How to use this Page

good for them. It's common sense that if a word will get a child in trouble in school, it shouldn't be in books either. I doubt any teachers want a student telling them "go to hell"

Well, Anon, there's language I use in school and then there's the language I use "out of school," so to speak. I wouldn't want children's reading experiences to be limited to school settings. I wouldn't want them limited by the language appropriate in school settings, either. I'd like to see people respect children's ability to tell the difference between language they can use in school and the kind they can't. I am confident that they know the difference.

Anon2

Anon1,
It's probably just bait your casting, but I'll rise to it just a bit. The logical extension of your argument is that any language not used in polite adult conversation should also not be used in books for adults. Your line of argument is fouled.
IF

I went to read 6Boxes's commentary. I really don't like the Scholastic book fairs. In the twelve years since my kids started school I have seen them go from mediocre to worse. They push off the cheapest, cheesiest, tacky, vacuous schlock on an audience that--for once in a YEAR probably--has the money in pocket to buy a book.

There's huge social pressure to give your kid money for the bookfair, so parents who would otherwise never buy a book for their kids, cough up the ten bucks. And what can the kids buy with it? Remainders that have sold nowhere else, overpriced pencils, posters, and TV tie-ins.

At the same time that I hate it, though, I have to say--it makes money. 6Boxes laments that Scholastic has a monopoly on bookfairs, but maybe this is WHY they have a monopoly. They don't ever push the envelope. They keep everything mainstream to a fault. When everyone cries out for a book to be included, then they know it is time to add it to the bookfair, but not before.

Anon2

As a Canadian who is often baffled by America’s policy on things like censorship particularly when free speech is in the country’s constitution, I’ll say this, it is up to the individual to put up the good fight. Now your rights Americans then make certain it is upheld.

I agree Roger. The "homosexual content" bit was about the lamest thing ever.

Seconded. Is it "sexual content" if a kid has, well, parents? What about all those books about kids with a baby sibling on the way? Does anyone have a problem with those? I don't think so.

My middle grade novel was considered by Scholastic Book Club-- they wanted me to take out the word "butt," any reference to the girl's period, etc etc. I was mayyybe willing to take out "butt" but come on, getting your period is biology. You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have the Facts of Life. I see nothing controversial in the Facts of Life.

Your look is very Michelle Obama, and very nice.

Great photos, Liz! You are quite the cover model!

You all look smashing. And who doesn't need an excuse to buy new clothes?! (I love your dress. I need the dress...)

You have the smize down pat!

You and the ladies look awesome, congratulations on a wonderful photoshoot and excellent article.

*gasp*
It's YOU! I didn't go back and check face to person from the article, so I didn't recognize anyone but Betsy Bird. What a great scarf!

You're all VERY Mad Men.

Thanks, all! I am very flattered & honored to be included in the article & the photo shoot. It's also kind of funny that there is a photograph of bloggers -- usually we're faceless, it's just our words.

that said, I'm seriously thinking of cropping one of those photos to use as my icon at twitter, FB & here.

Good job with the shopping! It was fun to hear the details behind the cover shoot.

You all look great, and it's great to see the faces behind the blogs. I'm still getting to know these different sites, but I know The Globe very well, and I can tell you for a fact that the tall Irish bartender pours the best pint of Guiness in NYC. Hands down.

You're all so beautiful! And stylish! And what attitude! It's clear you had a great time with this--your faces tell the tale.

And thanks for passing along the advice: Smile with your eyes and watch your elbows.

Awww! A fabulous photo!!

Great article, Barbara!

It is another fandom. And also another community. Fandoms are basically just communities loosely organized around something people are fans of, rather than organized around being real-bearded Santa Clauses or other common interests.

I'd guess that group dynamics are very similar for book bloggers/fandoms/communities as for other groups.

I think there are definately similarities; but I'm also curious as to what the "something" people are fans of *is*. Is it really "books"? That just seems like such a broad thing.

Well, it's not just books, but YA books -- and YA is its own genre, despite all the subgenres that exist within it. So I would say that yes, book blogging definitely has all the characteristics of a fandom.

I'm only peripherally involved as a reader/professional author who follows a few blogs like this one, but I know who the BNF's are, and I've seen the wanks, and I've watched selfishness and entitlement get out of control in some quarters, even as generosity and goodwill flows out from others. I see book bloggers getting together for their own meets and conventions, borrowing ideas for contests/interviews/reviews from each other and coming up with their own variations on the theme, and all the other things that are common in fandom.

Heh. Now it all makes sense...

This is an interesting observation. I agree with what King Rat has said, group dynamics are the same regardless of the subject of adoration. While I also agree that books on the whole is an awfully broad subject it is one that people have in common and is a conversation piece. Could there be offshoots of that -- as RJ mentions there are YA bloggers and such -- that make things seem more closely akin to fandom in the truest sense? Sure, but I still think the commonality exists between those that write fanfiction and those who blog about books.

Drama ends up being drama whether its about a television show, a character or about book blogging I suppose. In the end we're all wanking something.

RJ, I agree that part of the "fandom" comparison is in the various cliques (for want of better term) amongst book bloggers; and the various rules each clique follows (or expects others to follow).

Lush, it explains a lot, doesn't it?

Michelle, your last sentence is so true! And one person's passion is another's wank (i.e., when I say it, I'm sharing my wisdom and reminding you all of the rules; when you say it, it's wank).

Hmm, that makes me feel like I belong better! I never got into fan fiction, so the idea that it's all about the community of people who love the books/etc makes me feel lonely. But I guess kids/YA book bloggers can be my community of obsessives instead!

Lest we forget: Nancy Willard's picture book poetry collection won the Newbery: A VISIT TO WILLIAM BLAKE'S INN. It was also a Caldecott Honor Book.

Jane

So you've turned your cell phone off, have no crying baby (in this theater, at least, as there seems to be a signifcant one farther west), and will be a dutifully quiet movie goer?

Oh, absolutely.

I think many could have predicted it, but you precipitated it by offering popcorn. I'm waiting.

I am thrilled to bits.

oversurli

Library Sponsored Kissing Contests? Oh, do elaborate, please!

I just finished reading Kingdom today, and I read The Hunger Games last fall. It's very rare for me to have read all the books in an event like this. Of course, there are only two right now.

Kingdom most definitely has my vote. The Hunger Games has a strong mid-section, and it's an enjoyable read. But I'm mystified about why it has such a strong fan following.

It has a strong fan following because it is thrilling and easy to read. For some reason many people in our field consider this the definition of "great writing."

I do like Hunger Games. It's a great read and I think Suzanne Collins deserves credit for entertaining her audience. I have no idea why some librarians can't seem to get past the idea that the only good book is one you can get 75% of your seventh graders to read.

In their desire to get kids to read, they show no respect for those kids who already do. They assume that if a book isn't accessible it isn't any good. They read books that challenge their emotions, but they won't read things that challenge their intellects. When they run across anything more complex than The Hunger Games, they say, "Kids won't read this." Then they proudly proclaim that YA books have less "bull-shit."

I apologize for being so ugly, but it just makes me want to shout. I will sign with the the captcha word. It is very a propos.

Sincerely
oversurli

Yes it's all a massive plot. The Protocols of the Elders of Librarians.
Yours truly,
A Dedicated nefarious librarian

But it was John Green, trumpeter of the "good hard book" and fan of Octavian Nothing, who awarded a much-deserved win to Hunger Games in his round as a judge.

I'd pick Octavian over HG, but I think it's a mistake to ignore the depth in HG, the way it sets up the voyeurism of reality TV and then makes the reader complicit in that voyeurism -- the complicated relations between real actions and feelings, and simulacra of those actions and feelings. The vague line between what is a performance and what isn't.

It's sort of brilliant that a fast-reading adventure book can engage those questions.

takumashii,

No, it isn't. They engage that kind of thing on any given Star Trek episode. Is it engaged in any depth? No. That's the difference between Hunger Games and The Kingdom on the Waves. Depth.

That's what the Nefarious Librarians don't think kids can handle and John Green's fans prove them wrong.

Sorry,
still surly

Curious to learn more about the mysterious BOB, I logged on to the site and dutifully filled out the obligatory questionnaire. Am I the only one who resents having to supply so much personal information to a commercial organization? It seems a most distressing exploitation, perhaps profitable to whom? ( SLJ?) I await the junk mail etc which will now follow.

PS Yes, I know I was naif but perhaps it's understandable to think SLJ might not choose to cooperate with a market surveying -ad agency research project. They forgot to ask for SS# OR MOTHER';S MAIDEN NAME

I'm wild about Octavian, but Part II just isn't great with Part I. Yes, you can follow the story,thanks to the nifty plot summary, but Part II takes an achingly personal story and then stalls it off the coast of Virginia. Poor Katnis wouldn't stand a chance against the peerless Part I, but she's more than a match for a standalone Part II.

I am still surly, but if Lois Lowry wants to give the prize to Hunger Games, I can't honestly complain. I don't agree with Chris Crutcher that a fiction writer's first job is to get kids to read, but if it is HIS mission, and if it is what he values most in other people's work, then that is all I wanted out of BoB-- a chance to see what other people value in books. Maybe Lowry feels the same.

Or perhaps Lowry would like to say that we place too much value on "literary" and don't have enough respect for the skill it takes to write a busting good roller coaster of a book. Maybe Lowry will say that Yes, Kingdom is a good book of its kind, but Hunger Games is a GREAT book of its kind.

Hunger Games is the best summer blockbuster movie kind of book that I have seen for years. Lowry might say she likes that kind of book better, and that no matter how brilliant Kingdom is, she'd rather take HG to the beach.

It's just . . . if she says HG wins because more kids will read it as if we should *all* agree that that makes it a better book for young adults, I will be . . . disappointed.

oversurli

I agree that Octavian's story seemed stalled off the coast of Virginia for a while in Part II. However, I felt Hunger Games took a third of the book to get going, its world isn't very well developed, and the basic idea isn't all that original. (There's an Arnold Schwarzenneger movie that's very similar, for instance.) Yes, it has some very thrilling moments, but, technically speaking, I still think Octavian is the better book.

gail,

I was disappointed when I got around to reading Graceling as well. It seems to have the same sort of fan base, but I think the criticisms of it at BoB were spot on.

Katniss! Katniss! Katniss!

Ok, now it gets weird. I read Roger's blog entry last night, and dreamt that I woke up early to post something like "Oh, c'mon Roger, vote for Katniss." Then, in the manner of dreams, I spent a long time writing and correcting a blog comment about it that also included the fact that ALA members of the committee (what committee? Not sure, it was a dream) had a meet and great before they started work where they actually discussed books before they were supposed to, which biased the vote. Then my comment got posted in a park and someone corrected its grammar. Then the correcting guy got invited on Letterman with some chalk.

Ok. In case everyone isn't riveted by that fascinating dream, I will say this to Gail, who queries The Hunger Games' popularity. Gail, as a thriller/adventure story it works brilliantly, with surprises and suspense at every turn that (in my case) had me so involved that when someone came up to me and said my name while I was reading it, I didn't hear them. Throw in the "two worthy men are in love with you" scenario that never fails to satisfy (see the Twilight books) and you have a classic crowd pleaser. I adore it. But as for literary merit? Can't comment, haven't read Octavian.

Is keeping-you-so-involved-that-you-don't-hear-your-name a measure a literary merit?

Hey, Anonymous, in my estimation, yes, losing myself in a book (at an airport luggage carousel, no less) is one factor in weighing a book's "literary merit." There are books I admire in which I find my mind wandering, and I consider that a strike against them.

I think of Jane Austen, I think of Betsy Byars--both writers with an amazing degree of control in their writing. They understand pace, have impeccable timing in the way they cut from serious sections to humorous ones, and from big moments to small. They know how to intercut scenes, and exactly when to take the reader out of a moment. When I pick up a book by either of them, I don't want to put it down. The Hunger Games has all those qualities, too.

Sorry, it's oversurli who is asking about literary merit. I forgot to sign my comment. Thank you for answering.

I agree that the reader's absorption is a measure of good writing. I don't think it is the only one. So I wouldn't consider it a strike against a book if my mind wandered. A writer who keeps his reader absorbed is making it easy for the reader. He's spoon feeding something to the reader. It takes skill, but it isn't always the right thing to do.

On some subjects a reader should work -- or the reader isn't doing his own thinking. He's having someone else's thinking slipped in with the story the way a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.

Sadly, work makes my mind wander. I am more impressed with the writer who makes me work and keeps me coming back for more. Octavain One did that for me. I haven't had a chance to read Two yet, either.

Still, it does bother me that it takes such skill to keep a reader absorbed and it doesn't get much respect. Sometimes I think poorly written books get a pass because they are SRS and SRS books are supposed to be boring.

oversurli

I actually liked both books a lot for different reasons, so whatever Lois Lowry chooses, it will be one of my two favorite books of 2008.

An interesting common trait with these two finalists is that neither is a complete story in and of itself, since Octavian is volume two of a lengthy novel and Hunger Games is the first volume of a trilogy.

Will it matter if Lois Lowry has read volume I of Octavian? if she has, will that give the book an unfair advantage, since she obviously can't read the complete Hunger Games trilogy? Or if she's only read volume II, will she have enough background, since essentially she'd be starting a novel half-way through? Of the two, I'd say Hunger Games functions better as a stand-alone.

is this the place we are suppsed to write? a way of content control/

See me not saying anything? That's because I've totally stopped hijacking Roger's blog . . . promise.

oversurli and out

Elizabeth--I wonder if the torn-between-two-lovers scenario isn't a cliche, though I agree that people seem to really like it.

what ever happened to the cute little faces that used to accompany your messages? (the best part of the exchanges) I thought one wasn't permitted to speak without this sign of deference to the power elite

oversurli, I am with you.

I would also rather read an outstanding adult nonfiction book than an "outstanding" young adult novel any day. I would have said this as a teenager, too.

oversurli, you wrote: "Sometimes I think poorly written books get a pass because they are SRS and SRS books are supposed to be boring."

Can you (or someone else) explain what SRS stands for? I'm totally in the dark on this one.

Lyle Blake

Anon 1:45

You are just baiting me. You want me to break my promise to stop hijacking Roger's blog. Nunh-unh. No way. Some else is going to have to tell you why that's moronic.

oversurli

Well. I don't know what I expected to find in the comments about BoB, but this wasn't it! I love you all. Thank you!

It's totally amazing to me that folks think they have a legitimate right to post an opinionated opinion about what should win when they haven't read both entires! Tsk, tsk, that's not fair--- although I admire their gutsy willingness to admit to ignorance. But opinons based onignorance are ignorant and lack validity.

Sincerely, nitpicki

Liz - this sounds great. Any idea about how they might share some of the info from this event for folks who can't travel to it? Brooklyn is a long way from San Francisco...

Liz - you can park at the Brooklyn Museum, just go past the library on Eastern Parkway, turn right after the museum, and there's a parking lot. I think it's about $9 or $10. Street parking is very limited.

Alison
who works there

Your tag says this is stupid, and I don't understand why. How many of us have listened to Desert Island Discs? Do we think that because Illustrious Someone chooses Appalachian Spring over Eine Kleine Nacht Musik that Copeland's work is "better" than Mozart's? We listen to hear what someone we admire has to say about the music. I am reading the Battle of the Books to see what the Judges have to say. You are performance art. I think you did a fine job. I think Tim Wynne-Jones was splendid. I didn't think Scieszka was very impressive, but it might be that Trouble8 is just impossibly hard to do justice; TW-J certainly didn't make it sound any more appealing.

Of course it's about the judges. Isn't it ALWAYS? BoB just starts from that premise and runs with the idea. BoB should be interesting, thought-provoking and fun. It's stupid to insist it be anything else.

I *am* enjoying the comments from the judges but there are a couple of key distinctions between the BoB and "Desert Island Discs" (if I understand the latter properly). First, the BoB judges are handed two books to choose between, so we aren't learning anything about their actual favorites. Second, this arbitrariness is compounded by the fact that each judge narrows the field for the next round, meaning that Lois Lowry could easily be choosing between two books that say nothing at all to her.

I don't think it's always about the judges. The committees that select awards such as the Newbery have parameters, criteria, rules,and fifteen heads working together on the same books at the same time. The result--even when we don't like it--means something in a way that the BoB pick won't.

Isn't there some oft-quoted phrase about the race not always going to the swift, blah blah blah? Probably the rest of the quote undermines my argument, but I will make it anyway. The only thing that winning the BoB shows, is that the book one the BoB. I agree that it's going to be pretty silly if the winner's publisher puts it on a gold sticker and slaps the sticker on the book, but I don't expect they will. And I am so pi it is unsettling, but Roger, you aren't just performance art, you are a Role Model. The judges are showing us how they think about books. Cool.

Yes, the Newbery has rules that we hope keep people on the same page, but you cannot convince me that the committee that picked HIgher Power of Lucky would have picked Good Masters Sweet Ladies if they had all served their term one calendar year later. Or that the committee that picked Criss Cross would have picked Lucky. We don't get to see how Mary's devotion to non-fiction gets trumped by Sarah's love of historical fiction, but I'm sure it happens behind the closed doors. What matters is that some deserving book gets a prize. The criteria for the Newbery just helps with that.

Like the person you linked to earlier, you might ask what gets a book into the BoB to begin with.

Anon 11:44

Whoops.

I meant "book won the BoB." All the other errors are just typos, too, really.

Anon 11:44

Ecc 9:11, Anon 11:14! Sheesh.

Oh, um, yes, of course. Bible . . . I knew that.

Aren't I glad I'm
Anon 11:14

The best thing about the whole process is the commentary by Jonathan Hunt. He's becoming the Simon Cowell of children's literature.

apples and oranges...

Realize this marks me as Enormous Girl, but what actually kind of sticks in my craw about all this is it's a tiny bit mean.

If I write a novel and get nominated for the Newbery and then lose, I'm entitled to imagine that 49% of the committee was pulling for me and that I was a close second. But in BoB, I know for sure that some specific person I admire thinks my book is a little less good in some undefined and therefore total way than some other specific book, which I'm sure is a valuable object lesson in You're not supposed to please everybody, but I gotta tell you, I don't read the posts, they make me wince a little.

Jonathan (HB reviewer and judge for this year's BGHB awards) is great indeed and all the judges have had interesting things to say. I love that there's going to be an Octavian/Chains matchup--two white people writing about two black people in the Revolutionary War.

11:44, as i understand it the organizers chose sixteen (is that right) of the buzziest books of last year.

Enormous Girl, how do you deal with negative signed reviews? Getting one of those would probably hurt my pride more than the stated opinions of the BoB judges, who fall all over themselves about how tough it is choosing between two such great, great books--it's almost as if most of them flipped a coin, by the sound of it.

Who is the next judge and can we get him or her to please not use the phrase "apples and oranges?" At least it should be easy to avoid in this match up.

"11:44, as i understand it the organizers chose sixteen (is that right) of the buzziest books of last year."

I am imagining the Rube Goldberg buzzometer that they keep in the closet of the School Library Journal office.

Are there any that you would have put into the BoB that weren't there?

Anon 11:44

The novels the Horn Book chose for its best of the year list included The London Eye Mystery, Forever Rose and Last of the High Kings in addition to BoB contenders Kingdom of the Waves, Hunger Games, Graveyard Book, Forever Rose and Nation. Among our nonfiction choices (which included We Are the Ship and The Lincolns) we also had Christo and Jeanne-Claude, The Way We Work, Our White House and what was really my favorite book last year, Pale Male. We gave positive reviews to all of the BoB choices but obviously liked some better than others.

Another BoB contender on your best of the year list was none other than WAYS TO LIVE FOREVER.

I found the Fanfare list -- there are only NINE fiction titles picked as best books of 2008 and one of them is indeed Ways to Live Forever -- which is the contender of the first match, against Octavian nothing II.

Yeah, Ways to Live Forever slipped my mind in the recount. Nothing personal.

Dear Roger,

I love you.

Anonymous

Stop, Jon! You're embarrassing me.

I can't believe you want to be identified with Gallant! You're a "Your Own Pages" all the way.

Another Anonymous

Goofus and Gallant always makes me think of childhood trips to the dentist office -- reading Highlights while waiting to meet my doom.

Gallant may have been the "better" boy, but don't you think he also got beat up more on the playground?

Barbara Kerley

I do, and I was. And I totally blame Jon.

I'll meet you by the monkeybars right after school.

Of course, when runescape gold comes to pot, you can have too much of runescape money.

I read Ways to Live Forever a week or so ago and was VERY surprised to see it on the SLJ list. It just doesn't seem at all in the same sphere as the other books.

These beauty contests are all about stroking the ego for the people who judge and participate. The people who make books that I know are not this competitive about their books. These contests remind me of the (non) reality shows on TV that actually foster separation, humiliation and gladiator mentality. Why lay it in on children and their books ? If anyone is to be a judge of children's books let the children decide.

I love the idea of BoB and the chance to hear the judges be insightful and silly. Roger, my expectations are high. But I agree that the community of spectators is the most important part.

I also agree with Wolfson that there is something not-right in the world of kids' books. I wish there were a one-stop shop on the web for finding out about a wider range of books. I am speaking as a writer, but also as a reader and as the parent of readers. I find most of the librarians I know to be well-meaning, but useless. They only know about the very most highlighted books of the recent day. They seem tremendously burdened by other aspects of their jobs and they never seem to have read anything.

ovesse

I'm with Jill. Sure, this is all supposed to be fun and games, but it IS going to draw still more attention to books that really don't need another inch of column space devoted to them. I loved most of the chosen books and I'm still sick of hearing about them. Publishers don't have a lot of money for publicity, so why not give some free publicity to books that actually need it?

There are usually a couple or three surprise, lesser known books in the Morning News Tourney, so I think you could sneak in some faves -- but, no, it wouldn't work if the entire "contest" was filled with unknowns.

Yes, as noted above, thee affairs are just another way to enhance the status of the judges.

Date? The term wow goldis a little jarringwow goldPopWatch would wow goldNickelodeon Kids' wow goldup the 2009 wow goldlike to thank Miley wow goldCyrus for summing wow gold

I am REALLY excited about this. . . it's just very cool, and I think the book choices were generally top notch!

Wow-surreal matchups! cool.

I'd love to know the discussions that went on to reach these sixteen books!

Me, too. I had the same thought about Jellicoe Road not being on the list, even though the four Printz Honors were. But I was glad to see them address how they decided which books would face off against one another.

I love that you asked him what he was going to wear.

It was a great interview, Roger, and I enjoyed it mightily. I hope to meet the man himself this Saturday at Books of Wonder, because I love his new Blueberry Girl beyond counting.

Nice piece, but doesn't Mr. Gaiman live in Minnesota?

Nope, near it but not in it.

Great interview, Roger. And how ballsy of you was it to diss SLJ in an interview they have to pay you for and print in their magazine?

Nah, SLJ has always liked to keep things lively. Happy to help.

Great interview. I've always looked up to librarians for their gowns.

This interview makes me very very happy. Like the sun coming out after a storm: so nice to hear sensible and funny perspectives on the Newbery.

Thank you for this. You've redeemed SLJ's really disastrous coverage of this year's Newbery.

I appreciate your column, but not some of the language. I don't want my access to your blog to be blocked due to the language, so could we leave out the profanity, please!
Thanks

I'm sort of bewildered by the article--it seems like it's REALLY reaching for something controversial to say about the book. I like the commenter who says "Selection and placement aren't censorship, they're our job."

Roger, please shelve your blog in the YA section!

Dear Roger,

Please leave in the profanity. It is extremely appropriate and makes me laugh.

Laurie

It's only censorship if you don't let kids wander into the YA section.

Most fluent readers have floated there by the time they are 11.

Farah

Busy Mom--I do try to keep the language here on the mild side but am sometimes intemperate and don't believe in asterisks or euphemisms. Or filters--I'm sorry if your filter blocks my blog because of some salty language, but if I started writing with an eye to what might get filtered I wouldn't be able to say very much. Last week I tried to respond to a blog post over at SLJ that concerned sexual orientation, but their filters wouldn't allow commenters to use the word "sex," so it was difficult to get my point across.

And, Farah, it depends. Not all libraries allow children access beyond the children's room. And if you classify books in a way to deliberate limit their readership--to hide them--then, yes, I believe you are making a shelving decision based in censorship.

Oh, I agree. I hated it as a child, I hate it now. If a kid is old enough to ask, they are old enough to enter. And if they ask prematurely, they will go away and come back later.

Farah

Well, shit-stirring does make for fun reading. I love the commentary.

I am really really tired of School Library Journal and Debra Lau Whelan. I thought her first piece on the award winners was an embarrassment of bad writing and bad editing as well as "shit-stirring." I have to thank you for the new vocabulary because it is exactly the right term. I was pissed by the cheap shot at former Newberys, torqued by prudish characterization of libraries and really really cheesed off at the slap at Sherman Alexie.

All this reminds me of the Mom who called me up after our young teen daughters went to Titanic (with her permission)...she was horrified and angry, she said, to have found out that there was a scene of NAKED BREASTS as well as IMPLIED SEX (dramatic hand on steamy window)...the endless dead people in the water, the drowning children...that hadn't bothered her...so here we go, terrific book on death and life and friendship and finding one's way...and people are getting their knickers in a twist that he, potty-mouthed grown-up, swore (bad example, Mr. G!)and that someone else is using salty words to boot while talking about it on THEIR OWN blog...people, all I can say - if you cut me off in traffic, roll up your windows as you will not be happy at what you hear over the rock n' roll.

Great post - mine is shelved in my YA section ( or will be after the 15 students on the waiting list read it), but so are more than half of my Newberry titles. Never thought of it as a censorship issue. . .

For the record, most of students waiting for the book are elementary age.

That sounds like a great resource! I'm a teacher and an author, and I think I'll try to pick that up!

Beth Fehlbaum, author
Courage in Patience, a story of hope for those who have endured abuse
http://courageinpatience.blogspot.com
Ch. 1 is online!

Great article. Loved the books mentioned. I will have to check out this guide more often.

Tony Peters
Author of, Kids on a Case:The Case of the Ten Grand Kidnapping
www.eloquentbooks.com/KidsOnACase.html

The Exception is a great book. I thought he nailed the librarian character.

LOVED The Exception. My favorite book of 2007. Just posted about it myself :)

Hey! James Lee Burke! I think he writes the absolute greatest prose in the world. The first few Dave Robicheaux books burned themselves into my brain. I turned my late father, a psychiatrist, on to the series, and we used to have a field day doing armchair psychoanalysis of all the deeply damaged Burke characters.

Enjoy.

Congratulations, Roger! I knew you were COOL, to be sure, but hadn't thought about hot. Way to go! Looking forward to a New Year with ReadingRoger.

Um, that's because he's totally MY boyfriend, and he doesn't want to make me jealous. Sorry, Liz.

Liz, that's a nice nod to y'all in SLJ. Rock on.

Rufus Sewell *swoon*

see also: James Purefoy

Congrats! Can't wait to read the book . . .

Jules, who reads People.com when I'm trying to write at the blog and get stuck

W00T! Go you!

Haven't read SLJ, but I thought I'd look your blog up after reading your chapter in A Day In The Life.

I totally love your blog, and agree that pop culture is so important in connecting with the community, and hooking them onto library services, and just a better awareness of who librarians are and what they do (and not in that hipster NY Times kind of way).

Thanks, guys!

Andrew, I hope my chapter in A Day in the Life was useful to you. It's hard to believe it, but I wrote it 2 years ago. Nearly all of what I wrote remains true, though. :-)

I found this site through SLJ. I am very excited and hope to stick around and check out your site some more.