Age banding of books - bad, stop it!

I'm with Philip Pullman who is quite against books being age banded (i.e., this book is for 5-10 year-olds this book is for 11+ etc). Why should any book be "for" a particular age range?

As you've seen on this blog I am tickled pink by some very "young" books as well as some seriously heavy ones. If they work for me, they work for me.

If people are worried about young 'uns hitting subjects that are a little scary then, like TV, that's about ensuring people have the right info to decide upon - this book contains sweary Mary words, or this book has more shagging than a 70's rock concert, or this book will scare the beejessus out of most, don't say we didn't warn you.

The subject matter and how it's dealt is the defining, not some arbitary decision by a publisher.

As an exercise to tak your mind off the tedium of project management, that report you have to finish or the endless typing into Excel, pop these into categories:

Catergories you can use (yes, they overlap):
  • Pre-school
  • 5-9 years old
  • 10-14 years old
  • Teenager
  • 15+
  • Adolescent
And the books:
  1. The Hobbit
  2. Lord Of The Rings
  3. Rumpole of the Bailey series
  4. Harry Potter series
  5. The Bible
  6. The Koran
  7. An Unfortunate Series of Events series
  8. Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
  9. Holes
  10. Hitler: Hubris / Nemesis


Popular articles

The Difference Between One Million And One Billion

[UPDATE] Mayor 1883

Catastrotivity, The How To

High Moon

NO! The Greatest Story: Space Worm