On Monday, at the ALA's mid-winter meeting in Philadelphia, the winners of the most prestigious children's literary awards were announced. It's a really exciting time for publishers, writers, illustrators, and readers alike. Every year, we all have our favorites that we're rooting for, and after the fact, we sometimes have opinions about the titles that we think should/shouldn't have won. There's no exact science to the process and certainly everyone's taste is different. I imagine these facts are even more pressing on the various committees but that's what makes it fun, right? However, things did look and feel a little different this year. Papercuts talked to a few of the committee members and also made some speculation as to what did or didn't cause much ado about both winners of the coveted Caldecott and Newbury Awards.

Some people may have been surprised (albeit happily) that The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick won this year's Caldecott. Not because people disagree on how wonderful it is. No, I think most people in the field agree it is an amazing title worthy of all of the praise and applause it has received. But there was a slight controversy because it spans a bunch of genres and honestly it could have been considered for the Newbery Award just as easily. Part graphic-novel, part novel, part picture-book proper, this 533 page ode to film and specifically silent movies also appeals to a broader age-range than the usual Caldecott winner. Traditionally, the award goes to a more standard kind of picture book for a seemingly younger audience. Technically, though, "children" according to the contest's criteria, describes an audience of up to fourteen years old. Hugo was also a slight stretch because in the words of one anonymous blogger, "If you use the strictest interpretation of the Newbery and Caldecott terms and criteria, it's possible to argue that Hugo Cabret, which relies equally on its art and text to tell its story, might not be eligible for either award."

Choosing Hugo, was a brave choice and for some, a little unexpected. People who serve on the various committees are experts in this field and are trained to think critically and creatively about children's literature. Within reason, they should be encouraged to think slightly outside the box. When announcing the Caldecott winner the president for the Association for Service for Children's Libraries, said that Selznick's story "casts a new light on the picture book form." I think this is true, and is exactly what makes Hugo winning an even bigger triumph. I'm so excited to see how this affects titles being published in the near future and the ways we categorize them.

This is an interesting take on the editors' role when books win big. (Shelftalker)

Here's an early review by a much better writer than I, if you're still not convinced of Hugo's magic. (New York Times, reg. required)

Posted by alli