Comments | davidlubar: And the winner is -- the Y chromosome

davidlubar

And the winner is -- the Y chromosome

Jan 31, 2012 12:17

I recently posted a question on a listserve for librarians, asking whether there is a bias toward males in kidlit awards and promotion. Some interesting and informative responses resulted, as did some interesting replies to those responses in various private message boards. In the interest of generating a more-public discussion, and allowing ( Read more... )

Comments 39

anonymous January 31 2012, 18:00:13 UTC

Interesting discussion. Some people on YALSA-BK say they don't intentionally consider gender, it's not one of the things they're supposed to consider for awards, etc. Well, of course not. But that doesn't mean there's not unintentional ways gender is considered, the most obvious of which is that the publishers push male-authored books more, leading everyone to believe the male-authored books are more "important" and, therefore, award worthy ( ... )

davidlubar January 31 2012, 19:56:59 UTC

A lot of great insights and thoughts. Thank you for participating.

ext_1018631 January 31 2012, 21:59:39 UTC

My question is this, as a librarian and as a committee participant -- how am I to help change this, if I can? Or, how do I see that it's happening? I'm very glad to be a part of this discussion here precisely because I'm getting a window into something we librarians just don't see. We don't observe or understand the machinations of publishers the way that you authors do, so I'm very keen to understand why this is the case and if it is, how we might help both see it and change it from our end of things ( ... )

artistq January 31 2012, 18:03:58 UTC

Since the award choosers are mostly women, perhaps there is some need they have to feel 'attracted' to the author/illustrator they choose. Or perhaps that is the issue, they are choosing the author/illustrator and not necessarily the work ( ... )

davidlubar January 31 2012, 19:57:33 UTC

The repeat-winner issue is something I hadn't thought about. Thanks for adding it to the discussion.

ext_1018631 January 31 2012, 21:50:12 UTC

I personally have never felt any need to feel "attracted" to the chosen winner at all, and I'd argue that very much on the committees I've been on we choose the work, not the author. It can be tough, even, because one does have fondness for a particular author (for whatever reason) but the work doesn't quite make the cut for whichever award criteria. We really do focus on the work more than the author. I can't speak for any particular committee, but I can say that's been my experience ( ... )

anonymous January 31 2012, 18:06:29 UTC

1. I have noticed that YA librarians sometimes swoon over male writers in the public arena. If the librarian ratio was reversed and more men were on the committees than women, could they get away with this same swooning over the way authors look? I think not. As a woman and a librarian, it makes me cringe. We may read teen books, but we needn't act like teenagers in the process ( ... )

davidlubar January 31 2012, 19:59:45 UTC

I love your point about how a reversal of the ratio when it comes to swooning would provoke an entirely different reaction. Thanks for contributing so many excellent thoughts.

ext_1018631 February 1 2012, 04:29:04 UTC

1. Just to say: Librarians in a public arena (conferences & listservs) are not the same as librarians on committees. In the same way, YALSA-BK is not in any way representative of how committees think or work. So, do not judge awards decisions by the way librarians act at conferences or on informal listservs. It's not a fair comparison.

I have also seen my male librarian friends swoon over creators too, so...it does happen. :)

As for ratio of gender on committees, well -- some of that is recruiting, and encouraging people of all types to volunteer to be on said committees. I'd love to see diversity of all kinds on committees, and I think YALSA does its best, but it depends on people volunteering and stepping up to do the work too. I think the ratio has for more to do with the gender ratio of the profession as a whole than willingness to serve or any machination of the process.

deenaml January 31 2012, 18:54:12 UTC

Like Anon 1 said, there is a difference b/t the # of women authors who write YA in general (fantasy/romance/paranormal/chicklit) and the # of women authors who write LITERARY/PROBLEM NOVEL YA that has the chance to win a Printz Award. David -- any idea what the ratio of THAT is? I'm not sure myself ( ... )

davidlubar January 31 2012, 19:01:36 UTC

Wow -- great job with the Morris stats, and a very interesting point. Interestingly, there's also a perception (which I tend to share, though I haven't checked to see if it's true) that a disproportionate number of Printz awards and honors go to first novels. I guess it would be interesting to see if the male/female ration there is different from the Morris. I wonder whether the natural human instinct to say, "Look what I discovered" plays a part? Alas, I do not know the ratio you asked about, for books that would be considered to have a reasonable chance.

deenaml January 31 2012, 19:23:52 UTC

This would be an awesome project for an MLS/PhD MLS student to do....

Out of the stats I sighted from 2009-2012:
2012 -- Printz winner's FIRST novel period
2011 -- Printz winner's first YA novel (had pubbed and rec'd awards in adult sci-fi)
2010 -- Printz winner's FOURTH YA novel
2009 -- Printz winner's THIRD YA novel

ext_1018631 January 31 2012, 21:53:06 UTC

I'd love to see if this is true. I hadn't noticed that it's been true over all, but I have noticed (and wondered) about the trend in the last few years. I find it...inexplicable as a trend.

Thread 9

anonymous January 31 2012, 19:31:24 UTC

Ok, I know this will open up another can of worms but....I think it possibly has to do with the subjects male authors tend to write about as opposed to women. The award committees want books that are "literature" or what they consider literature. I think that most male author's do not include a strong romantic angle to their books. I think that is to their advantage since romance is not given serious weight.

davidlubar January 31 2012, 20:02:00 UTC

Wow -- that's another great aspect to consider. In a similar vein, the win by Jack Gantos sparked a couple discussions about the way humor is treated.

anonymous January 31 2012, 20:05:09 UTC

Yep, that opened a can of worms. I don't think anyone is saying romance novels should win the Printz award . . . any more than anyone is saying that action/adventure-type books commonly written by males should.

Besides, plenty of literature written by men includes romance. Romance is part of life. How about Ernest Hemingway or F. Scott Fitzgerald? Sure, those aren't bodice-rippers, but I don't think anyone is contending that bodice-rippers should win awards. What about Sarah Zarr, Amy Efaw, Mary E. Pearson, Gail Giles, Nancy Werlin, Lauren Oliver? Are they all writing dopey romance novels?

ext_1018631 February 1 2012, 04:40:00 UTC

I also think there's a lot of oversimplification going on here. Gender is an aspect, but so is genre and so is writing style and so are so many other more inherent aspects to the work. You cannot only count gender as the important factor. It's the work that's most important (and most discussed) not the author.

For example, Ship Breaker was considered surprising last year because it was the first time a genre book -- science fiction -- won the award. Going Bovine startled some folks because of its humor (as Jack Gantos did this year with the Newbery.) All the previous winners were essentially realistic fiction. I find that to be more significant than I necessarily find a gender breakdown of the Printz Awards.