Homer Price, by Robert McCloskey, c. 1943, 160 p., middle-grade fiction
I don't usually review books that are 70 years old, but as I was comparing my own book to it, I realized that few kids today may know about Homer. A check of the library records for our county confirm that, while the book is available in most of the branches, it only goes out about once a year. And that's a shame, because not only are the stories delightful and fun (as well as slightly absurd. . . if you have read The Ninja Librarian, you see where I'm coming from. . . ) but they are illustrated in the same style as his classic picture books (Make Way for Ducklings, One Morning in Maine, etc.), which means they are worthwhile just for the pictures.
Each of the six chapters is a free-standing story of some event in the life of Homer Price and his little town of Centerburg. In the first, Homer deals with a foursome of robbers by a creative trick and with a little help from his friends. As in each successive chapter, the set-up is engaging, and the story ends with a twist that shows some real creative problem-solving on Homer's part.
[I hadn't read the book for years until I picked it up last month, looking for something soothing. I was surprised to find the degree to which McCloskey's approach paralleled my own in the NL. Clearly early childhood influences are strong!]
In each story, underlying the elements of silliness and adventure that appeal to the children, there is a certain amount of social commentary that can appeal to the adult reader, particularly with reference to modern "progress." If only McCloskey had known!
The six chapters are:
The Case of the Sensational Scent
The Case of the Cosmic Comic
The Doughnuts
Mystery Yarn
Nothing New Under the Sun (Hardly)
Wheels of Progress
If you or your children haven't read this, get a copy now! While you're at it, pick up the sequel, Centerburg Tales.
Five stars. I can't think what I'd improve.
Showing posts with label Robert McCloskey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Robert McCloskey. Show all posts
Friday, December 21, 2012
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Who are you like?
I had intended today to post a discussion of editing one's work (since I'm busy procrastinating on just that task), but a post on Rachel Abbott's blog about writing blurbs got me thinking. Not just thinking that there's one more thing I should probably revise (again), but about one particular bit that hit a nerve.
Guest blogger Mark Edwards, writing about writing blurbs, encourages us to use the names of known authors (he calls it namechecking). You know the thing: "if so-and-so wrote such-and-such. . . ". Now, I can certainly see the power of this in advertising. Associating your unknown name and book with a name everyone (or everyone interested in your genre) will recognize is a great way to get some attention, maybe draw in some readers.
And yet. I have seen this done so much, and so clumsily. "This book has been compared to 'Harry Potter' and 'The Lord of the Rings'!" "It's like Steinbeck and Shakespeare met for a few drinks and wrote a novel together!" Things that sound both boastful and stupid. I guess if the reviewer for the NYT compares your book (in a positive way) to the work of a best-selling author, you should grab hold and go with that--and give the attribution and the link. But if your Mom says "oh, honey, you write even better than Danielle Steele" (NB: my mother doesn't read Danielle Steele and would never say such an insulting thing to me, especially as I don't write romances), you might want to rethink the comparison.
Of course, everyone wants to know what your book is like, and comparing it to something they know is the fast and easy way to get there. But it's a fine line between useful and reasonable name-dropping and something that sounds like a playground boast.
So here's what I think: I have no idea where the balance lies.
My inclination is to use words like "reminiscent of" and "in the spirit of" or even "inspired by the likes of." Actually, so far my inclination has been to avoid any such comparisons. But now I'm thinking about it, and thinking about a little revision of my blurbs to include some.
"The Ninja Librarian is a tall tale in the (slightly outrageous) spirit of Mark Twain and Robert McCloskey's Homer Price." (This might at least attract the attention of the parents and grandparents of my juvenile readers, though I'm not sure how many 4th graders will recognize either name, more's the pity). Or maybe "Hank the Cowdog would feel right at home in Skunk Corners." (Adult readers without children may, in their turn, need to look up who Hank is. Great fun for family read-alouds. Sort of like the NL. Check it out).
Is that too weird?
What do you think about "namechecking" in blurbs by unknown authors?
Guest blogger Mark Edwards, writing about writing blurbs, encourages us to use the names of known authors (he calls it namechecking). You know the thing: "if so-and-so wrote such-and-such. . . ". Now, I can certainly see the power of this in advertising. Associating your unknown name and book with a name everyone (or everyone interested in your genre) will recognize is a great way to get some attention, maybe draw in some readers.
And yet. I have seen this done so much, and so clumsily. "This book has been compared to 'Harry Potter' and 'The Lord of the Rings'!" "It's like Steinbeck and Shakespeare met for a few drinks and wrote a novel together!" Things that sound both boastful and stupid. I guess if the reviewer for the NYT compares your book (in a positive way) to the work of a best-selling author, you should grab hold and go with that--and give the attribution and the link. But if your Mom says "oh, honey, you write even better than Danielle Steele" (NB: my mother doesn't read Danielle Steele and would never say such an insulting thing to me, especially as I don't write romances), you might want to rethink the comparison.
Of course, everyone wants to know what your book is like, and comparing it to something they know is the fast and easy way to get there. But it's a fine line between useful and reasonable name-dropping and something that sounds like a playground boast.
So here's what I think: I have no idea where the balance lies.
My inclination is to use words like "reminiscent of" and "in the spirit of" or even "inspired by the likes of." Actually, so far my inclination has been to avoid any such comparisons. But now I'm thinking about it, and thinking about a little revision of my blurbs to include some.
"The Ninja Librarian is a tall tale in the (slightly outrageous) spirit of Mark Twain and Robert McCloskey's Homer Price." (This might at least attract the attention of the parents and grandparents of my juvenile readers, though I'm not sure how many 4th graders will recognize either name, more's the pity). Or maybe "Hank the Cowdog would feel right at home in Skunk Corners." (Adult readers without children may, in their turn, need to look up who Hank is. Great fun for family read-alouds. Sort of like the NL. Check it out).
Is that too weird?
What do you think about "namechecking" in blurbs by unknown authors?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)