A time wasting question for lounge lizards. Geography aside, I personally have a soft spot for Dahl because I was read these books as a child. These days, the range of Dr Seuss seems to be expanding and as they are graded for early readers through to competent are hard to resist for anyone with smaller children. Still, for pure storytelling, I think Dahl has the edge, though perhaps only suitable for slightly older children to understand the nuances.
I agree. Dr Seuss certainly has a good following, and quite a few films have been made based on his books. However, I've always found his books to be...weird. Now I understand that this is his style, and that many children love him for that reason. But Dahl was different. Instead of being weird, he was more fantastical. One of my favourite childhood books was George's Marvellous Medicine (in case you didn't know, it's written by Roald Dahl), and whilst certain scenes in the book are beyond realistic, they're definitely not as strange as Dr Seuss' creations. It's great that children have their own writer to look up to in their own generation, but I think Dahl is better.
I love Dahl, myself. He's a bit more offbeat than trusty Dr. Seuss. I still have my copies of Mathilda and the Fantastic Mr. Fox on my bookcase.
I love Dahl, and his adult stories are classics in my mind. The good thing is they are not in competition and there is a place for both of them.
this is comparing apples to aardvarks... as noted above, they're not in competition and the gap in the age range of their target markets is so wide i can't understand the point of the post, sorry to say...
I completely agree with Maia here. I don't see them as really comparable. They are both worthy in their own right, and other than falling into the large, general category of "authors of books for children," they target different ages, and are very different types of writers.
When I was a kid, I read - I think - all of Dr. Seuss. I haven't read much of Dahl at all, because after Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, I got the impression that he just hated kids. He seemed to take great delight in describing scenes in which kids were tortured and/or humiliated in various ways. That was a big turn-off for me.
They're two separate categories in my mind, divided between early childhood and the waning years. I've never sought to compare them because they are so different (and awesome) they can coexist quite happily.
Can't really compare the two. Well, only on a slim plane. But it's like asking what's better Barbapapa or the Incredible Hulk -cause they both shapeshift.
I read Dr. Seuss a lot as a child, whereas I haven't read much Dahl. Based on that, I prefer Seuss. I find that it's hard to make comparisons between any two writers in general. Every writer has strengths and weaknesses.
I read both when I was little. But I can still remember the rhymes from Hop on pop by Dr Seuss, even though my mum donated the book about half my life ago. Pup Cup Pup in Cup Cup Pup Cup on pup Pat sat cat Pat sat on a cat Pat sat bat Pat sat on a bat NO Pat! No! Don't sit on that! [cactus] Yep. That's my childhood right there.
I'm English and some of the Americanisms were strange to me but I loved Dr Seuss, especially the illustrations. Dahl, on the other hand, I absolutely loathed and his work always left me with a bad feeling--but I agree with the comments about them being for different ages and having different aims.
Interesting! I have to admit Dahl's not for everyone's taste. I found his work to be rather sour. I haven't read everything of his, I liked Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - but to me that was more fairytale/fable -as Charlie was nothing more than a little Red Ridinghood or Cinderella, zero personality, just a type ( starving good boy ) to be manuevered about and get his reward.
Roald Dohl has a seemingly exhaustive collection of classics -all really great stuff. Great writer. Fantastic imagination. But you simply can't beat RHYMES.
