I, too, would love to know more about the ALA’s thinking on the awards … Maybe if bloggers keep posting comments we can nudge them in that direction? In the meantime, many apologies for this delay and thanks for your patience. (On Saturday I am going to take on another complex library-related issue — that so many children’s books are appearing in a large format libraries like for story hours but this drives up the price for the rest of us. I love story hours but have a lot of sympathy for parents and others who get sticker shock at bookstores.)

For example, while I find the Bible interesting… it could be just a matter of how to get one to appreciate it, such as how one appreciates Shakespeare, stories and language. It’s entered my mind that sticking to the related facts any one person can identify with sends a stronger message than trying to explain the Bible.

The Bible is something we all know, yet have never studied–taken so much for granted perhaps that it’s often ignored much like the way it is often left in a hotel drawer. I haven’t even read the entire Bible myself.

I would also like to compare the three novels you mention here… it would be interesting to try to find why it was snubbed by the ALA–to see what they may have been thinking or considering.

“Schlitz seems to have inserted a scene involving the brother either because she wanted to add background about Maud without larding the novel with exposition or because she is setting up a sequel. Either way, it’s a cheat.”