CCBC-Net Archives
Rapunzel + Caldecott Discussion
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: WMMayes at aol.com <WMMayes>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 11:20:00 EST
In a message dated 981 12:02:31 EST, John Peters writes:
<< Though I've praised RAPUNZEL--in print--I'm having trouble seeing the
"venturesome creativity", the original vision, the (for want of a better word) subversive quality that one would hope to find in "the most distinguished American picture book
for children." >>
John- where does it say that "venturesome creativity" and, though I love this quality in picture books, subversion are what constitutes Caldecott criteria? I have read carefully the ALSC guidelines that define the committee's job, and those words are not mentioned.
It is nice to honor a book that stretches bounds and moves the artform forward, but that is not the stated goal of the award. Lots of people complain in the years the award goes to such books that they are disappointed it didn't go to a "beautiful" book. Again, not what the award is about.
How often I have wondered how the committees do their job when people can have such diverse ideas of what the award means! The guidelines seem almost designed to incite this sort of conflict, thereby guaranteeing a lot of discussion. What must it be like when a group of committee members who interpret the award as you do (and I know you are not alone in this) come up against a faction that wants breathtaking beauty? Or unparalleled visual narrative?
When the definition of "distinguished" is left up to each year's committee to reinterpret, only one thing can be guaranteed: There will be lots of discussion, both during and after the process. Discussion raises awareness and awarness sells books. Clever device, this Caldecott Medal.
Walter the Giant Storyteller WMMayes at aol.com
"Love, Food, Shelter, Clothing...Books!"
Received on Sun 01 Feb 1998 10:20:00 AM CST
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 11:20:00 EST
In a message dated 981 12:02:31 EST, John Peters writes:
<< Though I've praised RAPUNZEL--in print--I'm having trouble seeing the
"venturesome creativity", the original vision, the (for want of a better word) subversive quality that one would hope to find in "the most distinguished American picture book
for children." >>
John- where does it say that "venturesome creativity" and, though I love this quality in picture books, subversion are what constitutes Caldecott criteria? I have read carefully the ALSC guidelines that define the committee's job, and those words are not mentioned.
It is nice to honor a book that stretches bounds and moves the artform forward, but that is not the stated goal of the award. Lots of people complain in the years the award goes to such books that they are disappointed it didn't go to a "beautiful" book. Again, not what the award is about.
How often I have wondered how the committees do their job when people can have such diverse ideas of what the award means! The guidelines seem almost designed to incite this sort of conflict, thereby guaranteeing a lot of discussion. What must it be like when a group of committee members who interpret the award as you do (and I know you are not alone in this) come up against a faction that wants breathtaking beauty? Or unparalleled visual narrative?
When the definition of "distinguished" is left up to each year's committee to reinterpret, only one thing can be guaranteed: There will be lots of discussion, both during and after the process. Discussion raises awareness and awarness sells books. Clever device, this Caldecott Medal.
Walter the Giant Storyteller WMMayes at aol.com
"Love, Food, Shelter, Clothing...Books!"
Received on Sun 01 Feb 1998 10:20:00 AM CST
