Left Out: The Forgotten Tradition of Radical Publishing for Children in Britain 1910–1949 by Kimberley Reynolds

Abstract

Reviewed by: Left Out: The Forgotten Tradition of Radical Publishing for Children in Britain 1910–1949 by Kimberley Reynolds Christopher Owen Left Out: The Forgotten Tradition of Radical Publishing for Children in Britain 1910–1949, by Kimberley Reynolds. Oxford University Press, 2016. With Left Out, Kimberley Reynolds has provided an important and interesting contribution to the study of the history of children's literature. This book responds directly to previous research on children's literature during the interwar period and to the claim that children's literature during this time was "culturally disengaged" and "apolitical" (5). Reynolds demonstrates that the very opposite of this is true. Left Out provides a clear history of writing, illustrating, translating, publishing, disseminating, and reading radical literature for children in Britain between 1910 and 1949. In her analysis, Reynolds shows that a great deal of literature for children published during this time encouraged critical thinking and provided tools for creating a more progressive future. Reynolds's definition of radical literature grounds her entire study. She argues that radical literature for children is socially progressive; promotes a more just, equal, and modern society; and works to break down stereotypical attitudes to gender, race, class, poverty, ethnicity, nationality, and childhood. She argues that while mainstream children's texts during this time construct an idealized version of childhood as separate from and superior to adulthood, radical texts focus on helping readers learn critical thinking skills. This definition, with all its breadth and specificity, contributes to both Left Out's successes and shortcomings. While Reynolds is able to provide a very thorough history of radical children's literature from this period, during my reading of this book I often thought that she overprioritizes class issues and socialism. This results in a neglect of other social identities and issues (that are included in her definition of radical literature) that could have been resolved through a more intersectional approach. The introduction to Left Out works well to explain the foundations of Reynolds's argument. She defines radical literature and places it within the context of Britain's left-wing politics, modernism and the avant-garde, and progressive education. Reynolds uses the publishing of Victor Gollancz as a case study, giving particular attention to An Outline for Boys and Girls and Their Parents, edited by Naomi Mitchison. In this case study, Reynolds not only provides a critical literary analysis of radical left-wing children's literature, but also describes in great detail [End Page 231] how this literature was published and disseminated. She concludes this analysis with an investigation into who the readers were of these radical texts, ultimately arguing that, whoever the readers were, they were given a great deal of information about their bodies, their world, and the ways they could make the future a more progressive place. Reynolds's introduction is so clear that if, like me, you are not a specialist in publishing history, the rest of this book should still be accessible. Chapter 1, "War and Peace in Radical Writing for Children," investigates literature that opposes war and criticizes politicians and those who enable military conflicts. At the beginning of the chapter, Reynolds provides a jarring image from Harry Golding and Albert Friend's War in Dolly land (A Book and A Game), which features toy soldiers lined up as a firing squad, aiming their guns at a blindfolded doll. Reynolds uses the juxtaposition of children's toys and the overly realistic image of war to exemplify her argument: radical children's literature questions the wisdom and skills of those responsible for war. Reynolds later moves on to discussing the messages of pacifism that were taught in Socialist Sunday Schools, progressive schools, and in texts like The Young Socialist. In this discussion, Reynolds analyzes texts of several different genres for a variety of different ages, concluding that these texts reflect the liberal Left idea that the cure for war is a new form of social organization. One such society that was believed to be developing into this idealized future was post-revolutionary Russia, which Reynolds mentions for a smooth transition into her next chapter. Chapter 2, "Moscow has a Plan!: Representations of the Soviet Union in Radical...