GOOD MASTERS! is certainly informational, but the monologues which comprise the majority of the book are historical fiction, just as much so as THE ROAD FROM HOME and A GATHERING OF DAYS, in fact. The truly informational parts are the notes and sidebars and such that contain informational text. While the entire book does inform about the middle ages, I do not believe the book would have been ruled eligible for the Sibert Medal because poetry is not eligible.

Ditto for CARVER. Yes, it’s informational, but I would not classify it with either fiction or nonfiction (although it partakes of both), but rather . . . simply poetry. I do think that nonfiction–other nonfiction–can be written in poetry, but it must adhere to nonfiction standards of documentation and the like.

It’s not just the nonfiction (informational, poetry, and folklore) I like about the 80s. They have YA novels like JACOB HAVE I LOVED and THE HERO AND THE CROWN. They have transitional books like SARAH PLAIN AND TALL and THE WHIPPING BOY. They have a couple of picture books, too.

The diversity of the 80s gave way to the homogeneity of the 90s, the decade that Anita Silvey praised so heavily in her article, because it offered up one middle grade novel after another. (The 00s did do much better than the 90s with three nonfiction, two poetry books, one transitional book, and a picture book.)

I don’t think there should be a certain proportion of nonfiction or picture books or poetry or whatever, but the virtual absence of any of these genres gives me pause. Now you may actually believe that all those middle grade fiction novels in the 90s really were the best books of the year (just like you may really believe that HOMER P. FIGG is better than MOONSHOT or MARCHING FOR FREEDOM this year). But if you believe that I’ve got a bridge in Broo . . . I’m gonna sell you this load of crap, too: THE LION & THE MOUSE by Jerry Pinkney is the first book by an individual African American artist worthy of the Caldecott Medal.

I know Schlitz’s Newbery speech rubbed many people the wrong way, but I’m only interested in the text, and I’d consider that book informational–at least, informational enough–because it provides straight up nonfiction information about the time periods. Why not consider it an “informational” book with illustrative poems instead of a book of poems with supplementary information? That’s how I think of it–though I’m not sure one could say that one or the other is Right.

Now, what makes you leery of Carver as nonfiction/informational? I was talking with someone who couldn’t agree with the new Bob Marley book as nonfiction simply because it was poetry, but I don’t see why the form should decide that, why poetry can’t be a way of expressing information.

I just don’t agree with “that’s the way every decade should look”–I hope committees continue considering nonfiction seriously and would especially like to see some non-historical nonfiction honored (I looked once, and could only find one nonfiction title in the entire list that sounded like it might not be history, an art book), I’m only interested in whether they are honoring the best of the best, and i don’t think there “should” be a certain proportion of nonfiction.

On the other hand, I am leery of counting CARVER and GOOD MASTERS! as informational books. Yes, they both use poetry in service of history and the latter, in particular, is a hybrid of poetry, monologue, and nonfiction, but I worry that too many people like to list these as nonfiction because “a spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down.” In other words, isn’t it lovely to have something to make those dry facts not so dry? And didn’t Schlitz say as much in her Newbery Medal speech?

I still have doubts about Almost Astronauts and “excellent use of language”, “appropriate organization and documentation” (I found the organization sort of muddled, and others have commented about documentation), and the “supportive features” (which weren’t anything special, though I don’t think a lot of this is necessary in every book). Overall, I just thought the book was not very well-written in comparison to either Claudette Colvin or Marching For Freedom.

I rolled my eyes at the book a lot. And there were a couple of things I thought were downright ridiculous–like when Stone uses media comparisons to show how women’s roles have changed. Leave it to Beaver, sure. Later, Mary Tyler Moore, sure. Her examples for 1999? I think she mentioned Cagney and Lacey (off the air since 1988), Friends (not exactly a bastion of feminism), and Mr. Mom (1983). Stone wasn’t listing TV and movies that had come along since the 1970s; she wrote that these were what was showing at the time. One way or another (either writing or research), that was pretty careless.

1989 JOYFUL NOISE (poetry)
1989 IN THE BEGINNING (folklore)
1988 LINCOLN
1987 VOLCANO
1986 COMMODORE PERRY
1984 SUGARING TIME
1983 HOMESICK (memoir)
1982 A VISIT TO WILLIAM BLAKE’S INN (poetry)
1982 UPON THE HEAD OF A GOAT (memoir)

And that’s not including A GATHERING OF DAYS and THE ROAD HOME which are technically fiction, but strive for the effect of nonfiction.

2010 CLAUDETTE COLVIN
2008 GOOD MASTERS! SWEET LADIES!
2006 HITLER YOUTH
2005 THE VOICE THAT CHALLENGED A NATION
2004 AN AMERICAN PLAGUE
2002 CARVER: A LIFE IN POEMS

Right up there with the good ole 80s

2010 CLAUDETTE COLVIN

2006 HITLER YOUTH
2005 THE VOICE THAT CHALLENGED A NATION
2004 AN AMERICAN PLAGUE

1996 THE GREAT FIRE
1994 ELEANOR ROOSEVELT
1992 THE WRIGHT BROTHERS

1988 LINCOLN
1987 VOLCANO
1986 COMMODORE PERRY
1984 SUGARING TIME
1983 HOMESICK (memoir)
1982 UPON THE HEAD OF A GOAT (memoir)

While there was an eight year gap between THE GREAT FIRE and AN AMERICAN PLAGUE, I actually think the 1980s were the best decade for Newbery nonfiction: one medal, five honors. That’s the way every decade should look. The twenty teens have gotten off to a good start. Let’s hope it continues.