First blog post of 2018 is actually in January! A miracle!
Blogging more is one of my resolutions, and this specific post has been on my to-do list since the day after my last blog post, so I think I'm doing well.
I've been thinking a lot recently about how it seems that every famous Tom, Dick and Harry is writing children's books. It was David Walliams in particular that sparked this interest for me, purely because it was the first time that it dawned on me that there is a possibility here that their publicity may be the very reason that their books get picked up, or they may have even been asked by publishing houses to write them. I am not saying that the many celebrities who write children's books do not deserve their success, people such as Fearne Cotton and Dermot O'Leary created lovely books. But what I do find interesting is that their name on the front cover is, in itself, an easy USP, and it taps into that uniqueness of children's books: they operate on two levels. They must appeal, engage and entertain children, but also be marketable to the adults buying the books. Unless there really are kids like Boss Baby (you know that film?) that have money and can buy books despite the language/height barriers or whatever? So when people like David Walliams, who is on our television screens for a couple of weeks once a year, write a load of children's books (and get the brilliant Tony Ross to illustrate them) are they for kids or are they being directly marketed to said kids' parents or guardians? If you find Walliams funny on B.G.T on a Saturday night, then maybe come Monday morning when you've popped into town, you might wander into your local bookshop and see his name in writing (a font very close to that of the iconic font, which is actually just Sir Quentin Blake's handwriting, for Roald Dahl), and then maybe you may be so inclined to pick it up, buy it, and read it to your child because you're a bit intrigued. But just know that the marketing team did not have to do a single thing for that transaction to happen. A name just did a whole team's worth of people's jobs. Clever or damaging to the industry?
The success of Tom Fletcher's The Christmasaurus is paramount to anything I have ever seen before - it has only been in the world since October 2016 and Fletcher has already written songs to accompany it (available here), which has consequently been adapted into a stellar (apparently) stage show over Christmas just gone, and Hollywood sniffing around, wanting to make it into a film. That success can only be down to its brilliance and it inclusivity (the main character is in a wheelchair), but did it start with the marketability of Rock-Star-Children's-Author? It is the same reason that we are starting to have a generation of Hermoine's and Luna's and Severus' or whatever. The kids who were growing up when Harry Potter came out, or when Tom was singing about a lady with lots of different colours in her hair, are now having children. I'm only 22 but I'll be damned if my kids' nursery isn't filled to the brim with Winnie the Pooh memorabilia.
This seems to me to be a recent phenomenon, however. The books I read as a child were not, as far as I can remember, written by an already famous person, or a person who had made their successes outside of writing books. But this is my point, that name on the front of the cover is not for the children reading the books - it's for copyright and legal purposes and the adults buying books. I recently remembered a book I read an a tween, called The English Roses. It wasn't until researching it that I realised it was by Madonna. The Madonna. Eleven-year-old me did not give a rat's arse about who wrote this book, I just remembering lots of flowers, which I liked, and the characters having very long and stick-like legs. My mum's cousin bought it for me, but I wonder if she bought it because she saw 'Madonna' on the front cover, or she thought I would relate to these leggy characters? I don't remember particularly liking the book, but I did love the illustrations, beside the leg situation. So, for all you adults out there reading my fancy blog, next time you are thinking about buying a book and you recognise a name, analyse why you want to buy that book for your/a child you know. Is it because it has a clear, positive message you want that child to learn, or you'll think they will like it because it has a dinosaur/fairy/pirate in it, or because the main character looks like them (always lovely, especially for people of colour!)? Or is it because you saw X on the tv last night?
This Guardian article is a very interesting read and may open some eyes to the reality of celebrity authors. There are issues of celebrities being paid bigger advances than non-celebrities, and even ghostwriting. I am not calling for a coup or a revolution to bring kids books back to kids books authors, because, frankly, that is a long title for a revolution, but because I think that there are some great stories out there written by famous people. But be wary and smart in your book choices. Buy books because of their content, rather than the name on the front cover and practice what you preach when you tell your children not to judge a book by its cover.
All images from Google Images.
This whole thing makes me think about what it takes to be a children's author. So, as someone who has always been very vocal about wanting to get into children's books, I get a small insight into what other people think that is. From my experience, men think that having a child qualifies you for that career. A few men I have spoken to (not that I talk to loads of random men, but like my old boss or my cousin's husband) seems to respond to me saying I want to go into children's books with "Oh really? I actually have a few little ideas for stories" Is this a creative dad thing? Some men have children and suddenly think that the silly stories they make up for their kids at bed time (which usually involve their favourite toy) warrant every child in the country hearing them. This is arguably what children's books are about! For example, I was at Paradise Wildlife Park yesterday, having a rock 'n' roll Sunday, and there was a small section of the park with a house and some swings, and I noticed that there were these cartoon light-bulb looking things on the fences. There was an explanation in the form of a board of some kind, detailing that his specific part of the park was called Dumbleby Forest. Mark White had seen his little girls traumatised by growing up (relatable) and having to let go of their dummies, so he created a little world as an explanation as to way they had to let go of their comforters and be ok with it. The books detail that dummies grow and live in Dumbleby Forest, and so when it is time for children to give them up, they can be safely returned home, and the children don't have to worry. (You can buy Mark White's Dumbleby Forest here or visit the page on Paradise Wildlife Park's website.) Such a sweet story, and such a fabulous example of the power children's books have.
There is no algorithm for a successful children's book. You don't have to have children, have a job that involves them, and you certainly don't have to be famous: you just have to be able to create a little world for them to enjoy. I think it really is that simple.
Bye bye for now x
No comments:
Post a Comment