CCBC-Net Archives
Buffalo Tree
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Mactycho at aol.com <Mactycho>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:29:34 -0400 (EDT)
Before I begin, a personal disclaimer. I do not particiapte actively in children's lit listservs. I do not regard myself as sufficiently scholarly, having read with awe the contributions of many regular posters. However, I subscribed CCBC-net specifically to read and learn from what the most brilliant among us might have to say about _Buffalo Tree_.
I can only guess that there has been almost no discussion on this book because it has not been widely read yet. It cannot be that no one has anything to discuss, as this is one of the most "discussable" books of the year. Unlike Robert Cormier who has an automatic readership, few readers know of Adam Rapp. If you can only read a limited number of books each year to keep current with children's literature, _Buffalo Tree_ *should* be in your 1997 pile... along with _Tenderness_ of course.
_Buffalo Tree_ transcends questions of audience, and our reviewers' demands for flawless perfection. (We reviewers seem ever eager and zealous in our responsibility to point out thrilling inaccuracies.) In its style _Buffalo Tree_ is both coarse and fine, dirty and delicate, vulgar and poetic. In its characterizations it introduces us to *children*... some of whom survive in this most un-childlike of environments... an environment which is growing urgently and steadily more common in America: the juvenile detention system.
_Buffalo Tree_ shows commendable restraint in depicting a brutal setting, never succumbing to the worst stereotypes (some of which show up regularly in the daily papers).
The scholars among you can explore the author's repeated and haunting invocation of the dead tree and the color blue, and the code-like language, among other elements. Reviewers can look for discrepancies and flaws. Professionals can argue questions of audience. I simply urge you to *read*
_Buffalo Tree_. Then I dare you to forget Sura, Coly Jo and Long Neck.
With that said, I may just reread it yet again. Kate McClelland
Received on Sun 17 Aug 1997 04:29:34 PM CDT
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 1997 17:29:34 -0400 (EDT)
Before I begin, a personal disclaimer. I do not particiapte actively in children's lit listservs. I do not regard myself as sufficiently scholarly, having read with awe the contributions of many regular posters. However, I subscribed CCBC-net specifically to read and learn from what the most brilliant among us might have to say about _Buffalo Tree_.
I can only guess that there has been almost no discussion on this book because it has not been widely read yet. It cannot be that no one has anything to discuss, as this is one of the most "discussable" books of the year. Unlike Robert Cormier who has an automatic readership, few readers know of Adam Rapp. If you can only read a limited number of books each year to keep current with children's literature, _Buffalo Tree_ *should* be in your 1997 pile... along with _Tenderness_ of course.
_Buffalo Tree_ transcends questions of audience, and our reviewers' demands for flawless perfection. (We reviewers seem ever eager and zealous in our responsibility to point out thrilling inaccuracies.) In its style _Buffalo Tree_ is both coarse and fine, dirty and delicate, vulgar and poetic. In its characterizations it introduces us to *children*... some of whom survive in this most un-childlike of environments... an environment which is growing urgently and steadily more common in America: the juvenile detention system.
_Buffalo Tree_ shows commendable restraint in depicting a brutal setting, never succumbing to the worst stereotypes (some of which show up regularly in the daily papers).
The scholars among you can explore the author's repeated and haunting invocation of the dead tree and the color blue, and the code-like language, among other elements. Reviewers can look for discrepancies and flaws. Professionals can argue questions of audience. I simply urge you to *read*
_Buffalo Tree_. Then I dare you to forget Sura, Coly Jo and Long Neck.
With that said, I may just reread it yet again. Kate McClelland
Received on Sun 17 Aug 1997 04:29:34 PM CDT
