in re this post: i've been working in childcare recently and as such found myself regularly reading to children. (but even before this, i was at the public library and thus very exposed to the problem i'm about to discuss.) so like, take this all with a grain of salt that im just some guy without even a degree in the subject
BUT. there's a staggering difference btwn "books parents want their kids to read" and "books kids want to read". i think if you remember interacting w books as a child you may have some memory of this yourself. the first category of books, while often teaching good lessons or simply having pleasing pictures, contain nothing that is of interest to children
to wit, at the age where kids are reading/listening to either "the very hungry caterpillar" OR "a butterfly is patient," you might well have stop to define caterpillar or patient. so many kid's books are bought by parents reading with adult eyes, and not realizing that the whole narrative relies on context their 4 y/o doesn't have, without which the book is boring
if the context is just the word "caterpillar," then that's easy enough to surmount. if it's the concept of patience? something extremely abstract to most children?
"the very hungry caterpillar" isn't just a classic for its art style. it's also written to its audience in a way that fosters a love of reading. maybe "a butterfly is patient" does too, who knows. maybe megha's kids will grow up never reading bc their earliest memories of the activity are of boredom. who knows!
