From: Pamela Turner <pstrst>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 12:36:59 -0700

As a science writer for children, I think it really makes a difference if you are totally in love with your subject matter, and if you can write from some kind of personal experience. I do believe you have to be obsessive about getting the facts right. I think too many writers of science for children think it is OK to take facts from general-audience adult books and articles and do not bother to review the actual scientific literature.

I know there are a lot of librarians on this list, and I would like to know whether there is a greater need for good explanations of standard topics (like volcanoes, for example) or a greater need for books about new or interdisciplinary topics. For example, my first book ("Gorilla Doctors") is about conservation medicine, a very new field that combines human, animal, and environmental health, and my second will be about astrobiology, a combination of microbiology, planetary science, and geology. Neither fit very neatly into any standard curriculum, and I wonder if that is a plus or a minus.

Regards,

Pamela S. Turner www.pamelasturner.com
Received on Thu 07 Jul 2005 02:36:59 PM CDT