Morning, poppins!
Yesterday, for the first time in a long while, I submitted a Video Sunday for your approval. Trouble is, I may have failed to mention one of the most fascinating videos out there with a tie-in to books for kids, so I’d like to rectify the situation today.
The title of the article read, ‘Last Week Tonight’: John Oliver Turned a 20-Year-Old Kids’ Book with ‘Startling Parallels’ to Trump into a Bestseller. Naturally I tried figuring out what book they were talking about but I was coming up short. Turns out it’s good old The Kid Who Ran for President by Dan Gutman. That’s a title that is consistently on New York City public school reading lists every single year. Wouldn’t be surprised a jot if that’s how Last Week Tonight‘s writing staff heard about it (some of them must have kids). Glad to see it getting a bit of attention here and there. I won’t give away which candidate the “startling parallels” refer to (kidding!). Thanks to PW Children’s Bookshelf for the link.
A Gene Luen Yang comic piece for the New York Times simply called Glare of Disdain? Don’t mind if I do!
Horn Book came out with their 2015-2016 Yearbook Superlatives post once more. Fun bit. I wonder if they collect them throughout the year as they do their reading.
Tis the battle of the smarty-pants! Who did it better? Adam Rex and Christian Robinson at Horn Book or Jory John and Bob Shea at Kirkus? The choice is yours (though Christian Robinson probably sweeps the deck with his magnificent “Black people are magic” line).
See how I’m going from a Horn Book post to a Horn Book / Kirkus post to a Kirkus review? That’s why they pay me the big bucks, folks. In any case, usually when I post a review on this blog I like to link the books mentioned in the review to Kirkus. Why? Because they’re the review journal that has the most free archived older children’s book reviews online. Generally this is a good plan but once in a while it throws me for a loop. For example, a reviewer of the original Nate the Great back in 1972 had serious problems with the title. Your homework for the day is to read the review and then figure out what precisely the “stereotype” the book was faulty of conveying really was. I’ve read this review about ten times and I’m still baffled. Any ideas?
So I worked at NYPL for a number of years (11 in total). Of those, I spent about five or six of them working in close proximity to the original Winnie-the-Pooh toys. And in all that time I never knew them to look as good as they do right now. Oo la la! Goggle at that restored Kanga! And a Piglet where his skin ISN’T falling off his body? I don’t even know the guy now. No word on whether or not the restoration yielded more information on the music box in Pooh’s tummy (or if it’s even still there). Still, they look great (and appear to have a whole new display area too!). Thanks to Sharyn November for the link.
Did you know that Cricket Media (which runs Cricket Magazine as well as other periodicals) has a blog? I tell you this partly because I’m trying to contact someone at their Chicago location and so far my efforts have been for naught. A little help?
Did you know there was a children’s book award for science fiction? Yup. “The Golden Duck Awards, which are designed to encourage science fiction literature for children, have been given annually since 1992.” And as far as I can tell, they may still be going on. Check out their site here to see for yourself. You can suggest books from the previous year too, so have at it, peoples.
So I give up. Slate? You win. You do good posts on children’s books. I was wrong to doubt you. That post about how your son loves “bad guys” so you read him Tomi Ungerer’s The Three Robbers? That’s good stuff. And the piece on how terrible the U.S. is at translating children’s books? Also excellent. To say nothing of all the other excellent posts you’ve come up with and researched well. I doff my cap. Your pop-up blog is a rousing success. Well done you.
Question: How often has a documentary been made about a nonfiction children’s picture book about a true subject? Once at least.
Saw this next one on the old listservs and figured it might be of use to someone:
I just wanted to pass along an opportunity that I’m hoping that you’ll hope promote for ALSC. Every year, we give away four $600 stipends for ALSC members to attend Annual for the first time. Applications are open now and are being accepted up to October 1, 2016. For 2017, Penguin Random House is including one ticket for each winner to the Newbery-Caldecott-Wilder Banquet. Here is some more information.
Daily Image:
Because I just cannot stop with the Stranger Things. This one came via my friend Marci. Look closely enough and you’ll see Will hiding in the Upside Down.
Thanks to Marci Morimoto for the link.
The only problem I can see her mentioning with Nate is that he’s a white male solving a girl’s problem.
That must be it. Ah, the difficulties of a limited word count. And I’d agree if he just walked in and explained all her problems to her without her wanting him to but he’s a detective she specifically hired to solve a case. This seems less like mansplaining and more like commerce.
Maybe that he is a white male solving an African American girl’s problem?
Yep. I see that. But she hired him. I feel like that’s important. And for that matter, in 1972 how many white guys were solving black girls’ problems? Seems like they were causing the problems, not trying to solve anything. The reviewer calls this a “stereotype” so my question is how common a stereotype was it?
[I realize, by the way, that I’m arguing with a review that’s six years older than I am for a book that is so popular it’s still in print . . .]
I wonder if it’s more than just the white-guy-solves-black-girl’s-problems issue. I must admit I haven’t read Nate (or if I did, it was when I was wee)—how are Annie and brother Harry portrayed? Are they stereotyped in the illustrations, or in their speech, or … ?
Nope. The book could be published today and no one would blink an eye. I’m actually thinking of doing a post called The Weird Timelessness of Nate the Great. Most books from the past don’t age half as well as this one. Why?
(Not to mention Christian Robinson’s bra joke)
http://www.hbook.com/2016/08/authors-illustrators/interviews/five-questions-for-adam-rex-and-christian-robinson/
It seemed like it was as simple as he’s a white person solving a black person’s problem. I guess the stereotype of the white savior? Though, that’s usually when the problem is related to race, if I’m not mistaken.
Hence my confusion.