A few years ago, a house in a small town in Illinois went up for auction. It was owned by a dentist. He died, and the house and all its contents were auctioned. The person who bought it found, in the attic, skulls.

Do an internet search on “Indian Skulls Found in Home” and you’ll find the article in the Pantagraph.

Peck was apparently living in southern Illinois for awhile.

I’m guessing most of those who praise his book have no idea that a storyline about Indian remains would generate upset or offense. I wish society was not so oblivious.

When I read Roger Sutton’s reference to popcorn and PC police a few weeks ago, I wondered what he was referencing.

I bought the book today. When I got to the part where the body of the Kickapoo Princess is brought to Bobby’s house, I literally blanched. My eyes raced over the physical description of what was in that blanket. It was searing.

I stopped reading.

In the last hour I’ve skimmed a few reviews, and I gather that this is all a charade of some sort. Eventually I will finish the book.

But for right now, I am stunned, disappointed, angry…

Native people, again, are the plaything of the dominant culture. Mainstream society.

I get that Peck may be mocking white folk from downstate Illinois (probably LeRoy, the town closest to the Kickapoo ancestral grounds), but on the way to the unmasking of whatever is going to be revealed about that body, my emotions as an American Indian woman (tribally enrolled, grew up on our reservation, know where our cemetery is, knows our rituals for burial) are being trampled with Peck’s words.

It’s a knock-out punch. When I get up, I guess I’m going to learn he’s just kidding.

That kind of kidding, that kind of humor, we can all do without.

I realize many are put off by my suggestion that you think about it out of context…as if the so-called-bones were Jewish. Any non-Christian-belief-system-historically-hounded group will do in place.

My contention in this discussion is not with the subject matter itself, but in its Interpretation of Theme or Concept and Excellence of Presentation for a Child Audience, as in the Newbery criteria. I think that Peck undermines the humor that is the strength of the story by using a tactic that will disengage his intended audience.

…your comments on WYRM were totally grounded in the criteria: Plot. I just disagreed.

I was not comparing the literary merit of ROLL OF THUNDER, HEAR MY CRY and A SEASON OF GIFTS, but rather the pain that their respective readers may face while reading the book. I think a careful reading of the post will yield that conclusion.

If you click on the Mildred Taylor link above you will find that for some African American and Latino readers that the context of the book did not, in fact, diminish the pain.

You are welcome to define a distinguished book any way that you would like, but currently the Newbery criteria do not include the phrase, “does not disparage any group of people.” And even if it did, I think you would be hard pressed to convince us that the group of people being disparaged are the Kickapoo Indians. I think the group being disparaged, quite humorously, are the white country folk.

I think it was pretty clear in previous posts that I let go of some of my hang-ups with WHEN YOU REACH ME. I brought them up again to illustrate the point that you cannot cling to your own assumptions and not allow others to do the same.

I look forward to hearing your comments once you are able to get the book and read it. I think many people are in the same situation.

Your focus on how kids of a particular ethnic group might be hurt by a portrayal of their ethnic group ignores the ways in which racially insensitive content hurts all of us.

And yes, I would say the context of Roll of Thunder does “diminish the pain of the child reader”, though I don’t know that “pain” is the word I’d be using in this conversation. Roll of Thunder is cathartic, realistic. It’s never cavalier, and I get the impression that A Season of Gifts kind of is. I’ll try to read it with fresh eyes when I do read it.

Surely it isn’t hard to find a different Newbery winner that’s controversial in terms of how it deals with a racially-charged subject and makes for a more meaningful comparison.

As for how this kind of thing ties in with the Newbery criteria–which I think it must, because I think the definition of a distinguished book surely includes “does not disparage any group of people”–I wonder, in this case, about the clarity with which information is presented… or appropriateness of style… if others think that child readers might not get the point.

The characters in ROLL OF THUNDER are clearly hurt by the n-word, but that may not make it any less painful for the African American child. I’m just worried that we’re going to start ranking which reading pain is acceptable and which is not. It’s a slippery slope.

Peck is making a joke–but at whose expense? He’s mocking the whites, not the Indians. Monica is concerned that children will not pick up on this, and that may well be, but that’s probably true of the younger kids in the range.