Clare wrote: I just hope not too many kids buy it/are given it, then
give up origami in disappointment - we really need to start setting a
standard -but not sure how? Maybe carry an endorsement by NOA/BOS/OUSA etc?
I certainly agree that it would be unfortunate for kids and other
beginners to be turned off by a poor book. (It would be just as
unfortunate for them to be turned off by a book intended for more
experienced folders, but that's another story.) But I'm not sure it's wise
for us to do the turning off either.
I think that it would be more helpful to encourage and advise authors
and publishers than to try to regulate them, or to wave off potential
readers. This might not prevent poorly produced books altogether, but it
would help stem their proliferation. But when warning readers away from a
book, we need to think whether it is inexcusable in some objective way (as
when it contains unattributed or pirated works), or just disappointing
because it doesn't live up to our expectations -- which may be much higher
than the average reader's. Every book has some virtue, and every reader
has their own taste.
I think, too, we would have a very difficult time agreeing on a
publishing standard, or even a universal definition of "origami." Some
publishers lump all sorts of paper crafts under the heading of origami
because that's what is best known. At risk of being heretical, I might ask
whether deciding what is and isn't origami is really a problem we need to
address, or want to burden newcomers with.
That said, the idea of endorsement is excellent, and would certainly
help beginners and enthusiasts alike in finding books they will enjoy.
Perhaps stickers like the Caledecott medals for kids' books? I know that
as an author, I'd rather have such an endorsement than not, and I'd work
hard to get it, and I'm sure my publishers would too. I'm more moved by
carrots than sticks.
Andrew Dewar
