It's for a similar reason, I think, that children's literature often tends to stick in the public consciousness to a much greater degree than more 'mature' literature. I mean, think of how many books, movies, etc. borrow quotes, repeat themes from, and occasionally steal large chunks of stuff like 'Alice in Wonderland', 'The Wizard of Oz' and 'Winnie the Pooh'. The reason for this, I think, is that a good deal of media seems to treat the creative process as a sort of competition, rather than the labor of love that it should be. Everyone's scrambling to write that Pulitzer-winning book, or that Oscar-winning movie, or get that fifteen minutes of fame and notoriety for writing a song that has the word 'cunnilingus' in the lyrics. 'Look! Look! This is MATURE and DEEP! It deserves a prize!' 'Don't listen to that clown! This is even MORE mature and deep!' 'Oh, yeah? This is HELLA mature! It has SUICIDE BOMBERS in it!' 'Big whoop! Mine has cannibalism! It's pushing the envelope!' 'Pushing it? Mine is SHOVING it! Every single character in it is a topless woman! You can't get much more daring than that!' 'Pikers, the lot of you! Mine has suicide bombers that EAT topless women while BLOWING UP!', etc., etc., yadda yadda yadda. And the sad thing is, it works - for about a month or so, then they have to try again. Kid's authors, on the other hand, don't have that problem. Kid's lit rarely gets in the limelight (stuff like 'Harry Potter' notwithstanding), so most people who pursue a career in it do so for a simple reason - to produce books that kids will enjoy, and maybe read to their kids when they grow up. And while kids are perhaps more easily satisfied than adults in some respects, the stuff they like is really the same sort of stuff everyone likes - a good story, engaging characters, funny jokes, and situations they can identify with. A good kid's book, therefore, is really a good adult's book minus a lot of excess baggage.