From: Mary Lyons <melyons>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 21:57:56 -0500

Sue, Nina, Laura, and Marc have raised pertinent points, and I think it's great that we're discussing them. With Ginny's kind permission, I hope I can clarify. Nina wrote: "I think Partridge did a fantastic job of providing inobtrusive but easy to use references that serve both to establish her authority and to leave a trail for those who care to follow."

I meant only to support Elizabeth's comments, not to criticize her book. I haven't seen it, though I truly look forward to reading it, Woody being a favorite of mine. Also, I should have specified that I was referring to bibliographies of sources used during research, not those that list suggested reading for a young audience.

Laura wrote: "I agree that source notes don't always make for kid-friendly reading, but omitting them altogether or only including select source notes suggests that readers are just supposed to trust that the author got it right."

No, omitting source notes is definitely not a solution, which is why I didn't suggest it. Last week I read a picture book based on a legend. The author's note neglected to mention which legend, and it made me wonder how I would answer questions if I read it aloud to a child. Still, select or not, notes only define the truth as the author chooses to define it according to the source she quotes. I challenge anyone to find three dependable sources that give the same information for Hammurabi's Code. Was it the first set of laws ever? Or was it just the first set of laws written down? Or the second or third set? Was it the basis for Mosaic Law, or was it based on Mosaic Law? As Marc points out, some readers will want to follow the writer's train of thought as s/he sifts through various "facts." For these kids, extensive notes are welcome.

But surely I'm not the only educator/librarian to deal with reluctant readers, or even good readers, who walk away from a splendid informational book because it's too long, because it looks like too much to bite off at once, because it seems too adult, too "dry" as a brilliant 6th grade boy said of an award-winning title I recommended last month. And I know from my colleagues that I'm not the only writer who is anxious that years of work might be wasted if a reviewer makes one negative comment about my documentation.

Obviously, there's no perfect way to prepare documentation for all young readers. I mentioned Annie in my original post. Today I asked Annie's sister Clara (13 going on 23, reads both YA and adult books) if she looks at documentation. Clara said she never glances at it if she's reading for pleasure. If she's doing further research, however, she depends heavily on the notes. Unfortunately, this means that her school, at least, has turned pleasurable research into an oxymoron.

What a matrix! Within the 10 age range, we've got developing readers who need the most appealing book possible. We've got high?hieving kids able but unwilling to read more sophisticated YA texts. We've got readers choosing YA books for pleasure or research but not both. How do we writers do it all? And how do we convince adults that we've given it our best shot? As Jamaica Kincaid says in her gardening books, what to do, what to do?

One solution, as Marc suggested, is professional vetting, though an exciting idea to one scholar might very well be ridiculed by a second. (Ask William Ferris, folklorist and former head of the NEH, to define outsider art, then try to find a museum curator who agrees with his definition.) Another solution is twin reviews. A professional journal for science teachers
(sorry, I don't recall the title) used to provide a double evaluation of a title--one by a children's book reviewer and one by an expert in the subject. Both helped me make choices as I ordered books for the library collection. I bet there are specialists in the humanities would be pleased to do the same if asked.

I've also learned to make two sets of notes and bibliographies. One is for me in case an editor, a reviewer, or a curious child might ask a specific question. Through my web site, listed on my book jackets, I'm still receiving questions on a book I wrote thirteen years ago. My memory is less than perfect, so the first detailed bib. is handy, but I trim it for publication. How much depends on the length and the intended audience of the book. (I don't want to use up vital text space in a 48-page book, for instance.) This leaner bibliography is for the many children I taught who didn't like to read, who never finished one complete book in their short lives, who now have different faces and names but who still struggle to like books. Our low literacy rate is alarming, and I'm sorry, but I just can't forget those kids who need a different kind of help to make it through a book. In my experience this means short, accurate documentation that's meaningful to them, even if it's not sufficiently academic for adults.

Thanks for listening,

Mary E. Lyons

www.lyonsdenbooks.com
Received on Thu 02 Jan 2003 08:57:56 PM CST