The Newberry Award

[Ela]

Dang, you quoted me before I edited. Turns out the Caldecott is American too.

I edited out the Caldecott in my post.

[Rei]

I really need to find a copy of Doctor Dolittle. I absolutely loved the Rex Harrison film when I was little and I only learned there was a novel before it in the past few years.

[starlooker]

Critics want the Newberry award to dumb down, for heaven's sake, kids don't want to read sad things!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03293.html

Quote from one of the people interviewed for the article: "'The Newbery has probably done far more to turn kids off to reading than any other book award in children's publishing,' he said."

Also, from the first paragraph, "Now the literary world is debating the Newbery's value, asking whether the books that have won recently are so complicated and inaccessible to most children that they are effectively turning off kids to reading. Of the 25 winners and runners-up chosen from 2000 to 2005, four of the books deal with death, six with the absence of one or both parents and four with such mental challenges as autism. Most of the rest deal with tough social issues."

~~~~~~

On the one hand, I appreciate that kids need to read things that are accessible to instill a love for reading. I read pretty advanced things as a child/teen -- and I also read "The Babysitter's Club" avidly. I'd rather be friends with someone who loves reading Tom Clancy or John Grisham or even The DaVinci Code than with someone who disdains reading altogether.

On the other hand, I am absolutely appalled at the idea that because something is hard or complicated or might not be liked, it shouldn't be awarded. Stretch your minds, people! Yeesh!

(Oh, and blaming the Newberry for people reading less than they did 20 years ago is just ridiculous.)

I am very interested in my fellow pwebbers' thoughts on this.

[Young Val]

I read an article about this in Galley Cat this morning and wanted to vomit. (Actually, all of the stories on Galley Cat today have made me want to vomit).

In short, it's preposterous.

There was nothing "easy" about 1977 winner ROLL OF THUNDER, HEAR MY CRY. And THAT was well over 20 years ago.

[elfprince13]

The real issue is that not many people willingly choose reading over video games or movies, and the pathetic selection of reading material covered in school is hardly the sort of thing that will turn a kid on to reading. It's a parent's responsibility to show their kid that reading is just as, or more, entertaining than watching the Disney channel. Unfortunately most parents seem to be incapable or unwilling to take any responsibility for their child's education, and the school system is certainly incapable of doing so. I had a hard time not vomitting when my English teachers were dyslexic, didn't understand my vocabulary, and made grammar errors on every single one of our grammar tests. My brother's 9th grade english teacher decided Romeo and Juliet would be too challenging for them, and had them read a summary instead......but that was too long, so he split the reading up over 4 class periods. The elementary school scene isn't much better.

[Young Val]

The real issue is that not many people willingly choose reading over video games or movies, and the pathetic selection of reading material covered in school is hardly the sort of thing that will turn a kid on to reading. It's a parent's responsibility to show their kid that reading is just as, or more, entertaining than watching the Disney channel. Unfortunately most parents seem to be incapable or unwilling to take any responsibility for their child's education, and the school system is certainly incapable of doing so. I had a hard time not vomitting when my English teachers were dyslexic, didn't understand my vocabulary, and made grammar errors on every single one of our grammar tests. My brother's 9th grade english teacher decided Romeo and Juliet would be too challenging for them, and had them read a summary instead......but that was too long, so he split the reading up over 4 class periods. The elementary school scene isn't much better.

I agree that parents play an important role in getting their kids to read (and to be physically active, and to be well-mannered, and...well, parents have a crucial role in just about every aspect of their child's development).

I'm sorry that you went through what sounds like a sub-par school system. I have to say, though, that the required reading throughout my public school education was (with a few exceptions, of course) quite excellent and thoroughly enjoyable. I'm an avid reader regardless, so I might be biased. But I think the standard curriculum is quite good, though perhaps feeling a lack of contemporary literature.

[elfprince13]

I'm sorry that you went through what sounds like a sub-par school system. I have to say, though, that the required reading throughout my public school education was (with a few exceptions, of course) quite excellent and thoroughly enjoyable. I'm an avid reader regardless, so I might be biased. But I think the standard curriculum is quite good, though perhaps feeling a lack of contemporary literature.

mmm, you're lucky that you got a good reading selection.....but I've noticed the same problem at nearly every school I've visited (not just mine) across the country, and seems to be a common theme with a lot of friends who went to other schools. Its no wonder people want to dumb down the Newberry Award, most of our kids aren't being educated to be able to handle any level of sophistication, nor are they being taught to love reading.

[Young Val]

I think my curriculum was pretty standard...

Freshman year was, among other things, The Odyssey, Romeo & Juliet, Great Expectations, The Great Gatsby

Sophomore year: The Catcher in the Rye, Antigone, Julius Ceasar

Junior year: The Scarlet Letter, Ethan Frome, Our Town

AP English, Senior year: The Hobit, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Jane Eyre


Those are just off the top of my head. Obviously we read far more than that. But still...those all seem pretty standard to me...

[locke]

while it's somewhat appalling it's also addressing a disconnect between the books adults think children should read and the books children opt into reading today. How many Newberry awards did Harry Potter win? Dark is rising picked up one win and one honor for its series. To a degree to not award the book with the highest literary quality (Harry Potter) means the award makers feel its their duty to balance taste. You see the same thing with critics groups who award movies at the end of the year. It's very rare that you see a WallE or a Dark Knight win, it's much more likely you'll see an 'important' movie win.

I think the debate about what constitutes literary taste is an important one, and we can't just assume that because a book is about a girl being raped, or his best friend dying or parents divorcing that it has more literary qualities than a book like The Wee Free Men or Eragon. Having a debate about what constitutes quality in children's literature means the awards givers have to stay on their toes and can't just fall into a rut of awarding one kind of book in preference to others. It keeps the award relevant imo.

all that said, great books should be awarded whether their content is depressing or entertaining, based on the quality of the literature. no one wants to see an Eragon awarded just because it was popular, but on the other hand something as sophisticated as Harry Potter shouldn't be excluded just because it was popular that year.

This is interesting to me because there are a lot of cineastes out there this year that are absolutely furious WallE and Dark Knight are two of the seven most likely films this year to earn oscar nominations. They think films like that are a sign of dumbing down the award and catering to the lowest common denominator, because films like those two have no artistic merits intelligent adults should really concern themselves with, though children and average people are allowed to think such films are great.

[elfprince13]

Those are just off the top of my head. Obviously we read far more than that. But still...those all seem pretty standard to me...

I wish they were standard, we got maybe half of those, the rest was junk like Bless Me Ultima, and Black Girl/White Girl. and like I said, within 2 years of me going through it's been dumbed down to the point that Romeo and Juliet is too sophisticated for a ninth grader.

while it's somewhat appalling it's also addressing a disconnect between the books adults think children should read and the books children opt into reading today. How many Newberry awards did Harry Potter win? Dark is rising picked up one win and one honor for its series. To a degree to not award the book with the highest literary quality (Harry Potter) means the award makers feel its their duty to balance taste. You see the same thing with critics groups who award movies at the end of the year. It's very rare that you see a WallE or a Dark Knight win, it's much more likely you'll see an 'important' movie win.

I think the debate about what constitutes literary taste is an important one, and we can't just assume that because a book is about a girl being raped, or his best friend dying or parents divorcing that it has more literary qualities than a book like The Wee Free Men or Eragon. Having a debate about what constitutes quality in children's literature means the awards givers have to stay on their toes and can't just fall into a rut of awarding one kind of book in preference to others. It keeps the award relevant imo.

all that said, great books should be awarded whether their content is depressing or entertaining, based on the quality of the literature. no one wants to see an Eragon awarded just because it was popular, but on the other hand something as sophisticated as Harry Potter shouldn't be excluded just because it was popular that year.

This is interesting to me because there are a lot of cineastes out there this year that are absolutely furious WallE and Dark Knight are two of the seven most likely films this year to earn oscar nominations. They think films like that are a sign of dumbing down the award and catering to the lowest common denominator, because films like those two have no artistic merits intelligent adults should really concern themselves with, though children and average people are allowed to think such films are great.

It's the same academic snobbery that OSC talks about in the intro to Ender's Game, and that created a new category on the New York Times bestsellers list when Harry Potter was taking up the list for too long. And the same snobbery that causes AP English teachers to choose Black Girl/White Girl as reading material over Lord of the Rings, Ender's Game, or the Foundation series.

[locke]

No, OSC's paranoia about academic snobbery goes way beyond what I'm talking about, to the point where he disregards everything not genre as inherently lacking merit. it's the opposite of the academic snobbery and equally extreme. I actually think OSC's version is the more dangerous version to possess because belief in it causes a willful blindness of your own prejudice and biases and you're allowing those beliefs to be shaped by your opposites rather than your own criterion of merit. It's a much lazier, and an equally nasty disposition to take.

And if you drink that particular kool-aid long enough you wind up waxing rhapsodic about Sweet Home Alabama all the time, a fine movie, but its no paragon of the genre.

I wanted to point out that I did read the article first and my above post was more a reaction in general to the conflict of good-for-you books versus fun-to-read books (and I don't think these two are mutually exclusive). I do want to get on record that I think dumbing down content is a terrible idea. books should be challenging, but they shouldn't be totally inaccessible in the young adult genre. and one shouldn't take a non-problem-book novel to be inherently less challenging. Something as sophisticated (yet very accessible and extremely entertaining) as Terry Pratchett's Nation. that book taps into the same sort of melacholic tone that Lord of the Rings managed. But it's not a problem book, so should it not be really considered along with all the new books this year about divorce, suicide, deaths, betrayal, and rape that teach children valuable life lessons with a nine pound hammer to the head?

ETA I reread the thread and was reminded about the non-britishness of the award.

[VelvetElvis]

I would just like to point out that I am currently drinking koolaid, the song Sweet Home Alabama is playing on my playlist, and I find it to be quite a delightful movie.


So THERE.

[Young Val]

while it's somewhat appalling it's also addressing a disconnect between the books adults think children should read and the books children opt into reading today. How many Newberry awards did Harry Potter win? Dark is rising picked up one win and one honor for its series. To a degree to not award the book with the highest literary quality (Harry Potter) means the award makers feel its their duty to balance taste. You see the same thing with critics groups who award movies at the end of the year. It's very rare that you see a WallE or a Dark Knight win, it's much more likely you'll see an 'important' movie win.

I think the debate about what constitutes literary taste is an important one, and we can't just assume that because a book is about a girl being raped, or his best friend dying or parents divorcing that it has more literary qualities than a book like The Wee Free Men or Eragon. Having a debate about what constitutes quality in children's literature means the awards givers have to stay on their toes and can't just fall into a rut of awarding one kind of book in preference to others. It keeps the award relevant imo.

all that said, great books should be awarded whether their content is depressing or entertaining, based on the quality of the literature. no one wants to see an Eragon awarded just because it was popular, but on the other hand something as sophisticated as Harry Potter shouldn't be excluded just because it was popular that year.

Well, two things right off the bat--Harry Potter is ineligible because it's not an American book (I believe the series did win several awards in England. At least I'm sure it won the Smarties award). And two, Eragon and the rest of the books in the series are terrible. I mean, really, truly terrible books. So, I don't care how popular they are, I would never call them books of any "literary quality" and certainly wouldn't award them thus. (And I say this knowing full well that Christopher Paolini helped pay my salary for two years).

Plus, locke, I think if you'll go over the list you'll see that not every winner was an "issue" book. 1999's HOLES comes to mind. A super-popular, very entertaining book of literary value.

[elfprince13]

Plus, locke, I think if you'll go over the list you'll see that not every winner was an "issue" book. 1999's HOLES comes to mind. A super-popular, very entertaining book of literary value.

Holes was fantastic, and exactly the sort of book that should win. Something that has both entertainment value, and also makes you think a little.

[locke]

Holes is one of my favorite winners

I always get confused by the americanness of the award as I always assumed Susan Cooper was british/frome england. and by default when I think of the Newberry I go straight to Will Staten.

[locke]

And Neil Gaiman has a Newberry award to add to his pile. I've had the book since the week it came out and I really must get around to reading it. :-p

[Jayelle]

Woo! Go Neil. Graveyard Book is really good.