Day's stories met with such
unqualified praise at the time they were published, this example of
canting rubbish does not reveal. In real life parents certainly did
retain some of their substance for their own pleasure; why, therefore,
discipline a child for following the same inclination?
In contrast to Mr. Day's method, Mrs. Barbauld's plan of simple
conversation in words of one, two, and three syllables seems modern.
Both aimed to afford pleasure to children "learning the elements of
reading." Where Mrs. Barbauld probably judged truly the capacity of
young children in the dialogues with the little Charles of "Easy
Lessons," Mr. Day loaded his gun with flowers of rhetoric and overshot
infant comprehension.
Nevertheless, in spite of the criticism that has waylaid and torn to
tatters Thomas Day's efforts to provide a suitable and edifying variety
of stories, his method still stands for the distinct secularization of
children's literature of amusement. Moreover, as Mr. Montrose J.
Pages:
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193