![]() A “picture book for children” as distinguished from other books with illustrations, is one that essentially provides the child with a visual experience. It doesn't matter if 0 makes it easier for you to solve. It doesn't matter if 7 is your favorite number. It doesn't matter if x in the previous ten equations was always 10. It's like an algebra equation: x + 5, let x = 13. Rather, you have to go by the very broad definition listed in the Caldecott terms and criteria. You don't get to glom on to your favorite definition of what a picture book is, whether it's what That Great Scholar said or This Great Illustrator said Common Sense Thirty-two Pages or even what Most Picture Books Look Like. Here's the problem with that line of thinking: it's a game of semantics. ![]() ![]() Why shouldn't these books contend for the Caldecott Medal? Because they're not picture books?!? Pshaw! And for my money the best of the bunch are Boxers & Saints by Gene Luen Yang and March: Book One by John Lewis, Andrew Aydin, and Nate Powell. ![]() I'd like to revisit these issues, but this time in light of the fact that this year has produced the most amazing crop of graphic novels in recent memory. Earlier this season, Robin tackled the definition of a picture book (as contrasted with an illustrated book) and then went on to consider the proliferation of graphic novel elements in picture books. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |