Comments on: Girls vs. Boys

By: DaNae

DaNae — Sat, 27 Oct 2012 18:23:45 +0000

Jonathan, is it possible to link to KT’s presentation? If it is in writing.

By: Nina

Nina — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 02:31:30 +0000

mslibrarian, I agree with you at a level, and here’s my take. I don’t think there’s a pure bias against popularity. I do think that we as gatekeepers think we know more than the readers…and moreover, I believe we DO know more than them. But between those two points is a moment when our pride in our knowledge can obscure our observations of how children come to the books themselves…and I think that’s what you’re getting at. To be smart about children’s books, we have to be humble about our reactions.

Another example after Jonathan’s NUMBER THE STARS is TALE OF DESPEREAUX…which is chock full of familiar tropes and almost overdone metaphors of light and darkness. Overdone for an adult who’s read it before, that is. It took me several reads, and some convincing from a third grade teacher, to come to an understanding of how truly distinguished it is for its audience.

By: Jonathan Hunt

Jonathan Hunt — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 02:12:24 +0000

Many of us have heard KT Horning talk about presentation for a child audience. The example she uses is the literary allusion in NUMBER THE STARS (Little Red Riding Hood). It’s not the most stunning use of literary allusion, but in her discussion with children she came to the conclusion that it was distinguished for a young reader.

By: mslibrarian

mslibrarian — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 01:54:44 +0000

Wendy: I am not saying any specific committee or committee member is discounting any book due to its popularity — but I do think there is a general sense in the field as a whole that the gatekeepers know better than the intended audience. Of course, given the experiences we all have as decades-long and thoughtful readers, we do KNOW better. The question is: what do we value more?

By: Jess

Jess — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 01:52:45 +0000

Re: THE FALSE PRINCE and predictability. (I’m not a fan of the book, especially in relation to Newbery criteria, and I am a fan of THE THIEF, just to get that bias out of the way). I think what bothered me wasn’t that I could predict the twist, but that being able to predict the twist didn’t heighten the book in any way. It didn’t make me feel proud and accomplished and observant, which is how I usually feel when I manage to predict a twist or guess the solution to a mystery. Also, I like to occasionally doubt my guess, and that never happened here. So predictability can be good, and twists don’t have to be guess-proof, but the book needs to offer something extra to the reader who guesses it.

By: Nina Lindsay

Nina Lindsay — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:57:47 +0000

For the record, there’s plenty of Riordian and Rowling in Wilson’s series. But I don’t think any of the themes were that original to begin with. Which is fine with me: we like tropes for a reason! Just nicely executed ones, please.

By: Brandy

Brandy — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:30:46 +0000

@Mark-I am completely with you on Riordan’s cringe inducing prose. My eight year old daughter recently discovered the Percy Jackson books and, knowing there was some discussions I wanted to have with her on some themes, I’m currently reading the first two to her. And oh my it is so much worse when you read it aloud.

By: Mark Flowers

Mark Flowers — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:03:42 +0000

@mslibrarian – first, thanks for taking my somewhat cranky comments so well.

As for Riordan – here’s how I see his stealing from Rowling: his main character grows up believing himself to be an ordinary human untli he is 12 at which point he discovers he actually has magical abilities. He is whisked off to a special school for others with similar abilities, a school which is divided into houses based on what types of magical abilities the residents possess. He befriends a brainy girl and a dorky boy and the three of them go off together to solve a mystery well beyond their capacity. I know that not all of this is unique to Rowling (Rowling herself was accused to stealing from various sources), but where I’ve always defending Rowling is in her ability to combine the various sources she used in a particular way, and it is that combination that I think Riordan took wholesale from Rowling.

As for his prose – I don’t have a copy on hand (lent it to a teen – they do love it!) so I can’t quote as I would like to, but I can say that I found myself over and over again being stopped short by infelicities in the language, awkward phrasing, colloquialisms that didn’t hit home as those of a 12 year old, and more. If you read it different, more power to you. I think Riordan has a great sense of plot and pace – the rest of the Percy Jackson series is much more his own, and I quite like the first 39 clues book – and I happen to think that his use the Greek myths as the basis for his magic is much more inspired than Rowlings somewhat hodgepodge sense of magic – so if you and others (and of course all the kids and teens out there) have a different sense of his prose (or can overlook it) I think that’s great. Seriously.

I will concede on THE GRAVEYARD BOOK in favor of DESPEREAUX for my example of a popular book.

“Each book, even the popular ones, should be examined based on their merits and the suspicion of popularity should cease. Do you not agree?” – I absolutely, 100% agree. My point was just that if we somehow lived in parallel universe in which literary quality was rewarded in direct proportion by popularity, there would be no need for awards of this nature. But of course, there are always popular artworks that are also of high artistic merit (says the lifelong Beatles fan).

By: Wendy

Wendy — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 20:42:45 +0000

What makes you think the committee is suspicious of, or discounts, books that are really popular?

By: mslibrarian

mslibrarian — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 20:34:17 +0000

ah… “the book was established” should have read “the award was established”…