Tess, what did you see as the PURPOSE of the Rosoff? I’m not too put off by the voice, but it feels a bit… I dunno, pointless? Yes, we get it, the world seems like it was left to rot in the sandbox while God wandered off to lunch, or, in this case, wank, but haven’t we all made snide pseudo-deep comments like that? What does a full length treatment of that idea offer you as a reader that makes it seem new or fresh or at least not stale? (Anyone else can chime in too, obvs.) And so agree– the Lanagan! Tender Morsels was my RealPrintz year, and I would read anything that woman writes. Even grocery lists, which in her hands would doubtless be surreal gems. Dream sauce and sugar noodles, with a side of fascinating commentary on gender, perhaps? Yum!

I am struck by how often Booklist starred the winning titles (5 out of 8, including 3 where it was the sole star. Booklist did not review “Looking for Alaska” due to its policy of not reviewing books by its own employees, but it was on their Best of the Year list so presumably they would have starred it if they had reviewed it.)

I wonder if there is a correlation between this and the fact that a Booklist consultant sits on the committee. Perhaps someone who has been on the Printz Award Committee can tell us if the consultant plays an active role in the discussion, or whether the way the stars fall is just coincidental. And what, exactly, is the role of the Booklist consultant on the committee?

In any case, perhaps a better indicator for this blog — or any group doing mock Printz Award discussions — rather than counting stars would be to give automatic contender status to any YA book that receives a starred review from Booklist.