CCBC-Net Archives
point of view (fwd)
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: lhendr at unm.edu <lhendr>
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 14:03:26 -0700 (MST)
I've been forwarding some of the CCBC discussions to my colleague Jeanne Whitehouse, who writes picture books under the name Jeanne Whitehouse Peterson. Some of the things that Nancy Werlin wrote several days ago seemed to resonate with much of what Jeanne has shared with me over the years. What follows, is Jeanne's response to Nancy's message, which is included below Jeanne's.
---------- Forwarded message ---------Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 18:10:04 00 From: jeanne whitehouse To: lhendr at unm.edu Subject: Re: point of view (fwd)
Thank you for sending some of the current conversation about structure and character impact in imaginative fiction. When I teach children's literature and when I think about my own writing I ponder this same tension. I need to "feel" the rhythms, the patterns of the work and I need to consider (and feel) how the main character is coping.
Years ago, during the late 1960s, I sat in on courses offered by Leland B. Jacobs at Teachers College, Columbia. When "Jake" discussed novels he always spoke of Levels of Meaning. He said that there are three levels of meaning in novels--levels we might consider for discussion: Verbal level, or the way the author uses language or structures the text, the Behavioral Level, or how the character copes with his/her problem and the Transcendent Level, (the Moral or Spiritual level). Jake said that "sometimes the strengths of the Verbal and the Behavioral combine" so that the work
"transcends the ordinary." Over time I came to interpret this in my own way--especially after reading THE CHILD AS CRITIC, Glenna Davis Sloan, and CHILD AND STORY, Kay Vandergrift (both of whom also attended Jake's children's literature classes).
Today I continue to ask: 1) Is the work interesting? (as I focus on language and narrative structure. 2) Is the work truthful? (as I ponder the believability of the character's actions and emotions and 3) Does the work reverberate? Am I moved to action?
I think it's interesting to ponder our own transaction with novels, like SEED FOLKS. Authors, like Paul Fleischman, spend much energy imagining the structure, the language, the forms of the piece. While his work in WHIRLIGIGS and SEED FOLKS doesn't "transcend" for me, it certainly gives me much to ponder about the ways the world works. Like a good mystery, I am thankful for the mental stretch, the puzzle. And I am pleased that I, the reader, am left to hold onto my own meanings. In the end I find Fleischman's work much more "life like" than some works which feature a single, heroic character.
00 > From: Nancy Werlin ccbc-net
multiple points of view (and there are many). I wonder, however, if we can also look at what is lost, and what is risked.
suggest that the more point-of-view characters you add to a book (i.e., the more breadth), the less likely it is that some or all of these characters will
come across as having any depth. Moreover, in order to individuate in little space, the author may well stray into leaning on stereotyping. In some of the books we've discussed here, I've felt this to be the case. (Whether or not this may yet work, in the context of an individual book, is a separate question.)
story-path, and the deep pleasure of identification/empathy with a particular individual. Of course, when a multi-voiced novel is successful, these pleasures are exchanged for others. But the power of the standard story-path is very, very, strong; it is linked into the subconscious of all those who read regularly, and, in giving it up, well, much is relinquished.
succeeded (for me) in fully compensating for that primal power.
I'm glad indeed that some authors do; it stretches the mind and the heart in different ways. But I would be curious to hear others' thoughts on the risks taken by multi-voiced novels, as well as on their matching compensations.
Forwarded by Linnea Hendrickson Lhendr at unm.edu
Received on Sat 14 Nov 1998 03:03:26 PM CST
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 14:03:26 -0700 (MST)
I've been forwarding some of the CCBC discussions to my colleague Jeanne Whitehouse, who writes picture books under the name Jeanne Whitehouse Peterson. Some of the things that Nancy Werlin wrote several days ago seemed to resonate with much of what Jeanne has shared with me over the years. What follows, is Jeanne's response to Nancy's message, which is included below Jeanne's.
---------- Forwarded message ---------Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 18:10:04 00 From: jeanne whitehouse To: lhendr at unm.edu Subject: Re: point of view (fwd)
Thank you for sending some of the current conversation about structure and character impact in imaginative fiction. When I teach children's literature and when I think about my own writing I ponder this same tension. I need to "feel" the rhythms, the patterns of the work and I need to consider (and feel) how the main character is coping.
Years ago, during the late 1960s, I sat in on courses offered by Leland B. Jacobs at Teachers College, Columbia. When "Jake" discussed novels he always spoke of Levels of Meaning. He said that there are three levels of meaning in novels--levels we might consider for discussion: Verbal level, or the way the author uses language or structures the text, the Behavioral Level, or how the character copes with his/her problem and the Transcendent Level, (the Moral or Spiritual level). Jake said that "sometimes the strengths of the Verbal and the Behavioral combine" so that the work
"transcends the ordinary." Over time I came to interpret this in my own way--especially after reading THE CHILD AS CRITIC, Glenna Davis Sloan, and CHILD AND STORY, Kay Vandergrift (both of whom also attended Jake's children's literature classes).
Today I continue to ask: 1) Is the work interesting? (as I focus on language and narrative structure. 2) Is the work truthful? (as I ponder the believability of the character's actions and emotions and 3) Does the work reverberate? Am I moved to action?
I think it's interesting to ponder our own transaction with novels, like SEED FOLKS. Authors, like Paul Fleischman, spend much energy imagining the structure, the language, the forms of the piece. While his work in WHIRLIGIGS and SEED FOLKS doesn't "transcend" for me, it certainly gives me much to ponder about the ways the world works. Like a good mystery, I am thankful for the mental stretch, the puzzle. And I am pleased that I, the reader, am left to hold onto my own meanings. In the end I find Fleischman's work much more "life like" than some works which feature a single, heroic character.
00 > From: Nancy Werlin ccbc-net
multiple points of view (and there are many). I wonder, however, if we can also look at what is lost, and what is risked.
suggest that the more point-of-view characters you add to a book (i.e., the more breadth), the less likely it is that some or all of these characters will
come across as having any depth. Moreover, in order to individuate in little space, the author may well stray into leaning on stereotyping. In some of the books we've discussed here, I've felt this to be the case. (Whether or not this may yet work, in the context of an individual book, is a separate question.)
story-path, and the deep pleasure of identification/empathy with a particular individual. Of course, when a multi-voiced novel is successful, these pleasures are exchanged for others. But the power of the standard story-path is very, very, strong; it is linked into the subconscious of all those who read regularly, and, in giving it up, well, much is relinquished.
succeeded (for me) in fully compensating for that primal power.
I'm glad indeed that some authors do; it stretches the mind and the heart in different ways. But I would be curious to hear others' thoughts on the risks taken by multi-voiced novels, as well as on their matching compensations.
Forwarded by Linnea Hendrickson Lhendr at unm.edu
Received on Sat 14 Nov 1998 03:03:26 PM CST
