CCBC-Net Archives
Editions of Watership Down
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Jean Casey <jcasey>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 10:14:02 -0500
Yes, Watership Down is alive and well among today's readers. I am a middle school media specialist, and I often recommend this book as part of a "classics" booktalk.
(Okay, so I stretch the definition of "classic"!) As someone mentioned earlier, there are some readers who seem drawn to it because it's a thick book. But most of those who try it are happy with their choice. I've purchased numerous replacement paperback copies and have had to rebind my hardbound.
One other comment. Not to belabor the point, but aren't many of the books we regard as classics today the "crossover" books of their generation? When there was no children's literature, didn't kids latch onto "adult" books that were read aloud and claim them as their own?
Thanks for this great discussion.
Jean
6/ 8 9:53p >>> Just as some in the CCBC-Net community were curious to "see" the British editions of the Harry Potter books during the past year, I became curious to see the British edition of "Watership Down" at the time WD was published in the USA.
To my astonishment, the cover of the British edition featured little bunnies, whereas Macmillan's U.S. edition was printed on paper stock causing it to be a much thicker physical volume, but no longer in page length than the British edition. The U.S. jacket was one any self-respecting business person - male or female - could read during the daily commute. It was handsome, even distinguished, in design. No little bunnies there.
The U.S. paperback edition was published by Avon for children, and yes, there were bunnies on it. Well, maybe they were rabbits.
I'm so glad Editor Susan Hirschman recapped her discovery of
"Watership Down" for Barbara Barstow, and that Susan also told us
(from her Greenwillow Books desk) something about some of the publishing decisions on this side of the Atlantic. Indeed, WD was a major trade book - for adults and for children in the USA. A crossover success! I echo Katy Horning's thanks to Barb Barstow for sharing that fine message from Susan Hirschman, the U.S. editor of
"Watership Down."
I may be wrong, but I don't think there were "translations" of British words in the U.S.edition of "Watership Down," to use Arthur Levine's phrase for the substitution of words, i.e., "sweater" for
"jumper" as mutually agreed upon by the J. Rowling with him.
I'm now curious to find out whether or not today's young readers or any of today's adult readers find and/or enjoy "Watership Down." Does anyone have anything to say about the life of "Watership Down" today as a crossover book for either audience of readers during the late 1990s?
Ginny Moore Kruse (gmkruse at ccbc.education.wisc.edu) Cooperative Children's Book Center (CCBC) A Library of the School of Education (www.education.wisc.edu/ccbc/) University of Wisconsin - Madison
Received on Wed 09 Jun 1999 10:14:02 AM CDT
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 10:14:02 -0500
Yes, Watership Down is alive and well among today's readers. I am a middle school media specialist, and I often recommend this book as part of a "classics" booktalk.
(Okay, so I stretch the definition of "classic"!) As someone mentioned earlier, there are some readers who seem drawn to it because it's a thick book. But most of those who try it are happy with their choice. I've purchased numerous replacement paperback copies and have had to rebind my hardbound.
One other comment. Not to belabor the point, but aren't many of the books we regard as classics today the "crossover" books of their generation? When there was no children's literature, didn't kids latch onto "adult" books that were read aloud and claim them as their own?
Thanks for this great discussion.
Jean
6/ 8 9:53p >>> Just as some in the CCBC-Net community were curious to "see" the British editions of the Harry Potter books during the past year, I became curious to see the British edition of "Watership Down" at the time WD was published in the USA.
To my astonishment, the cover of the British edition featured little bunnies, whereas Macmillan's U.S. edition was printed on paper stock causing it to be a much thicker physical volume, but no longer in page length than the British edition. The U.S. jacket was one any self-respecting business person - male or female - could read during the daily commute. It was handsome, even distinguished, in design. No little bunnies there.
The U.S. paperback edition was published by Avon for children, and yes, there were bunnies on it. Well, maybe they were rabbits.
I'm so glad Editor Susan Hirschman recapped her discovery of
"Watership Down" for Barbara Barstow, and that Susan also told us
(from her Greenwillow Books desk) something about some of the publishing decisions on this side of the Atlantic. Indeed, WD was a major trade book - for adults and for children in the USA. A crossover success! I echo Katy Horning's thanks to Barb Barstow for sharing that fine message from Susan Hirschman, the U.S. editor of
"Watership Down."
I may be wrong, but I don't think there were "translations" of British words in the U.S.edition of "Watership Down," to use Arthur Levine's phrase for the substitution of words, i.e., "sweater" for
"jumper" as mutually agreed upon by the J. Rowling with him.
I'm now curious to find out whether or not today's young readers or any of today's adult readers find and/or enjoy "Watership Down." Does anyone have anything to say about the life of "Watership Down" today as a crossover book for either audience of readers during the late 1990s?
Ginny Moore Kruse (gmkruse at ccbc.education.wisc.edu) Cooperative Children's Book Center (CCBC) A Library of the School of Education (www.education.wisc.edu/ccbc/) University of Wisconsin - Madison
Received on Wed 09 Jun 1999 10:14:02 AM CDT
