Post History
It's been decades since I was a kid watching cartoons on TV, and I can still sing some of the Schoolhouse Rock songs. Schoolhouse Rock, for those unfamiliar with it, was a series of short (2-3 min...
Answer
#3: Attribution notice added
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/44344 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
It's been decades since I was a kid watching cartoons on TV, and I can still sing some of the _Schoolhouse Rock_ songs. [Schoolhouse Rock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schoolhouse_Rock!), for those unfamiliar with it, was a series of short (2-3 minute) bits of educational programming interspersed among Bugs Bunny, Road Runner, Bullwinkle, et al. Each episode taught one concept -- math, grammar, US history, or science (later they added others). The episodes were memorable because of the following factors: - focus -- _one_ concept, no complications, e.g. today we're talking _only_ about conjunctions - catchy melodies with refrains (repeated sections) -- earworms work! - simple, entertaining animations that aligned with the structure (so refrains repeated animation too) - relatable, sometimes humorous or absurd, visuals Examples on that last point: The main character of "I'm Just a Bill" (... sitting here on Capital Hill) is a rolled-up piece of paper with a face, arms and legs. "Conjunction Junction" involves a railroad operator pulling "trains" of words together, using cars labelled "and" and "or". The visuals reinforce the content, just like the music and poetic structure make the words memorable. _Schoolhouse Rock_ was aimed at kids in early grades in school, not toddlers, so the audience is more advanced. And you're writing a book, not producing a TV show, so you have different tools. But you're not the first person to write books in verse for kids (consider Dr. Seuss as a prominent example), so you do have some models. Putting all of this together, I suggest: - Use art liberally, and use a style that is age-appropriate. Use _characters_, not abstractions. Make them caricatures -- maybe you personify gravity as a lazy-but-still-cheerful slug, for example. - Focus on one topic at a time. In your chapter/story about gravity, do _not_ get distracted by air resistance, acceleration, and other gravity-related topics. Those are discussions for another day. - Use a _motif_ of some sort, whether it's a particular verse structure with lots of repetition, or alliteration, or something similar. If you're aiming at toddlers, assume that somebody is going to be reading the book to the child, so favor things that have a strong effect on the oral form. Kids can latch onto meter and rhymes even if they can't read yet, but they might not notice acrostics, for example. - Simplify. You want to explain science as it really is, but toddlers don't have the foundation for that yet. If you find yourself saying "well, actually..." or "_technically_ it's really this..." while writing, stop and refocus. I'm not saying to talk down to kids; they'll hate that. I'm saying to teach the 95% that's accessible and mostly true and just not talk about the exceptions _yet_. Then you can have _another_ story that builds on that foundation and talks about special cases, if you want.