I guess some of both, Calli. Since I didn't go into library science either, I'm working on gut instinct -- so I won't quarrel with anyone else's views. But HP doesn't feel like a children's book to me -- I think of children's books as aimed at a pre-teen audience. And there are some things, especially in the more recent books (
Umbridge's pen
, anyone?) that I'm not sure I'd want a younger child (under 9 or 10, certainly) reading.
While Rowling's idea of maturing the series as it goes along is a brilliant way to keep her current younger fans interested, it's likely to create a problem for future parents. An 8 or 9YO could easily handle Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone or Chamber of Secrets, but Order of the Phoenix or even Goblet of Fire? Or, since I'm not a parent and rarely deal with children, am I misestimating what kids can handle?
Depends on what you mean, Wolfram. I'm not familiar with all of them, but I don't see TCITH as SF in any way, shape, or form. It belongs in the children's book section. Ditto on the pop up book.
I don't mind including children's books in the SF category, but Cat in the Hat? Classifying the book as SF is almost as bad as classifying The Cat in the Hat movie as a comedy.
An 8 or 9YO could easily handle Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone or Chamber of Secrets, but Order of the Phoenix or even Goblet of Fire?
I think that this is pretty accurate and what librarians in my acquaintance have been facing. As the series gets darker, it will be less and less appropriate for 2nd/3rd graders. I've read interviews herself where Rowling says it wouldn't be approrpriate for those kids.
But HP doesn't feel like a children's book to me -- I think of children's books as aimed at a pre-teen audience.
Young Adult, which is in my brain a totally separate category, often is not treated as a separate category in bookstores. So if you are looking for a book like
Go Ask Alice
(about drug addiction)
or
Speak
(a fantastic and actually sweetly funny book about a girl who has been raped)
you would find them in the same section of the bookstore as ABC books.
If I'm using song lyric references for chapter titles in a book, what is the best way to credit them? An appendix at the end. Part of me think's it's patronizing to assume the readers won't recogize "Cutting it Fine" as an Asia lyric and that if they don't remember the song "Some Like it Hot" they will remember their was a movie by that name.
But on the other hand, not everyone will get the references; there are plenty out there who have never heard of Asia, and anyway part of me thinks that if you refer to work by an artist there is an ethical requirement to credit them. (I'm assuming that one sentence references are still fair use - that even under stricter copyright laws,I don't have to secure permission.)
In the US this was published as "The First Two Lives of Lukas-Kasha", and it is among Alexander's better novels.
Oh, my god, I read that. I had no idea that was Lloyd Alexander. I have no idea where my copy went, how I got it, and little memory of the plot. Weird.
I've never heard of
Asia
or "Cutting It Fine". So I, as a reader, would appreciate an index or list of acknowledgments or something. OTOH, I think Emma Bull used all song titles for the chapter headings in
War for the Oaks
and I don't recall her providing any such list.
Gar, actually quoting songs is a whole 'nother deal. I have friends (Mely) who've seen most of their royalties on a short story eaten up by payments for song lyrics.
I believe the rule is that you can use up to [edit: seven (7)] words of the song before the need to pay royalties kicks in.
Note for Jacqueline Carey fans: The December Locus mentions that Jacqueline Carey has just sold the Imriel trilogy, featuring characters from the Kushiel books, to Warner.
