A Cruddy Week
5 things lessons from a tough week in kidlit
Whelp. It’s been a week in kidlit-land. To catch you up, our National Ambassador for Young People’s Literature, Mac Barnett had a book come out that had this now notorious quote:
“I have a nagging fear that children’s literature suffers from a slightly higher crud percentage than literature as a whole…maybe more like 94.7 percent of kids’ books are crud,”
It indeed went over like handing the folks treading water in the industry (beset with sharks and worried about a pulled drain) a very large weight. I felt it grow heavier for me and for my colleagues. And that sucks.
I am a Mac Barnett fan. I really love a lot of his books. My now teenagers love his books too. I have learned a lot about writing and illustrating books for children from the duo of Mac and Jon. I pre-ordered the book (Make Believe) and was very much looking forward to reading it when it arrives (maybe today!?)
So what do you do when one of our own steps in it? I think, and this will surprise no-one, that I’m keen to engage with the mess and learn what I can about books, myself, the industry, and what we all can do better.
Here’s five things from the cruddy week that was:
1. START HERE
When this all hit, I realized I didn’t have all of the info. I couldn’t find the quote (mostly because our AI optimized search engines blow chunks) and I hadn’t read the book it came from. This substack from Afoma Umesi is incredibly clarifying, nuanced and smart. She’s read the book and made an effort to wrestle with the quote in context. I can’t do better and won’t try to:
And then, check this out from Jennifer Laughran,1 senior agent at Andrea Brown Literary Agency. This is a nice summary:
He’s a smart guy. He’s talented. He clearly thinks a lot and cares a lot about children’s books. And A LOT of what he talks about in the book is spot-on. However. Alarming Quotes get a lot more clicks than Nuanced Philosophical Arguments. And with a platform as big as his, they can do a lot of damage.
★ Become a Paid Subscriber ★
I’ll leave you with this comment from recent paid subscriber, Stacey Ramirez: “Hi Jacob. I just upgraded to your paid subscription. I’ve been getting your weekly newsletter and I look forward to it every week. I get so much out of it. Just a note to say thank you and keep up the good work!”
2. THE GOOD
The book’s central argument is serious and worth engaging with. Barnett believes that children’s literature suffers from a particular problem: It’s made by adults for an audience they are no longer part of and often do not respect.
There’s a gaping “experiential chasm” between adulthood and childhood, he argues, and most children’s authors fail to find a way across it. The result is books that talk down to children, moralize at them, or simply reflect what adults think children should want rather than what children actually want.
Afoma’s read on what’s good in Mac’s book is what got me excited to read it in the first place. This lesson is one that is in danger of being lost amidst the righteous anger about “crud.” I do think there’s a percentage of books that “that children endure rather than love” and that this is the likely culprit.
I don’t think a hard look in the mirror and asking “am I being too didactic here?” is bad. It’s good to ask “what does my audience actually find interesting?” as a central and guiding principle. My first author-illustrator book flirted with this issue and I’ve learned to run any new manuscript through this question.
I don’t think his percentage is right! And I don’t think didactic books are without any merit. I think books that are endured rather than loved get their due. The danger is that this turns kids off from reading entirely. Engaging with this question is an important responsibility.
3. THE BAD
Author Kate Messner posted, “When our current ‘ambassador’ was chosen last year, his hometown newspaper announced he’d been picked to ‘champion children’s literature across the country.’ But today, my social media feed is full of the most amazing artists and illustrators who are feeling the exact opposite of championed.”
This is why my stomach dropped into my feet and I had a hard time working on Tuesday. When a guy who is near the tippy top of the profession lets a quote into the world that is dripping with condescension it’s a gut punch at a time we needed him to lead.
To make matters worse, condescension from a white guy in the times with live in an industry (like many) with a history of marginalizing minority and female voices is unequivocally horrible.
What can be learned? It’s good to wrestle with these questions honestly — to self-examine. I have and will continue to. I can lift and build up. I can champion the work of my colleagues with more vigor and love. (Making great books for kids is hard. We need everyone.)
4. CRITICISM
Children’s book authors in general can stand to take a bit of criticism. The field could use more of this kind of rigorous, opinionated engagement with its own practice.
One of the things that Afoma brings up that caught my attention is this need to engage with criticism more honestly. There are great books and books that are not so much. It’s ok to be upfront about this!
There are many reasons for this lack of engagement. Kidlit people are really, really kind hearted and making books is hard. Birthing a book is worth celebrating — “you did the thing!” But getting better at making books means asking yourself “what could be better?” and “How did this book not reach it’s potential?” I can only improve my craft when I understand what makes a great book great.
Mac’s comment is 100% not the right way to criticize, IMO. But I also think the discourse that says all books for kids are great is doing a disservice too? Criticism invites the maker to examine their work so the next one is a progression.
I don’t want to make just ok books. I want to get better. Understanding what makes them tick in a deep way is one of the ways we grow. More of this, please.
5. MOVING FORWARD
A hard week? Yes. But when negative things hit and we don’t engage and learn it’s worse. I don’t know if Mac’s apology will land — but I’ll share it here for posterity.2
“Thank you for the opportunity to respond. First of all, I want to acknowledge the passage I wrote is hurtful, especially to people who work hard making books for kids. I understand why people are upset and feel betrayed. In trying to make a point, I got hyperbolic and glib. I was wrong. I’m truly sorry.”
Here’s to a better week.
Best,
Jacob
I always have art for my Substack posts! I’m still floating in the ocean of final art for JUST JELLY, my 2nd author-illustrated picture book and can’t share much right now. Let’s dig around in the archives and find something to brighten things up…
Jen’s Ask the Agent Tumblr is an absolute must read.
From this School Library Journal write up on the whole thing: Mac Barnett Responds Amid Continued Backlash
Thanks for bringing me up to speed Jacob - at the kidlit webinar last night I was out of the loop on the references (always behind the news ball, especially while in a final art deadline cave). (Nice to "see" you there!). This is really thoughtful, and you're helping keep the conversation from being too all or nothing. Jennifer's words; "Alarming Quotes get a lot more clicks than Nuanced Philosophical Arguments." Yes.
In a bizarre way, I think Barnett proves his own point, by virtue of the fact that this ended up in a BOOK. This wasn't a random comment posted to Substack or said off the cuff in an interview. Presumably, dozens of people reviewed the manuscript, from editors to proofreaders to publicists, etc. and no one flagged the comment as problematic. Perhaps there's more tone-deafness in the 'adults' in the room than anyone wants to admit.