, Walking on Falling Fences, too has a goal of encouraging positivity. The enemy to Fallen Fences is not sad thoughts–it is Fences. Fences create divisions in thinking. Fences keep psychic baggage in the shadows and give them strength. Fencing is part of language. When Fences first fall there comes the rush of conception shining into otherwise stale terrain and can be tripped on if you’re not careful, so better learn to walk on them, otherwise the language in sad books are bad books.
