If you have any connection to the universe of children’s publishing, you have probably heard about this. I’m not up in arms or anything, as a) I’m not completely clear on the details of the proposal and b) “best of” lists are always limited, ultimately, in their usefulness. But, the idea is that BBYA would be replaced by some kind of popular vote, and that got me thinking about the starification of our culture, something that’s been bothering me for awhile now.
I love our friend the Internet. You know I do. But I’ve always hated that you can’t write an Amazon or Goodreads review without adding a star rating. How can you rate a Carson McCullers novel using the same scale as a VC Andrews novel—that is, 0 to 5 stars? I might give both Member of the Wedding and Flowers in the Attic a 5, as they are both totally satisfying to me in their own ways. But they are hardly equal. This same star scale is used to rate all consumer products, restaurants, cities, mechanics, doctors, ISPs, hair stylists…the list goes on and on.
Aren’t these things a tiny bit more complicated than a five-star rating system? What do the ratings and rankings really tell you other than an average opinion of average people who may or may not be anything like you in their needs and tastes? In an ideal world, excellent things would also be popular, but the fact that America’s Funniest Home Videos has been the most widely-viewed TV show for eons tells you that is not always the case.
Some books are excellent but not popular. Some books are popular but not excellent. Some are excellent and popular–yay! Of course this all ties into the last big online debate in kidlit: Who is qualified and should be allowed to review books? Which ties into the bigger cultural picture and the demise of print journalism, the controversies over citizen reporting and mommy bloggers, and the re-evaluation of the purpose of and need for gatekeepers.
There is a seismic cultural shift going on, and the ALA is not immune. As is always the case with change, whether it turns out to be bad change or good change, something is lost. I think we lose a lot by the way star ratings have encroached on how we make choices, and I fear that they—and any kind of popular vote scenario—can even keep us from knowing certain choices exist. The breadth and depth of the BBYA list has been so great—it’s hard for me to see the proposed changes as anything but a loss, with nothing gained since there are already so many ways to measure and reward popularity.
8 comments for this post
The Oscars have increased the Best Pic category from 5 to 10 nominees, many believe because Wall*E and Dark Knight were left out of contention due to the smaller nom pool. No doubt, this change will impact the overall nom process allowing for more box office sellers to get their foot in the door.
It’s almost like – so it’s not enough that your movie made a bazillion dollars, now you want the gold statuette too?
Some could say the BBYA issue is similiar. Popular books are selling by the dozens, do they really need to be force fed to us via a list?
Still, I’m on the fence. “Best lists” are so subjective, from word go. And honestly, they’re not nearly as diverse as they should be. And I’m using the term diverse broadly. But, if YALSA identifies a way so that a broad mix of opinions (libs and readers) feed into this newly structured list, maybe it won’t be as limiting as early speculation leads us to believe.
I was disappointed when NYPL included music and movies on their best list. Aren’t there enough lists that tout popular movies and music?!
But, maybe it’s our own fault. Let’s be honest – in many respects Best lists contain books adults and critics love and maybe readers not so much.
These lists need to be more diverse (literary/popular/mainstream/niche) or they risk being useless to the young readers.
[Reply]
Sara Reply:
July 10th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
@Paula Chase, I agree with every single one of your points.
[Reply]
they—and any kind of popular vote scenario—can even keep us from knowing certain choices exist — this is exactly what I fear with this proposed change. There are wonderful gems out there that will never be as widely read as they should be, and this will be even more true if we have to rely on “popular vote” to spread the word about what books are out there.
[Reply]
Roger Ebert has openly stated that he uses a sliding scale for his star ratings. A “4″ summer blockbuster action movie is not equal to a “4″ international drama in terms of film quality, artistic merit, etc.
That said, and also acknowledging the serious implications of this issue, I chortled when I saw that you, Sara, categorized this entry under “the borg”. Tee hee.
[Reply]
Sara Reply:
July 11th, 2009 at 9:47 am
@Todd T, When I saw 17 Again, a friend I saw it with asked, “So on a scale of 1-10 what did you think?” and I was like, “For comedies about switching bodies/ages/genders, 8.”
[Reply]
The BBYA is getting rid of the old list due to overlap, but I don’t see how this changes anything. Popular books don’t need any more exposure. I would prefer a great books you probably missed list.
[Reply]
Sara Reply:
July 11th, 2009 at 9:45 am
@Doret, Right – good idea!
[Reply]
Since I am actually on BBYA, I just wanted to say thanks for the thoughtful post and for the support. I totally admit BBYA needs some tweaking, but the process is pretty amazing to be a part of.
[Reply]
Add your comment