“Classics”

As I read my homeschool journal, written more than 20 years ago, I began to think about toys and books that have become classics. They never go out of style (although they sometimes get reinvented and reinterpreted), and they are played with at least several generations.


I think that Colorforms—those thin vinyl pieces that would cling to shiny “boards” to make pictures—fits the definition of a classic. Not necessarily the versions that come with pre-printed pictures of whatever is popular at the moment—Popeye, back in the day, or Dora the Explorer, now—but the original solid-colored shapes invented by Ogden Kniffin. Bright blue and yellow and red and green and white. Circles, squares, triangles, rectangles.

I had Colorforms when I was a kid, and I loved making almost limitless pictures with the bright-colored shapes. My kids had a huge set and loved it. I imagine little kids these days still play with Colorforms (if they have access to them), and that my grandkids, if I ever get any, will love them, too.

Classic toys include super simple (and endlessly variable) toys like balls and kites and yo-yos. Of course wooden blocks need to be on the list. Kids can use blocks to build almost anything. Legos are fabulous because, like wooden blocks, they can be used in thousands of different constructions—and these creations are far more durable because of the interlocking nature of the bricks. I also like colored number rods and magnetic building sets.


As much as I like classic toys, classic books can be another matter altogether. Many of the books considered “classics” in children's literature failed to earn fans in our household. We all loved Lewis Carroll's Alice books, along with the books by a trio of women authors—Laura Ingalls Wilder, Louisa May Alcott, and Jane Austen (books by the latter aren't classified as children's lit—but my teens loved 'em!)—but some other so-called classics left us flat.

We thought Heidi was a bit preachy. The attitude of The Swiss Family Robinson toward animals horrified us. We found Barie's Peter Pan odd, Travers' Mary Poppins unpleasant, and Verne's 30,000 Leagues Under the Sea slow. Do these truly hold their value for most modern children, as classics are supposed to, or do they stay on the list out of habit or even guilt? (I'm thinking some librarians somewhere have thought to themselves, “Well, it's not that accessible to modern kids, and certainly nobody reads it, but we OUGHT to love it and read it, so it stays on the list!”)

Obviously, I know that some people love each of the books that failed to thrill us—taste being personal and idiosyncratic—but I wonder if these books still have widespread and enthusiastic child readers.

I also wonder which of the books written recently—within the past decade, say—which of those that have been touted as “modern classics” will actually turn out to be classics? Certainly a well-written book can be called classic immediately, because one meaning of the word is “top-rate high quality,” but I wonder which of the current batch of children's books will garner truly enduring interest.

Any suggestions?