February 2000
Staff -- School Library Journal, 2/1/2000
The J.K. I Know
"She was only poor for a brief period of time when she finished the first book...not the whole time she was writing it."
I am writing in response to Susan Staley's letter ("Hey, J. K., What's the Story?" November 1999, p. 10), which criticized J. K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books, for stating on the Rosie O'Donell Show that she was poor when the Harry Potter books first appeared, then retracting that in the SLJ interview, saying that the press made this up.?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Before you get irritated, or assume that "celebrity status has adversely affected Ms. Rowling," please try to understand that this is all a matter of emphasis. It is true that, for a while, at the time Ms. Rowling first tried to submit Harry Potter to publishers, she was a single mother living on welfare, and she recounted memories of those difficult times on the Rosie O'Donnell Show, not to gain sympathy, but just as a humorous episode.
When the books were first published, and achieved success, the British tabloids blew this aspect up out of all proportion, trumpeting her as a "rags to riches" phenomenon. The American press and media picked up on this, and endlessly repeated it.
Then came the SLJ interview, with its headline: "Forget the published reports. The author of Harry Potter was not a single parent who decided to write and--bingo!--created an instant classic," and describing her as "peeved at the press." These headlines, again, are sensationalizing one small aspect of what she said, making SLJ itself not much better than the tabloids! In the interview she simply said that she started writing the Harry Potter books years earlier, in 1990, long before she became a hard-up single mother, and that she's indignant at the assumption in the press that Harry was an "instant" book that she only wrote out of poverty. She was only poor for a brief period of time when she finished the first book and was trying to get it published, not the whole time she was writing it.
I can tell you that, in person, J. K. Rowling is a wonderfully warm, friendly, funny, and unpretentious person, just like you'd expect from her books. She had a cheery and sincere greeting for every child and parent she met on her recent U.S. tour, when she signed about 40,000 books in two and a half weeks. Celebrity status hasn't spoiled her in the least. Unfortunately the media always tend to sensationalize, distort, and simplify as soon as somebody becomes famous, just so that they can claim to have a "new angle" on the person.
Readers beware, things are seldom that simple, or one-dimensional.
John Mason
Associate Marketing Director
Scholastic, Inc.
New York, NY
Amazing Bald Eaglet
In response to Carolyn Angus's review of my book Amazing Bald Eaglet (Peartree, 1999; October 1999, p. 133), the book's facts should take precedence over the misinformation provided. The reviewer takes issue with "mixing" of the eaglet's story with the narration providing general information about eagles in their natural surroundings. One is emotional, with sensitivity about one eaglet's traumatic beginning, and the other is educational. What distinguishes Amazing Bald Eaglet from other eagle books is the "story within a story"--two stories in one about the same theme, each uniquely different. They appear side by side on each page, to be enjoyed separately, or together as one.
The "anthropomorphisms," give this eaglet a personality with human qualities with which readers can identify. As to the "confusing terminology," the names eaglet egg, eaglet-egglet, Bald Eaglet-Egglet identify this eaglet prior to hatching, also distinguishing it from other North American eagles like the Steller's Sea Eagle, White-tailed Eagle, or Golden Eagle. After hatching, the chick is called a Bald Eaglet. As to "misinformation," in general, small birds are more densely feathered than big ones, based on more energy expended, relative to weight, on maintaining body temperature. The books recommended as "better titles on the topic" are primary picture books and inappropriate for this book for more advanced readers.
Photos and pictures scattered throughout, and the full-page colorful photographs by noted photographers, liven the text, and stimulate interest even before reading the story, and create a feeling for birds in their natural habitat. The "hyperbole" mentioned--"Its unbroken landing on the ground had an impact on mankind and became recorded in history" is "fact," unless the reviewer can refute documentation by biologists, as well as state and national news, including CNN and CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, the violation of county, state, and federal laws, and the 1305 people nationwide who called the Audubon Society with 719 names for the bird!
The true essence of Amazing Bald Eaglet is found in the St. Petersburg Times (October 10, 1999): "The author retells the story from the eagle's fall and nurturing by surrogate eagle parents to its emergence as an eagle named Seminole Wind. The book also provides information about eagles in general. Sketches and photographs make this an ideal book to read to young children, a reference for older ones and a keepsake for adults."
Barbara Birenbaum
Clearwater, FL
Our Reviewer Replies:
A review of a science book should provide an evaluation of both content and style, keeping in mind the intended audience, and include a comparison to other materials on the same topic to aid librarians in making collection-development decisions. My review of Amazing Bald Eaglet reflects these concerns. Additionally, to keep the review brief, I cited only a few of the book's problems. Birenbaum does clarify the specific example of misinformation that I cited in my review ("the smaller the bird, the more feathers it has") by stating that "in general, small birds are more densely feathered than big ones." Failing to include the reference to density in the text of the book, however, leads to potential confusion. Children will be reading Birenbaum's book, not her letter. Her comments suggest that I did not understand the concept of a story within a story. In general, I think the device is useful for presenting science material to children. Nonetheless, the texts of the survival story of Seminole Wind and the general information "story" about eagles are mixed together in Amazing Bald Eaglet and therefore less than effective. I stand by my original evaluation. What could have been an interesting book about an amazing bald eaglet is a hodgepodge of anthropomorphism, redundant and confusing terminology, misinformation, and hyperbole.
Carolyn Angus
Claremont (CA) Graduate University
A Monologue Dialogue
The absence of familiarity with the theatre world in general and the monologue book world in particular are perhaps the most striking features of your review of Craig Slaight and Jack Sharrar's Great Monologues for Young Actors Vol. 2 (Smith and Kraus, 1999; October 1999, p. 176). The evaluation of an important contribution of dramatic literature for young people requires a response.
Ms. Riedel states: "There are odd choices in that the play or playwright is not known…" Slaight and Sharrar are leaders in this field and have been celebrated for their collections. A vital mission of these books is to expand the body of dramatic literature for young actors. To this end (and by design) Slaight and Sharrar include material from a wide spectrum of professional and well-known playwrights, the familiar and the not as familiar, but nonetheless contemporary playwrights. It's because these volumes do not include the "standard" fare that they have been received so successfully both critically and with the students and teachers.
The review also states: "the chosen selection is not of high interest or dramatic quality." What is "high interest"? According to whom? Slaight and Sharrar bring 30 years to their work with junior high and high school-aged actors, and continue to work with the material they select for their books in their studio classes at the prestigious American Conservatory Theater.
Another criticism is that "a weaker speech of Portia's from The Merchant of Venice is given rather than the one that is usually singled out"--presumably the "Quality of Mercy" speech. Once again, by design, the editors chose material that might not have come to the young actor's attention.
Riedel objects to the fact that "There is little comedy in the collection." The collection is not titled Great Comedic Monologues for Young Actors.
She also says, "The authors neglect to advise young actors of the importance of reading the entire play when working on a monologue." We offer the following from the introduction to the book: "The brief introduction [to the speech] will help you focus your interest, but only in as much as it leads you to the full play, and the rigors of creating a character in the same way you would work to play to the entire role…. Such work cannot be abridged and it would be wrong to interpret the intentions of this book to be a shortcut to quick-fix character creation."
Finally, the characterization of Shakespeare as a well-known playwright is analogous to characterizing God as a well-known religious figure.
Marisa Smith
Smith and Kraus Publishers
Lyme, NH
Our Reviewer Replies:
There are many, many plays in the canon of world dramatic literature and not many books on monologues for young actors. After 15 years as a professional actor, looking for and performing monologues, I can state that there is no dearth of excellent material from which to choose. With all the material available by critically recognized playwrights, where is the need to expand?
When looking for monologues, an actor would be drawn into a piece upon reading it. The selections in this book are often awkwardly cut, and edited. Explanations are often needed to provide logical beginnings for the pieces, and some even include lines from other actors in a scene. The choices make some of the monologues difficult to work on or perform--many of these selections would be tough going even for experienced actors.
I repeat, there is too little comedy in the book. And it is not titled Dramatic Monologues, either.
Regardless of Slaight and Sharrar's current positions, or previous publications, it was this book that was reviewed. The editors and their publisher had an opportunity to provide beginning actors with accessible, stimulating, varied material and, in my opinion, that opportunity was lost.
Cris Riedel
Ellis B. Hyde Elementary School
Dansville, NY
Teens Are Tough
I just had to respond to Jennifer Bromann's article "The Toughest Audience on Earth." (October 1999, p. 61-62). I've been booktalking to teens since 1984, and one thing I learned then, and have followed ever since, is this: never, ever lie to a teen about a book. You will most likely lose any credibility you might have, and if you ever booktalk to those teens again, they just won't believe what you say. As for reading aloud, it depends on what you read. In Hawaii the best technique was to "sell" local Hawaiian literature in the classrooms. Whenever I read poetry, or even an entire short story, those books would get the most circulation. As we say in Hawaii, "Go figgah, yeah?" Maybe Bromann's techniques work for her, but mine work for me, so it's really up to the individual librarian how to booktalk. The main thing is, get out there and booktalk! Teens are a tough audience, but I love 'em.
Kat Kan
Assistant Manager, Young Adult Services
Allen County Public Library
Fort Wayne, IN
