From: Ginny Moore Kruse <gmkruse>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 12:10:52 -0600

One of the dilemmas of any literary award committee - or any discussion of books eligible for an award - is that required to assess literary quality, regardless of how much one agrees with the theme or topic of a book, or how personally satisfying a children's or Y.A. book might have been to read. Is there such a thing as a perfect text when one is assessing literary quality? How can a committee choose between the proverbial apples and oranges?

The spotlight's glare on each and every past book award winner reminds us that there's probably no "perfect" book. "Thursday's Child" by Sonya Harnett is grim, spare reading, and even though it's an exceptional literary accomplishment, it's so difficult to choose to vote for it, rather than a book more enjoyable to read. "The House of the Scorpion" by Nancy Farmer has a gripping, discussible plot and well?veloped, memorable characters, but the final sections of the story are confusing. "This Land Was Made for You and Me" by Elizabeth Partridge offers an incredibly valuable perspective on Woody Guthrie, yet there are undocumented references to what Woody might have been thinking or feeling. We could each go on and on, book by book.

What's an award committee to do? It's what each award committee worthy of its task ultimately does. First and foremost, it's a group, not an individual. The group pays attention to the guidelines set up for that particular award. The committee determines literary excellence; or depending upon the nature of the award, its committee members combine literary excellence with the accomplishment of a certain theme or purpose; or maybe they think only about child appeal, or notability or memorability within a particular genre. Committee members use their heads, not their hearts, as they follow the guidelines of their particular award. Where do CCBC-Net participants who are sharing their favorite books of the year fit into this melee? Hey, we can follow our heads and also our hearts! We can vote with our purchases, as well as our CCBC-Net comments.

I'll buy both "...Scorpion" and "This Land..." for book gifts. I enjoyed reading them, and I'm sure others will, too. When we buy book gifts, we don't have to consult a committee. We only need to consider the recipients along with our personal resources.

I've already bought "When My Name Was Keoko," by Linda Sue Park; "19 Varieties of Gazelle" by Naomi Shihab Nye; "Out of Bounds" by Beverley Naidoo; and "Dillon Dillon" by Kate Banks for book gifts. I suggest that each of these particular books not only passes the personal satisfaction, budget, and recipient "tests," each is also worthy of a major literary award. Why? Because if any of these four books - also so enjoyable for me as a reader - has a literary weakness, it seems to me to be a very insignificant one. These four are among my favorites, among many other books I appreciate for many reasons this year.

That's what an award committee ultimately has to do. Its members must determine which literary weakness they as a group can decide to live with - and get ready for the spotlight's glare, not on them but on the books they choose. Apples and oranges? Absolutely. Always.

Which new books for children and teenagers who can read independently have grabbed your heart? Why? Are they in the category of book gifts, or books you'll recommend or teach? Have any new books also grabbed your head? Which ones are worthy of serious literary awards? Which fit into both categories? Why? Which are your favorites?

Peace, Ginny

  




Ginny Moore Kruse gmkruse at education.wisc.edu
Received on Wed 18 Dec 2002 12:10:52 PM CST