William Sleator's books

It was telling when Orson Scott Card, upon finding that I had read many of his books and not just the Ender series, got so excited and asked, "So, you must like William Sleator's books a lot?" and proceeded to gush over Sleator's work, specifically Singularity. I acted a bit dense and tried to high-five Card who told me that he's not the "high-five kind." ooops! But, our brief conversation reminded me how much I DID enjoy all the books I read by Sleator, and how much I appreciate that he not only creates gripping plot and probing philosophical and moral dilemmas, he also really gets in science right (at least according to the theories of the time when the books were written.) My favorite titles by him are Singularity, for its illuminating explanation of black hole and singularity and for its protagonist's emotional and moral struggle after he realizes that he can age himself and turn the table on his superior and sometimes bullying brother; The Boy Who Reversed Himself, for its vivid depictions of different dimensional worlds and the protagonists' grappling with adolescence and romance; The Green Future of Tyco, for its dizzying time-hopping scenes and Tyco's realization of how a person's past shapes his future and how one can become careless with one's actions and turn out to be quite despicable; The House of Stairs for its chilling social experiment and exposure of the darker sides (and some brighter sides) of human nature; Among the Dolls, for its creepy depiction of neglected dolls and their revenge upon the careless girl. And I can't talk about Sleator's works without mentioning how much fun my students and I have had for years now when we shared the jokes (gross, quite often) and humorous events (highly exaggerated, quite often) in Oddballs -- short stories based on his family stories.

2008 Anaheim ALA Highlights in Pictures

I'm back home in warm and breezy New York City. It's beautiful here by the Hudson. The sun just set. And we saw many beautiful white sails on the river in the dimming sunlight.... Now it's time to upload some pictures from the ALA Annual Conference. I never remembered to bring a camera but this time, I did and boy did I go a bit crazy! I should have taken some pictures of the Notable Children's Books Committee but I got too nervous and too focused on "work" and never thought of capturing those moments which were super important. These pictures here preserved the moments that I relaxed and had fun with friends -- old and new.

But before the people pictures... see the carpet in the Ballroom of the Disneyland Hotel.... can you "Spy Mickey"?

Yes. Monica and I (and Nina) went to Disnleyland!

Peter Sis

Orson Scott Card



Nina Lindsay, Me, Candace Fleming, Eric Rohmann, Richie Partington at the Lucky Strike Bowling Lane (Orange Block)



Andrew Clements



Reunion with the 2002 Newbery Committee
(Kathy Odean, Ken Setterington, Louise Sherman, Jeri Kladder,
Patty Carleton, Me, Vaunda Nelson, Vicky Smith)



Lisa Falk, Vicky Smith, Elizabeth Overmeyer, and Kathy Odean



I also saw Joanne dinner and "glanced" and said hi to Deb. Junko is in Germany and Gail and Shron were not at the Conference.

THE CALDECOTT/NEWBERY BANQUET, JUNE 29th, 2008.

Yup, it's me with the 2008 Caldecott Medal winner Brian Selznick. Our footwear matched!



2008 Newbery Winner Laura Amy Schlitz with Nina Linday, Newbery Chair.



2002 Newbery winner Linda Sue Park with me.



Me, Kathy, and Louise pre-banquet



Jonathan Hunt, friend, librarian, reviewer, and 2008 Printz Committee member Monica Edinger, friend, teacher, author, blogger of children's literature, and 2008 Newbery Committee member. At the banquet.



Me with Hope Anita Smith, poet, author of The Way A Door Closes and Keeping the Night Watch.

In the Land of The Mouse

Writing this from The Anaheim Hilton. On a warm evening in Southern California. This is a strange land and I still feel a total stranger. The reason for me to be here? The many exciting things happening at the American Library Association's Annual Conference. Among these exciting things:

The 2009 Children's Notable Books Committee has met for the past three days, discussing the merits and concerns of 59 books for children from the Spring 2008 offering. I am so pleased to be on this committee, with ten other thoughtful readers and critics who really understand books and especially books for children. Here is the list of the books in excel form that we discussed from the ALSC Web Site.

The interesting and often illuminating conversations: with authors, illustrators, editors, critics and other librarians: Candace Fleming, Orson Scott Card, John Green, Peter Sis, Eric Rohmann, Linda Sue Park, Dinah Stevenson, Laura Godwin, Brenda Bowen, Anne Scwartz, Vicky Smith, Nina Lindsay, Monica Edinger, Jonathan Hunt, Elise DeGuiseppi, Martha Walke, Eliza Dresang, and many many others.

Of course, there was the Newbery/Caldecott Banquet to celebrate this year's award winners and honorees. Anyone who attended this year's Banquet would probably agree with me that the two speeches were magical, all done without the help of Mouse Ears or a Fairy's Wand. Here's a detailed blog entry by Wendie Old about the evening. Thanks to Tim Jones, Marketing Director at Henry Holt, I was seated with the coolest people in children's publishing: poets Nikki Giovanni and Anita Hope Smith, author/illustrator Laurie Keller, author Mary E. Pearson, publisher and author Laura Godwin, and editor Christy Ottaviano (who now has her own imprint!)

Some other personal highlights:

• I want to publicly congratulate on a job so brilliantly done by Karen Breen and Nina Lindsay, chairs of Caldecott and Newbery Committees in their introduction of each title. It was a pleasure to listen to their descriptions of the books. And both of them looked so beautiful on stage, too!
  
• Brian's "starry shirt" and silver boots were "the talk of the banquet hall!" I had the chance to capture both in pictures.
• It was wonderful to hear Eeyore's Books for Children mentioned by Brian. He worked there. I did, as well: Brian on the West Side store and I on the East Side. (And he wasn't exaggerating when describing the somewhat demanding and difficult patron, either.)
  

All I do is not reading...

This entry is sparked by Neil Gaiman's blog entry of today -- someone asking about becoming an editor because she loves to read and being an editor, in her mind, will be all about reading. Gaiman posted a really good response from a TOR editor, and it boils down to the fact that, no, an editor's job is not reading all day.

Same thing that I often experience when people talk about wanting to become a Librarian because they love books and reading and in their mind, Librarians seem to be doing nothing but reading. The truth is, at least in my case, I almost NEVER read on the job. I read on the way to and from work on the subway, I read at night, I read brushing my teeth in the morning, I read on the weekends, I read in bed, and I read on vacation. But, if I can steal 10 minutes in any given day to read a chapter or so, I'll count myself lucky! There is a lot of data management, program preparation, PR, reference assistance, readers' advisory, reading list compilation, finding resources for patrons and for the web pages... all those little "tasks" that take up all the time in an 8-hour day that a passionate reader will definitely find frustrating if he or she got into this profession thinking that they wouldn't need to do much else. (HA! Think again!)

I am fortunate that I love to read AND love to do all the other things that come with the job (umm... maybe not that much chasing down overdue books, cleaning my desk, or shelving...) and I'd recommend anyone who wants to be a librarian thinks about this job as a service profession, as a PR profession, and as an Information Management profession, on top of a Reading Profession.

Webkinz as Stories

This is what was told me by my 9-year-old daughter who is an avid Webkinz player. Rumor #1: If you complete the Legendary Crown of Wonder and you put it on your Webkinz pet. The pet will die. Rumor #2: Ms. Birdie (who runs the Adoption Center) will steal your Webkin or she will stab your webkin. Rumor #3: Dr. Quack (the Vet) has a gun and shoots your pet behind the curtain when you take it for a check-up.

Webkinz is an online game site which is designed to be gentle and all the games (even the shoot-them ones) are revised so no one is ever killed and the violence level is probably 5 on a scale of 0 to 100.

And yet, young children obviously create and relish their own darker and more frightening stories. I found this deeply interesting and illuminating.

Balancing Act

I have been thinking ... not only authors have to balance the plot, the tone, the characters, the excitement and the poetic moments, a reader, especially a critical one that has some responsibilities to other readers (such as a teacher or a librarian,) has to perform such acts constantly when recommending and sharing books. I really love Wilson's 100 Cupboards and yet I can totally see some flaws. Do I have to preface my recommendation by "although there are parts of the book that might not seem convincing..." before getting into all the exciting stuff that I believe most children would love? Or, do I just enthusiastically "push" the book like I did today to a bunch of 6th graders without mentioning my own reservations because they might not find those parts as annoying as I did? Shouldn't I somehow be honing their literary critical thinking abilities? If there is a major flaw, shouldn't I point out and "enlighten" these young readers? This dilemma applies to the opposite situations as well -- when I "know" that a book is very well written and painstakingly crafted, but I am not personally responding to it or moved by it, do I then not advocate for it? Or, shouldn't I muster some pretend enthusiasm in hope that maybe some young readers will appreciate the story, the character, the subject matter, etc., even if I have not? I don't do this very well... not well at all.

Roasted Chickens

It's funny how I often associate my reading experiences with my food experiences. This is yet another one. I am reading a new fantasy novel and it is so taste-less that I have to keep skipping pages and getting more and more annoyed by the book (and by the author, I guess.) It is like eating a badly roasted chicken. Although the cook rubbed the chicken with all sorts of herbs and roasted until the outside is golden brown, for some reason the meat is neither juicy nor flavorful. The temperature might have been wrong. The herbs might have been too old. The chicken itself might just been bland to start with. Anyway, the meat simply is woody and tastes like paper. The author of this book dressed up the story with all sorts of "ingredients": magical creatures popping up every two pages, dangers lurking at each corner, young people taking charge of matters, and lots of references to historical facts. But, at the core of the tale, there is nothing for me to savor. The sentences are plain, the pacing is laborious, the details are tedious, and the characters are neither vivid nor admirable. In short, I can't swallow this impressive looking bird!

The Metamor City Podcast

Creator: Chris Lester
Listening Level: Older YA and Adults

Edition: 2007/2008 Audio Podcast

I have been listening to this Sci-Fan podcast for the past few weeks... catching up their early episodes from late 2007 and approaching this year's newer productions. Every story happens in Metamor City -- a futuristic sci-fi setting with magical creatures and fantasy elements. Fairies, demi-gods, mages ride on super-motorbike like vehicles and fight each other with not only magic but modern weaponry. The main ingredients of the stories I've listened to so far are violence, magic, sex, and humor: both light and dark. It's definitely entertaining.

Waiting

So. Here are some books I'm waiting to read: Neil Gaiman's Graveyard Book (Fall); Diana Wynne Jones' House of Many Ways -- sequel to Howl's Moving Castle (June); Kate Thompson's The Last of the High Kings -- sequel to The New Policeman (May); Rick Riordan's The Battle of the Labyrinth -- the 4th book of Percy Jackson (May); Tamora Pierce's Bloodhound -- the 2nd book in the Legend of Beka Cooper series; and for the longest time, George .R.R. Martin's Dances with Dragons -- the 5th book in his Song of Ice and Fire series. Hmm... these are ALL fantasies. I guess my taste remains the same.

In the meantime, I'm reading for the Notables, looking for good middle and lower grade titles and great picture books. Another fun thing that I'm doing is to advise a senior project: a young writer is working on her fantasy novel and I'm slowly entering (one chapter at a time, commenting and editing) a world rich with history and magical happenings. It's a lot more fun than I had anticipated!

Enough with the Prophecies!

Today at school, during a heated book discussion, a 6th grade boy exclaimed (over others' fondness of the Warriors series), "Enough with the prophecies!" He couldn't stand the formulaic tradition that seems to be mindlessly overused by fantasy writers these days: someone exists, always, to fulfill a prophecy! I thought he definitely had a point!

And, I add my own exclamation: Enough with the Headless Children on Book Covers; and Enough with the Reflective, Metallic Dust Jacket with Some Sort of Scientific Graphic Designs! (So weird -- so many sci-fi titles and series with almost identical cover designs, but they are not by the same authors or published by the same companies.)

I wonder what other exclamations people have now regarding children's books.

Harry Potter in the House

Lily has been very into HP lately. She's reading the 5th book now and we've caught up with the films to the 4th. I am reminded again how lengthy and tryingly so of the beginning of Goblet of Fire: the repeated problems at the Dursleys, the "journey" to get to the World Cup, and the Quidditch game there.... almost 200 pages before seeing the gang back to Hogwarts. I remember the read a disappointing one for me, since there was high expectation after my favorite 3rd volume. This almost prevented me from reading book V. If not for my sense of "professional" duty, I might have taken one look at the 800+page of Order of Phoenix and gave up. Thinking back, there were quite a few cool moments in HP5 and I can't wait for Lily to discover them. (And I think she won't be annoyed as much by the poorly portrayed teen angst as I was.)

We talked about the length of books and how I am not against long stories. I just have no patience of rambling for rambling sake. One of my favorite books is Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell and the series of Song of Ice and Fire are both famed for being quite long. The length worked to enhance their charm -- I didn't want the stories to end -- didn't want to get out those worlds to be back to my ordinary universe.

Resolution

I know I have not been very good at being a blogger. I don't keep a tight schedule. I am not compulsively entering every little thought on these pages. I don't do small talk. I don't post a couple of links or news about books. But, maybe I should. Maybe I should take my blogger responsibilities a bit more seriously. Maybe I should tell you that I am re-reading and re-looking at Faeries by Brian Froud and Alan Lee (1978) -- a long time treasure of mine. The book that taught me a lot -- not just in Faerie lores but in being able to read narratives in English (I was a freshman in college in Taiwan, studying to become an English teacher) and also to decipher hand-written texts. And how much I want to share this book with my 9-year-old big reader daughter who has just recently finished Spiderwick Chronicles.

Or perhaps, I should write about all the little conversations I have with my daughter and my students regarding all sorts of stories. Such as tonight, after watching the truly excellent 3rd Harry Potter movie, her indignation over the changes the director and the filmwright (sp?) had made. Or how some of my students are excited about Airman and For Boys Only.

I guess I just convinced myself that, for my own sake, I should start writing as often as I can manage and just FORCE myself to be diligent about recording my thoughts and experiences regarding stories here. Preferably on a daily basis.

2007 Favorite Books

These are the books I personally liked most, remember the best, and hope to continue recommending to young readers from the 2007 publishing year: (Arranged by Title)

For Middle and Older Readers:

Arrival by Shuan Tan
Atherton by Patrick Carmen
Blue Lipstick: Concrete Poems by John Grandits
Chaucer's Canterbury Tales by Marcia Williams
Click by Linda Sue Park and others
A Crooked Kind of Perfect by Linda Urban
Edward Hopper by Susan Goldman Rubin
Elijah of Buxton by Christopher Paul Curtis
Emmy and the Incredible Shrinking Rat by Lynne Jonell
The Game by Diana Wynne Jones
Good Masters! Sweet Ladies! by Laura Amy Schlitz, illus. by Robert Byrd
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J.K. Rowling
Hitler's Canary by Sandi Toksvis
The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick
Just Grace by Charise Mericle Harper
Kiki Strike: The Empress's Tomb by Kristen Miller
Laika by Nick Abadzis
The Land of the Silver Apples by Nancy Farmer
Leepike Ridge by H.D. Wilson
Marie Curie by Kathleen Krull
Miss Spitfire by Sarah Miller
The New Policeman by Kate Thompson
Peak by Roland Smith
Reaching for Sun by Tracie Vaughn Zimmer
Tap Dancing on the Roof: Sijo (Poems) by Linda Sue Park
The Traitor's Gate by Avi
The Wall by Peter Sis

For Younger and Non-readers

The Bearskinner by Laura Amy Schlitz, illus. by Max Grafe
The Chicken-Chasing Queen of Lamar County by Janice Harrington, illus. by Shelley Jackson
Dimity Dumpty by Bob Graham
Duck at the Door by Jackie Urbanovic
First the Egg by Laura Vaccaro Seeger
Grumpy Bird by Jeremy Tankard
How to Paint the Portrait of a Bird by Jacques Prevert, illus. by Mordecai Gerstein
Knuffle Bunny Too by Mo Willems
Let It Shine: Three Favorite Spirituals by Ashley Bryan
Pictures from Our Vacation by Lynne Rae Perkins
Rainstorm by Barbara Lehman
600 Black Spots by David A. Carter
There Is a Bird on Your Head by Mo Willems
Tracks of A Panda by Nick Dowson, illus. by Yu Rong
Very Hairy Bear by Alice Schertle, illus. by Matt Phelan

Without Apology!

I have been keenly aware of a "phenomenon" recently, even though it must have been going on for a long time -- many people preface their discussing of a recent favorite children's book by saying, "Um... I know it is not that literary..." and then going into some details as to why the speaker enjoyed the book: it has such an exciting plot; the idea is so intriguing; the characters are so funny; there are so many cool magical elements, etc. And yet, during this enthusiastic reporting -- the speaker has to qualify more than once that, "I think that children would LOVE this book, even though it is not that literary" or "I don't know why I liked it so much, even if I could see that it doesn't have much literary merit..."

I am weary of this apologetic tone. What IS literary anyway? It seems to me that when someone says that a book is "not literary" she means that the "language is not metaphoric or descriptive" or the "sentence structures are not that complex" - basically, there is a straightforwardness to the writing style that is too low or too simple to elevate the work onto the "literary altar."

More thoughts to come -- when I'm no longer completely wiped out!

Re-thinking Lyra (the movie)

I posted this on Child_lit and thought that it should be here as well. I don't want to prevent people from going to see the movie. So much of it is done right and beautifully. It will be a shame if it doesn't reach a large audience!

After almost a week -- I finally have to come to terms with my own
inability to judge this movie. I plan on seeing it again, putting
aside my pre-conceived notions on what the movie should have been and
just see it as it IS -- a movie based on a book... a book that I have
come to love and treasure more and more, the longer it lives in my
heart.

I have posted on my online journal the initial reactions from me and
the group of teens who went to the movie with me. And on Monday, I
had a chance to talk to a group of 6th graders who saw the movie over
the weekend. Here's the link of the school blog recording what they
had to say: http://blogs.dalton.org/thereadingnook/?p=320

What warms my heart is the level of intensity in the discussion over
this adaptation -- they have a LOT a LOT to say and they say with
conviction and passion -- they know ALL the details in the book and
they want the movie to convey every single important element in the
book -- and the elements they care about are not just action and plot.
They care about the rendition of the characters; the relationships
between the characters; the "hidden" messages; the importance of
minute moments; the pacing and story form; the struggle between the
light and the dark; and the ambiguity of the characters and their
actions. It is truly satisfying to hear these young readers take the
book so seriously and so much to heart. I think it is cause for
celebration!

Now, if I don't have to read so many new books for my Notables duty,
I'll be re-reading the book! I'll do what Monica's been doing --
listening to it soon.

Seen Lyra

Friday night, thirteen of us, two librarians, a college student, and 10 middle and high school fans of the book, went to see the 10:20 p.m. showing of The Golden Compass. It's an event that had been much anticipated and the excitement level couldn't be higher! We watched as the familiar story unfold on a huge screen with beautifully crafted backdrops and set designs telling a rearranged and much abbreviated story. We agreed wholeheartedly that Lyra and Mrs. Coulter couldn't have been cast better. Dakota Blue Richards is a perfect Lyra with a most fierce and sincere performance. Nicole Kidman is just right for this beautiful and brutal seductress role. The other characters are all adequate with the exception of Eva Green who just doesn't seem to embody her role as described in the book, and of course we absolutely adored the CG creatures: the Daemons and Iorek are superbly rendered. But, then, we got annoyed as well... since we loved the book to pieces, it's simply impossible to please us no matter who writes and produces the film. Here are some of our complaints:

We were really annoyed by the visual representation of Lyra's reading of the Alethiometer. Every time that same design of her going into a "visual" trance through the swirly golden dust to read the truth, you could almost hear us groan and moan. Not only that the special effects are not that impressive, they do not capture what Lyra does with the instrument at all. Lyra reads the Alethiometer with a lot of logical reasoning that has everything to do with interpreting symbols -- almost like using a different language. And yet, on the film, it looks as if she is looking into a crystal ball and seeing imagery with some kind of psychic power. If she can see how things "happen" with images, she wouldn't have taken Roger to the north to see her father at all. (And, of course, the studio decided to end the movie on a happy note where Roger is found, rescued, and going on the adventure with Lyra, rather than the actual ending featuring the ultimate betrayal from Lord Asriel.)

Having Iorek voiced by Ian McKellan is also a little difficult for us to bear since most of us are fans of the Lord of the Rings movies as well and we kept hearing Gandalf's voice. The moment when Lyra is crossing the narrow ice bridge and Iorek screamed, "Run"... looked and sounded so much like where Gandalf yelling at Frodo and the Fellowship when they came out of Moria, chased by the Balrog that we almost all burst out laughing.

We were also puzzled as to why the filmmakers chose to show "Dust like" images when the Daemons die in the movie -- since it is spelled out in the book that the people cannot see Dust and that Lord Asriel's ability to capture Dust on the hologram is incredibly rare. Why couldn't they come up with something different but equally eye-pleasing, conveying the deaths of the Daemons on the battlefield? (Imagine lines of blue smokes or something... There simply is way too much Golden Dust going on, including the swirling of psychic power when Lyra reads the Alethiometer, in this movie!)

We were dismayed by how unsophisticated the CG effects seems when it comes to the witches' flying and fight sequences (they look like from some old fashion Superman movie scenes.) We missed the emphasis of Cloud Pine as their flying transport, we don't think that Eva Green is right for Sarafina Pekkala, or at least the way her character is represented in the script,

Why do the characters have to repeat this information, "It's an Alethiometer. A Golden Compass." so many times in the movie? After the first or second time, the audience must have known that the thing is called an Alethiometer....

As mentioned above, the way the movie ended created the biggest outcry of protest from the group. Since the filmmaker decided that how the book ends is not ideal (not happy and a huge cliffhanger,) the movie ends when Roger is saved and going North with Lyra. Here, Lyra reads the Alethiometer and says that she's bringing something useful for her father. Readers of the book KNOW what that "useful thing" is and we felt terribly terribly saddened by this scene. Other audience, who have not read the book, would have been incredibly shocked if the filmmakers DO put the scene where Asriel betrays Lyra in the second movie. They would not have been prepared because Lord Asriel has not been successfully portrayed as an ambitious and morally ambiguous man (as he is presented in the book) and they would have not believed that Lyra was misinterpreting the Alethiometer because in this movie, Lyra could SEE what's going to happen (whereas in the book, it is always clear that she is just INTERPRETING the symbols and guessing).

Someone said that there should be THREE movies for this one book alone! Yes... we want nine movies out of this trilogy!!! And we want the scenes that show characters' human sides: we want to see how Lyra charms the Gyptians by being one of the crew (a montage of her working side-by-side with Ma Costa or Lord Faa, maybe? instead of long panned shots of the ship going down the big river?)

Here's the list of people from school who went to the movie together: Joe Quain, Roxanne Feldman, Josh Revesz, Daniel Liss, Celena Kopinski, Genevieve Oxman, Russell Meredith, Allison Flamberg, Parker Zhao, Max Weinreich, and Gabe Levine, Zack Pintchik.

Full Circle and Then Some

I found an entry on my pre-blog reading notes, on the day of finishing reading The Golden Compass for the first time, eleven years ago. The date was 9/11/96...

I wrote,

"I was Devastated.

How could the book end such way? I was all hoping for a completion, a happy reunion, a resolutioin.. and was thrown the cliff-hanger for BOOK II -- which is NOT available yet. Oh.. what agony.

/complaint mode off!

What a treat. What a complicated and yet simple, deep and yet playful, violent and yet gentle, and moving and yet chilling book!

One thing that is so charming and yet so unsettling about Lyra is that, even though she has a truth-reader, and she is a truth-teller -- she also masters the art of lying. She knows the truth about the people (or creatures) that she confronts, and then uses that knowledge to manipulate them and gain upperhand. Even though, since she is pure at heart and means only well, she does not apply that skill to harm people (just to kill the bad ones!) She is indeed the same as her mother, who is also a master in the art of deceit.

Pullman's portrayal of a parrallel world to 19th century earth (Oxford, London, The Arctic, etc.) is almost hypnotic. The fascinating description of Daemons (substantial representations of humans' souls that live and die with their humans and share all pain and joy with them) and the strong BOND between them and the humans is what draws me to the book in the first place and still is what works for me all the way til the end.

This is the 1996 Andersen award winner and rightly so."

I couldn't find an even earlier note about how by that time, I was losing heart at the state of Fantasy fiction for children and how I seemed to have lost my appreciation of this genre but The Golden Compass saved me and rekindled my love and faith in this genre.

Then... 11 years and 1 month and 20 days later -- I sat in a friend's apartment, at a small gathering of children's lit. lovers, eating pizza and sharing stories and toasting the upcoming movies, the online community of child_lit listserv, and the friendship we forged through discussing children's books -- with Philip Pullman! I told him in person how I felt when the first book ended. He asked my opinions over which Harry Potter to read (The Third, of course) and also whether I liked Jonathan Stroud's work and Megan Whalen Turner's books and genuinely valued what I had to say about them. We talked about the bench and he related the tender story of discovering a wooden heart left on THE BENCH, with the carving dedicating it to Lyra and Will.

I still couldn't quite believe that this night had happened, but I do have this to prove to myself:

What I Have Been Learning

With the help of my Notable Books for Children Committee friends who have read and nominated for many nonfiction titles, I have had the chance to learn so many things: from facts about microraptors (pigeon-sized, feathered dinosaurs) to the history of U.S. Investigative Journalism, to how nuclear fusion actually works, among many other topics. I can't wait to read about the history of Underwear!

More Getty Images Covers

It just so happened that out of the three books I read in the past two days, two of them are with very strikingly designed covers using Getty Images. I have yet to make up my mind as to whether Leap of Faith conveys all the turmoil Abby experiences in her 6th grade year and whether the wire-art skeleton is not a poor substitute of Fats (the carefully and elaborately - and probably messily labeled - skeleton). As cover goes, both are eye-catching, for sure. Did anyone read these and can comment on whether they effectively and artistically reflect the tone/content of each title? (And don't we have enough headless torsos in teen novel covers by now?)

Getty Images / Book Covers

So, I've noticed that more and more children's/YA book covers use photographs from the online image collection Getty Images. Although it is not "wrong" and I should not feel judgmental about it -- I feel "cheated" whenever I see that copyright note at the back jacket flap, stating that the image is not created specifically for or inspired especially by the text of the book.

I DO judge books by their covers, since I am a physical/materialistic book lover and care deeply about every creative aspect of the book, as an object of art. And I must admit that even though so many of these covers look quite pretty and pristine and attractive, they lack a depth, or "soul," that speaks to me as a reader -- especially AFTER reading the stories contained within. One recent example is the cover for Miss Spitfire: a blurry child's hand holding a green apple... WHY an Apple? I guess Apple is a "teachery" symbol -- but apple has little connection to Helen Keller and Annie Sullivan's emotional journey... the DOLL (Helen's first word) or the PUMP/WATER (Helen's final breakthrough objects) would have served so much better, or a powerful scene with the two main characters having one of their many conflicts -- and artwork INSPIRED by the story would have been so much more affective than Found Photos.



What gives? Pricing alone? Lack of hired talent? Anyone can shed some light on this?

Literary Device Noted

It's Sunday morning. Lily is reading Naylor's The Girls Get Even, the follow-up title to The Boys Start the War. She stopped reading for a minute to share with me this observation, "Mom, it's like you can see inside Caroline's head and inside Wally's head. But they can only guess at other characters' thoughts. So Caroline and Wally are like the main characters." I was tempted to explain the third person limited omniscient point of view and then move on to how even if they are the "narrative minds," they are not necessarily the main characters. (Although often they would be.) Then I stopped myself. She has turned back to the story. Let her read. The literary vocabulary can come later.

What gave me the tingles of delight was the fact that she noticed the narrative voices and device all by herself. I wonder if it makes her happy to make this one discovery...

Materialistic and Physical

There seems to be a general perception that readers are non-materialistic and care more about the intellectual and the spiritual world, since we tend to be lost in stories and thoughts once the words start playing in our heads. But, it is not so, at least not for this reader. I am a lover of BOOKS -- the entire physicality of these beautiful objects. When done right, or done brilliantly, all of these elements please me: the colors and designs of the covers, the thickness (or thinness) of the volumes, the various trim sizes, the choices of paper (glossy or pseudo-antique, smooth or coarse,) the smell of the new ink, the interior designs: the balanced amount of white space, the size and style of the font, decorative drawings, illustrations, and any other design elements.

Of course, if it doesn't matter what the book LOOKS or FEELS like to you, what matters to you is only the content that lies in between the covers, then, you won't understand my relationship with books. You will not understand why I will NEVER ever pick up the paperback edition of Dealing with Dragons and was so sad when the hardcover edition went out of stock for a while. You also wouldn't understand the sense of ecstasy coursing through me when looking at pages with the pleasing text to margin ratio and the non-annoying or distracting font choice. You also probably won't believe the degree of annoyance when I encounter a poorly designed book with the "wrong" font choices, terrible interior decorations, low quality paper, sloppy illustrations, etc.

I am confessing here: I have sinned! I am a materialistic and physical book lover.

A Thin Line

According to some scholars, there had, for a long time, a gender bias in children's books. Traditionally, boys were portrayed as "strong, adventurous, independent, and capable," while girls tended to be "sweet, naive, conforming, and dependent." Girls in books tended to be more passive and "acted upon" rather than the active seeker of solution and adventures. However, I could recall many female protagonists who possess all the positive and active characteristics: Charlotte (Charlotte's Web,) Claudia (From the Mixed-up of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler,) Meg (A Wrinkle in Time,) Cimorene (Dealing with Dragons,) Leslie (Bridge to Terabithia,), India Opal (Because of Winn-Dixie,) and Lyra (The Golden Compass.) This is just a start of a long list of names. I doubt not that young readers "need" these strong girls in their readings to form part of their world view without the traditional gender bias. Many newly published books for children continue this trend. (Lucky in The Higher Power of Lucky comes to mind.)

For a long time now, there has also been a group of girl protagonists that I might term "misunderstood." The famous ones are Ramona (Ramona the Pest and other titles,) Gilly Hopkins (The Great Gilly Hopkins,) Harriet (Harriet the Spy). These girls are head-strong, actively seeking adventures, and (on the surface) do not care how others perceive them. (But as readers soon find out, they are all insecure and desire to be noticed, admired, and loved.) Out of this vine, there grew the current bunch of girls who are not only strong and adventuresome, but also couldn't care less what others perceive them and how others might feel and react to their words and actions.

More and more female protagonists act rudely and selfishly and have been praised for their "pluckiness" and nonconformity. We see a mild case of witty snippishness in Mia (Princess Diaries,) and then there are the younger cast such as Junie B. Jones whose antics, unlike those of Ramona's, are a lot more intentional and whose sarcastic descriptions of the others (children and adults alike) are beyond just a show of pluckiness or humor. Last year we saw a group of amazingly talented outcast girls in Kiki Strike: Inside the Shadow City. They sure are adventuresome and resourceful. No guys ever helped them with their mission. They are bonded over life-and-death situations, saving each other from great perils, and sharing secrets no one else could know. And yet, when they are with each other, sarcastic put-downs are uttered and thrown at each other relentlessly. These are not merely nonconforming, plucky girls: they are downright rude and nasty.

And, yet, it seems, the world celebrates them. "Kiki Strike celebrates the courage and daring of seemingly ordinary girls, and it will thrill those who long for adventure and excitement." --School Library Journal and "This is a rallying cry for the ‘curious’ and an effective anthem of geek-girl power . . . All in all, an absurdly satisfying romp for disaffected smart girls." --Kirkus Reviews

When did so many girl protagonists cross the line and went from being admirably courageous and confident to being mean-spirited and self-congratulatory in their total disregard of others? I always believe that literature does not exist to cultivate readers' manners or to provide role models. A good storyteller should always aim at achieving a good story. It is true that these girls exist in real life (flinging insults at each other as a way to show intimacy and quick wit, much like their male counterparts) and that the world of stories should be wide-open and encompass all kinds. However, it is crucial that children's book creators and their teams do not simply make up these characters to follow a trend since these are what children see and hear on a daily basis, both in their real life and on TV/in movies and seem to fit the market place.

I wish that more critics and readers are aware of this somewhat subtle but insidious shift in children's literature heroines and continue to appreciate the "traditional" "strong, adventurous, independent, and capable" literary girls whom we admire and would love to be friends with after reading the last sentence of a tale.

More on this later.

Pulled Pork Theory

My daughter commented at dinner the other night after I enthusiastically devoured a superb Pulled Pork Sandwich, that, "Because you like pulled-pork so much, you're NEVER going to say that it's not good!" I looked at her, thinking, yup, she's probably right. Since I love love love this particular food, it's more likely that I would enjoy it as a meal option than some other choices (such as pickled herrings over a green salad.) However, thinking further, I replied, "Hmmm, just because I love pulled pork doesn't mean that I can't tell a good pulled pork from a badly done one, or from an excellent one. In fact, because I AM a pulled pork expert (consuming, not making) I probably am more sensitive to tiny differences in quality from one pulled pork to the next."

Then we went on and talked about my taste and ability to tell a good fantasy novel from a poorly constructed one. And, how, reading is like eating: to a more practiced and sensitive palate, small alterations in ingredients and textures could make a huge difference in my level of enjoyment. Spaghetti must be cooked al dente in my household -- slightly firmer or one degree limper both result in less enjoyment. That's why we guard the pot and test the noodle and quickly drain the water and serve when it's "just right." I know, it's a curse! But, a bliss as well, when everything is "just right" or when something exceeds expectation. Like the superb pulled pork from a grocery delivery service: all prepared and ready to serve (after a couple of minutes in the microwave!)

So, this is my pulled pork theory: just because I like a particular kind of books doesn't make me blind to the differences in quality from one offering to the next (the opposite probably applies.) And, it is important, for my professional life, to widely sample different kinds of writings and styles, all sorts of genres and formulas, so when it comes to discerning the poorly done, the mundane, and the divine, I can make well-informed and balanced judgments.

Serving on the Notables

So. Some of you might know that this year (and next and who knows...) I have been reading as a Member of the ALSC Notable Children's Books Committee, along with ten other VERY diligent and VERY intelligent and extremely knowledgeable and generous members!

So, the question I have been asked most is: How could you possibly read these many books? (Yup, we've each received already around 1000 titles and that's just the first half of the year's submission.) The short and quick answer is, "I can't!" So, I read as much as my slow pace allows, and then rely heavily on other members who read faster and have better radars to best books for recommendations. Without them, and without the current responsibility, I wouldn't have read the excellent survival story/mystery Leepike Ridge or what I am currently reading and definitely enjoying, Does My Head Look Big In This?

I am totally enjoying this experience, although of course, overwhelmed, as well. More to report another day.

It's definitely an addiction

Reading, that is. I have been reading nonstop due to my responsibility on ALSC's Notable Children's Books Committee. Although so many books so far have been disappointing or just bleh, my passion for reading has only increased. So, this reading thing must be an addiction: I am constantly looking for the next book that will grab me, get me lost in a different and dexterously constructed world (and it doesn't even have to be a fantasy land or a futuristic one) and keep me in a dizzying haze when daily routines seem less real than the characters or relationships in a story. How else could I categorize this constant search for the next Big Experience?

This desire is so strong, it's often physical!

Am I evil in demanding high standards?

I've been teaching an online graduate course on fairy tales as children's literature these past few weeks. Recently, we debated heatedly about picture book fakelores and whether they should remain on library shelves and classrooms. Some of my students were puzzled by my passionate stance, believing that as long as the books are in high quality, with good stories and great illustrations, created by well-intentioned and reputable authors/illustrators, what's the big deal if they might be misleading. One student stated that if she was to choose between a beautifully made story, with some misrepresentation of the culture, but entertaining to the young readers, and a boring but accurate book, she would definitely choose the former. I completely understand how she feels. But, a big question remains:

Why would we even need to "choose"? Why couldn't we demand that books created for children and purchased by libraries and schools always be both accurate and entertaining? Why would anyone want to just settle for the lesser evil?

(I've been called the mean step-sister by a student already, so I imagine that I'm probably an evil step-mother now that I want these teachers and librarians to never settle for second best and always demand the best for our kids and for ourselves.)