How to use this Page

Lectitans question of the week is a very interesting one: In what ways do children's and young adult novels shape readers' notions of gender roles? How can and do they present more options, especially to girl readers, for how to spend a life? They go on to add, "I'm looking here for titles, trends, and examples of literature where girls get to choose who they are going to be, or that explore when and why they don't get to choose who they are going to be" and "What has shaped the women we are now, and what will shape the girls of the future? What role does children's and young adult literature play in affecting boys' and men's views of women? How can we show girls the myriad of possibilities open to them without coloring their view of which possibilities are best?"

The questions are thought-provoking, but the answers aren't always easy to put into words. Which female characters have influenced me personally? I'd have to say LauraIngalls Wilder and Anne Shirley. The Little House books were a big part of my life in elementary school. I wanted to be Laura Ingalls Wilder. I wanted to be a teacher. I wanted to be a wife. I wanted to be a mother. I wanted to be a writer. I didn't just want one of those roles, I wanted them all. In the books, Laura didn't want to be a teacher. Not really. She took on that role out of necessity. It's been a while since I've read the books, so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Mary was the one who wanted to teach. That teaching was something Laura did because the family needed money. She was also in part living Mary's dreams for her. Just like she was always Mary's eyes. How she had to soak up so much more of life so she could share with her sister the beauty and depth of the world. But the tv show, teaching was her dream. It was something she was passionate about. So I'm not sure which influenced me more--the books or the show--but Laura Ingalls Wilder was definitely a part of my life. Anne Shirley was another character that made a big impact on me. Again, she wanted more out of life. Here was a girl with a big mouth. She had thoughts. She had opinions. She was so lovably stubborn. She was curious. She was spirited. She was adventurous. She was just so unique. And like Laura Ingalls Wilder...there was an emphasis on teaching and writing. (Although I can't remember if the movies added the emphasis on writing, or if it is in the books as well. If I'm getting it wrong, please let me know.) The traditional roles were there in the later books--she was a wife and mother--but she never quite outgrew her personality. She controlled her temper better, but she never lost herself either. Another female character that I think has in one way or other shaped the culture is Scarlett O'Hara. In some ways, it is easy to see Scarlett as a girl who definitely wanted society to change. She hated the fact that society dictated what women could or could not do. She was smart. She was good at numbers. She was good at business. She wanted a career. She didn't want to be a traditional homemaker. She didn't want a passel of brats to take care of. She didn't have a nurturing bone in her body. So while she liked to put on the mask of feminitity and helplessness to have men fall all over her, she was very independant, very capable. She knew how to work a room to her advantage. She knew how to manipulate both men and women to get what she wanted. She was in no way admirable. She was full of flaws. But there is a certain spirit about her that is appealing.

I think children's literature is important. I think it has come a long way from where it started. Elsie Dinsmore? Yuck. I'd take Ramona, Junie B. or Clementine any day. It would be very interesting to read a book or two from each decade (beginning in the nineteenth century) to see what changes have occurred. I think there have always been a few role models like Jo March that do stick out from the norm.

One of my recent favorite books with a strong heroine is NOBODY'S PRINCESS by Esther Friesner. Runaway Princess by Kate Coombs is another. Enjoyed Just Ella by Margaret Peterson Haddix. I'm sure I could think of plenty if I really sat down and thought about it.

As far as gender roles go, the thing that annoys me most about some fiction (and about some people in real life) is the portrayal of young teen girls that are so desperately seeking a boyfriend that that is the only way they define themselves. They define their worth by their status. If a boy likes me, I must be special. If I don't have a boyfriend, there must be something wrong with me. So they are always in-between relationships. It's never just okay to be by themselves. They have this need to be part of a couple at all times. To feel inadequate otherwise. Not a good picture, in my opinion. You have to know yourself; you have to love yourself; and you can never define yourself solely in terms of another person.

This week Lectitans is asking readers a very important question: "What is the recipe of good historical fiction?" Since historical fiction borders on an obsessive passion of mine, I thought I'd answer on my own blog.

I think there are many elements that make up good historical fiction. One of the signs--or marks--for me is that a writer turns a previously "boring" or "uninteresting" topic and spins it into a book that I cannot--will not--put down. For example, I had zero interest in reading any literature--fiction, nonfiction, poetry, whatever--about the Erie canal. No interest. Yet, I could not put Jim Murphy's Desperate Journey down. I was absolutely hooked. Why? Because of the writing. Strong writing--whether it is characters, plot, style, language, whatever--has the power to draw you into any story regardless of the topic or any prior interest. Which brings me to another very important element: characterization. The magic--and it's pure magic--of the Little House series by Laura Ingalls Wilder is in the characterization. A writer needs to make the characters come alive for the readers. Carolyn Meyer is another great example. I am absolutely in love with her Royal Tudors series because she makes these historical figures into living characters that you can relate to...understand. I don't know how she weaves her magic, but I see it. How else can you explain how both Elizabeth and Mary can be presented as sympathetic characters in her books? Bloody Mary has never been high on my list of characters I'd want to meet...but yet Carolyn Meyer presents her as a very human, very vulnerable, very sympathetic character. With Beware, Princess Elizabeth and Mary, Bloody Mary she could be talking about any broken family where the parents are separated or divorced. She could be talking about ANY dysfunctional family. So I think it's key for writers to present characters that are human. In other words, readers need to be able to say, "Oh, they once lived and loved and had the same fears and hopes that I do." Good historical fiction makes the characters, the period, the culture come alive. When you forget the stale facts and statistics and the 'boring' things you have to memorize in school...and get drawn into the story...the author has done something right. Some of my recent favorites include Black Duck by Janet Taylor Lisle, Bread and Roses, Too by Katherine Paterson, and Crooked River by Shelley Pearsall.

It's been quite a while since we've answered a question of the week (this was our last one), and we're ashamed to say that this question was asked a long long time ago. But better late than never!

If you'd like to send us a question of the week to answer, feel free to put it in the comments section below, or email us at bluerosegirls at gmail dot com.

How do you read, evaluate, and think about picture book manuscripts?

This question may be answered by all of us throughout the week, so keep checking back!


ALVINA:
When I review manuscript submissions, I look for beauty in the writing, whether it makes me laugh, moves me, if the characters come alive, and most of all, if it surprises me--if the concept is original. I also consider whether I can envision what the illustrations would look like, if I can see the finished product in my head, if there are good illustrative possibilities. But as our company has cut back a bit on the picture books we publish, originality really is a key. Will this book stand out in the market? Would I pick it up as I scanned the shelves in the bookstore? I also look to see if there's a "hook" in the text--can it be promoted with a holiday or event, such as back to school or Valentine's Day? That's always a plus. It's also partly a gut reaction (a "blink" if you will).

In addition, I do have many illustrators that I work with or would love to work with, and I'm always keeping an eye out for a text that would match their style, so that comes into play, too.

ANNA:
When I am sent a manuscript to consider illustrating, I look for a tone that is similar to some aspect of my illustration approach and style. Something that I think will merge well with my work, a quality that inspires me, makes me itchy to draw. Usually I can tell right away if its something I want to work on. There has to be some aspect of the storytelling (subject, description, style) that relates to my vision as a visual storyteller.

GRACE:
These days I don't do too much illustrating for other authors; I've found writing and illustrating my own work incredibly rewarding and hard to let go of. Usually I only consider illustrating someone else's story if 1)it's a person whom I know is sensitive to my style and is used to my visual voice 2)the story is great something I wish I had written myself 3)it's a story that lends itself well to my particular style 4) I feel a real connection to the words and subject matter. The last is probably the most important.