Jason Reynolds and Comparing Author’s Works
Jason Reynolds has two books this year that I think are worth discussing. Usually we talk about not comparing a book to an author’s previous work. Well, in this case we absolutely can compare as they are both eligible titles and both quite wonderful.
Of course, we still have to compare them to all of the other eligible titles of the year, and not just to each other. I think, for the purposes of this blog and our Mock discussions, we would probably choose to have only one on our shortlist, just to create a bit of diversity in the conversation. Remember that our shortlist is likely a LOT shorter than the list of nominated titles the real committee will discuss. In the real committee discussions both titles could not only easily make the list of nominated titles, but both could actually earn an honor or a win. If two Jason Reynolds titles rise to the top of the list and are among the most distinguished, what might happen? The committee can’t just decide to pick one for sake of diversity the way that we can do here. They are each discussed as their own separate entities.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
It’s an unlikely scenario that they both would end up with a Newbery sticker, but it’s a fun thought exercise to imagine what the process could look like in that locked room in January. As for our process here, do you think they both deserve discussion? Is one solidly more likely than the other to earn a medal? Does one deserve to be on our shortlist more than another? Where are they similar and where do those similarities end? Which one better addresses our criteria?
GHOST and AS BRAVE AS YOU both explore themes around the past and the way it haunts. GHOST uses running and track as both a plot point and a metaphor of fear and shame that moves the story forward where AS BRAVE AS YOU uses a familiar plot device of children traveling to visit family where they learn about life and themselves. In both cases these could be seen as easy, almost trite, ways to tell a story, but Reynold’s masterful writing and impressive character building keep both stories fresh and powerful. Gritty, real, emotional, and endlessly appealing, both novels speak truth and entertain. Reynold’s greatest strength, I think, is voice. There wasn’t a moment in either book when I was drawn out of the novel or found something felt inauthentic. I think I would need to do a re-read of each title before I could break down my thoughts enough to choose a favorite.
As an aside, I do think a conversation comparing GHOST to BOOKED could be interesting.
Filed under: Uncategorized
About Sharon McKellar
Sharon McKellar is the Supervising Librarian for Teen Services at the Oakland Public Library in California. She has served on the Rainbow List Committee, the Notable Children’s Recordings Committee, The Arbuthnot Honor Lecture Committee, and the 2015 Caldecott Committee. You can reach her at sharon@mckellar.org.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
SLJ Blog Network
Surprise! Announcing 1000 HORSES FOR THE KING
Fuse 8 n’ Kate: Wee Winnie Witch’s Skinny by Virginia Hamilton, ill. Barry Moser
The Night Mother | This Week’s Comics
Talking with the Class of ’99 about Censorship at their School
In School Library Journal: Good Grief: Middle Grade Authors Normalize Loss
ADVERTISEMENT
I think these are serious Newbery contenders, and I would consider nominating and voting for both of them. GHOST is shortlisted for the NBA while AS BRAVE AS YOU is shortlisted for the Kirkus Prize. Needless to say, both books could have lots of shiny stickers on them by the time late January rolls around.
AS BRAVE AS YOU . . . I love the third person narration here, and the characters are all so well drawn that I feel like I know them, but the book seemed a bit long to me, and I’m not quite sure the resolution of the book succeeded for me, or that the theme was presented as clearly.
GHOST . . . Loved the tightly crafted plot here, in contrast to AS BRAVE AS YOU. First person voice is good. More great characters. GHOST seems pitched to a middle school audience while AS BRAVE AS YOU seems slightly younger to me.
I’m not sure which I like better, maybe GHOST by a smidgen, but there may be room for both of these on my ballot.
I still need to read GHOST, but I’ve read AS BRAVE AS YOU and I also felt that it was a bit too long. For me, it dragged a bit. However, I have once again been surprised by my students’ reactions to a book. I have had two fifth graders pronounce it as their favorite book already! As an aside, both of those students are white – proving yet again that books with children of color as their protagonists are not only for children of color. Both of these kids said the book continually surprised them and held their attention. We just added GHOST to our reading list, so I’ll be back when we have more to report on that front.
I enjoyed Ghost and thought it was an excellent start to a new series, but I’m not sure it really twigged any of my Newbery buttons. Everything was solidly good, but only Castle’s characterization really stood out as distinguished and I need more than just one aspect to reach out and grab me. There were a couple of places where that “starting a new series” vibe shone a little too hard – the sort of thing that will make the entire series as a whole stronger when you re-read it, but which may be a drawback to the book when it stands on its own. The occasional nonstandard grammar seemed inconsistent to me, but perhaps it was a type of code-switching that I wasn’t knowledgable enough to clue in on. I’m looking forward to the other books and getting a deeper look at some of Castle’s teammates.
I read AS BRAVE AS YOU a few months ago and don’t remember all the details clearly–probably because I read it around the same time as Claire Legrand’s SOME KIND OF HAPPINESS and they’ve melded into a blur of “dealing with personal and family issues while spending a rural summer with extended family.” I do remember the dead bird VERY clearly. I did like it a lot while I was reading it, and I would certainly be rereading it and taking better notes if I were serving on Newbery.
I just finished GHOST today, on the other hand, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see it in serious Newbery running at all. I noticed a lot of kind of parallel foreshadowing that I think is appropriate for the age group. For example, in the middle of the story, Ghost is surprised to discover where Sunny lives (because he’s cool and down-to-earth); at the end of the book, Ghost is surprised to discover where Coach grew up (because he’s an adult and seems distant). My heart sank along with Ghost when he didn’t get his uniform with the rest of the team, even as my responsible adult brain was glad that the shoplifting was coming home to roost.
I’m not sure how I feel about Brandon returning at the track meet at the end of the book–it seemed a little pat, but it definitely upped the stakes of the race. I loved the unresolved ending, though I assume we’ll learn the outcome of the race in the next book in the series, which weakens it a bit for me. But I don’t think the Real Committee can use the outside knowledge that there will be a next book, so that’s just an aside.
I thought the characterization of Ghost was masterful — so many small touches, those sunflower seeds, for example. I thought the secondary characters were wonderfully realized, say the store owner, his mother, and the other team members. Setting — Reynolds nails it through a variety of sensory descriptions. Found the plot compelling, nice switches, not obvious. Those episodes of Ghost running, in races, away from things, people, his father, himself, from his own thoughts — just fabulous. The writing, tone, — speed, a sense of running whether physical or in his head was just marvelous, All that running, running, running. Remarkable I thought. All in all, my top Newbery love to date.
Thanks for the comments on these books. I’m still thinking about my reactions to both of them. On the one hand, I think the highs in AS BRAVE AS YOU are pretty impressive. I love the third person narrative voice, and I think the characters are well done. I read somewhere recently a comparison of the intergenerational relationships here rivaling those in the Rita Williams-Garcia trilogy, and I’d agree with that. I’m not sure what to make of the whole dead bird subplot, and the bravery theme telegraphed in the title seems a bit murky to me. This one feels more like a Newbery book, but I actually think GHOST may be the better crafted, if less flashy, work. As I said, I’m a fan of both of these books, and can be goaded in to voting for either or both.
I finally read Ghost and thought it was ok. Not great, but ok. I found Ghost’s voice authentic and engaging, but, as a gay man, I was really taken aback by the use of the term “cupcake” as a pejorative on page 50. Cupcake is commonly used to describe an effeminate gay man.
And if we discussed a single word/sentence undoing The Hired Girl last year, I think it’s meaningful to bring up subtle (and overt) homophobia in books and how that can be “harmful” to readers.
Hard to tell if this post is tongue in cheek (I think so, but not sure). In a sports context–which is how I believe it’s being used here–a cupcake is a pushover. For example, SEC football teams always schedule a bunch of cupcakes in September.
Actually, it isn’t, Jonathan. Thanks for taking my comment so seriously.
Words have different meanings to different people. When the word is hurled at you (along with faggot, queer, etc) by a bunch of assholes while you’re holding your boyfriend’s hand in public, it becomes a weapon.
Not that Urban Dictionary is the end all, but the nowhere in ANY of the definitions of “cupcake,” are the terms ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’ described. And there are 7 definitions.
As a sports fan (and this is a sports book), I read this as Jonathan read this. My Iowa Hawkeyes got slammed last year for scheduling too many “cupcakes” early in the season. In fact, the word is used all the time in sports radio and journalism.
I’m sorry that the word brought you (Joe) personal harm, but that wasn’t the intent of the use of the word in this story. It shouldn’t be a disqualifying element.
I’m not entirely sure that THE HIRED GIRL comparison fits either. You are talking about a personal reaction to a slang word with many different meanings. THE HIRED GIRL controversy came down to historical accuracy, did it not?
Sorry – had lots of family in town this weekend, so doing some catching up now. I’m at work, and the book is at home, but I’m going to take a good close look at this page this evening and add my thoughts then. Thanks, Joe, for bringing it up.
Mr. H., respectfully, on Urban Dictionary, #46 & #57 address exactly what I brought up.
I wasn’t aware of it as a sports term because obviously my experience with the term is different than yours.
HIRED GIRL was trotted out as an example last year because, in a passage, Joan disparagingly refers to American Indians and that was seen as offensive by many. I think the comparison stands because many people brought up the fact that it (the comment about Indians) was harmful to them, or the reader, or children. Furthermore, the argument brought forth by many of these dissenters here or elsewhere, as I recall, was that neither “authorial intent” nor “context” could be used as an excuse to the book’s insensitivity.
I disagree with this. Not being a sports person myself, I understand now the context of the word’s use in GHOST, and, perhaps, too, the authorial intent of Reynolds. I still think the book is merely okay.
Since Joe brought this up, I’ve read that part of GHOST over and over trying to understand what Reynolds’ use of ‘cupcake’ in that passage means and I honestly still don’t truly comprehend what was intended. Being a sports fan (and a gay man, fwiw) I first thought it was simply as Jonathan and Mr H. had indicated, but it’s not even clear upon further review. If someone could help with what that paragraph means, I’d appreciate it.
I read right past it the first time, so I clearly wasn’t initially offended. And I usually notice overtly heteronormative or anti-LGBTQ terminology.
I apologize. I see those now on Urban Dictionary. I didn’t scroll through enough pages!
While I still believe Reynolds’ intent was sports-related, I see your point and understand the comparison to THE HIRED GIRL now, in regards to the idea of ‘intent’ and ‘context.’
In my opinion, ‘authorial intent’ and ‘context’ should be taken into consideration because in this day and age of political correctness, anyone and everyone could be personally offended by ANY word.
I find the argument of the harmfulness of specific words intriguing. To some, the violence in PAX would be considered harmful to children. To some, the use of the word ‘scrotum’ would be considered harmful to children. Where is the line? Is there a line? Why did the “Indian’ people win their argument with THE HIRED GIRL yet, the ‘scrotum’ people lost theirs with THE HIGHER POWER OF LUCKY? Is it case by case? I’m not sure a book should be tossed from consideration because of a few specifics that may be harmful to children in the eyes of some. If that ‘some’ becomes an overwhelming majority, then of course.
OK. I’ve read and re-read this passage now. When I read it initially, I didn’t know the sports connotation for the word and just read it as a word kids would use for another kid who was secretly scared and I think that just made sense to me. Knowing the use of the word in sports makes even more sense. I do understand the concerns of Joe, but was unaware of the term as a pejorative used for gay men.
I also appreciate Mr. H’s point that we have to be careful that curation of potentially offensive language doesn’t become censorship and it is a fine and complicated line. If the word used in the book was clearly meant as a slur, I would have no problem at all with calling that out. In this case, I think it’s clear that it wasn’t being used that way, and yet it is too bad that this is a word that has the potential to cause pain.
So, what’s the conclusion here? I think this is the exact kind of discussion that it’s important to have around titles we are talking about in terms of Newbery consideration. In this case, this is not a fatal flaw in my mind. I can, though, respect the opinion that to others it might be.
FYI, the passage in question . . .
“Nah.” I chuckled just for a second because I knew the kinds of kids coach was talking about. The kids who say they ain’t scared but really be scared of everything. Kids like Brandon [the bully]. He talked all that trash and teased people because he was shook. A cupcake. But that wasn’t me.
Re: Cupcake
When Kevin Durrant signed with the Golden State Warriors, Russell Westbrook posted a picture of a cupcake on his instagram account with no caption or commentary.
In sports culture, “cupcake” is an insult, for someone who is soft or scared, or looking for the easy way out.
Certainly an insult and one that would be understood as an insult to the intended reader of GHOST, but I’m not convinced it needs to be taken in any other context but the sports context it’s presented in.
I think that there’s some justification for pointing out words that might offend a group of people. And I can understand Joe’s reaction especially because the word was one he’s heard in his life. But I find it a bit unsettling to have adult readers acting as watch dogs, sniffing out particular words and discrediting a book for their use. Language changes constantly. New slang words slip in and become accepted or words that mean one thing gradually mean something else. An author might target his words toward a certain audience almost like an “in” joke or a sneaky way of appealing to a narrow audience with special knowledge. For example, the “rope” found under a tree in a southern state might mean a “jump rope” to 99% of white readers but a “lynching rope” to 99% of black readers. But often an author is using a word through one of his characters in a way that’s true to his character’s age, background, education, etc. In THE HIRED GIRL, the story is told first person and everything is seen from the character’s perspective. I think we need to realize that books for kids are not usually intended to set a perfect example for young readers. What if the GHOST character did intend to use “cupcake” as a mean slur? I would assume that would be telling readers a lot about that character. If children’s authors begin to feel they must write for adults who are determined to make every word of every book safe and ” harmless,” fewer and fewer authors will write realistic stories.
I am a little late to this discussion, having read through all the comments only this week. I started because of my admiration for these two books by Jason Reynolds. But I was quickly drawn into the side discussion on the slang meanings of the word “cupcake “.
I have never heard either of these uses: not “cupcake” as a slur for gay man nor “cupcake schedule” as a description of a series of sporting events against easy to beat opponents. I reread that paragraph in Ghost and don’t believe that the context implies either of those meanings. (I completely passed over the word “cupcake” in my first reading.)
The issue is further complicated because Reynolds appears to be using African American English grammar to provide the distinctive voice for the main character, Ghost. Is it possible that “cupcake” has an even different connotation in that vernacular?
I have just read As Brave As You and still need to read Ghost. I am a blind individual, so I try to read as many books as I can that feature disabled characters. I don’t know about the Newbery, but I wouldn’t be surprised if As Brave as You wins the Schneider Family Book Award. There were a few instances of stereotyping, (Grandpop’s “face-mapping” and counting of steps, for instance), and for those reasons I thought briefly of not finishing the novel. But, Genie intrigued me, and Grandpop was compelling enough that I continued. Am glad I did as it was a very powerful story.
I have only recently discovered this blog and am enjoying your insightful discussions of books. I hope to read The Girl Who Drank the Moon soon as the premise sounds so very interesting.