Minor fandom rant

[daemonluna]

(I thought about friends-locking this entry. I thought about posting to the community from whence the impetus for my rantiness came. Instead, I opted to just post here. Partly, I'm kind of curious what the community response is going to be. And partly, I wanted to get all this out so that if I do go and comment, I can hopefully do so without jumping down the original poster's throat over having the audacity to have *gasp* different opinions than I do on books!)

Dear Gordon Korman fans,

Stop whining about how none of his new books can ever approach the brilliance of Macdonald Hall, No Coins Please, Don't Care High, and other vintage Korman. Please.

Because really, they are fun and I loved them too, but his later stuff? Much better written.

You probably won't feel that same rush of for his new books because truly, you're not twelve any more. And if there's one thing you do better as an adolescent than any point in your life, it's feel things with great passion. (Which is not to say that you're not going to get that same huge love for a good book, it just might be for different books. And perhaps not quite so very often.) If you can go back and read the books you loved when you were younger with that misty haze of nostalgia, I'm all for that.

But please, please, please don't try to convince me nothing these days is as good as the books you read when you were a kid. I've read a lot of kids' books. A lot. It's an essential part of my job to know what's out there, what's new, what's good, and what kids want to read. Very few things annoy me like people bleating on about there being no good books for children these days just because their beloved childhood favourite hasn't stood the test of time, and they haven't read a kids' book since they were ten.

(Minor digression: If I have to hear one more time at a F&SF con panel on children's lit, "I don't see why kids aren't reading the classics these days. What's wrong with Heinlein? They should all be reading Asimov!" I will throw things. Like there's been nothing written in the intervening fifty or sixty years.)

Honestly, though. You're not the target audience any more, especially for his adventure series. Eight to thirteen year olds (especially boys, and often reluctant readers) who like suspense and survival stories eat them up. They're fast-paced, tightly-written, and not meant to be a Macdonald Hall retread.

To be perfectly honest, his Macdonald Hall era books are, um. Not very well written. Don't get me wrong, I love them. But the strongest part is the plot and timing. Large chunks of text are just dialogue. Pretty well all of his main characters are Bruno and Boots over again. (Outrageous friend! Cautious sidekick! Together, they fight crime have wacky hijinx!)

He's developed a lot as a writer. Sure, not every single one of his many, many books is brilliant. (To choose one of his latest, Maxx Comedy was really kind of so-so.) However. Son of the Mob is the same sort of humor as A Semester in the Life of a Garbage Bag, or I Want to Go Home, but his characters actually have some dimension. And though I wasn't big on Jake, Reinvented (moderately successful Great Gatsby retelling), No More Dead Dogs was truly inspired. (As well as being way too much fun to booktalk.)

Personally, I think that it's a good thing that he's grown and changed as a writer. He's made a very successful career for himself, and I really don't think he's sold out.

So, please. Take off your blinkers of best-book-ever childhood nostalgia. (And if not, then please don't rant about it extensively without using cut tags.)

Not Love but Sincerely,
Me

(I'll just be over here, repeating an impromptu librarian mantra on diversity of readers and opinions...)

Comments

[perian.livejournal.com]

Amen!

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

Thanks. *g* I'm still deciding if I'm going to go comment on the original thread. Sadly, a lot of the current replies are "oh, you are so right!" tyoe stuff.

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

I agree that there's been an awful lot of great stuff written in the last 50 or 60 years, but I think teens who are planning on going into science should probably read Heinlein and other pulp from the immediate post-war period, because the tone has shifted so much in the science industry: there's a lot of hope and anticipation now, but it's not nearly the same as it was then.

(On the other hand, you will never convince that any children's book will ever-ever-ever be as excellent and life-defining as Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day, and that book is almost 35 years old.)

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm totally for kids still reading Heinlein and Asmiov. Just because it's old doesn't mean it's not good. It's just the whole "what was good enough for me is what kids today should be reading, dammit!" attitude. That's not ALL that's out there. I think that we should be supplementing the old stuff with something that reflects the way our ideas about science, race, gender, all of these things have changed.

It's usually the die-hard SF fans who are reading the classics. Which is not to say that other kids aren't reading SF. (Hot items at both my schools recently have been City of Ember by Jeanne Duprau, a post-apocalyptical city underground type book, and the Shadow Children series by Margaret Peterson Haddix. One booktalk to grade five today, and I had twelve ten-year-olds all desperately wanting the first book.)

And Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No-Good Very Bad Day is still awesome! I use it for storytime for kindergarten all the way up to grade three.

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

[I actually have no idea what you do (the specifics, I mean).] I wonder how useful it would be to do comparative readings (for middle-school aged kids?) of SF fiction across different historical eras, and compare it to the science history and science fact they are learning.

My reading of SF for kids stopped when I stopped being a kid and I moved into the adult landscape; I actually have little idea of what the YA books of the last 15 years are displaying in terms of science studies-type information (rather than just scientific development).

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

At the moment, I'm an elementary school librarian. The bit of my day I'm referring to is once-a-week storytime. (of course, for them it's once a week, for me, splitting my time between two schools, it's sometimes upwards of thirty a week.) In my library, everyyyyone gets storytime, from K-6. The little guys, it's mostly picture books, older kids, I'll essentially "sell" a longer book, tell them a bit about it and read an excerpt. Then, if they want to sign it out, there's an elaborate system of fairness involving popsicle sticks. What I choose might be thematic, seasonal, related to what they're doing in class, or just a balance of "well, I did one action-adventure and a girly book last time, let's throw in non-fiction, fantasy, and something silly this week."

Comparative readings sound fascinating, but more a junior high and high school level. And it's something that would be done in class rather than the library, depending on your school. (And here we would get into a long digression about teacher-librarians vs librarians or library techs, lack of funding and support. But I won't go there.) Suffice to say, I don't assign homework, because I don't submit marks for report cards.

YA SF and fantasy, the boundaries are always a bit blurry. Kids and teens read up and adults read teen books and there's much less of a dividing line than with other genres. But a lot of current YA SF is soft SF with its roots in sociology or psychology, whether it's ten years in the future or two hundred. The hard science is usually part of the plot, but it's more along the lines of what effects genetic engineering or direct advertising feeds into our skull would have on society than just wow, look what we can do. Or municipal Darwinism, giant mechanized cities tearing about and scavenging each other for scrap and parts. (Books in question: Diary of Pelly D., Feed, and Mortal Engines.) I haven't done an exhaustive study though, by any stretch.

Oy. That was long. Sorry for the rambly-ness.

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

No, that's fascinating. And I didn't think you had anything to do with book assignments; and I did realize later that I was thinking of stuff for older readers. But it's nice to hear more about where YA SF/fantasy is right now, and how to get younger people to read widely.

teacher-librarians vs librarians or library techs, lack of funding and support. But I won't go there I think that's the sort of conversation I would love to have with you over some quality food and alcohol.

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

"Storytime" for the older grades (above about grade two or three) doesn't get done very often. But I think you're never too old to be read aloud to. And it lets them know what's out there and gives them something besides series books to cling to. Besides, I love booktalking. *g* It means I do a LOT of reading on my own time, though.

It was worth it yesterday though when one of the grade six teachers told me his kids are reading SO much more this year.

I think that's the sort of conversation I would love to have with you over some quality food and alcohol. I would love to--though I can really only comment on the sad state of affairs in Canadian schools.

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

It means I do a LOT of reading on my own time, though. You say that like it's a bad thing.

Do you have any recommendations?

[chaleur23.livejournal.com]

Wow! I am guilty of that sometimes, daemonluna, and you are absolutely right. I often wonder how much of my current favorites are unduly influenced by nostalgia :P. I think I'm going to go back and read more of them to see. I know the _Dragonriders of Pern_ series was not quite as thrilling the last time I read it, that's for sure.

Side comment to thelastgoodname. I'd send teens who are interested in science to something like "Surely you're joking, Mr. Feynman" or perhaps better, "Dear Professor Einstein: Albert Einstein's Letters to and from Children" before sending them to Asimov or Heinlein. Though I suspect they'd probably be embarassed to be seen with either book.

I guess I'm weird that way.

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm all for having nostalgic favourites. *g* It's just that it might be... prudent to acknowledge emotional attachment when we're making sweeping statements about the quality of an author's work. (And that obliquely-worded crankiness on my part is due to the post that inspired my rant.)

And I tried listening to Dragonflight as an audio book while at the gym--I quit more because the chapters were really long audio files and I had to spend twenty minutes fiddling with my cheap MP3 plater to get it back to the same spot each time--but oooh, my, are the gender roles definitely a product of the decade in which it was written. Which is not to say I'm not going to dig up my copy and reread it properly.

And hmm, I'm going to have to look up both your book suggestions and see if they'd be at the right level for my library...

[thelastgoodname.livejournal.com]

I would want them to read the old SF not to learn about science or scientists, but to learn about how our views of science have changed so drastically in the last 50 years -- the heroic lone scientist (who has a great sense of humor) is a great notion, but not a very useful one for the types of problems tomorrow's scientists will be facing. However, they can (especially the smart ones) compare the unrelenting heroism of American individual triumph in those books (particularly Heinlein, but a number of others as well) to our current, rather more pluralistic and depressing concerns that show up in a number of more recent books. That's the lesson I would want them to learn, as early as possible.

Also, I think I may be thinking about students older than the ones daemonluna works with.

[merriman.livejournal.com]

Dude, word.

This is so true for a number of authors (Tamora Pierce comes immediately to mind) and it drives me nuts. Also, I have a coworker who constantly complains that kids "aren't reading the classics", and it makes me want to throttle her. Largely because kids do read the classics, once they're hooked on a genre. But starting out with Asimov and Heinlein? Not gonna happen. Get them hooked with something new and good and shiny, then push the classics when they complain that they've read everything. It does work.

Also, for the record, some of the "classics" could benefit from a snazzy reprint. John Christopher's Tripod books sat untouched on our shelves for four years. They had faded covers, or rebound solid color covers with plain white lettering. They looked ancient and were ignored. About a year ago they got reprinted with bright sparkly foil covers and modern looking fonts and images, and now they fly off of the shelves on a regular basis.

Kind of sad, but true.

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

Oh, good lord, don't get me started on teachers and "classics." If I see one more recommended reading booklist that's been sent home (and I find out about it third-hand through a parent volunteer weeks later) that is half decades-old Newbery winners (Homer Price, ferchrissakes!) and half traditional dead-white-male literary canon (Treasure Island, Alice in Wonderland, and I kid you not, Pilgrim's Progress)... well, then I will have seen at least four this year.

Yeah. I'm working on some new recommended booklists.

And yay for reprints! I've got a bunch of the reprinted Macdonald Hall books, and the original 80's covers. Guess which ones go out first. (Other reprints-for-which-I-am-extremely-grateful include Diane Duane's Young Wizards series, Phyllis Reynolds Naylor's Alice books, Lois Lowry's Anastasia books, anything by Bruce Coville...) I've been meaning see if there's been much research on browsing behaviours of fiction readers...

[merriman.livejournal.com]

I'm dying for the Julia Redfern books to get hardcover reprints, but my boss said the last time she looked they were nowhere to be found.

We get classics-heavy reading lists too, but fortunately it's just "recommended" and there's a big disclaimer at the op saying "read whatever you want!" When I do the online version next month I'll send you a link if you want.

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

Sure, I'd love a link! One of my biggest problems with classics lists is that our school, though resolutely middle-class, is about half white. We've got a lot of Chinese and East Indian kids, some Muslim families, and a few Japanese and Korean students. Trying to find a wide range of reading levels and interests to reflect our school's population even a little is hard enough. Trying to come up with a classics booklist that isn't 99% white is even harder.

(And I won't go into my frustation with the one GRADE THREE teacher's insistence that her kids read at X number of classics by the end of the year. The reading list she FOUND ON THE INTERNET (and gave to EIGHT YEAR OLDS) has Bridge to Terebithia on it, among other unsuitable titles.)

I don't think I ever read Julia Redfern. What I'm dying for is a reprint of Lucy Boston's Green Knowe books.

[merriman.livejournal.com]

I'll post a link when I finish the lists. I've got to go through and do a second proof reading (they credited Eragon to "Paoli, C." and it made me cry because these are professional media specialists), then build links to our OPAC for each new title.

Julia Redfern's great. I read them when I was ten or eleven.

The Green Knowe books have been reprinted, IIRC. We just got our replacement copies in, but I'm not sure if we were able to get library bindings or if we had to get them hardbound by our distributor.

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

Also, Tamora Pierce's later stuff is TOTALLY better than her early books. Alanna had RED HAIR AND PURPLE EYES. And a TALKING CAT. (I still love the series, though.)

[merriman.livejournal.com]

Daine isn't a hell of a lot better, but at least the books are better written. What I like about Pierce's heroines is that while they're just pushing the bounds of Sue-dom, they have flaws. Real flaws that get them in trouble and in some cases almost kill them.

I adore the Alanna books, but in comparison to, say, Will of the Empress, or Trickster's Queen? They're miles away from each other.

[daemonluna.livejournal.com]

The Immortals books are my least favourite, I think. Which is not to say I don't like them. I love the Circle of Magic books, and part of that is because I'm working with elementary kids, and there's no romance in the first series. (And possibly not the second, I honestly can't recall off the top of my head.)

(Question after I booktalked the first MacDonald Hall book to grade four: "So... are the girls, like, their girlfriends?" Me: " No Davis, there's no kissing.")

I loved the Trickster books, and Will of the Empress made me giddy with happiness. (OMG! The slash! It's CANON!)

[merriman.livejournal.com]

The closest there is to romance in the second set of Circle books is when Briar quasi-flirts with one of the gang girls while he's treating her for flea bites. Way sexy, eh?

The fourth book hints at prostitution, but I don't think it's ever said outright. All the girls who die are dancers or musicians or whatever.