Comments on: Accuracy or Agenda?

By: a teacher

a teacher — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:19:48 +0000

I think lots of people were troubled by things like that in the book, that’s why it was so split amongst readers. Personally, I feel like a lot of people let Stone off the hook simply because she wrote “passionately”. I don’t like that either . . .

By: Children's Librarian

Children's Librarian — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:40:52 +0000

I agree with other posts that Stone’s writing style TELLS the reader how to feel about the Mercury 13 rather than allowing the reader to feel admiration, anger, etc. for themselves. Stone’s editorializing is troubling (p. 59 “NASA was treating Cobb like an annoying child who didn’t quite know her place.”) and uncited statements (the 5-page assault on Jackie Cochran and p. 115 “The most drastic change occurs in college, where more technical majors, such as computer science and electrical engineering, are increasingly being ruled out by female students.”) undermine authentic research. Anyone else troubled by these?

By: Nina

Nina — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:25:51 +0000

Susan, but who says she has to tell the entire story of space exploration? She’s defined her story, and she tells it well.

Are we supposed to criticize Hoose for not giving us the full story of Rosa Parks and Dr. King?

By: Susan

Susan — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 11:30:48 +0000

Tanya Lee Stone is a terrific writer, and her subject fascinates. But if her potential readers don’t know what actually happened during Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, it’s like teaching alternate history to someone who doesn’t have any comparison.

By: Colleen Mondor

Colleen Mondor — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 21:58:40 +0000

One thing I really liked about the book is that it made clear the only qualification the women did not meet (jet time) was one they could not meet (the only jet time was in the military for combat and women were not permitted in those aircraft). Stone does hammer this home but I think she needed to in order to combat the prevailing opinion that the original Mercury astronauts had the “Right Stuff” and no one else did. She also is trying to explain something that is no longer true today and might be hard for modern readers to grasp with women so welcome not only in the Space Shuttle but the airlines, etc.

As a girl growing up on the Space Coast I wondered why there were no female astronauts in the 70s and now I know – they weren’t allowed to become astronauts and the same was true of African American military pilots who were denied jet time due to discriminatory policies (as the author points out).

If you are telling a long ignored story of this caliber is it wrong to be passionate about it and call discrimination when you see it? I don’t think so. There were easily women pilots who could have flown jets at that time – unlike Amelia Earhart, Bessie Coleman and those of an earlier era, they just didn’t have access to the equipment. Heck the major airlines didn’t hire a woman to fly the line until 1973.

Discrimination against women in aviation was a fact during that time as any aviation historian will acknowledge. Stone is just saying it like it was.

By: Jonathan Hunt

Jonathan Hunt — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 15:42:01 +0000

Jim, can you tell us whether you have read ALMOST ASTRONAUTS? In earlier comments, I surmised that you hadn’t, but I would happily stand corrected.

I hate to be so nosy about this point, but when comments from subject specialists who have not read the entire book (ALMOST ASTRONAUTS, A SEASON OF GIFTS, YEARS OF DUST) are entered into the Newbery debate, it’s almost impossible for me to take them seriously.

By: Kate

Kate — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:28:30 +0000

Well, actually, the book does include some comparisons as to how men did on similar tests, though it would have been interesting for the kids to do even more research on that topic.

(And in fact, I’m thinking that this whole conversation about what’s included and what’s left out in nonfiction writing — because ALL nonfiction writers pick and choose which facts to include — would make a great exploration for the kids, too. I’d love to do a literature circles unit in which students read a selection of nonfiction titles including this one and then do additional reading to find out what the authors may have decided not to include in the text. They could speculate as to why, then write letters or Skype with the authors…but anyway, I digress.)

I just think your earlier argument (if this is the same “a teacher” above) that kids won’t see the difference between hard facts and an author’s conclusions fails to give middle school students enough credit. They are sophisticated readers who appreciate various viewpoints and will debate them with great enthusiasm.

By: a teacher

a teacher — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:12:49 +0000

“This book led to a fantastic discussion about what might have been for these 13 women and the reasons that might have existed — valid and otherwise — for NASA’s unwillingness to consider women for the space program at that time.”

Just curious, did your discussion with your 7th graders include talk of how men fared in similar training exercises?

And for the record, I don’t think anyone is complaining about Stone writing passionately. People are complaining about how she conveniently left out details from the “whole story”.

By: Kate

Kate — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:50:17 +0000

I taught this book to a group of 7th graders just after it was released last spring, and I have to say that I disagree with the argument that kids can’t read the nuance of nonfiction that has a distinct point of view. This book led to a fantastic discussion about what might have been for these 13 women and the reasons that might have existed — valid and otherwise — for NASA’s unwillingness to consider women for the space program at that time. I found it to be distinguished – and truly unique – in part because of that impassioned tone that others are complaining about.

By: leslie c

leslie c — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:43:44 +0000

Stone does not argue that the US space program should have been more like the USSR’s, just that that the US program could have been better than it was, by moving more quickly to include women. Yes, conditions for women and minorities in the US have changed for the better in many ways but can’t an author question why the change didn’t happen faster? It happens all the time in civil rights movement books. Saying “do the math” has nothing to do with this book. She’s not saying NASA is evil or the US space program is a failure. Her book’s about events where change could have happened but didn’t, w a thought provoking way to look at social conditions over time.