Blog about vintage kids' books

I really dig this blog "Vintage Kids' Books My Kid Loves" wherein the author reviews children's books of yore that she digs up at thrift stores, library sales, and used bookstores. Even if you don't have little ones, the pages she posts have wonderful art. Above left, "Let's Grow A Garden" (1978) by Gyo Fujikawa. Above right, "Welcome Home Henry" (1970) by Muriel Batherman. Vintage Kids' Books My Kid Loves

David Pescovitz is Boing Boing's co-editor/managing partner. He's also a research director at Institute for the Future. On Instagram, he's @pesco.

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

Dave Rattigan

I had Gyo Fujikawa’s Oh, What a Busy Day! when I was a wee boy, and bought it on eBay a couple years back for nostalgia’s sake. It’s one of my favourite possessions, and I regularly read it to my nephews and niece when they visit.
WhatIFound

I would worry about kids losing more than 7 points of IQ if you deprive them of reading and knowing these wonderful old books.
Somehow all of us had older books and we’re still here.
DeputyHeadmistress

PJFRY, I do not know if you are doing this sort of fear mongering bait and switch on purpose or if you really have been deceived by the Press Releases from PIRG, Public Citizen, NRDC, the Consumer’s Union and other Naderite groups.

Nobody is arguing that lead isn’t nasty stuff in the blood stream or that it isn’t a cumulative poison. But you seem to think it somehow just magically enters a child through the air, and this is not so. You jump from ‘lead in the blood is dangerous’ to ‘books poison children,’ and there is NO evidence to support this.

Lead is in soil, paint chips and dust from older homes, vinyl blinds, pvc coating on power cords, antique furniture, keys, brass objects, and yes, some books. It all adds up.

Here’s where you are wrong- NO, it only adds up if the child actually INGESTS it- there has to be some mechanism to GET the lead from point A to point B, and you seem to imagine this transferrence as something almost magical.

the paint chips have to be ingested, the dust gets on their hands and they put their hands in their mouths, or the inhale it, and the lead in keys, brass objects, etc ONLY ‘adds up’ in a child if they suck on or chew those things- and sucking doesn’t extract the lead from every item- lead crystals, for instance, and books for another. The only scientific data I know of on this topic indicates licking a book does not, repeat NOT leach lead from the printed page. Chewing an entire book MIGHT, IF that book actually had lead in it (doubtful, as lead was NOT used in all pre-1985 books, only in a few) and IF the child at enough pages with lead in them (again, doubtful), and if the child had poor nutrition (vitamin C and calcium deficiencies have a lot to do with the higher lead absorption rates in children from impoverished families)- except, and this absolutely astounds me- there is NO RESEARCH supporting this theory about what MIGHT happen.

You include books with ZERO science to back that up. You are not using any scientific data or risk assessment to back up your claims.

Once more- SOME books have SOME lead in SOME of the colored inks. T

Babies and toddlers routinely mouth their books,

Cute. Not only is there no scientific data indicating any child ever has ever had the slightest bit of lead introduced to their blood stream from a book- not ONE, but we also aren’t talking about regulations on only books for babies and toddlers. We are talking about books for 12 year olds, 11 year olds, 10 year olds, 9 year olds. 8 year olds, 7 year olds, 6 year old, etc.

I am sure that I am not the only parent to read their kid a book so many times that they have personally witnessed the ink being worn away.

And your evidence that this somehow magically translated into lead separating out of the substrate, separating out of the ink, and entering the child’s bloodstream is based on…. what?

Or to watch the corners of books disintegrate from being sucked on.

When Jennifer Taggart lead tested her pre-1985 books, the majority of them had no lead. A few had lead well within the new limits set by the CPSIA, and a small handful had *some* lead in *some* of the illustrations. Do you understand it’s not saturated throughout the book? This is where risk assessment is extremely useful, because, as you say, when babies do chew books, they chew the corners. They do not eat through the center like the Very Hungry Caterpillar. And low and behold, IF there is any lead (and remember there generally is NOT), it will be where there are brightly colored illustrations (and only a few of those) NOT in the corners of the book.

Children absorb lead much more readily into their body than adults do. A child will absorb approximately 40-50% of all lead that they place in their mouths, as opposed to adults who will absorb about 10%. And young children, especially those younger than two, place their hands in their mouths much more frequently than adults.

None of which in any way supports your contention that pre-1985 books need to be kept out of children’s hands. In fact, the fact that they would only absorb half or less indicates the law is even more unnecessarily draconian than we knew, since older books do not routinely have lead, and it wasn’t used in all the inks, either. .

Children from poor backgrounds, the kind of children who are more likely to own items purchased from thrift stores, are most likely to suffer from the effects of lead exposure.

Children from poor backgrounds are the kind of children most unlikely to own BOOKS, and now they will be even more unlikely to own them, with no benefit to their health, and much harm to their education.
Frank W

Never heard of the CPSIA law before because I live across the big pond, but it sounds like FahrenheitÂ 451 to me. Save the books if you can.
syncrotic

Old childrens’ books always make me sad for some strange reason. They belonged to a generation that no longer has any use for them: one that collectively grew up and ceased to find any wonder in growing a garden or helping dad build a birdhouse. This is deeply saddening.
pjfry

#12-

I agree with you that there are major major problems with the CPSIA, and I think it would be a terrible tragedy if any books ended up in a landfill as a result of this bill, as I am sure that many probably already have. However, I do believe that it is important to protect children from lead, and other toxins, wherever they may be found.

The problem with lead is that it is a cumulative poison, each exposure results in more lead being built up in the body, and even small amounts of lead can lead to lifelong health and behavioral problems. Lead is in soil, paint chips and dust from older homes, vinyl blinds, pvc coating on power cords, antique furniture, keys, brass objects, and yes, some books. It all adds up.

Babies and toddlers routinely mouth their books, it is the first way that they learn to interact with them. I am sure that I am not the only parent to read their kid a book so many times that they have personally witnessed the ink being worn away. Or to watch the corners of books disintegrate from being sucked on.

Children absorb lead much more readily into their body than adults do. A child will absorb approximately 40-50% of all lead that they place in their mouths, as opposed to adults who will absorb about 10%. And young children, especially those younger than two, place their hands in their mouths much more frequently than adults. Certain health factors, such as a high fat diet, and low calcium and iron intake, can cause even higher rates of lead absorption. Children from poor backgrounds, the kind of children who are more likely to own items purchased from thrift stores, are most likely to suffer from the effects of lead exposure.

Right now, the CPSIA seems poised to do very little to punish the companies that are actually posing a significant health risk to children, and a lot of damage to the people that actually care about nurturing and protecting kids. It would be awful if libraries and thrift stores were harmed or forced out of business by the CPSIA. Likewise, WAHMs making cloth diapers or baby clothes, or the companies that make the wood toys that I buy my children. I feel very strongly that the INTENT of the CPSIA is a good one. However, I do agree with you that it is poorly written and needs to be thoroughly overhauled before being implemented.
DeputyHeadmistress

I’m certain that there are fewer than a dozen cases that could ever conclusively link lead poisoning to ink in books.

I am not aware of a single one, and I’ve been looking as have others. So there are actually zero cases that could ever conclusively link lead poisoning to ink in books.

The law doesn’t outright ban their existence (like say Lawn Darts were) but it does put into place regulations that make their existence financially crippling to the point that they might as well ban them.

It is true that private citizens, at the moment, may continue to own those books. They simply cannot donate them to thrift shops or sell them and libraries are not supposed to check them out to children or in cases where children might use them. Libraries are, some of them, ignoring this law. Mine, sadly, is not ignoring it. They are pulling all kids pre1985 books, and because some books have no printed dates other than copyright date, they are pulling some books purchased in the last year or two that were undoubtedly printed post-1985 ‘just to be safe.’

And recently the CPSC ruled that it doesn’t matter, because books have no useful value after 20 years anyway.
here.
Takuan

http://www.newarkadvocate.com/article/20090221/NEWS01/902210305
codereduk

@#14, you ain’t kidding.

I have a bunch of Dr Seuss books from the 60′s and 70′s, and the government will get them when they pry them out of my cold, dead hands.

Oh, btw, I had no problem with my own two children handling them, and as far as I can see, they have suffered no ill effects from doing so.

All it takes is some vague science, some innuendo and a sprinkle of paranoia, and that’s a receipe for the government to do whatever the hell it wants. Including taking away perfectly good books from our children.
Anonymous

Wow, I was just past the target age when these books came out. It makes me feel a little, well… OLDER as someone previously pointed out. When I was the age that these were targeted too, my Granny used to read to us every night on the porch swing. It was a nice kind of introducing us to Outdoor Living. “Furniture reading time”, as we called it, was always special.

Thanks for bringing back those sweet memories,
Bill
abushaw

Don’t be sad #6, they probably grew up and bought books on growing gardens and building birdhouses that were a little more rigorous than “Henry planted some seeds, Henry waited for the seeds to grow…” Really, If you teach your kids to love books by reading to them as much as possible and being an example as an adult who reads, it’s not the particular book that matters!
Whereismyrobot

Here is another good blog about children’s illustration:
http://picturebookillustration.blogspot.com/
richlb

The problem with the CPSIA (and other laws like it) is that they overinflate the risk and don’t consider the full consequences in advance. I’m certain that there are fewer than a dozen cases that could ever conclusively link lead poisoning to ink in books. But instead of putting common sense recommendations out to libraries, booksellers and parents, they just make the old, outdated books unsellable.

The law doesn’t outright ban their existence (like say Lawn Darts were) but it does put into place regulations that make their existence financially crippling to the point that they might as well ban them. Libraries are the hardest hit because they lack the financial resources to replace the books that they will have to dispose of.

In general, I think I trust parents to keep their children safe a lot more than I trust the government to keep them safe. My classic books (I’m not too old, but i do have some pre-1985 books that I keep for my 11 year old daughter) are cherished. It’s a shame that the local library can’t cherish them as much as I do and share them with more kids than I could hope to share mine with.
Anonymous

Does anyone know or have a copy of the teaching series…it was little booklets in a case…and you had to master each level (colors I think) before moving on….with comprehension tests???? I can’t think of the name of it…but I was in elementary school from 74 to 79…..any ideas? Thanks.

Rodni Cruz
richlb

Get ‘em from the thrift stores while you can. The CPSIA law now in effect is resulting in many of the older books being boxed and put in storage at best and discarded in the trash at worst.
Drowse

DFW’s biggest used book chain, Half Price Books has put a halt on shelving all children’s books made pre-’85 due to the lead supposedly in the books. They’re going to a distribution facility to be destroyed in the future.

I’m assuming thats the CPSIA referred to above
RainyRat

So no-one’s read Struwwelpeter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struwwelpeter), then? Genuinely vintage (first published in 1845), and one of the most disturbing kid’s books that I’ve read, with a high bodycount even for that kind of book. Not entirely sure what the parents were thinking when they bought a copy for the five-year-old me, but I *never* sucked my thumbs…
pjfry

RICHLB-
These books certainly have artistic and historical value, and I don’t think that they should be destroyed, but it is important to keep them out of little hands. The ink in most books printed prior to 1985 contain lead. Just touching the books, not to mention gnawing on them which many kids do, can result in unsafe levels of exposure.

There is no safe level of lead in anyone’s body, but it is especially dangerous to babies and young children. Blood lead levels of just 5 to 10 mcg/dl in young children, below CDC limits, can result in 7 lost IQ points. There might still be a lot of bugs to work out with the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, like the prohibitive cost of testing for one, but the goal is a very important one.
victoria thorne

Mighty “scribbler,” who pens “Vintage Kids Books My Kids’ Love,” actually has two blogs…the other one is http://www.scribblinginsanantonio.com.

She’s a beautiful writer, as well as a superb book-finder.

These qualities, combined with her ability to be a ridiculously awesome mom (clearly comes through on her blogs, this trait), make her a real-live hero for our time.
Anonymous

Some more on CPSIA and book banning from an industry blog:
http://bookshopblog.com/2009/02/14/cpsia-book-banning-in-the-guise-of-safety/

In addition to banning pre-1985 books, it also bans things that don’t meet the CPSA’s definition of “ordinary books”. They define an ordinary book as:

â€œThe term â€œordinary bookâ€ in this context means one that is published on cardboard or paper printed by conventional methods and intended to be read. It excludes childrenâ€™s books that have plastic, metal or electronic parts.â€

(quote from http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/101lead.pdf )

This bans ALL books that contain staples, as is common in about 1/4 of all children’s picture books. Nevermind that lead in staples would render them completely ineffective as staples. All Golden Books contain staples under the little gold binding tape. The entire Clifford the Big Red Dog series got pulled here because they’re all staplebound!

Yes, lead is BAD. But the CPSIA is completely unrealistic about what items reasonably contain lead.
Anonymous

The CPSIA does not keep pre-1985 books out of ‘little hands;’ it keeps them out the hands of every single American youngster from age TWELVE on down.
And they are ending up in landfills thanks to this bill- many thrift shops have pulled theirs and are refusing to accept them in their donations. My library is pulling ours right now, and if they cannot sell them they will dispose of them.

Books printed before 1985 *sometimes* contained *some* lead in the inks. The Smart Mama (Jennifer Taggart) XRF tested several older books and she found most of them were lead free, only a few had lead in some of the illustrations.

“Just touching the books, not to mention gnawing on them which many kids do, can result in unsafe levels of exposure. “

There is no evidence I am aware of that this is true. What is your basis for making it? What studies do you know of that suggests lead in the ink (which becomes part of the substrate) somehow just comes off on a child’s fingers?

And while your next statement may be true (there are no save levels of lead in the blood), you took a flying leap of logic there, as there is not a case on record where lead from a child’s book entered the blood stream.

What evidence that does exist suggests that touching, holding, reading, even licking the book will not result in a chlid absorbing the lead, because saliva turns out not to be a very effective way of separating lead out of a printed page.

Actually EATING the entire book *might*- if a child chanced to eat a book that had more lead in it than most other pre-1985 books, but I suspect most children would be complaining of a belly ache for other reasons before they finished chomping down an entire book.

And I don’t know any children over 2 who lick, suck, or chew on their books, yet this draconian law forbids the sale of all pre-1985 books for the use of children as old as 12- with zero evidence it’s even possible for that book to harm a ten year old.
risk assessment is completely forbidden by the CPSIA as it stands.
DeputyHeadmistress
http://heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com
Grant Gould

Gyo Fujikawa is a treasure. My two-year-old loves his “Baby Animals” so much, I’ve already had to repair it a dozen times.

The art is frankly a little bit disturbing — almost anime-ish with huge eyes in unnaturally round heads — but somehow speaks directly to the toddler hindbrain.
Anonymous

Dear me… when did ‘vintage’ mean 1970′s? I was born in ’76, dude, I’m not vintage! I clicked the linky and expected to see books from th 40′s and such. Now I feel old. *sigh*
Gyo is awesome, btw.

-too lazy to create an account ;)
wolfiesma

I always find great kids’ books at thrift stores but I feel a little guilty that I’m taking the books out of circulation by buying them… I have the fantasy I will amass the definitive library on childrens’ lit and then take the list of titles to a publisher who will defer to my superior judgement and find a way to re-release every single one in a mass market addition so everybody else can read them, too. It could happen!
Ito Kagehisa

“The Griffin and the Minor Canon”

http://www.amazon.com/Griffin-Minor-Canon-Frank-Stockton/dp/006029731X

“The Bee Man of Orn”

http://www.amazon.com/Bee-man-Orn-Frank-R-Stockton/dp/0060297298

I like the recent versions illustrated by Maurice Sendak.
Larskydoodle

I wrote a paper in undergrad called “Children’s Literature of the 1920s.” I was hoping to find some validation of my thesis in this link. I’m only a little disappointed. Glad to learn about the CPSIA.
DianneS

Dutch of Sweet Juniper has an account of taking the vintage books out of an abandoned Detroit elementary school. He’s looking for help from anyone in the area who can salvage and redistribute to non-profits, libraries, or after school programs:
http://www.sweet-juniper.com/2009/03/i-scrapper-postscript.html