I have been fascinated to look over some of the recent writings on the Carnegie Medal choice this year, particularly looking at compelling articles from Lorna Bradbury. The idea that the Carnegie Medal has, for a long time, stopped honouring the sort of books that tick boxes, preferring anything that offers a dose of controversy or challenge (i.e. Stone Cold, Northern Lights or Junk in the nineties), seems increasingly confirmed by so many contemporary choices.
During MA studies this year, I found (slightly to my surprise) that there had not been much general thought or concern given to the quality of literature for children before the Carnegie Medal was created (in the 1930s), and one of the Carnegie’s aims was to raise competitiveness among authors through honouring the most outstanding fiction of the year. Inevitably, given the subjective nature of one ever judging a book, there were controversies from the start (i.e. when The Hobbit lost to The Family from One End Street). But the Medal certainly took care to award its fiction conscientiously, which (to me) is understandable; it was the first of its kind and the ‘right’ fiction needed to be recognised, taken seriously and applauded.
A glance at the list of early prize winners can see that some now classic books are included, i.e. the culminating books of The Chronicles of Narnia and Swallows and Amazon series from C.S. Lewis and Arthur Ransome, as well as The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge (a favourite book of J.K. Rowling’s). Social factors seemed to be at work in eventually altering the Carnegie’s typical book choices, however, as children’s books began to deal with “parental discord, social misery and delinquent behaviour” (Barker 1998, 42), according to one theorist, with passing time. The Carnegie eventually adapted the nature of its choices, especially in the nineties.
The initial aim set forth by the Carnegie of awarding outstanding fiction was vague enough to be beneficial, though, and I think there is a lesson for any future book prize in it; choosing an “outstanding” novel for children is both a vague and subjective undertaking, but it allowed the Carnegie to adapt and move with the times. So it is not surprising that the Carnegie continues to flex its own prize-giving muscle and leverage by awarding darker stories like Stone Cold in 1993 and, with the awarding of The Bunker Diary, not much has changed. In another sense, though, this could also be symptomatic of Carnegie choices bracketed by the times, particularly in a time when darker, edgier YA fiction is in vogue.
Sources
Barker, Keith. 1998. “Prize Fighting”, Children’s Book Publishing in Britain since 1945, edited by Reynolds, Kimberley and Tucker, Nicholas. Aldershot, England: Scolar Press
During MA studies this year, I found (slightly to my surprise) that there had not been much general thought or concern given to the quality of literature for children before the Carnegie Medal was created (in the 1930s), and one of the Carnegie’s aims was to raise competitiveness among authors through honouring the most outstanding fiction of the year. Inevitably, given the subjective nature of one ever judging a book, there were controversies from the start (i.e. when The Hobbit lost to The Family from One End Street). But the Medal certainly took care to award its fiction conscientiously, which (to me) is understandable; it was the first of its kind and the ‘right’ fiction needed to be recognised, taken seriously and applauded.
A glance at the list of early prize winners can see that some now classic books are included, i.e. the culminating books of The Chronicles of Narnia and Swallows and Amazon series from C.S. Lewis and Arthur Ransome, as well as The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge (a favourite book of J.K. Rowling’s). Social factors seemed to be at work in eventually altering the Carnegie’s typical book choices, however, as children’s books began to deal with “parental discord, social misery and delinquent behaviour” (Barker 1998, 42), according to one theorist, with passing time. The Carnegie eventually adapted the nature of its choices, especially in the nineties.
The initial aim set forth by the Carnegie of awarding outstanding fiction was vague enough to be beneficial, though, and I think there is a lesson for any future book prize in it; choosing an “outstanding” novel for children is both a vague and subjective undertaking, but it allowed the Carnegie to adapt and move with the times. So it is not surprising that the Carnegie continues to flex its own prize-giving muscle and leverage by awarding darker stories like Stone Cold in 1993 and, with the awarding of The Bunker Diary, not much has changed. In another sense, though, this could also be symptomatic of Carnegie choices bracketed by the times, particularly in a time when darker, edgier YA fiction is in vogue.
Sources
Barker, Keith. 1998. “Prize Fighting”, Children’s Book Publishing in Britain since 1945, edited by Reynolds, Kimberley and Tucker, Nicholas. Aldershot, England: Scolar Press
No comments:
Post a Comment