Reviewers debate literary fiction vs genre fiction in Newbery context

Children's literature devotees undoubtedly know about the John Newbery Medal, which the Association for Library Service to Children awards each year to authors of children's literature. Jonathan Hunt, a Newbery judge, has found himself invested in a back-and-forth discussion with other bloggers over how children's genre books should be judged.

Hunt seems to have lit the fire of debate by revealing he had picked The Hunger Games third on his Newbery ballot last year.

He followed up with a discussion of the differences in expectations for genre vs. mainstream fiction. Some of his comments may strike people as a little incendiary, although I don't get the impression that he is looking to make a divisive statement.

Still, Hunt concludes his analysis of literary meritocratic standards by suggesting that women seem to prefer character-driven stories while men seem to prefer plot-driven stories (some exceptions allowed in both generalizations, naturally).

I mostly like spaceships, rayguns, and complex background history. I rarely have a clue about what is going in the plot of any book I'm reading until maybe the 3rd or 4th pass through a book. And if a book cannot compel me to read it a second time the best plot in the world won't help it.

But what got my attention about the debate is the fact that the writers are discussing children's literature. If science fiction and fantasy are not going to be taken seriously because they tend to be plot-driven (not something I necessarily agree with -- Andre Norton, one of my favorite characters, sometimes came close to sacrificing plot for the sake of building interesting characters -- oh, wait, she was a woman -- darn!).

Okay, let me start over. If science fiction and fantasy are not going to be taken seriously in general when compared to literary fiction (I've never understood what that is supposed to be), then imagine how much of a disadvantage children's science fiction and fantasy must struggle with to win recognition.

Frankly, many people have commented to me they were not impressed with the first Harry Potter book. I thought it had all the elements of a great children's story and many elements of a more adult story. But I also point out that J.K. Rowling's writing seems to improve with each book. Her task undoubtedly became easier because the kids in the stories were growing up. She was able to gradually introduce them to more mature themes.

Voldemort and his cronies could become more dangerous, and more people could die, because that is what happens when you grow up. The world becomes more dangerous and more people around you die. I'm not sure if the last Harry Potter book is really a children's book, but if it is then I believe Rowling has demonstrated (as have other authors of children's fiction) that children's science fiction and fantasy can be a force within literature.

And that's really all I wanted to say.

SF-Fandom is a moderated, fan-run community devoted to science fiction, fantasy, history, and mythology. SF-Fandom was founded in 2001 and is part of the Xenite.Org network. Free registration is required to post. Please be sure you read our Posting Guidelines.