Topologies of the Classical World in Children’s Fiction: Palimpsests, Maps, and Fractals by Claudia Nelson and Anne Morey (review)

Book Reviews better reading and better thinking, but also enable students to link what they are learning in the classroom to the much larger project and challenge of changing the world. The editors are clear that “covering a [keyword] term’s history and use in the children’s literature of all 196 countries on this planet is well beyond the scope of what any of these essays can accomplish” (xi). The editors state that their goal is “a map with fewer blank spaces—a map that will, like all maps, need to be redrawn as the landscape changes” (xi). The editors also “acknowledge the absence—both on advisory board and among contributors—of Bangladesh, China, Cuba, Egypt, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Japan, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Russia, among many others” (xi). In the new edition of Keywords, there are, however, references to China or Chinese in the essays on “Affect,” “Audience,” “Authenticity,” “Boyhood,” “Children’s Literature,” “Classic,” “Culture,” “Family,” “Fairy Tale,” “Gender, “Identity,” “Multicultural,” “Postmodernism,” “Race,” “Story,” “Trans,” and “Translation.” But the misrepresentation of Chinese children’s literature still occurs now and then. It might be a wise choice to invite Chinese scholars to join the program in drawing the map. The diversity and changes of the landscape of Chinese children’s literature is becoming even more challenging and complicated. Serving such a large number of young people (3.7 billion) in China, Chinese children’s literature deserves more merit and due attention. It is obvious that the second edition includes more examples from regions beyond Anglophone, but examples from the Middle East are still sparse and some specific regions are still under-represented. In my view, only with scholarship from Asia, Africa, and Latin America will it be possible to develop an edition more truly international.