The campaign against age-banding/branding now contains more than 1,700 signatures.
Since my last round-up, I've landed upon some more views in the blogosphere:
Adele Geras on the Guardian blog
It's a Crime (or a Mystery)
The Naughty Step
A chair, a fireplace & a tea cozy (for a view from the US)
and some second thoughts on the matter from Books, Mud and Compost
plus [later addition] here's Alan Garner's comment on Fidra blog's excellent post on the subject:
"The Thought Police seem to have been wrong-footed by the surge of rage over this proposed attack at the root of literature. My agent and I each objected to age banding, and my publisher, HarperCollins, has agreed not to apply age banding to any of my work. Philip Pullman reports the same instant climb-down. The speed with which the publishers have backed off may be simple courtesy (yet why were authors not consulted in the first place?), or there may be something in Kay Tie’s blog in the Telegraph last week, which pointed out that authors now have moral rights in law. Did the Publishers’ Association take legal advice before attempting a fait accompli? It could be, though this is only conjecture, that the Association is now running scared. Anyway, let’s hope so. The best way forward is for as many authors and illustrators as possible to object to their publishers; and to do it now. Once the pebbles start to tumble out of the dyke, the structure must fail."
and [even later addition - I can't keep up!] yet more on Fidra about what's really behind age-banding - ie more Tescofication of our lives . . .
SPOONBILLS STOP OFF TO FEED
19 hours ago