CCBC-Net Archives
kid's science, catching up
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Vicki Cobb <vicki.cobb2>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:03:59 -0400
I finally get a chance to weigh in on a subject and for technical reasons nothing was posted. So here are a few of my comments:
In response to Norma Jean's comments about having manuscripts vetted by publishers, my experience is that most of mine have been read by expert readers. The most recent, my biography of Harry Houdini (something very different for me), published by DK Books was vetted by none other than Sid Radner, Houdini's brother's protege who just auctioned off Houdini memorabilia last fall in Las Vegas. His only comment was that I had Houdini's height wrong by an inch which was understandable since there was a descrepancy between the height Houdini claimed to be, 5' 5", and his passport, 5' 4". Sid gave me interesting insight into Houdini's sensitivity about his short stature (he often stood on his toes for photos)--an interesting titbit that found it's way into the text.
In regard to illustrations, I am always given sketches for approval so that I'm in the loop as a book comes to life. When an illustration must illuminate a concept the going can be tough and it helps if I can communicate directly with the artist. In I See Myself I wanted to show kids how light is scattered as it bounces of surfaces that are not shiny. The analogy (from my optical engineer son who is also quite messy) is to throw a bunch of ping-pong balls down on the floor of a room covered with toys. The balls scatter in all directions as they strike the uneven surface of the floor. Julia Gorton had to redraw the picture several times (at the end with help from a sketch by my son) to get it right so there is no question about the concept.
In the conversation about a narrative science book vs other types I feeel that it is my job to put science into a context that makes it meaningful. I try and give a conceptual framework illustrated by activities and facts that bring the big ideas to life. Hands-on activities without explanation of how they fit into a big picture are gratuitous--it's called the "So What!" factor. (Books like "The Way Things Work"
require that the reader provide the concept being illustrated because he/she has the question that provoked consulting the book.) And big abstract scientific ideas, without example in a child's life make science dry and uninteresting. When the two are blended, you get a compelling narrative
Vicki Cobb
Received on Thu 14 Jul 2005 04:03:59 PM CDT
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:03:59 -0400
I finally get a chance to weigh in on a subject and for technical reasons nothing was posted. So here are a few of my comments:
In response to Norma Jean's comments about having manuscripts vetted by publishers, my experience is that most of mine have been read by expert readers. The most recent, my biography of Harry Houdini (something very different for me), published by DK Books was vetted by none other than Sid Radner, Houdini's brother's protege who just auctioned off Houdini memorabilia last fall in Las Vegas. His only comment was that I had Houdini's height wrong by an inch which was understandable since there was a descrepancy between the height Houdini claimed to be, 5' 5", and his passport, 5' 4". Sid gave me interesting insight into Houdini's sensitivity about his short stature (he often stood on his toes for photos)--an interesting titbit that found it's way into the text.
In regard to illustrations, I am always given sketches for approval so that I'm in the loop as a book comes to life. When an illustration must illuminate a concept the going can be tough and it helps if I can communicate directly with the artist. In I See Myself I wanted to show kids how light is scattered as it bounces of surfaces that are not shiny. The analogy (from my optical engineer son who is also quite messy) is to throw a bunch of ping-pong balls down on the floor of a room covered with toys. The balls scatter in all directions as they strike the uneven surface of the floor. Julia Gorton had to redraw the picture several times (at the end with help from a sketch by my son) to get it right so there is no question about the concept.
In the conversation about a narrative science book vs other types I feeel that it is my job to put science into a context that makes it meaningful. I try and give a conceptual framework illustrated by activities and facts that bring the big ideas to life. Hands-on activities without explanation of how they fit into a big picture are gratuitous--it's called the "So What!" factor. (Books like "The Way Things Work"
require that the reader provide the concept being illustrated because he/she has the question that provoked consulting the book.) And big abstract scientific ideas, without example in a child's life make science dry and uninteresting. When the two are blended, you get a compelling narrative
Vicki Cobb
Received on Thu 14 Jul 2005 04:03:59 PM CDT
