From: Steven Engelfried <sengelfried>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:23:07 -0700 (PDT)

I don't know if there's more interest in the visual world than words today (as Norma Jean asks), but I do think authors, illustrators, and publishers have been able to use visuals more effectively in books since the early 80's. Maybe it's as simple as improved technology and affordable costs opening up the visual possibilities? I feel that informational books with strong visuals generally promote literacy and reading, rather than discouraging it. I especially like the way illustrated books can cut past the limits of print on its own. Good illustrations can reinforce content from the words so that readers struggling with some vocabulary can still make sense of it all. And illustrations can also inspire the interest that can lead a reader to tackle a book with a challenging reading level. "Leonardo's Horse" is a very well written book, with words (by Jean Fritz) that could stand on their own, but Hudson Talbott's illustrations enhance the content and certainly draw some
 readers who might have passed on a less visually appealing book. And though the pictures are attractive on their own, most everyone who sees them will want to read the words and learn more...
   
  

Norma Jean <nsawicki at nyc.rr.com> wrote:
  Prior to the 80s, it was nearly impossible to successfully publish picture books for middle grade/older kids, the feeling being the audience considered them ?baby books.? Now that is much changed and I wonder why. Computers? More interest in the visual world than words? An increasing problem with reading and literacy?

Steven Engelfried Multnomah County Library 205 NE Russell Street Portland, OR 97212-3796 503-988-5206 stevene at yahoo.com
                 
--------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min.
Received on Wed 20 Sep 2006 06:23:07 PM CDT