The bestowing of the Newbery Award began with 1922’s winner, The Story of Mankind by Hendrick Willem van Loon. I don’t know what kind of reception that book received from librarians of the day, but it’s likely that the choice was as fraught with controversy as every other Newbery winner since has been.Whether an award winning book is received positively at the time is, in my opinion, of less importance than whether or not the book has staying power. Will it still matter in 20, 30, or even 60 years? Will it have the power to move the readers of the future?
I don’t profess to having read all of the past Newbery winners, but here are my thoughts on a few.
When in elementary school, my son was told to choose a Newbery winner from the school library for a book report. When he complained about his chosen book, Rabbit Hill by Robert Lawson (1945 medalist) and told me that it was unlike the books he usually read, I decided to read it for myself. I was surprised by two things - first, was the book’s blatant racial insensitivity towards African Americans.
The second was the book’s pronounced religiosity - it being an unabashed homage to Saint Francis. Researching and discussing further, I discovered two things. While, sadly, my son’s school library is still loaning a 1966 edition, copies of the book printed after 1970, have had the offensive parts removed. (Of course, this opens up another series of questions that will have to wait for another time) The second thing I discovered in speaking with a colleague who remembered the book fondly from her own youth, is that children do not read with the same eyes as adults. What is a blatant display of some ism or other to a librarian, may pass unnoticed by a child. I, myself, was surprised when I re-read A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle (1963 medalist). As I child, did I realize that Mrs. Who was quoting from 1 Corinthians? No, I’m sure I did not.
So what exactly is “staying power,” and how do we measure it? I began my blog, Shelf-employed in 2008. Early in that year, I posted a review that I had written in grad school of Christopher Paul Curtis’ 1996 Newbery Honor book, The Watsons go to Birmingham: 1963. To date, that single post has had more viewers than anything I’ve ever posted before or since. A wonderful book, however, I wonder... is the post’s popularity due to the fact that kids are desperately seeking answers to school assignments? Does the fact that a particular book pops up in school assignments and reading lists year after year make it a good book? Or does it mean that no one has changed the list or the homework in years? And along those lines, what should or does matter in a book’s longevity? If I “hand-sell” a favorite book of mine to repeated library customers, does that mean it’s a good book because it never ends up on a weeding list? If a teacher assigns the same book every year because she loves it, does that make it great, or merely required?
In my opinion, one of the best endorsements for a truly great book, is an adult patron coming to the library to find a beloved book from his childhood. There are only two books that I’ve ever witnessed meeting that criteria: Lois Lowry’s, The Giver (1994 medalist) and Holes by Louis Sachar (1999 medalist).
Which Newbery winners still call out to you over the years? And which ones have fallen out of your favor? Find the complete list of Newbery medalists and honor books here.


That would be an interesting post to do on PUBYAC and NJYAC...we often see "stumpers" where librarians are helping patrons (often adult) find cherished books from their childhood, but these are usually obscure since it someone at the library had recognized it, it wouldn't have been posted as a "stumper." It might be fun to conduct a poll asking librarians what titles adult patrons do remember and request from their childhood.
ReplyDeleteYes, a great idea. It's time I resubscribed to PUBYAC. I think my old subscription was tied to an email I no longer use. My favorite book from early childhood was most definitely The Wind in the Willows, which had been around for many years before I found it. First published in 1908, I can still enjoy it today.
ReplyDelete