> kids can certainly tell an _engaging_ story from a boring one, and kids of all age can turn their noses up at an overly preachy story. Hmm that's interesting

> kids can certainly tell an _engaging_ story from a boring one, and kids of all age can turn their noses up at an overly preachy story. Hmm that's interesting, I would definitely believe it. (I was one of those kids that didn't get past Prince Caspian until his late 20s. Although I didn't recognise it as preachy when I was younger, just not all that interesting.) > Tolkien and Lewis disagreed ... This reminds me of David Eddings vehemently declaring Tolkien far too prissy (his word iirc) for high fantasy - that was my first exposure to the "all art is an evolving conversation" perspective, without realising it. I wonder if -- as far as books for 9-year-olds go -- the conversation has stalled and therefore lost interest, even from a child's perspective. The publishing/entertainment world has poured enormous amounts of money into the previous generation's teenage years (Harry Potter, Twilight, etc), maybe we forgot/decided not to invest in Good Art for the next round of younger kids while that was happening. I'm still biased in favour of screen time as a primary issue, but I could also see lower publishing, advertising (etc) investment in that age group as a huge confounding problem.