Dr. Suess

The Cat in the Hat
My parents never read Dr. Seuss to me. Isn't that odd? We had books upon books. I loved to read. Both of my parents loved to read. But somehow, Dr. Seuss just wasn't a part of that. So my experience with Dr. Seuss is a bit skeptical. I don't have that feeling as a parent that I must have this Dr. Seuss book or that one. I have watched The Cat in the Hat movie with my children, but only once when it first came out. Is there something terribly wrong with the fact that I watched to movie before ever reading the book?

Okay, so I had read parts of the book, but never the entire thing! I recently sat down and read all of it. It is a tad disconcerting. The mother leaves them home alone, the children let this very odd cat loose in the house. It makes a huge mess. It cleans it all up. It leaves. She comes back and we assume never finds out. Yes, strange, but fun. And leaving it necessary for an explanation that children should never, ever allow a stranger into the house. But did I like it? I don't really know. Not really, I guess. I would much prefer a beautifully illustrated book with a plot that makes sense, but my oldest daughter loves the silliness of Dr. Seuss. My younger daughter--not so much. She prefers the orderly type of book as well. I wonder if Dr. Seuss admiration can be correlated to right and left brain function. . .

The Lorax
On to The Lorax. This is actually a book that I read in high school biology. If The Lorax can find its way into high school biology classes, I certainly think that it is didactic. While it is entertaining, and the whimsical pictures are fun, it is meant to instruct (and perhaps even instill a little guilt). However, the child at the end is left with a seed--perhaps symbolic of a seed of hope. This book is clearly a warning of what progress without responsibility can and will do.

Didactic books are still written. In fact I came across an interesting article here: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE2D7133BF933A0575BC0A964958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all As I was reading I was surprised at the cynical tone (especially for the NYTimes) that the writer took regarding books written to educate young people about the environment. I confess that I did not look at the date of the article until after I had read it, at which point I was surprised the article had been written at all--cynical or not. It was written fifteen years ago.

While not environmental in nature, I can think of two didactic books that we enjoy in our own home frequently: So You Want to Be President by Judith St. George and David Small and Our 50 States: A Family Adventure Across America by Lynne Cheney and Robin Preiss. Also there are many books that are used to teach letters, numbers and shapes in fun and creative ways such as: The Alphabet from A to Y With Bonus Letter Z! by Steve Martin and Roz Chast, Shiver Me Letters: A Pirate ABC by June Sobel and Henry Cole, and Chicka Chicka Boom Boom by Bill Martin, John Archambault, and Lois Ehlert. These books are all fun, not preachy. To be a successful didactic book for children, it needs to be fun and educational. The Lorax accomplished this, while those environmental books mentioned in the article evidently did not.