How quick are we to classify books that have seals from awards as "good literature?" Does it necessarily mean that because a book has been honored, it must be an appropriate piece of work? Awards allow a book to be recognized, but there is still a bit of controversy in what the awards actually do.
On one hand, awards, such as the Newberry and Schneider Family Book Award, honor pieces of literature with exceptional criteria. Awards like the Coretta Scott King award, honor literature featuring exceptional African American works of literature. All of these works are written by insiders, so therefore know the subject matter quite well. Also, awards allow authors representing the non-majority a chance to be acknowledged without being swamped over by the mainstream popular pieces of literature.
On the other hand, what “the criteria” a book contains, is also debatable. Some of the criteria for selecting a book for the award are so strict and whittled down, which could be excluding some books with great content. Other books are selected simply by a jury vote using generous standards, which can easily let a book with poor subject matter (like full of stereotypes) under the radar without ever knowing. Also, by honoring only certain pieces of literature, are readers being drawn away from other great books just because they don’t see “the seal of approval?”
Overall, there will always be a debate over the efficiency of book awards and each side makes some valid points. It all boils down to finding a balance between the two.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment