Among national awards for children’s literature, my studies this week included consideration of the John Newbery Medal. Awarded annually by the Association for Library Service to Children, the Newbery Medal recognizes the author “of the most distinguished contribution to American literature for children” (ALSC, n.d.) In 2022, ALSC commemorated 100 years of the Newbery Medal.
About 15 years ago, a Washington Post staff writer highlighted complaints by critics: “whether the books that have won recently are so complicated and inaccessible to most children that they are effectively turning off kids to reading” (Strauss, 2008).
The article included this perspective by a 13-year-old student: that “‘If you force someone to read a book, the less likely you are to like it” (ibid). The student, Elias Feldman, was referring to a practice by teachers to assign Newbery Medal-winners. Specifically, he alleged, teachers “like to select books ripe for analysis rather than for a gripping narrative” (ibid).
I think that what was being raised in this article were essentially two separate issues: one being, which books are being chosen as medal-winners and which books are teachers using in their classrooms?
To answer the former question, I think we need to consider award founders’ original perspectives, as well as consider sentiments expressed in more recent articles.
From a Newbery centennial-themed issue of Children & Libraries, l learned that Clara Whitehill Hunt, one of the award’s pioneers, held a specific concern that children should not read “cheap” series fiction. Hunt denigrated such fiction as “trash” (Marcus, 2022; Grad, 2022).
So, in 2008, to say that that year’s medal-winner was “inaccessible to young readers” (Strauss) would not necessarily put it at odds with the medal’s original intention.
Remember that the purpose of the medal was to honor what adults viewed as literary excellence, rather than the popular reading appeal that a book held for young readers.
(It’s because of popular reading appeal that readers’ choice awards hold great interest for me: especially awards where children, themselves, nominate titles and vote for the winners.)
One positive development is that Newbery award winners are becoming “more welcoming, more inclusive, more loving, of readers from all backgrounds” (Park, 2022). And committees are “looking at all types of writing and not just at novels” (Hartz, 2022). “A case in point, New Kid by Jerry Craft became the first graphic novel to win the Newbery, in 2020” (ibid).
I’d like to slightly rephrase what I identified as a second issue in Strauss’s article. Which decade’s medal winners are teachers using in their classrooms? Have their novel selections kept up with the greater diversity among more recent medal winners? Or are they still teaching from the same books that teachers relied on 10, 15, 20, or more years ago?
In 2022, the editors at School Library Journal partnered with the National Council of Teachers of English: to create extensive booklists for “Refreshing the Canon” (Diaz, 2022). “Some of the criteria for selection included relevancy of subject and theme, diversity and representation, and the contemporary needs and interests of current students” (ibid). Hopefully through their efforts, students today will encounter more diverse selections: books that offer gripping stories as well as material for analysis.
References:
Association for Library Service to Children. (n.d.) John Newbery Medal. Books & media awards. https://www.ala.org/alsc/awardsgrants/bookmedia/newbery
Diaz, S. (2022, May 10). Time to refresh the canon: Here are our picks. News & Features. School Library Journal. https://www.slj.com/story/time-to-refresh-the-canon-here-are-our-picks-slj-ncte
Grad, K. (2022). Ahead of her time: Hunt was early pioneer for children’s literature. Children & Libraries, (20) 1, p. 8-10.
Hartz, T. (2022, June 1). 100 Years of the Newbery Medal: A look at the legacy—and future—of this distinguished award for children’s books. American Libraries, 53 (6), pp. 28-31; 34-36. https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2022/06/01/100-years-of-the-newbery-medal/
Marcus, L. (2022). The people behind the medal: John Newbery, Frederic G. Melcher, and Clara Whitehill Hunt. Children & libraries, (20) 1, p. 3-7.
Park, L.S. (2022, May 16). From trend to norm: How the last twenty years of the Newbery can guide us. The Horn Book. https://www.hbook.com/story/from-trend-to-norm-how-the-last-twenty-years-of-the-newbery-can-guide-us
Strauss, V. (2008, Dec. 16). Critics say Newbery-winning books are too challenging for young readers. Arts & Living: Books. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/15/AR2008121503293.html
On a personal note: I actually felt chagrin (if that's the right word for it) when reading Strauss's article. Strauss seemed to single out autism in what I felt was a judgmental way. Strauss observed that, "Of the 25 winners and runners-up chosen from 2000 to 2005, four of the books deal with death, six with the absence of one or both parents and four with such mental challenges as autism." My reaction, internally, was to ask why Strauss had singled out autistic people in that way. Don't we deserve to be represented in fiction? What about our windows and mirrors? Was Strauss really suggesting that our presence in children's literature made those books unpalatable to young readers?
ReplyDelete