Category Archives: Battle of the (Kids’) Books

Grand Finale for SLJ’s 2012 Battle of the Kids’ Books

Today for the BoB‘s final round Big Kahuna Jonathan Stroud decides between Ruta Sepetys’s Between Shades of Gray, Mal Peet’s Life: An Exploded Diagram, and Gary D. Schmidt’s Okay for Now (the Undead Poll winner).  It has been a grand battle this year — the judges were uniformly brilliant as was our stalwart commentator Jonathan Hunt. This year we added on two kid commentators, 6th grader GI and 7th grader RGN.  They were amazing and I hope we can develop this aspect of the commentary further next year. In fact, my dream has been for someone to volunteer to develop a shadowing site modeled (albite way smaller) on the Greenway/Carnegie one.

Congratulations to all!

2 Comments

Filed under Battle of the (Kids') Books

And We Are Off!

Today begins the 2012 SLJ’s Battle of the Kids’ Books. Age four now, my baby is growing up. We’ve got amazing contenders, judges, commentators (a couple of kids this year in addition to Mr. Hunt), sponsors, and followers.  Be sure to check in daily over the next few weeks.  It is going to be grand!

1 Comment

Filed under Battle of the (Kids') Books

This Isn’t My First Battle

SLJ’s Battle of the Kids’ Books OFFICIAL (well, as official as anything we do at the BoB) Trailer!

Created by the amazing Everdeen Sisters (AKA Summer Ogata and Lauren Downey). More about them and their making of the trailer here.

Leave a comment

Filed under Battle of the (Kids') Books

The Judges Are Coming!

To launch this year’s Battle of the Kids’s Books SLJ did a smashing article in which four of our distinguished judges were revealed.  Starting today we will be celebrating each of our judges with individual posts. The first four will be of those already announced, but then we will go with those who were not. So if you want to know ALL of this year’s judges keep a close eye over the next few weeks over at the BoB site!

As for what they will be judging — we will be announcing that closer to the time of the actual Battle.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Battle of the (Kids') Books

SLJ’s Battle of the Kids’ Books 2012

And so it begins — the contenders for this year’s Battle of the Kids’ Books have been revealed! If you aren’t familiar with this contest (which yours truly, I’m happy to admit, initiated four years ago), do check it out.

3 Comments

Filed under Battle of the (Kids') Books

Andy Mulligan’s Ribblestrop

I am a big fan of Andy Mulligan’s Trashpublished last year in the United States to very positive reviews. (It also made it through two rounds in last year’s SLJ’s Battle of the Kids’ Books; those elegantly penned decisions are here and  here.)  And now, having just read them, I’m here to report that Mulligan’s other two books, Ribblestrop and Return to Ribblestrop, are just as good (although as of this writing, they have not been published in the US and I don’t know of any plans to do so).  While I had the books on hand for a while it was the latter’s winning the Guardian children’s book prize that spurred me on to read it and then to go on to read the first one. Completely out of order and not recommended as such, but I admit that I quite enjoyed going backwards in learning about the characters and their circumstances.

The two books are part of a projected trilogy set in a most unconventional school, Ribblestrop. And so, yes, this is absolutely a school story and moreso a boarding school story.  There is a school song, uniforms, and so on.  But it is, in every way, a completely unconventional school and school story — there are lovely adults around who care about the students and do help in the end, but are also occasionally cluess. There are also hideous adults around who are out for absolutely no good as far as the children go.  These are serious badies, villains, meanies with no complicating factors to gain sympathy — they are completely and utterly bad, terrifyingly so at points.  More importantly, there are the students who can be considered in two parts.   First of all there is a motley group that includes Millie, a very angry thirteen-year-old and the only girl at the school; Sanchez, the son of a Columbian mobster; Sam, a sweet and vulnerable new boy; Ruskin (and, in the second book, his brother Olie) with his poor vision and smarts; and a few more. The second cohort are the orphans, a group from India, street children it seems (and somewhat related for me to the boys of Trash) who all seem to be incredibly capable at all sorts of things, not a weak one in the bunch.  Mulligan, a veteran international school teacher, on his website, writes of the orphans:

They are from India, with bits of Nepal thrown in. Like Millie, they are fusions of the various children I have met – especially the children I taught in northern India, with a work ethic so intense it was scary. And manners that used to shame my own.

Both books have intense plots; in both the children are put in tremendous peril. There are violent moments, very violent ones where children get seriously hurt.  While the good adults around them (the headmaster and a couple of their teachers) help, it is always the children in the end who save each other, working as a team to do so.  I’m not great at doing plot summaries by and large and with these two books the plots are complex and so I recommend going elsewhere for more specifics (and here to read an excerpt from the second book).

The books also have moments of absolute wonder and delight.  I don’t want to give too much away, but there are some wonderous places around and under the Ribblestrop estate, there is a ghost, there are glorious learning experiences, dramatic football games, remarkable acts of building and creation, wild animals, and delightful meals. Not to mention that they are funny in the best understated sort of way.

The first thing Sam noticed as he pushed open the laboratory door was a large pair of hairy knees sticking out from under a bench. He noticed them because in his exhausted state he tripped over them and, as he was carrying a box full of test tubes, the result was noisy.  (pg 117, Ribblestrop)

To my mind, the best description of the books is this one from Mulligan when accepting the Guardian prize:

“I never expected the Guardian to award such a stonker of a prize to a book that is dangerous, violent, irreverent, politically incorrect, joyously sentimental, anti-adult, pro-child and sometimes bizarre – but I’m very glad they have.

Me too.

3 Comments

Filed under awards, Battle of the (Kids') Books, Reviewing

SLJ’s Battle of the Kids’ Books’ Finale

This year’s Battle of the Kids’ Books has been amazing. I’m totally biased, of course, but I truly feel that each judge has written a remarkable decision essay.  For that is what they really are — thoughtful and carefully written articles, each on two books.  Some of the judges ended up going for books that you might expect of them (due to their own writing) while others did not. And each of the fourteen who judged the rounds leading up to this Monday’s Big Kahuna finale (judged by Richard Peck) came up with unique ways of deciding their matches. Here are tastes of each that I hope intrigue you enough to go (if you haven’t already) and read their decisions in total:

  • Francisco X. Stork decided to abandoned “fun” as a criteria and went for the match winner’s “elegant, readable, complexity.”
  • Dana Reinhardt decided that “there is just as much drama and adventure in a girl riding a rope swing over a pit of gravel despite her paralyzing fear because she wants to impress the brown eyed boy she loves, as there is in a newly minted king orchestrating the defeat of ten thousand….”
  • Barry Lyga split himself in two and wrote his decision as a One Act Play.
  • The match winner’s “lasting resonance of its narrative power” was what decided Susan Patron.
  • Dubious about the graphic novel format Karen Hesse was “… forced to retract my misgivings.”
  • Adam Rex called it on a footnote.
  • R.L. Stine was direct and blunt in his decision.
  • After contemplating character, setting, language, and plot Mitali Perkins made her decision on theme.
  • Shakespearean comedy made the difference for Laura Amy Schlitz who wrote in her decision that “Comedy is a celebration of human resilience.”
  • Naomi Shihab was won over by how a contender’s “… muscular and forward-moving, the lavish hum of place, waves, longing, wrap around a reader with hypnotic transporting power.”
  • An all-nighter factored into Patricia Reilly Giff’s choice as did finding the winning contender’s creator’s “… imagination dazzling.”
  • Pete Hauptman channeled his childhood self in his decision.
  • “One is soul-filling while the other satisfying. For me, I’ll go with the soul and I choose…” wrote Grace Lin.
  • Karen Cushman was gobsmacked!

1 Comment

Filed under Battle of the (Kids') Books