Officer Buckle and Gloria: a surprise Caldecott winner?

Pam A. Lewis
Tue, 6 Feb 96

I was very disappointed in reading this book. Please tell me why you think this was an award winning book for children.

In response to a fellow teacher's query: "I was very disappointed in reading this book. Please tell me why you think this was an award winning book for children."

Granted, I have not reviewed a myriad of children's picture books released in 1995, but I was at a seminar last week in which the topic was 1995 Childrens Literature. "Officer Buckle And Gloria" was displayed and discussed. True, the book wasn't terribly innovative, it wasn't "cutting edge," it didn't contain illustration styles that we've never seen before, BUT... it was very funny and sweet and the folks at the seminar loved it... including me. The kids I've shown it to seem to love it as well.

Nevertheless... why did this book stand out among the 4,500 released last year? I really have no idea. There were LOTS of funny and cute and sweet books released last year. If you ask me, giving the award to OB&G was the committee's answer to the hailstorm of criticism they received over last year's Caldecott winner. Personally, I'll take Officer Buckle and Gloria over a picture book (with a VERY one-sided story) about the L.A. riots any day. Just my humble opinion...

Pam asked:
"I was very disappointed in reading this book. Please tell me why you think this was an award winning book for children. My boss will love this one...I got it straight from the horse's mouth. Basicly she said, sometimes you just have to give in and let them have their way. Everyone had to finally agree even if it wasn't their first choice it was one everyone could agree on.

It was because the of the lay out design and not so much because of the illustrations themselves. When Officer Buckle was on stage he was always boxed in a frame, much like a stage would frame a performer. In the other pages, there wasn't a frame around him. The antics of the dog were also a real plus. Like a roomful of jurers, each had their own ideas about what worked and what didn't and they voted a number of times until some of them finally had to compromise. If you had seen some of the other candidates that the committee had to vote on, this one was better then it might have been.

I will know more after our Children's Services meeting next Tuesday, when she will discuss more in depth about how the committee came to it's descision this year.

Thanks for the insights, Katy. I'm definitely curious about what you mean in saying that the other potential choices were worse. Does that mean that (in your opinion) the other really "good" choices got knocked out of contention early?

Although the art seems less innovative to me than I would expect in a Caldecott book, I was struck, when I got my review copy this week, by the way the illustrations have to be read to understand the story...the way they so often run counter to the text or add additional vital information. I could hardly imagine reading it aloud to a group, for instance, unless the reader were constantly pointing out the sight gags.

I had thought maybe the "safe" choice was less a reaction to the flap over last year's Caldecott than a reaction to the "Families First" kind of pressure libraries are under these days. Who could attack this book?

A response from the "field." After the announcement, I read "Officer Buckle and Gloria" to groups of children all week. The children ranged in age from 5 to 10 years old. I introduced the book by telling the children it had just won the Caldecott for this year (we talked some about the award and awards in general) and after I finished reading the story I asked them why they thought the book had won. Since the 7 to 10 year olds are involved in the selection of the Irma S. and James H. Black Award for us, we have had many conversations about the importance of text and illustration together as a criteria for an award-winning book. Almost to a person, the children were enthusiastic about "Officer Buckle and Gloria" - they enjoyed the humor, felt that the fact that most of the story is really told through the illustrations made it an appropriate Caldecott choice. They felt the award was not for art so much as for illustration of text. Many also felt that the safety tips were an important consideration - that in addition to the humor there was a "moral" if you will. They commented that the pictures didn't stay within rigid bounds on each page, etc.I did not have to point out the details in the illustrations, they picked up on them immediately. In each class, one child or another would point out something - "look, she's signing autographs; oh, oh, she's standing on a swivel chair... The only exception was, since I was reading to rather large groups, the picture of the little girl wearing her safety helmet was hard for them to see. After we finished the book I left it on the table for them to pour over. They all spotted her then. Teachers who listened to the story responded very positively as well. For our school, at least, a popular and understandable choice.

Reply to message from Marion of Tue, 06 Feb
"Nevertheless... why did this book stand out among the 4,500 released last year? I really have no idea. There were LOTS of funny and cute and sweet books released last year. If you ask me, giving the award to OB&G was the committee's answer to the hailstorm of criticism they received over last year's Caldecott winner. Personally, I'll take Officer Buckle and Gloria over a picture book (with a VERY one-sided story) about the L.A. riots any day. Just my humble opinion..."

Well, I liked Smoky Night, and didn't think it was one-sided. Officer Buckle is, as you say, funny, cute, and sweet. But Smoky Night took on a hard subject, and did (in my arrogant opinion) a very good job.

Lord, when I die, can I come back as Eve Bunting? I am -so- impressed by her talent, versatility, and hard work.

I HAD to answer this question posed by Jane Kurtz.

I presented this book to an ECFE group a few months ago. One of the mothers was very indignant. Interupting me at great length (she literally went on and on), she asked if the book made it clear how incredibly rude it is to interupt speakers or whether the book just treated it as being funny. She discoursed on how children should be taught to be respectful and quiet during speeches and not cause disruptions or misbehave. As the room got quieter and quieter, I think it suddenly hit her what she was doing. She shut up abruptly. Have I consistently misspelled interupt during this post? Too early in the a.m.

I cannot understand how Brian Pinkney's Faithful Friend could lose to this book!

Does anyone know what the criteria are that are used to determine which books should receive Caldecott Awards? How about the Newberrys?

There has been so much talk about disappointment in this year's Caldecott; just curious.

I've been hoping someone would offer an in-depth analysis of Officer Buckle and Gloria, but since no one has, let me see what I can do, (with some trepidation considering the phalanx of distinguished critics, such as Nodelman and Neumeyer, standing by, spears undoubtedly at the ready).

My first impression of the book was that it looked "ordinary," a typical kids' picture book. The art was not look beautiful or gorgeous like the art in Grandfather's Journey, nor unusual and startling like the art in Smoky Night.

But when I started to read the book, I was captivated. The connection between the text and the pictures is outstanding. The more one looks at the pictures, the more one sees, and every detail relates to the story. In addition, the pictures communicate energy and a childlike perspective. There is a wonderful variation in perspective and distant and close-up views, each view chosen for a purpose.

The expressions on the faces of both Officer Buckle and his school children audience, not to mention Gloria herself, always tell us what is really going on. If you're not reading carefully, you might not catch on until you get to the opening where Officer B. first appears on stage with Gloria. All of a sudden the children are beginning to sit up and pay attention, for the first time. Only the pictures let us know what is happening. If we are concentrating on the words only, we are going to be as clueless as Officer Buckle himself. Of course, Officer Buckle thinks they are paying attention to HIM, and he gets more and more pleased with himself, and begins to read his safety tips "with PLENTY of expression." The rather complex idea that success leads to more success and that a little praise can work wonders is graphically illustrated here.

When Officer Buckle receives letters thanking him for his program, he thinks the pictures of Gloria show "a lot of imagination." He does not have a clue that the children are drawing Gloria as she actually is. Of course, we, the readers, know the truth! Rathmann's pictures show us what Officer Buckle cannot see.

When I read this book aloud to my college students, I circled around showing the pictures on every page. As I read, I could see that not very far into the book they were already creating their own mental pictures of what was going on before they saw the pictures. Then, when I showed the pictures, they all laughed, as though on cue. The book got funnier and funnier page by page.

But, like all great comedy, it had its poignant, almost tragic underpinnings. We come to the point where we don't know whether to laugh or cry. Poor Officer Buckle! He never dreamed that Gloria was the reason for his success. The picture where Buckle dicovers the truth is priceless. Gloria sits beside him on the couch, giving him a worried sideways look (she knows!), and we see the image that Buckle sees on his television screen, reflected in the mirror behind his head, as he startles and spills his popcorn and his glass of milk.

Like Charlie Chaplin in the Goldrush when he is stood up by the beautiful Georgia, Officer Buckle goes into a funk. Nowhere is it stated, but we know that Officer Buckle is thinking, "It wasn't me they loved! It was Gloria!" Pandemonium descends upon the school. Finally, the story is wrapped up as Officer Buckle realizes his best safety tip ever, "Always stick with your buddy!" Without each other, each is nothing.

There are lots of lessons here, but the stick-with your-buddy safety tip ending beautifully integrates the safety-tip motif and the meaning of the story. This is not merely a tacked-on moral.

My students identified additional themes: competitiveness, jealousy, cooperation, tolerance, childish pleasure at seeing an adult looking foolish and making mistakes, delight in spectacular accidents, recognition of oneself in similar situations (people laughing hilariously at a joke one doesn't realize one has made, for example).

But most of all, everyone agreed that this apparently simple book, with its pictures carefully designed to complement and extend the nicely developed plot, was more complex, had more depth to it, and was a more remarkable achievement than it first appeared to be.

In a message dated 96-02-06 21:27:55 EST, Marion wrote:
"Nevertheless... why did this book stand out among the 4,500 released last year? I really have no idea. There were LOTS of funny and cute and sweet books released last year. If you ask me, giving the award to OB&G was the committee's answer to the hailstorm of criticism they received over last year's Caldecott winner. Personally, I'll take Officer Buckle and Gloria over a picture book (with a VERY one-sided story) about the L.A. riots any day. Just my humble opinion..."

Well, there is an old saying that "a camel is a horse designed by a committee." I think it must be very hard for a group of very opinionated librarians (are there any other kind?) to come up with an award recipient upon which everyone will agree. Some years, the camel is denounced for being "too P.C.", and some years it is denounced for being obtuse and "not for children" and some years it is denounced for being not special enough. These are compromise winners, usually, and as such will rarely correspond to most people's ideas of what should have won. And I sincerely doubt that any Caldecott committee meets with the agenda in mind to answer the criticism of the previous year's award.

I agree with Linnea and her students:

Early last December, my library's circulation manager and I did a "Gifts in Print" booktalk, where we gave our suggestions for gift books for the year. I enthused about _Officer Buckle and Gloria_. I said I didn't think it was in the running for the Caldecott, because nothing about the illustrations leaped out and said, "I AM ART." But it was my favorite picture book from last year, and one that I was sure would endure.

(For the record, I thought _My Mama Had a Dancing Heart_ would win, but I thought all those people predicting _Carousel_ could be right).

On this list we've discussed the failure of award committees to accurately identify titles that will stay with us -- _Charlotte's Web_ being the notorious example. Perhaps the Caldecott committee saw in _Officer Buckle and Gloria_ what I did: a book that is going to be loved for a long, long time; a book that would have a long publication life with or without the award?

I want to thank Linnea for opening a door of understanding for me. Like so many others, I was underwhelmed by the book (and so were my children, 13&9) I was surprised when one of my editors told me that at a recent book fair (pre-award) that they'd sold out of a huge pile of the books and it was the hit of the fair.

I think sometimes an award makes us look closer and deeper. This is a book that, though I reviewed, I was not mad for. On reflection, the committee's decision (whether intentional or not) makes an interesting statement. It asks us to take a look at books that are understated, in this children's marketplace of flashy books. In writing a review recently, I refocused and really came away admiring the way Rathmann had found child-like images to express the underexpressed, complicated feelings of jealous and betrayal.

This puts me in mind of the librarian stereotype I grew up with, that librarians were thoughtful people who considered deeply. And that is very much what we need in a marketplace overwelmed with glitz and message. Rathmann also provided (and has in the past) provided a model that fights the "teach those kids" model. Her teaching (the safety tips) takes back seat to amusing and delighting readers,showing an effective and original environment to spawn learning.

A sidelight--I know a woman whose touring pre-adolescent, lowersocio economic background, "at risk" children about our town, taking them to sites to have "celebs" (basketball and pizza makers alike) read books. The Police Chief adored Officer Buckle.

So Linnea, thank you...and drat...now I have to write my review again! One more point of curiousity--it's interesting to me that all are talking so much of CCB when Midwife was the award book.

I was in a bookstore last night and picked this up again. (It did not have a medal on it!) I couldn't stop smiling. I like the way the art is full of little sneaky details (like the kid in the safety helmet), and especially, of course, the way Gloria acts out. There is so much expression in the pictures, and there is something very, very sweet about Officer Buckle's joy in "having a buddy."

It's a real "children's book" -- a book FOR CHILDREN. Seems to me that there have been a lot of child-unfriendly Caldecotts over the years. This one is a delight.

I am surprised that no one has mentioned Susan Meddaugh's MARTHA books in conjunction with OFFICE BUCKLE. Personally, I would love to spend an afternoon with Martha and Gloria. Imagine what that would be like!

You nailed it Linnea! This is a book you need to read several times to an audience before you recognize its potential -- and kids don't "get it all" until multiple readings, but they DO return to it. The multiple levels of interpretation make this book more than it appears on the surface. Most of all I am impressed with the way you helped your students think about why it might have received the Caldecott. Well done!!

On Friday 2/9/96, SharynN wrote: "It's a real "children's book" -- a book FOR CHILDREN. Seems to me that there have been a lot of child-unfriendly Caldecotts over the years. This one is a delight."

I agree; while my earlier posting may have sounded as if I was denouncing "Smoky Night," my intent was to point out that it was a picture book (a very compelling picture book) that was NOT for young children. I have used the book (and other "child-unfriendly" picture books, like "Hiroshima No Pika" and "Rose Blanche" for example) very successfully with OLDER children who can appreciate the differing points of view and can inquire/explore the "big picture" regarding the events depicted in the books. These books have been the "ice breakers" that have started interesting discussions and have prompted research and inquiry into real-life events.

And "Officer Buckle and Gloria" is a wonderful book that amuses and delights children and adults alike. That's okay, too.

But is there actually an age limit on the Caldecott's? Whatisface's authobiography won a medal or honor - that certainly wasn't a "picture book" as we usually think of them, and it was for middle grades.

I tend to agree with Sharyn that I like to see "child-friendly" picture books, especially as award winners. (I think it's rather telling that whenver the subject comes up, I've hardly ever seen any of the books people mention as possibilities. I just don't choose those books from the publisher catalogs.) But still, it seems like asking the comittee to choose books by that criteria goes against their stated mission, unless they're choosing books that can't be considered children's books by most reasonable standards. This message seems to show that that isn't the case.

I have now had a chance to look at OB&G. It is a very delightful book and I enjoyed it alot. It reminded me in many ways of the Elizabeth Levy "Something Queer" series. It is very "child friendly"! But Caldecott quality?--i still question that. I think some recent comments sound more like revisionist reviewing! In the same stack of new books with OB&G was STORM BOY by Paul Owen Lewis. Now this was a very dramatic and spectacularly illustrated story. I looked at the list of Caldecott winners and realized that most selections over the past 25 plus years did not thrill me. And I guess I am not the only one, since I have heard similar comments over the years. (1988 when Owl Moon won over Steptoe's *Mufaro's Beautiful Daughters* was the biggest disappointment.) The press release from ALA states in part "...illustrations in brilliant colors combined with a creative use of white space to engage the reader in humor and warmth." This comment seems rather lack-luster to me--awarded for use of white space? All of this is IMHO, of course! I am hoping the spelling gods will forgive me for misspelling Newbery. I know it has only one r and I could hardly believe that I had messed up. But I did! Tomorrow is another day!

I read this to my fifth graders and they too loved it. They enjoyed the numerous wordplay, ie. Napville. They laughed throughout the story and at the end were very inventive on other adventures these two characters could have. thanks for all of the discussion.

This message is being cross-posted to child_lit, KIDLIT-L and PUBYAC. I humbly ask your pardon for the duplication. I'm still reeling from the Caldecott choice. I haven't commented before becuase it's just been in the last few days that I got a chance to look carefully at _Officer Buckle_, and I still don't see it. It's cute, I read it to a group of kids at Borders and they seemed to enjoy it. I agree with those who say it's accessible. But I think there are more worthy books who also use the frame creatively and whose art is well integrated with the text, but whose art trancends the mere cartoony. I think that the honor books were good choices, even though not the books most of us expected. If they were going to choose one of their list for the award, I would have liked _The Faithful Friend_, which was the one book I thought should be honored, but didn't think had much of a chance. I think its a totally well-integrated picture book experience with a terrific story. I once read it as the only story at a Border's Books storytime, where the attention span is generally two seconds, and the kids were rapt.

I think the Newbery committee got it right. I know that _The Midwife's Apprentice_ hasn't been embraced by everyone, and there has been some question about it's kid appeal. But hey, my to copies of _Walk Two Moons_ are still sitting on the Newbery shelf a year later having never been checked out. _The Midwife's Apprentice_ already been checked out numerous times.

I've been following these awards since I was in Junior High, and the school librarian encouraged me to read all the Newbery winners, which I did dutifully. It took me one school year, and afterwards I created my own Academy Awards for the Newbery books. My award for best Newbery winner back then was _The Bronze Bow_. I remember my least favorite was _M. C. Higgins the Great_ which I didn't understand. Susan Cooper's _The Grey King_ was the first one I read before it actually received the award. I remember getting the news and running around the house yelling "Far freakin'out!", a phrase I picked up from Doonesbury. I got so into it that as a kid a couple of times I was able to tell my librarians what had won before they found out. So it's been especially fun to be at the announcements and see the reactions. This year it was the stunned gasps at the announcement of _Officer Buckle_ and the loud applause at the announcement of _The Midwife's Apprentice_. I hope that amid all the mini-controversys regarding the books selected we keep in mind the visibility that the awards give outside the library community to real children's books.