Tag Archives: Newbery Thoughts

I had fun help putting the first set of Newbery seals on the four 2013 titles.

Read all about the 2013 Newbery and many other youth media awards on this press release.

(evidence of hard work — photo taken on my phone at the

meeting room after we chose the winner and honor books.)

Got up, washed up, brushed up, got dressed, and headed toward the Press Room where the committee’s phone calls to the authors will be made shortly. Yes, I am excited.

I have not posted for a long long while… spending most moments reading and re-reading all the officially nominated titles. Can’t tell you exactly how many books are “on the table” but it’s definitely more than 7 (if we ALL have nominated the same titles) and quite a bit fewer than 105 (if we ALL have nominated different titles.) The great news is that because there are so many wonderful children’s books in 2012, I have no single “top choice” title in mind. Rather, there are more than top 20s for me! I’ll be so pleased if any of these gets recognized as the 2013 Newbery winner or honor book! The slightly sad reality, though, is that many of these deserving books will not be in the press release come Monday morning. I hope to be able to talk a little more about my favorite 2012 books once the 2013 Newbery titles are determined and known throughout the world! I’m excited!!!! I hope many others are, too!

This is IT… somewhat… we have submitted ALL the suggestions by now.  Two more nominated titles in two weeks and then it’s the final sprint: re-reading and re-evaluating and re-thinking.

I spent the last few weeks trying to find titles worthy of suggesting and nominating — and am happy to report that I found two outstanding books that gave me tremendous pleasure to read and made me consider seriously to suggest/nominate.  One of them made to my final Suggestion to the chair today.  It’s a fresh book that feels very different from all the other books I encountered this year which, at this late in the year after reading so many wonderful books, speaks for its uniqueness and distinguishing quality.  I am still unsure, though, whether I will nominate it.  Time to agonize again!!!

I have been thinking about the Newbery criteria day and night for quite some time now… as I read and think about books, and as I read about others’ thoughts on 2012 children’s books.  Over the years, many have tried to unpack what truly marks the “most distinguished” literary contribution to the American children’s literature.  Just yesterday, Nina Lindsay wrote about her thoughts on “The Art of Writing” at Heavy Medal.

Many of her thoughts coincide with my own reactions to literature — for children and adults alike.  Here’s my own attempt at explaining my own set of criteria beyond what’s displayed on the official Newbery manual document.

But first, let’s see what literary elements are highlighted in the official Newbery Manual:

These criteria are purposefully vague to leave room for interpretation by each year’s committee and to allow for flexibility of different kinds of books to be considered fully and on equal footing.  Note that the document does not call for “A group of fully developed characters that are three dimensional and have gained insights and grown by the end of the story” — instead, it just implies that the committee members should consider how successfully (appropriate to the book at hand) the author has “delineated” the characters; it also does not call for “A strong plot that follows the successful formula of storytelling, containing clear exposition, exciting rising actions, meaningful and gripping conflicts, a satisfying climax, and a solid denouement.”  Because, yes, perhaps, most books (be they fiction or nonfiction) will succeed by having this kind of structure, some other books simply don’t rely on following the conventional definitions of “a good plot” to make them Great or Distinguished.

The set of criteria also allows for different kinds of books to be considered: nonfiction, fiction, poetry, easy readers, picture books, etc.  And the six entries serve as a solid foundation as we read and consider books for their distinguishing qualities.

I have discovered that, for myself, the consideration of plot, setting, character development, clarity, accuracy, and organization serves best when determining whether a books gets an “above average” rating and warrants a spot on my monthly suggestions list.  However, these elements are not all that I consider and especially not when I start putting together arguments for “most distinguished” titles of the year.  Indeed, if these are the only aspects we focus on during our deliberation come January 2013 in Seattle, the discussion hours will become tedious quite quickly and will never rise above mundane exchanges.  To reach the level of exhilaration and enrichment, we will have to delve into the more elusive, and possibly more subjective aspects of literary works. This is when the whole business of “interpretation of the theme or concept” and the “appropriateness of style” comes into significant play.  I already expressed my thoughts on the Thematic Presentation in another post, so my focus here will be on Style.

I am grateful for our charge to consider the “Appropriateness of style”  because the word “style” allows for such wide and diverse interpretations.  Due to its vague nature, Style has always been something messy to convey or explain and it encompasses many many literary aspects: from mood, to tone, to employment of specific devices, to word choices, to rhythm and word sound, to pacing, to the use of/or lack of figurative language, etc.  I sincerely hope that when we sit around the conference table as a team of 15, we will be talking a lot about each book’s style and how that distinguishes some books from others.

That is when I can present sentences or scenes from beloved books to showcase the craft of a skilled author: the ability to find fresh turns of phrase; the dexterity in writing a sentence that paints an image vividly or conveys the internal struggle of a character without spelling blatantly out for the readers; the expert and consistent use of a particular narrative device; the talent in crafting a satisfying but not too-predictable ending; the successful employment of humor, or irony, or pathos; and many many other literary aspects that are not plot, character, setting, facts, or organization.

As I continue reading and re-reading nominated books, the most wonderful challenge will be to find concrete examples from the texts to illustrate the more conceptual aspects of the authors’ literary achievements. Thanks to the non-prescriptive and non-rigid nature of the criteria, the Newbery Award deliberation will maintain its vigor and freshness year after year.

A week ago, we all received the compilation of the second round of nominations. Almost 1/2 of the titles from October were re-nominated, receiving more supports this month. Some newly added titles also received multiple nominations — showing how some minds function the same way. About half of the titles on the list only receive one nomination each while some have much higher nomination counts. However, I don’t want to analyze too much based on total nominations received since I simply don’t believe that these numbers tell the whole story or are solid indicators of any book’s winning chances.

There are some great additions and I’m so pleased to see that someone else has nominated particular titles so I don’t need to — there are at least half a dozen of them that I also love dearly. Now they are on the table — and I feel greatly relieved! Was I surprised at some of the nominated titles? Sure I was! But that just shows how drastically different our reading tastes or judgments could be from each other. Which — I guess, should come as no surprise at all. I am sure that at least one if not two or three or all of my nominations have not made it to the top of someone else’s list. The few books that are so low on my rating ladder obviously have been sitting comfortably on someone else’s top spots. Now, my job is to make sure that I re-read these books via the lenses of my fellow committee members, taking into consideration what they have said in their nominating paragraphs and do my best to understand the positive aspects of these books. At the same time, if I continue to find these books not on par with my definitions of outstanding or distinguished, I must find ample textual evidences that support my reservations and present them clearly and succinctly during our deliberation process. In the end, no matter how I personally feel about any specific title, I must consider the whole picture and vote according to the majority will of the committee.

These are the challenges that I find most enriching and that is why serving on the Newbery is such a valuable professional and personal experience. It not only offers me the opportunity to intensely examine a slice of children’s literature but also the chances to hone my skills as a community member under a structured democracy.

The second round of official nominations is due today… I finalized the write-ups and emailed the file to our chair at 6:00 p.m.  Two titles are due from each of us.  This time around, I had something that I didn’t have in October: a fairly strong sense of the leanings of the Committee as a whole.  I re-read the nomination paragraphs from my fellow committee members, especially those titles that I am in favor of.  Some books already received multiple supports and I feel quite comfortable to not worry about re-nominating those.  But one of them, I have grown to like so much more because of the experiences I’ve had with the readers’ reactions in my community, because of re-reading passages, because of my fellow committee members’ reasonings, and because of some online thoughtful conversations.  I see more clearly now the merits of this book and understand some of my original reservations as being not on solid ground.  So, I nominated this to add my support and justifications.

Then, there is the second title.  I can imagine someone’s mouth drops, another one’s eyes widen, and someone else’s head shakes: If they ever find out what this second title is.  (Ah, indeed, fourteen other people in the world will find out tomorrow when we all receive the compilation of nominations!!!)  Is this a good move?  Is this a waste of my nomination?  I don’t think so because I do so so love this book, and I do so so want at least to have a chance to talk about it with my fellow committee members.  It deserves a place on the table — even though it might not fit the conventional Newbery Winner Profile.  Who knows… there could always be a surprise!

This has been fun.  One more set to go in December and we will go into re-reading, re-thinking, and strategizing mode!

Sometimes, to understand what something IS, one has to think of what something ISN’T.  So, I’m going to write a few posts about what I think the Newbery Award Isn’t — starting with Thematic Choice.

Over at SLJ’s Blogland, Karyn Silverman discusses her reaction to Never Fall Down by Patricia McCormick, a highly praised book and a National Book Award finalist based on the true story of a young person’s life under the rule of Khmer Rouge. In her post, Karyn concludes how she will recommend this title for its historical significance but not for its literary merits. As to the book’s Printz award winning chances?  She wrote, “the Printz doesn’t care about importance, or message, or history.”  Her final words on the post are, “The Printz is an award for literary excellence, and on that front, this does fall down.”

What Karyn illustrates of the Printz Award is equally true of The Newbery.

In the Newbery Manual, it is stated that:

“Committee members need to consider the following: a. Interpretation of the theme or concept, b…..”

It also contains an additional note: “The committee should keep in mind that the award…is not for didactic content…”

These are the only directions regarding themes that Newbery committee members have from the official document.

What this informs me, then, is that my focus of examination should not be on whether a book is about sibling rivalry, death,  historical events, lunch money, girl power, or anything else that the author chose as the central theme(s) of the book at hand.  What I should care most, then, is how well, literarily, the author interpreted such theme(s).  For example, if I am to choose from the following three (made up) books based on the authors’ skills in theme interpretation, I will probably ask these questions to start (but of course many more aspects will have to be explored):

A. An easy reader about the fun of playing with blocks

Has the author managed to make the fun and joy palpable to its readers?
Has the author successfully employed an appropriate narrative device (such as rhyming) for the audience?

B. A middle grade fiction about the importance of environmental protection

Has the author created a riveting plot line that pulls the readers in and keeps them engaged all the way through?
Has the author created true-to-life characters that the readers care about greatly?

C. A nonfiction about the history of fireworks

Has the author presented the most significant moments clearly for the intended audience?
Has the author expertly captioned all the illustrations to further illuminate the topic?

My duty is not to choose a winner based on which theme I believe as most significant (to me or a young reader) but based on which of the books is most literarily successful after thinking hard about each book, and after deliberating with input from my whole committee.

So, I say,

The Newbery Award is not for the book with the most significant theme.
The Newbery Award is not for the most teachable book.
The Newbery Award is not for the book most likely to change a young reader’s life.

I was checking my emails every half an hour yesterday — wishing for the results of the first round of nominations. But, of course, that was an unreasonable desire: the Chair had to collate fifteen people’s nominations and format them in a way that makes sense into a word document with write-ups and spread sheets with #’s and other basic information. Steven sent it out before midnight west coast time — and I woke up with the information loaded in my gmail and thus my phone. Before even putting on my glasses at 6:00 a.m., I was reading the nominations…. You guessed it — it’s not THREE titles. (If everyone had nominated the same three books, that would have been the case.) And it’s not FORTY-FIVE titles (everyone nominating completely different three books.) It is somewhere in between. But I can’t tell anyone the exact number. I CAN, though, share my various reactions: I am DELIGHTED and EXCITED by the strong support of certain titles. I am PUZZLED by some of the choices. I am RELIEVED to see that I’ve read and thought hard on almost all the titles except for a couple and that can easily be remedied. I am MOTIVATED by some nominations to read the nominating paragraphs carefully and also to re-read really really carefully and figure out why my own initial reactions are so at odds with some of my committee members. I am EAGER to continue reading and finding fall/winter titles that might have not been on anyone’s radar yet. I am IMPRESSED by the professionalism and thoughtfulness of all my fellow committee members. And I am definitely HUMBLED by the intelligence and elegance shown in my colleagues’ nominating paragraphs. Now, continue reading!

The first 3 nominations (of 7 total) are due next Tuesday (10/9/2012) — and I’ve narrowed down my top choices to SIXTEEN titles! Haha! Among these, fantasy, realistic fiction, historical fiction, nonfiction, picture book — for ages 3 to 14. The fiction titles are split almost down to the middle of male and female protagonists and the nonfiction are mostly biographical or historical with some science elements as well. Some are humorous, some are incredibly innovative, and others are just solid with polished proses. Now… which three do I push to the top of my chart? Also to consider: which titles have already received a lot of support from the Committee? Since we have suggested monthly and also cast our support to previously suggested titles, in theory, we can guess which titles others might nominate. Should I use my precious 1/7 for a title that I just KNOW others will nominate anyway? If we all think this way, will some of our true favorites be left un-nominated? That will be disastrous! But wouldn’t it be wasteful if I put on the ballot a book that has not garnered much support and simply won’t be getting any more? How confident am I in my ability to to convince others of a particular title’s worthiness and to elevate its status to become the front runner?

A friend suggested: This first round, vote with my heart. Which three are truly MY personal favorites of the year? The fact is: I don’t know.. I simply don’t know… I love so many of them. Darn it, authors, you gave us such an amazing 2012 and now I suffer from this riches!!!

Ok.  These are the exact words from the official Newbery Terms and Criteria document:

The Medal shall be awarded annually to the author of the most distinguished contribution to American literature for children published by an American publisher in the United States in English during the preceding year. There are no limitations as to the character of the book considered except that it be original work. Honor books may be named. These shall be books that are also truly distinguished.

And, to further define the terms, we have:

A “contribution to American literature for children” shall be a book for which children are an intended potential audience. The book displays respect for children’s understandings, abilities, and appreciations. Children are defined as persons of ages up to and including fourteen, and books for this entire age range are to be considered.

Since children is defined as “up to and including 14-year-old” individuals and if you, like me, are familiar with many 14-year-olds, you would know that quite a number of them read general adult books, classics not intended for children, and most of them have encountered and loved Young Adult books.  So, why can’t we then just judge ALL books published in America this year and pick the ones that are most stellar, literary-wise, since basically they can all be appreciated by some or many 14-year-old readers.

Because, the terms also dictate that we only consider books which “children are an intended potential audience.” I take this as charging the Newbery Committee to take the publishers’ designations (if not always the authors’) into consideration.  So, we can safely get rid of all the books published by “grown up” houses.  Still we are left with the sticky bunches marked 12 and up, 13 and up, 14 and up, and the generic “teens” — which, actually, basically are ALL YA titles published in the U.S.  (Since I don’t recall seeing designated age range for 15 and up or 16 and up…. If I’m wrong, please comment and I will correct the post.)

So, how can we then decide WHICH YAs are TOO YA and which are OK YA?

This is quite subjective, indeed.  And there are 15 subjective age-assigners in the Committee who might or might not agree with the member next to him or her.  So, I can only offer how I might interpret the terms and how I currently consider to be the OK YAs:

It is actually super easy for me now:

If a YA book can be appreciated greatly by 14-year-olds and that they won’t feel “embarrassed to be caught reading a babyish book,” but I also have no problem recommending it to 11 or 12 year old readers because I believe that the themes, the presentations, the events, etc. in the book can be grasped without additional life or literary experiences by those younger readers, then, I will embrace whole-heartedly and believe such title falling quite squarely within the terms of the Newbery manual.

On the other hand, if a YA book can be appreciated greatly by 14-year-olds and they feel that they are stretching their experiences, literary abilities, or even a bit on the “risque” side while reading this book, and I find that I keep recommending it to my 16- or 17-year old high school readers because they really would GET the book much better, then, I would consider such title NOT eligible for consideration for the Newbery.

Summarize quickly: My eligible YA titles will be those that 14-year-olds are the “oldest readers” and my ineligible YA titles will be those that 14-year-olds are the “youngest readers.”

Does this make sense for anyone else?  Or am I somehow delusional?  I cannot tell others how to solve this puzzle (not even my fellow committee members.)  We all have to find our own measurements and comfortable ways that help our minds wrap around this really tough question.