CCBC-Net Archives
Re: Caldecott at 75: Diversity (or lack their of)
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Colleen Kelley <cakelley_at_ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 20:47:22 -0400 (EDT)
body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}
body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}
I agree. And here is some perspective. If these numbers begin in 1938, when the first Caldecott was awarded, it is important to remember that in 1940, 89.8% of the US population was white ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_American ). You can see in this table that in 1950 the percentage was 89.5, 1960? 88.6%. In 1970, 87.5% of the US population was white. In 1980 it was 83.1%. In 1990, 80.3%. In 2000, 70.1%. And in 2010, 72.4%. Black Americans are the largest racial minority, comprising 13% of the population ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States ). When you look back over such an expanse of time, I think you have to remember what these numbers represent historically and proportionately, and not simply look at numbers out of context. Likewise with the representation of men and women. Women gained the right to vote in 1920. In 1941, a disproportionate number of men to women went overseas until at least 1945. And the percentage of women to men in the workplace over this same time period is worth considering. However, "Why Don't Women Illustrators Win Caldecott Awards?" at http://rt19writers.blogspot.com/2012/01/why-dont-women-illustrators-win.html poses the question and lists additional links at the end of the discussion. According to "The First American Women Illustrators" ( http://kidlitwhm.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-first-american-women-illustrators.html ), a big problem with early female illustrators is that they left their careers to marry and raise families. FYI: There are some interesting numbers at http://www.vidaweb.org/three-years-to-stump-and-stack-and-stem that give a clear picture as far as adult books go as to percentages of male and female who review and are reviewed for various publications. More information and discussion about this article can be found here http://www.salon.com/2011/02/09/women_literary_publishing/ and here http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/feb/04/research-male-writers-dominate-books-world , among others. Colleen
-----Original Message----- From: Kiera Parrott Sent: May 15, 2013 5:40 PM To: "Nick Glass (TeachingBooks.net)" Cc: ccbc-net ccbc-net Subject: Re:
Caldecott at 75: Diversity (or lack their of)
Hi everyone,
This is fascinating. Thom's question, "What do we do with this information?" is the central piece for me. Since the criteria only concerns itself with residency requirements for the illustrator (and since considering the gender or ethnic background of the artist would actually be a violation of the terms of the criteria) then what can we do? (Besides creating more awards.)
Having recently gone through the selection experience, I can speak for myself (not my fellow committee members or past committees.) When I personally looked at books during my term, I was concerned with 1) eligibility and 2) how the art, design, and story held up to the criteria. Oftentimes I wouldn't even look at the name of the author or illustrator until I wrote it in my notes. For me, it was purely about the merits of the art.
That said, it does trouble me when I look at Thom's numbers. It would seem that the major awards are a reflection of the times and the culture in which they are chosen. If we want more award-winning picture books by more women and from a more diverse array of artists, I think we need to start at the very beginning. We need to begin valuing the arts again in schools. Children and young adults who have a talent passion for art design need to be nurtured. They need to be told that YES, you can have a career in the arts. So many kids (especially those in lower socio-economic spheres) are discouraged from pursuing art as anything other than a hobby. There is a lot of misinformation about what it means to be a working artist or illustrator. Kids are told "that's not a real job" or "you'll never make any money."
That's clearly not a quick or easy solution! But if we in the public library treat art the way we treat book discussions and early literacy, perhaps we can help do our part in nurturing young artists to pursue their passions.
Kiera
Kiera Parrott Head of Children's Services Darien Library, CT kparrott_at_darienlibrary.org Twitter: @libraryvoice
On May 15, 2013, at 4:41 PM, "Nick Glass ( TeachingBooks.net )" nick_at_teachingbooks.net wrote:
Thom Barthelmess gave a fantastic and most memorable talk at Carthage College last fall called "Caldecott Culture: Looking Back on their Diversity (or lack thereof)". He acknowledged at the beginning of his talk that his data was unofficial research, and not ready for publication. He categorized to the best of his ability the gender and race of all winners and honorees in the first 75 years of the Caldecottt, and knows that his data isn't fully accurate since he was identifying culture of individuals without their own self-identification. So please know that my notes below from his talk are based on unofficial research that Thom acknowledged was an early investigation and not ready for publication.
That said, I found his presentation to be so revealing that I still have my notes.
322 medal and honor winners recognized for 310 medal and honor books
63% male
87% caucasian
He broke it up by 25-year-periods, and more women were recognized in the early years.
The last medal or honoree who is not a caucasian man, caucasian women, or african american male was David Diaz in 1995.
12 times all the medalists and honorees were men. Only 2 times were all the medalists and honorees women.
He ended the presentation with questions about what to do with this information. Lots of them. And the room was ablaze with conversation, as I'm sure this conversation will be.
Nick
_______
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 20:47:22 -0400 (EDT)
body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}
body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}
I agree. And here is some perspective. If these numbers begin in 1938, when the first Caldecott was awarded, it is important to remember that in 1940, 89.8% of the US population was white ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_American ). You can see in this table that in 1950 the percentage was 89.5, 1960? 88.6%. In 1970, 87.5% of the US population was white. In 1980 it was 83.1%. In 1990, 80.3%. In 2000, 70.1%. And in 2010, 72.4%. Black Americans are the largest racial minority, comprising 13% of the population ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States ). When you look back over such an expanse of time, I think you have to remember what these numbers represent historically and proportionately, and not simply look at numbers out of context. Likewise with the representation of men and women. Women gained the right to vote in 1920. In 1941, a disproportionate number of men to women went overseas until at least 1945. And the percentage of women to men in the workplace over this same time period is worth considering. However, "Why Don't Women Illustrators Win Caldecott Awards?" at http://rt19writers.blogspot.com/2012/01/why-dont-women-illustrators-win.html poses the question and lists additional links at the end of the discussion. According to "The First American Women Illustrators" ( http://kidlitwhm.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-first-american-women-illustrators.html ), a big problem with early female illustrators is that they left their careers to marry and raise families. FYI: There are some interesting numbers at http://www.vidaweb.org/three-years-to-stump-and-stack-and-stem that give a clear picture as far as adult books go as to percentages of male and female who review and are reviewed for various publications. More information and discussion about this article can be found here http://www.salon.com/2011/02/09/women_literary_publishing/ and here http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/feb/04/research-male-writers-dominate-books-world , among others. Colleen
-----Original Message----- From: Kiera Parrott Sent: May 15, 2013 5:40 PM To: "Nick Glass (TeachingBooks.net)" Cc: ccbc-net ccbc-net Subject: Re:
Caldecott at 75: Diversity (or lack their of)
Hi everyone,
This is fascinating. Thom's question, "What do we do with this information?" is the central piece for me. Since the criteria only concerns itself with residency requirements for the illustrator (and since considering the gender or ethnic background of the artist would actually be a violation of the terms of the criteria) then what can we do? (Besides creating more awards.)
Having recently gone through the selection experience, I can speak for myself (not my fellow committee members or past committees.) When I personally looked at books during my term, I was concerned with 1) eligibility and 2) how the art, design, and story held up to the criteria. Oftentimes I wouldn't even look at the name of the author or illustrator until I wrote it in my notes. For me, it was purely about the merits of the art.
That said, it does trouble me when I look at Thom's numbers. It would seem that the major awards are a reflection of the times and the culture in which they are chosen. If we want more award-winning picture books by more women and from a more diverse array of artists, I think we need to start at the very beginning. We need to begin valuing the arts again in schools. Children and young adults who have a talent passion for art design need to be nurtured. They need to be told that YES, you can have a career in the arts. So many kids (especially those in lower socio-economic spheres) are discouraged from pursuing art as anything other than a hobby. There is a lot of misinformation about what it means to be a working artist or illustrator. Kids are told "that's not a real job" or "you'll never make any money."
That's clearly not a quick or easy solution! But if we in the public library treat art the way we treat book discussions and early literacy, perhaps we can help do our part in nurturing young artists to pursue their passions.
Kiera
Kiera Parrott Head of Children's Services Darien Library, CT kparrott_at_darienlibrary.org Twitter: @libraryvoice
On May 15, 2013, at 4:41 PM, "Nick Glass ( TeachingBooks.net )" nick_at_teachingbooks.net wrote:
Thom Barthelmess gave a fantastic and most memorable talk at Carthage College last fall called "Caldecott Culture: Looking Back on their Diversity (or lack thereof)". He acknowledged at the beginning of his talk that his data was unofficial research, and not ready for publication. He categorized to the best of his ability the gender and race of all winners and honorees in the first 75 years of the Caldecottt, and knows that his data isn't fully accurate since he was identifying culture of individuals without their own self-identification. So please know that my notes below from his talk are based on unofficial research that Thom acknowledged was an early investigation and not ready for publication.
That said, I found his presentation to be so revealing that I still have my notes.
322 medal and honor winners recognized for 310 medal and honor books
63% male
87% caucasian
He broke it up by 25-year-periods, and more women were recognized in the early years.
The last medal or honoree who is not a caucasian man, caucasian women, or african american male was David Diaz in 1995.
12 times all the medalists and honorees were men. Only 2 times were all the medalists and honorees women.
He ended the presentation with questions about what to do with this information. Lots of them. And the room was ablaze with conversation, as I'm sure this conversation will be.
Nick
_______
---Received on Wed 15 May 2013 08:47:22 PM CDT
