In a previous post, Shelf-Employed talked about a book’s staying power and asked why it is that certain Newbery winners have greater staying power than others. I’d like to take this a step further and look at honor books that have, for one reason or another, become more popular over the years than their winning counterparts.
I’ve found several examples dating back to the 1930s. Here are just a few:
1988 Winner: Lincoln: A Photobiography by Russell Freedman
1988 Honor Book: Hatchet by Gary Paulsen
1982 Winner: A Visit to William Blake’s Inn: Poems for Innocent and Experienced Travelers by Nancy Willard
1982 Honor Book: Ramona Quimby, Age 8 by Beverly Cleary
1953 Winner: Secret of the Andes by Ann Nolan Clark
1953 Honor Book: Charlotte’s Web by E. B. White
1942 Winner: The Matchlock Gun by Walter Edmonds
1942 Honor Book: Little House on the Prairie by Laura Ingalls Wilder
1939 Winner: Thimble Summer by Elizabeth Enright
1939 Honor Book: Mr. Popper’s Penguins by Richard and Florence Atwater
Perhaps you recognize some of these Newbery winners, but if you ask a group of children, they will probably be much more familiar with the honor books.
So why do we still know and love these honor books even though the winners have fallen into obscurity? Perhaps it has something to do with an author’s work after winning an award. Some may continue writing but never receive the same level of recognition with their later works. Others, such as Laura Ingalls Wilder, may go on to publish a multitude of much-loved stories that push them to an even higher level of regard. If Little House on the Prairie was not part of the Little House series, would we still remember it today?
Technology may also play a role in a book’s staying power. Your library surely saw an increase in requests for Mr. Popper’s Penguins after the 2011 movie was released. Would Thimble Summer see a surge in popularity if it too was made into a movie? Or are books made into movies because they are popular? Along the same lines, I wonder if nonfiction titles and books of poetry are at a disadvantage if they cannot be translated to the big screen.
Technology may also play a role in a book’s staying power. Your library surely saw an increase in requests for Mr. Popper’s Penguins after the 2011 movie was released. Would Thimble Summer see a surge in popularity if it too was made into a movie? Or are books made into movies because they are popular? Along the same lines, I wonder if nonfiction titles and books of poetry are at a disadvantage if they cannot be translated to the big screen.
Could it be that the Newbery committees were flat wrong with their selections? Probably not. In 1942, The Matchlock Gun, a story about ten-year-old Edward Van Alstyne defending his family with a gun during the French and Indian War, likely rang true to an audience struggling with their own fear of Nazi invasion. Today, when the threat of war does not weigh as heavily on the minds of our youth, children may have a hard time relating to Edward’s peril. Or perhaps this book has lost popularity due to its negative portrayal of Native Americans. I think we can all agree that a book’s success goes hand in hand with the social and cultural climate of its time. When this climate changes, some books may no longer connect with readers.
Why do you think certain honor books have greater staying power than winners? Should the Newbery committee be concerned with a book’s staying power when making their selections?
