From: Pamela Turner <pstrst>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 12:08:00 -0700

I totally agree with Kelly Milner Halls' comments about going past the literature, talking to experts, and making new connections. But is it clear not all writers bother to go that far. I was recently vacationing in Palau and interviewed a scientist who studies marine lakes there (for a adult magazine article) and she was blown away by the fact that I had actually read all the available literature on the subject. She told me most reporters just sat down and said, "So please tell me what is special about the jellyfish in the lakes." And then she would discover that their published piece was filled with inaccuracies.

The underlying problem is that few book and magazine publishers pay enough to cover the costs of research and travel, not to mention top-notch photos and other illustrations, which are increasingly the responsibility of the writer. I'm always so madly in love with my topic that I will blow my expense budget to do a job I am proud of, but then I am not trying to pay a mortgage with my writing income. A lot of science writing is done write-for-hire and the authors aren't paid well enough to cover more than a trip to the local library. It is no wonder so much science writing sounds "canned."

Pamela S. Turner www.pamelasturner.com pstrst at pacbell.net

Author of "Gorilla Doctors: Saving Endangered Great Apes" Houghton Mifflin Books for Children 2005
*Horn Book starred review
*Kirkus starred review
*School Library Journal starred review
*Junior Library Guild Selection

 Author of "Hachiko: The True Story of a Loyal Dog." Houghton Mifflin Books for Children, 2004
*Golden Kite Honor Award
*Henry Bergh Honor Award, ASPCA
*Junior Library Guild Selection
*Booklist starred review
*2004 Silver Parent's Choice Award
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: kellymilnerh at aol.com
  To: pstrst at pacbell.net
  Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 11:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [ccbc-net] Simple and not-so-simple science


  I'm new to this list, but I wanted to respond because I also write science for young readers (Dinosaur Mummies and Albino Animals most recently -- Wild Dogs this fall). I agree, being engaged by your subject translates into the text you create and even the layout your art director is inspired to use to frame and energize the words. Excitement and even something as basic as FUN shows.

  But I'm going to take Pamela's comments about not relying on simple research a step further. When I do school visits, I tell the kids it's not my job to give them details they can find on the web or in other books and articles. I say it's my job to dig deep and find fresh facts whenever possible -- to jump ahead to what they can't find on their own; to practically look into the future.

  I will read and study all the available literature -- both professional and trade.
 THEN I'll go straight to the sources, the experts on the cutting edge, to see what's about to happen NEXT. I interview them, I talk to them, I jo in them on adventures when possible. It keeps me down right GIDDY about a project to connect and discover something new.

  I also try to use what I learned writing 1600 articles for kids magazines and newspaper sections in the books I create. To sell an article, you can't rehash old goods...because it's all been done and done and done again. To sell an articl e, you have to come up with a new twist on an old idea. When I write science or any nonfiction for young readers, I try to give them something they might not have imagined before; like Dinosaur Mummies, organic soft tissue fossilized along with the bones.

  Thanks for letting me join the discussion.

  Kelly Milner Halls
  Freelance Writer
  www.kellymilnerhalls. com
Received on Sat 09 Jul 2005 02:08:00 PM CDT