CCBC-Net Archives
[CCBC-Net] Awards
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Barbara Scotto <barbara_scotto>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 23:40:04 -0500
I was absolutely delighted to learn that A Single Shard by Linda Sue Park had won the Newbery. It is a thoughtful, beautifully written book. However, rather than dwell on its merits which I am sure others will do, I'd like to respond to some of the issues raised in the discussion so far.
I too am disappointed that Amber Was Brave, Essie Was Smart didn't at least receive a Newbery Honor, and that The Land was passed over for a Printz Honor. On the other hand, I am willing to trust and accept the judgment of the committees that read all of this year's current output of books and spent many hours discussing those same books. Someone commented that a particular book received no consideration, but we have no way of knowing that. The book might have been extensively discussed for one of the major awards and eliminated before or even in the final voting. It might have been nominated as a Notable Book, but some of those nominations are voted off the list before any public group discussion takes place.
I suspect that if you convened several Newbery or Caldecott or Printz committees in any given year, each committee would come up with a different list. We all have different tastes and different critical stances, and we all bring with us to any book discussion lots of baggage based on our own experience. Also rich book discussion, which generally happens on the major award committees, often broadens and deepens people's appreciation of particular books. Other books may not stand up as well under such intense scrutiny.
I am puzzled by the comment that having different numbers of honor books
"smacks of political struggle." What the differing numbers say to me is that each year's crop of books varies as does each year's committee. Some years a few books rise to the top of the pile, and in other years, many books do.
As far as stars and best lists are concerned, they are certainly an indicator of favorable critical attention, but they are also the products of groups of people whose tastes and critical abilities differ in just the same way as that of the award committees. Generally only a handful of books appear on all of the major lists. As far as the Notables Working Discussion List is concerned, the list that appears on the ALSC website may not contain the books discussed this summer. The list they handed out at ALA this past week did not include the earlier books even though those books were part of the final vote.
What seems most important to me in all of this is the number of really good books for children and young adults that are being produced. Having just arrived home from ALA, I have a stack of new spring titles waiting to be read. Who knows? Maybe next year's winner will be among them.
Barbara Scotto Michael Driscoll School Brookline, MA
Received on Tue 22 Jan 2002 10:40:04 PM CST
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 23:40:04 -0500
I was absolutely delighted to learn that A Single Shard by Linda Sue Park had won the Newbery. It is a thoughtful, beautifully written book. However, rather than dwell on its merits which I am sure others will do, I'd like to respond to some of the issues raised in the discussion so far.
I too am disappointed that Amber Was Brave, Essie Was Smart didn't at least receive a Newbery Honor, and that The Land was passed over for a Printz Honor. On the other hand, I am willing to trust and accept the judgment of the committees that read all of this year's current output of books and spent many hours discussing those same books. Someone commented that a particular book received no consideration, but we have no way of knowing that. The book might have been extensively discussed for one of the major awards and eliminated before or even in the final voting. It might have been nominated as a Notable Book, but some of those nominations are voted off the list before any public group discussion takes place.
I suspect that if you convened several Newbery or Caldecott or Printz committees in any given year, each committee would come up with a different list. We all have different tastes and different critical stances, and we all bring with us to any book discussion lots of baggage based on our own experience. Also rich book discussion, which generally happens on the major award committees, often broadens and deepens people's appreciation of particular books. Other books may not stand up as well under such intense scrutiny.
I am puzzled by the comment that having different numbers of honor books
"smacks of political struggle." What the differing numbers say to me is that each year's crop of books varies as does each year's committee. Some years a few books rise to the top of the pile, and in other years, many books do.
As far as stars and best lists are concerned, they are certainly an indicator of favorable critical attention, but they are also the products of groups of people whose tastes and critical abilities differ in just the same way as that of the award committees. Generally only a handful of books appear on all of the major lists. As far as the Notables Working Discussion List is concerned, the list that appears on the ALSC website may not contain the books discussed this summer. The list they handed out at ALA this past week did not include the earlier books even though those books were part of the final vote.
What seems most important to me in all of this is the number of really good books for children and young adults that are being produced. Having just arrived home from ALA, I have a stack of new spring titles waiting to be read. Who knows? Maybe next year's winner will be among them.
Barbara Scotto Michael Driscoll School Brookline, MA
Received on Tue 22 Jan 2002 10:40:04 PM CST
