CCBC-Net Archives
RE: Caldecott and diversity
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Lindsay, Nina <NLindsay_at_oaklandlibrary.org>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:35:51 -0700
Sharon, you've latched on and articulated beautifully the thought I was trying to figure out how to make. At last ALA, a few of us sat in a hotel lobby talking about this issue, and landed here. I don't think the committee is biased regarding who the artist is. But our collective sense of how to interpret the criteria may be biased towards certain kinds of art....the same kind that tends to find acclaim among communities of privilege, and so we find mostly communities of privilege (i.e. white men) trained and making a living in this kind of art in children's books.
We do see a diversity of art styles in Caldecott winners...but maybe it's just easier to come to a consensus on a certain kind?
Nina Lindsay
Supervising Librarian for Children's Services
Oakland Public Library
125 14th Street
Oakland CA 94612
Phone: 510-238-6706
Fax: 510-238-6865
nlindsay_at_oaklandlibrary.org
From: Sharron L. McElmeel
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 12:58 PM To: Katie Clausen Cc: ccbc-net_at_lists.wisc.edu Subject: Re:
Caldecott and diversity
My comments come as a long-time librarian, literacy advocate, and as a person whose family is as diverse as many get - Native American, African American, Gentile, Jewish, protestant, Catholic, agnostic, old, young -- my family is inclusive. My experience also includes serving on a Caldecott Committee (2007), but now deemed ineligible by virtual of conflict of interest (I organize authors for author visits at literacy events and actively promote those visits). With that being said -- here are my general thoughts on the Caldecott and diversity. Because of my close exposure to some diversity, I have some very opinionated ideas about cultural representation.
I do not find a problem so much with the make-up of the committee per se but "our" collective idea of "beauty" and "best art" is a relative one and that perception is swayed by our traditional middle class upbringing. I'm not sure that I can make this concept clear but perhaps I can use an analogy. Teachers are often drawn from those who are left brained therefore they tend to teach more to the children who also are left-brained. Children who learn more visually - that is right-brained, often have more difficult times learning because their teacher perceives the path to understanding through her/his own left-brain. Those librarians/teachers are often drawn from the same pool and educated traditionally by other like-minded individuals. Our collective sense of artistic beauty is non-diverse. Now that does not negate that we can not learn to appreciate other forms of artistic expression but what comes naturally is what we are familiar with although innovative. Clearly we can understand this appreciation of beau ty if we look at the cultures (I know some in Africa) who enlarge their ear lobe or lower lip to create something of beauty in their eyes. I would not view that as beautiful because of my perspective. Similarly some artistic expression is not going to be viewed as favorable in one culture as in another.
What to do about that? That is a root problem inherent in the sameness of our graduate/college education IMHO.
The other point I would like to mention is that while we view this award as one of artistic expression and the award goes to the illustrator we must also remember that the text must be worthy of the illustrations; and book production plays a major role in the overall assessment. Whether gutters line up (could be the problem of the printer not the illustrator), the endpapers and other design elements - often a decision made by the publisher and out of the hands of the illustrator. All factor in. I am wondering how many "small presses" can afford the amenities to showcase wonderful art work in relation to the budgets of a larger press that can afford to put impressions in the cloth covers (such as the snowflake on the cloth cover of SNOWFLAKE BENTLEY or the mosquito on the cloth cover of WHY MOSQUITOES BUZZ IN PEOPLE'S EARS etc.). Even printed end pages factor into the overall design and help to tie the art into the "book" look.
There are so many factors beside the art itself.
Sharron McElmeel
On 5/16/13 10:30 AM, Katie Clausen wrote:
we need to choose the best art.
Sharron L. McElmeel Instructor University of Wisconsin - Stout RDGED 703 Children's Literature in the Reading Program RDGED 704 Young Adult Literature in the Reading Program Home _at_ Cedar Rapids IOWA e-mail: mcelmeels@uwstout.edu phone: (319) 393-2562 (in CST zone)
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:35:51 -0700
Sharon, you've latched on and articulated beautifully the thought I was trying to figure out how to make. At last ALA, a few of us sat in a hotel lobby talking about this issue, and landed here. I don't think the committee is biased regarding who the artist is. But our collective sense of how to interpret the criteria may be biased towards certain kinds of art....the same kind that tends to find acclaim among communities of privilege, and so we find mostly communities of privilege (i.e. white men) trained and making a living in this kind of art in children's books.
We do see a diversity of art styles in Caldecott winners...but maybe it's just easier to come to a consensus on a certain kind?
Nina Lindsay
Supervising Librarian for Children's Services
Oakland Public Library
125 14th Street
Oakland CA 94612
Phone: 510-238-6706
Fax: 510-238-6865
nlindsay_at_oaklandlibrary.org
From: Sharron L. McElmeel
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 12:58 PM To: Katie Clausen Cc: ccbc-net_at_lists.wisc.edu Subject: Re:
Caldecott and diversity
My comments come as a long-time librarian, literacy advocate, and as a person whose family is as diverse as many get - Native American, African American, Gentile, Jewish, protestant, Catholic, agnostic, old, young -- my family is inclusive. My experience also includes serving on a Caldecott Committee (2007), but now deemed ineligible by virtual of conflict of interest (I organize authors for author visits at literacy events and actively promote those visits). With that being said -- here are my general thoughts on the Caldecott and diversity. Because of my close exposure to some diversity, I have some very opinionated ideas about cultural representation.
I do not find a problem so much with the make-up of the committee per se but "our" collective idea of "beauty" and "best art" is a relative one and that perception is swayed by our traditional middle class upbringing. I'm not sure that I can make this concept clear but perhaps I can use an analogy. Teachers are often drawn from those who are left brained therefore they tend to teach more to the children who also are left-brained. Children who learn more visually - that is right-brained, often have more difficult times learning because their teacher perceives the path to understanding through her/his own left-brain. Those librarians/teachers are often drawn from the same pool and educated traditionally by other like-minded individuals. Our collective sense of artistic beauty is non-diverse. Now that does not negate that we can not learn to appreciate other forms of artistic expression but what comes naturally is what we are familiar with although innovative. Clearly we can understand this appreciation of beau ty if we look at the cultures (I know some in Africa) who enlarge their ear lobe or lower lip to create something of beauty in their eyes. I would not view that as beautiful because of my perspective. Similarly some artistic expression is not going to be viewed as favorable in one culture as in another.
What to do about that? That is a root problem inherent in the sameness of our graduate/college education IMHO.
The other point I would like to mention is that while we view this award as one of artistic expression and the award goes to the illustrator we must also remember that the text must be worthy of the illustrations; and book production plays a major role in the overall assessment. Whether gutters line up (could be the problem of the printer not the illustrator), the endpapers and other design elements - often a decision made by the publisher and out of the hands of the illustrator. All factor in. I am wondering how many "small presses" can afford the amenities to showcase wonderful art work in relation to the budgets of a larger press that can afford to put impressions in the cloth covers (such as the snowflake on the cloth cover of SNOWFLAKE BENTLEY or the mosquito on the cloth cover of WHY MOSQUITOES BUZZ IN PEOPLE'S EARS etc.). Even printed end pages factor into the overall design and help to tie the art into the "book" look.
There are so many factors beside the art itself.
Sharron McElmeel
On 5/16/13 10:30 AM, Katie Clausen wrote:
we need to choose the best art.
Sharron L. McElmeel Instructor University of Wisconsin - Stout RDGED 703 Children's Literature in the Reading Program RDGED 704 Young Adult Literature in the Reading Program Home _at_ Cedar Rapids IOWA e-mail: mcelmeels@uwstout.edu phone: (319) 393-2562 (in CST zone)
---Received on Thu 16 May 2013 04:35:51 PM CDT
