I think Blundell's book deserved the National Book Award for many reasons, but most notably for it's sensitive handling of mature subject matter. Without shoving it down our throats, she gives us a character who just doesn't see how one can discriminate against Jews for no real reason, which can be helpful for younger readers who need an "ally" (fictional or not) in sticking up for others. Additionally, she gives us a very flawed family and shows how parents are humans, too. I think that this realization is one of the key parts of adolescence - the time between "My mom is stupid and always wrong!" in middle school to "My mom is human and sometimes she is wrong, but she is my mother" as you grow older. Her character chooses to keep the family together by lying despite her anger at her mother and suspicion of her stepfather, but does it in such a way that a reader can form their own opinion of what she should have done.
Despite the heavy topics (infidelity, sexuality, war, anti-Semitism) Blundell's book also includes many of the things a teen girl worries about in a relatable way... so that maybe even a girl who doesn't aspire to smoke cigarettes glamorously can relate in the way that she aspires to listen to music in coffee shops alone. The plot is intricate and detailed, and while I felt the characters could have been developed more, I liked her approach because it allowed me to relate them to people I knew and better visualize them despite the difference in time period.

1. Which of the novels that we've read so far had a character you found most likeable? What are the traits that drew you to that character?

H.F., from Finding H.F., was my absolute favorite character from any book I've read in a while. She reminded me a lot of my friend Teresa from high school... very upfront and funny about her sexuality and personal style. It was also so sweet to read her and Bo's hilarious exchanges. It made me wish I had friends that funny, or that I was that funny. Yes, she misunderstands Wendy's intentions, but in general I feel that she is a good role model in the book.

2. What do you think you are discovering about the world of literature written for young readers, i.e., what do you know now that you did not know when the course began?

I didn't realize how important genres were (historical fiction like Crispin, poetry like Make lemonade, the bildungsromans). In fact, one of the things that drew me to the course was my belief that YA Lit lacked the same big barriers between genres. However, I suppose that what I may have been thinking of when I took the class was the fact that many YA Lit novels are coming-of-age stories that maybe would not fit into an adult genre. (The only possible exception I can note is the Chick Lit - "woman goes through divorce/death, meets new friends, cheats on somebody, learns something" category).

P.S. Katy I'm sorry I'm posting this late, I'm trying to get caught up in all my classes.

What are your feelings about a book for teenagers that features a lesbian protagonist, like Finding H.F.?

I was always raised to know that if I were gay, it would be fine, and that gay people weren't "freaks," but as several of my lesbian friends have confirmed, a lo of families aren't like that. Coming of age novels are essential to young adult literature already, as adolescence is precisely the time to know that people can get through what you're going through. But for gay and lesbian teenagers, it's often even more vital to know that kids like them exist, and their feelings are universal. Relatable, funny characters like H.F. can serve as role models or at least examples.

I think that, similarly to parents who feared that Harry Potter would turn their children into witches and wizards, some parents may fear that a book with a lesbian character will inspire their children to try to be gay. However, sexuality is a hard thing to fake. I'd be hard-pressed to find a straight person who could really pretend to be gay for a major length of time.

Views on Children's and YA Lit - then and now:

"When you compare your views about literature written for children and young adults before this course began to what you are thinking now, what would you say has changed for you?"

I think I have always had respect for children's literature, but I had definitely tended to make value judgments very easily. For example, A Wrinkle in Time seemed far more respectable and valuable than, say, Gossip Girl. However, I do think I'm joining the "As Long As They're Reading" bandwagon. The most important thing about a book is how it relates to the readers, because reading is far more active than, say, watching TV. It doesn't just have to be entertaining enough to stare at, it has to be entertaining enough to make you turn a page.

However, this class does give me a more hopeful outlook for the genre, in that I see that all the creativity didn't end with the classics. Just because they get less press in the internet age doesn't mean that incredible books like The Invention of Hugo Cabret aren't being written and read all the time. I think I had forgotten that as I grew older and spent less time in the YA section than previously. It seemed for a while that the only books any middle schooler read were Twilight, but now I see that, just as when I was in 7th grade, there are still creative and unique books that aren't being turned into movies and franchises.

What would you say to someone who might think of children’s picture books as “lesser” literature?

Having met picture book author/poet Laurel Snyder at a reading here last semester, I can say that my opinion of picture books has definitely changed from a view much like that. I have always appreciated picture books... I did bring Frederick with me to college, after all. However, as a writer, I found the suggestion that I should write children's books insulting. "What," I thought to myself, "you don't think I can write a real book?"

Laurel Snyder's story of editing her poetry and prose into a picture book really changed this idea for me. It made me realize that, even if your audience is less conscious of it, stories for children can still contain words that don't fit, or excessive description, or not enough description. There are probably many authors who ignore this and use a cheap formula to sell sub-par work... but then, there are plenty of adult novelists who arguably do the same. Picture books have the additional hurdle implied in their name - they need pictures. For authors who are also illustrators, this can mean telling a story with images, which would be hard enough for most who would consider the writing easy. However, for authors who work with illustrators, this means an extremely demanding collaborative process to get things right; one in which both the author and illustrators creative views must be considered, and things rarely important to the average novelist (words on a page, breakdown of sentences) can become vital to the presentation of the story.

In addition, there's the argument of their vitality. Children can't be expected to learn their alphabet and a basic vocabulary and jump right in to "young reader" chapter books (with intimidatingly high amounts of words), without any familiarity with the subject or storyline. Part of the joy of learning to read is being able to read your favorite picture books without your parents'... it turns reading into a highly personal, independent process at a young age. As such, shouldn't more respect be shown to the authors who basically provide that impetus for youth to read? When I'm a parent, faced with the challenge of raising a child in a truly digital age (in a way unlike any that our generation really saw... yes, we had iPods and cell phones, but not in elementary school) I fully intend to send a thank you note to any author who can interest my child in a paper-and-ink book.

(Laurel Snyder's picture books include Inside the Slidy Diner and Up and Down the Scratchy Mountains if anyone wants to check them out).