Review Unwritten—Katherine Paterson’s Bread and Roses, Too

Just after putting down this latest Paterson book, I had idea after idea about what to say. That was a month ago (at least) and the details have now faded. All my brilliant points of critique, all my Deep Thoughts. Oddly, details of the story itself are not lost, nor are one or two things I’d thought when I first read it. This is probably for the best—the things that remain will be the most important.

I’m reading a printed collection of Katherine Paterson’s lectures, The Invisible Child. The first is titled, “In Search of Wonder,” and in it she writes,
“If knowledge without a sense of reverence is dangerous, morality divorced from wonder leads either to chilling legalism or priggish sentimentality. I am always nervous when some well-meaning critic applauds my work for the values and lessons it teaches children, and I’m almost rude when someone asks me what moral I am trying to teach in a given book. When I write a book I am not setting out to teach virtue, I am trying to tell a story, I am trying to draw my reader into the mystery of human life in this world. I am trying to share my own sense of wonder that although I have not always been in this world and will not continue in it for too many more years, I am here now, sharing in the mystery of the universe, thinking, feeling, tasting, smelling, seeing, hearing, shouting, singing, speaking, laughing, crying, living, and dying.”
As she has in the past, Paterson accomplished this in Bread and Roses, Too.

Through careful research she effortlessly transports us back in time. Effortlessly, we hear the distinct accents of the Italian ladies, and the Polish ladies, and the Lithuanian ladies. Effortlessly, we fall into the lives of daughter of Italian-immigrants, Rosa and US-born, Jake. And as Paterson has done in many of her novels, she succeeds in her treatment of difficult subject matter.

Paterson is well aware of her tendency toward taking on challenging topics. From the essay, "Creativity Limited," reprinted in The Invisible Child, but dating back to The Writer in 1980, she writes,
“Let me offer a brief and brutal survey of my already published novels for children and young adults. In the first, the hero is a bastard, and the chief female character ends up in a brothel. In the second, the heroine has an illicit love affair, her mother dies in a plague, and most of her companions commit suicide. In the third, which is full of riots in the streets, the hero’s best friend is permanently maimed. In the fourth, the central child character dies in an accident. In the fifth, turning away from the mayhem in the first four, I wrote what I refer to as my “funny book.” In it the heroine merely fights, lies, steals, cusses, bullies an emotionally disturbed child, and acts out her racial bigotry in a particularly vicious manner.”
This is just her first five books. In Bread and Roses, Too, Paterson confronts head-on alcoholism, abuse, and again bigotry, without glossing over or authorial judgment.

Paterson writes her world as it exists for her characters. In the same lecture, she writes,
“Yet, somehow, when a story is coming to life, I’m not judging it as appropriate or inappropriate, I’m living through it. In The Sign of the Chrysanthemum Akiko ended up in a brothel not because I wanted to scandalize my readers, not because I’m advocating legal prostitution, but because in twelfth-century Japan, a beautiful thirteen-year-old-girl with no protector would have ended up in a brothel.”
Likewise, when Jake is cleaned up by a young priest after being beaten bloody by his drunken father, the priest shudders, but does not run out and call Child Protective, or vow to stop the monster who did this. No, he clothes Jake and sends him back out on the street. Other issues are dealt with similar deftness. Rosa’s devout Catholicism, the harsh effects of life in the mills are but two more examples.

Yet with all this praise, Bread and Roses, Too is not my favorite Paterson work. I have two reasons and both have to do with characterization. First, I found Rosa’s continual negativity tiresome and it kept me from fully identifying with her. At every turn she is wary of the events taking place in the book, fearful, and generally a wet blanket over the enthusiasm of her mother and sister. Having a character with these traits is fine in moderation – it gives her something to overcome – but I found Rosa's struggle more caused by obstinance (or the author's manipulation) than believable struggle. I rooted for her mother and sister, but spent more time wishing I could just shake Rosa by the shoulders, “Get with it, girl!” than looking forward to what might happen to her next.

Along the same lines, there is an unresolved tension between Rosa and Jake as to who takes center stage. The novel opens with Jake digging a hole for himself in the trash heap, and shortly the point of view switches to Rosa. I love books with multiple points of view – the scope it gives, broadening out from one character’s often myopic view of the world. But, often one character is considered the protagonist or lead.

Because more weight, in terms of page numbers and emotional intensity (all that angst and negative energy), is given to Rosa, I assumed she was the lead and big changes would be in store. Yet toward the end of the book I realized that was not the case – Rosa doesn’t change in any life-shattering way. She accepts and gets behind the central movement of the plot eventually, but I was never fully convinced of her ambivalence in the first place (as said, it seemed more a convenience for the sake of plotting), so this wasn’t so big of a surprise. The real change comes in Jake, who goes from being a selfish little trash-digging rogue, to an upstanding young man, with a loving family, no less. This made Rosa seem more a vehicle than a real person. A vehicle to drive the plot, but also one to drive theme, and this I noted particularly in her line toward the end regarding all her prayers being answered but one, that one being for Jake, which by the end is also answered. This treatment is far less deft and subtle than I’m used to with Paterson, and was a disappointment.

That said, Bread and Roses, Too still brought out the tears and still made for a fulfilling read. The history is vibrant, the dialects superb, the characters lively, and the plot satisfying despite those minor qualifications.

A Mix: Good, Bad, Ugly ...


Black Stars of the Harlem Renaissance by Jim Haskins, Elanora Tate, Clinton Cox, and Brenda Wilkinson. 2002.

Ok, time for a rant. I haven't ranted in a while, have I? Well, maybe. Even so, a rant is due so here it is:

The chapter on Du Bois: Do we have a reliable narrator? Du Bois is introduced as “one of the greatest scholars the world has ever known.” First we have the issue of a lose definition of scholar (what is a scholar, exactly?), and then the absurd grandiosity of the superlative. "Greatest World Scholar!" So Du Bois should be canonized with historical and world scholars such as Aristotle, Plato, Hegel, Hume, etc? Or is the author introducing us to a figure who is made larger than life with exaggeration? Acceptable in a Tall Tale, but not in a biography.

Ok, on to pg. 7: it’s said that Du Bois has an academic career that claims nationwide attention. Yet the development, the “proof” to back up his "nationwide attention" is that he taught English, Latin, Greek, and German at the university level. I know a handful of Classics professors ... sadly, they don't get much attention, locally or nationally. The author then follows up that "nationwide" claim with details of Du Bois' marriage and kids. No development of his scholarship, what this "attention" consisted of, or anything else of real interest. 


In fact, Du Bois' ambivalence toward Nazi Germany is entirely ignored, and his strong beliefs against racial integration never mentioned. I found more detail at Wikipedia than I did in this chapter! Even children deserve 1. the facts and 2. the truth at age/developmentally appropriate levels.

Most other biographies: these sketches are so short. I found myself irritated by the lack of interesting detail and by the inclusion of mundane this-is-what-I-read-in-the-encyclopedia factoids. The sketches don’t live and breathe, they gloss over an entire life in sometimes the boringest possible way, with broad and often clumsy brush strokes that, because of the first line of the first sketch and huge omissions of facts, make me want to double check all the facts. Very text-book-y.

Yet the book is uneven. The section on Langston Hughes was interesting and vivid. It didn’t have the broad-brush feel some of the other sketches had. Hmmm. Which makes me ask if there is a problem with the book as a whole, or an issue common to a multi-authored book. Perhaps some authors are better at research/writing/clarity/intellectual integrity than others?

I also noticed that many of the books referenced in the notes are secondary sources at best. Honestly, I wish I'd seen Wikipedia referenced - there might have been more details!

Two Undecodable Books (ok, maybe a little decodable)


Henry and Mudge and the Tumbling Trip plus The Big Sleepover by Cynthia Rylant. 2005.

An adventure story about fun and friendship.

Rylant uses short sentences, though I must say from a reading-developmental level (whatever it’s called), the vocabulary used requires decoding skills a Level 2 might not have. “Knocked” and “enough” are more level 3 or 4, I think, but what do I know? I only taught three kids how to read.

The second of hers (Sleepover) was fun and un-frightening but on a topic that might be frightful for a child. Tender. It does not, however, make me eager to host my kids’ first sleepover (and I don’t even have knickknacks!).

Cinderella or Cinderella or Cinderella - All the Same



Cendrillon: A Caribbean Cinderella by Robert D. San Souci. S&S, 1998.

Immediate connection with the narrator appearing before the title page. The fabulous voice is already rich and engaging, then add the surprise of the narrator being the “fairy godmother,” well!

Such a different take from Yeh Shen (a Chinese Cinderella retelling by Ai-Ling Louie), yet Yeh Shen is so much more culturally rich. It’s a truly different version of a classic tale, not a retelling of one with a switch in cultural setting.


I had this complaint about a Halloween version as well, Cinderella Skeleton. It was the same old story but with skeletons and undead vs. humans. I know we all just adore Pinkney (the illustrator) and San Souci is better known than Ai-Ling Louie, but honestly, the writing and originality of this tale pale compared to Yeh Shen; even the illustrations are lacking in the artistry of Ed Young’s paintings. If a culturally rich adaptation of a classic tale is going to be on a required reading list for any MFAC program, I think it should be Yeh Shen.

A Little Moody over Judy Moody


Judy Moody by Megan McDonald. Candlewick, 2000.

Very Ramona-the-pest both in tone and content: the every-day becomes huge in a way that takes a child’s moods and struggles seriously. Funny and “edgy” for a third grader. A venus fly trap, a doll that gets sick, fake hand in a toilet.

Judy is just as smart and sensitive as Ramona, and I liked how the story was built around a “me” collage. A lovely addition to the "Cute Little Girl" genre. (Is there such a genre? There certainly must be ...)

Witness this!

Witness by Karen Hesse. 2002.

This book was made up of poems from different points of view and usually in differing and discernible voices all telling one story.

The plot, though ... the story seemed to end at the wrong spot. It ended with one of the secondary (even tertiary) characters, with a sort of twilight zone “dun dun dun!” campfire ghost story ending. The whole meaning of the book was lost.

I saw little Esther’s attempt to take the Heaven Train (i.e. kill herself) as the primary focal point of the book—she’s certainly the only character the reader ends up knowing intimately and loving thoroughly. Yet this scene happens mid-way in. The scene seen by the author (I’d guess) as “climax” is her father getting shot. Why is this climactic? We don’t know nor really care about her father, except in how his death might hurt Esther.

So, today's lesson boys and girls, is this: end a book with something directly related to the character we come to love most. And the most emotionally charged moment maybe ought to be the climax? Or that the emotional intensity must escalate to the climax. So if the reader is choking on sobs at the half-way point, she sure better be all-out weeping by the end. Dénouement is allowable, but it really can’t take up half the book (and the “shooting” scene, like I said, wasn’t resolution—it was escalation/climax, except it ended up being anticlimactic related to the Heaven Train in the middle).

A Compass of Gold, off to a Good Start


The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman.

The power of a great opening: Pullman’s The Golden Compass begins, “Lyra and her daemon moved through the darkening hall, taking care to keep to one side, out of sight of the kitchen.” We see a bit of each method of creating conflict. We know Lyra only by name, but it’s a lovely name, likeable and not quite ordinary. We sense that Lyra is also a likeable and not quite ordinary girl. The hook in this case involves action—Lyra is sneaking around in the dark—which provides obvious mystery: why is she sneaking? What on earth is a daemon? Pullman makes us wait.

Pullman continues to keep us waiting. He follows his opening line with a smidge of description—Lyra lives in a fancy place—and then provides a glimpse into Lyra’s character when she taps crystal to hear it ring. She’s curious and playful, yet her response to her worrywart daemon of, “They’re making too much noise to hear from the kitchen,” shows Lyra as a sensible, independent girl.

In effect, we are dumped straight into the action in a strange world. Lyra snoops where girls aren’t allowed, but before our curiosity about Lyra and her world can be sated, she must duck into hiding to avoid detection. Yet more questions arise as she overhears a plot to murder her uncle. Lyra’s character has heart, we have ample hook to propel us forward, and Pullman gives us abundant mystery. If we want answers, we must read on.

The end of the book continues with questions. Lyra rescues a group of children, but the story continues into the next book. Of the three, I thought the first two fit together best. The whole world of the dead/souls/something like that in the third was bizarre and hard to follow.

The Gift of Suffering


The Giver by Lois Lowry. 1993.

Lowry opens The Giver with a description of fear and immediately cements the unusualness of the world she’s created as well as giving us insight into the young protagonist, Jonas. She also is so deliciously good at creating a Utopia that seems wonderful, at the start, and only slowly becomes sinister. It’s not at all obvious, unlike, say, Wrinkle in Time, that this Community is full of darkness. Especially chilling is the parallel between Lowry’s Community and that created in Hitler Youth.

  • Emotions are real and honest. I think it was Stephen King who wrote that the key to creating fear was to let characters respond in a realistic way to unrealistic situations (something like that). Lowry does exactly that. Jonas has the same doubts and confusions any of us would have given his situation, which makes the story all the more believable.
  • Last residency some of us were discussing the ending, some saying that Lowry was shocked that anyone thought Jonas and Gabe died in the snow. They’re riding down to an “Elsewhere that held their future and their past.” Throughout, Elsewhere has been the place people go when they’re released. I.e., when they die. So where else but into death was Jonas headed? I always assumed the boys died. Yet reading the book again, I see the ambiguity. My only point is that clarity would have been far, far more satisfying. I spent 10+ years being disappointed and peeved by the end to the book, while now I’m just bewildered.

ChuggaChugga ChooChoo!


Freight Train by Donald Crews. Greenwillow, 1978.

Conceptual, informative, this little book teaches object permanence (through the tunnel cut away) and prepositions like through and by, and it uses real train terminology. It has a certain energy and excitement to it—forward momentum and rhythm of a train.

What is my Job?

Job as in work, not Job as in the guy with all the bad luck from the Bible. You know, the one who has a whole book named after him.

For the past few months I've been thinking of working, of vocation, of all the "free" time I'll have when all three kiddos go to school in a few weeks. Sure, I'm a student again and sure I have a house that I love and an aversion to offices. But what of meaning and purpose and all those Big things that drive other women into the workplace? What of a paycheck?

I applied for a job before leaving for my MFA residency. Part time, a sort of mirror-under-the-nose job (meaning you only have to be breathing to get it). I didn't get it. The ones who did get hired are, well, alive I suppose, but very young. I'd never thought of myself as old, and I've never once thought the past ten years raising children would be seen as inconsequential (honestly, how many 20yr olds know how to feed a family of five for less than $100 a week?). But, well, the girl doing the hiring was herself no more than 25 so I must have seemed positively ancient. Who knows. That may not be the reason at all. The job description said some weekends and I said, "yeah, sure, a few weekends are ok," yet the two new hires were scheduled for every single weekend. What's more, I already did the job on a volunteer basis, so why pay for what they could get for free? I was even called to cover some of the newly hired employee's shifts (without pay), which was enough for me to say see-yah-latah to the volunteering gig, which is too bad because I *liked* being there. But I *dis*like being used more.

Anyway, I applied for another job just last week, interviewed two days ago, and now am waiting to see if I'm called for a second interview. My emotions are more tangled than St. Nick's shoelaces because, you see, I want them to want me, but I'm not so sure I want them.

I should have thought through this earlier, say before applying, but I didn't. I only thought, "Wow, I could do that job! I might like it!" I didn't think of my MFA of my kids my garden my dog my running program my photography ... I just thought of this title and how cool it would be to add to a query letter "I'm the Program Coordinator at blablabla."

The job would involve public speaking. Fine. I like to give presentations, I'm seldom (that) nervous, I think I'm pretty entertaining when I speak. But, well, my sense of humor is a little *off* sometimes, and I've noticed this organization lacks a sense of humor (certainly my type of humor). And I don't wear cosmetics. I blame it on sensitive skin but really I just hate the way it feels. I hate feeling "made up" and artificial. I hate not being able to give Dr. D a hug without leaving a smear of foundation on his jacket or not wanting to snuggle up to Mud Pie because my mascara might smear. I like to feel superior to all the "made up" ladies out there, which covers for knowing that they, rightly, feel more beautiful than me. I'm not a pretty person, and I'm ok with that. Some days. When I'm at an interview with a mascara-clad, hair-highlighted, heel-and-hose-wearing potential boss, however, I don't like feeling homely. I want to scream "look past the freckles! The start of wrinkles and dark circles around my eyes! You need me!" But inside I know they're seeing the future Face Person for their organization and they're judging her on her face. Which isn't much to look at.

The job would involve writing. Fabulous! I love to write, rather obviously. But that's the problem. I do love to write, I have to write to breathe, but I love to write what I love. I may not want to write for their publications or in their way, or I may enjoy it but may have little lovin' left for my own writing, which just won't fly with this aforementioned MFA.

A job could offer me so much. Money, a feeling of competence and importance, immediate gratification, an avenue for growth and pushing beyond my anxiety (agoraphobia, you've met your match!). But I'm just not sure. I had these great ideas for starting a book club at the kids' school or being a room mother or building a chicken coop. I'm eager beyond words for my mornings of sweet solitude once ALL THREE little ones are in school. I'm thinking maybe, just maybe if I can ever get this anxiety disorder kicked I might get off the medications and perhaps, oh dare I think it, have one last baby. I want to get a Ph.D. so Dr. D and I can be a pair-a-docs. I want to be the kind of mom I imagined myself being, before the reality of motherhood knocked me on my ass. I want to rake leaves this fall without the panic of too-much-to-do-too-little-time. I want to inhale. To exhale. To feel both. I want to grow my photography business and hook rugs.

So, anyway, the phone just rang and I ran to answer it with hope-mingled-terror. Do they want me? Do they? Oh, please, please, please want me. Prove that I'm not ugly, not marked by my past and the shadow I carry and will always carry as long as I'm alive. Please make me meaningful.

And yet ... when caller ID foretold a sales call, I was greatly relieved.
a drawing I did in college ...

How to Build a Mosque


Mosque by David Macaulay. Houghton Mifflin, 2003.

The intro is sort of dry, but the melding of fiction and nonfiction with fascinating detail on construction held my interest to the end. Yet why was there such a need for bathing? (I know it’s ritual bathing, but the text doesn’t tell me this.) There’s a ton of info on engineering, but not much on culture. The how is thorough; the why is underdeveloped.

That's Just Plain Nonsense, Eddie


The Complete Nonsense of Edward Lear. by Edward Lear and edited by Holbrook Jackson Dover, 1951.

Lear was the youngest of 21 children and was brought up by his sister, who cared for him until he was nearly 50. He was an eternal child with “invincible boyishness,” according to the editor. This collection contains several works from 1846-1895.

Random thoughts:

These are so like the jokes my kids make up—so un-funny that they’re funny. A woman playing harp with her chin. Ha! They make me want to rhyme and be silly. Some have double meaning, like a person of Leeds with a head full of beads who eats gooseberry fool. And Lear uses great words like scroobious, dolorous; he embraces the absurd and violent—characters file off thumbs or kill a flea on their knee with a hatchet. Others are most un-politically correct, which I always appreciate.

For a time there’s a theme of going and not coming back (perhaps around the time of his sister’s death?). The short stories are like dreams of free association. He employs repetition like a picture book author might, but with horrendously creepy elements: story of seven young of various animals and all die awful deaths until the parents pickle themselves. Um, lovely!

The Nonsense Cookery is hysterical as are the visual puns in the Botany. He has fun rhymes for the Alphabet. I notice the limericks get more sophisticated in his later work. Rhymes are frequently brilliant, and this without the benefit of rhymezone.com!

My favorite on p. 205: “There was an old man in a garden/who always begged every-one’s pardon;/when they asked him, “what for?” – he replied “you’re a bore!”/And I trust you’ll go out of my garden.” I can imagine Lear writing this on a particularly grumpy day.

Is Lear an influence on Dr. Seuss, I wonder? He has some critters chopping up a Sage because they need sage for a recipe. HAHAHA!

The final alphabet points to some rather obvious Father issues.

Babe, Such a Gallant Pig


Babe: The Gallant Pig by Dick King-Smith. 1983.

The style is hysterically understated and plays off stereotypes of the gumpy farmer and meddlesome wife. I found the proper usage of bitch for female dog interesting. I do wonder if dam might have been substituted? (Can dogs be dam and sire or is it just bitch and dog?).

  • Charlotte’s Web feel. The animals have personalities. But while Charlotte saves Wilbur, Babe saves himself. And his surviving the holidays isn’t so much of an issue. It’s more about Babe learning to herd sheep.
  • The action reads a bit like a screenplay, stripped down to necessity.
  • Love the little details like “Shepherding suited Farmer Hogget—there was no waste of words in it” (55).
  • In the final challenge, rain stops and a single shaft of sunlight flows down. Fabulous use of atmosphere to add drama.

Exquisite Poetry for Two Voices


Joyful Noise: Poems for Two Voices by Paul Fleischman. 1988

This is a Charlotte Zolotow book, which is no surprise. Such lovely language, metaphor, all the poetic devices one learns in school. I don’t read music, but this reads like I imagine music to be read—heard in my head, both voices blending, pulling apart, coming together.

Fleischman made use of point of view by getting in the heads of bugs. Most vivid, the differing views of life between worker and queen bee (even if a mite predictable). And on the more unexpected side, the water strider analogy to the biblical walking on water miracle was beautifully done.

Riverboat, Riverboat Float Me Away!

Wow, what an afternoon aboard a Mississippi riverboat (see, I know those third grade spelling lessons would come in handy - MI SSI SSI PPI). Good times had by all despite my horror at getting on an old yellow school bus. They smell the same, sound the same, feel the same - was never happier to get off a vehicle.

Jen Huffman shared her amazing eye talents,


The Mississippi impressed with raging beauty,


Our boat, the Mississippi Queen,


And the Fab Four: me, Mandy, Elizabeth, Jen.

Secrets, Platforms, Bizarre Britishisms


The Secret of Platform 13 by Eva Ibbotson. Dutton, 1994.

Rich and fun fantasy. Ibbotson starts off with quaint Brittishisms, ghosts, and secret doors to other worlds. What’s not to love? Loads of fantastical invention and a heavy dose of political correctness. Atmospheric with a distant 3rd person narrator, similar in voice to others like Charlotte’s Web, Tuck Everlasting, a storybook voice that’s lolling and gentle, saying “come along for a story, children.”
  • There’s no mad rush to get the action going at the start. Too bad children are so impatient and discriminating that they won’t bother with such a slow beginning (note sarcasm). In my experience, children are far more tolerant of lousy writing/boring books than adults. Not that this is lousy or boring. Much to the contrary.
  • Wonderful use of jump cuts/scene breaks and such, and phrases like pancakes “warm as puppies,” make me salivate. 
  • A strange, Dursley-like character (Harry Potter). 
  • Deft use of POV. Note the selection from pp. 91-92: We were in a rather distant 3rd narration, then a new paragraph, “Raymond was still staring at the little creature. No one at school had anything like that. He’d be able to show it off to everyone. Paul had a tree frog and Derek had a grass snake, but this would beat them all.” Clearly diving into Raymond’s head, then pulling back out again with the voice of another character speaking. 
  • Handbags of Harpies. HA! And the various scenes weave together brilliantly. Mrs. T’s perfume down the drain giving away her location, etc. All around fun!

Collection of Poems, linked


Carver: A Life in Poems by Marilyn Nelson. Front Street, 2001.

Would it be admitting ignorance to say I don’t like poems I don’t understand? I mean, I sort of understand “The Perceiving Self,” but I mostly don’t. It makes me wonder if the purpose of poetry is to communicate, to feel smart, to make your reader feels unsmart ...

“[T]ouched our stamens/pleasured us with pollen.” Obviously sexual, but what to do with a lynching? Other images in that one confuse me too. Am I too dense to read poetry? 

I do love the artistry and form of this book: poems from various perspectives all drawing a picture of Carver and the world in which he lived. The sad truth: I had to Google Carver to make sense of the poems (I dimly remembered his name being related to peanuts from some lesson in preschool—my lord, preschool!). Thank God for Wikipedia. 

I wish Nelson had found some way to contextualize the poems for those of us who are a. young (since this is in the junior nonfiction section), b. products of the modern educational system, c. missed a lot of school (literally or metaphorically) even if a and b are not the case, or d. are just plain ignorant. 

Lovely words, lovely poems, but the poems are sort of like single petals of a yellow flower. We don’t know if we have a daisy or a dandelion. And how we understand and appreciate the flower depends upon where we find it: a garden, the lawn, a clogged downspout. “His students/see the light of genius/through the dusky window of his skin”—beautiful petals, but of what? Where? Many stunning poems like, “From an Alabama Farmer.” But the title says it’s a life in poems. Somehow I missed the life, found only poems.


Nelson's other book for this age group however, Fortune's Bones, is among my favorites of all time.

On Punctuating Dialog ...

It’s a common confusion – how on earth do I punctuate dialog? Punctuating dialog is the same as punctuating any sentence, isn't it? You put the end punctuation at the end of a sentence? Except with dialog, even if it’s not the end of a sentence, you still might put in end punctuation, but then you need more end punctuation, and ... it’s a confusing mess. The key is this: in dialog you are punctuating complete and separate sentences. Take this example:

“Mary, I really like you.” The boy reached for the soda and poured a glass.

“Mary, I really like you” and “The boy reached for the soda and poured a glass” are both complete sentences. There’s a period after “I really like you” and the first word of the second sentence is capitalized, just as you’d expect.

Most people intuitively punctuate both sentences separately. Only those who are thinking about “some rule” they learned back in high school, about how a comma comes right before the end quotation mark, mess this up. But really, it makes sense. If the sentences are separate, if each can stand on its own, then you punctuate them like two distinct sentences.

Now for the sticky comma. Where it goes and why. Another example:

“Your beard is looking good today,” Mary said to Miss Maven.

“Your beard is looking good today” IS a complete sentence, but “Mary said to Miss Maven” is NOT a complete sentence. Said what? Huh? Mary said something? It’s what is called a Dialog Tag. Like a Christmas gift with a tag telling you who it’s from, the Dialog Tag tells you who said something and (sometimes) how it was said. The stuff in quotes is the gift. The “said whoosibuts” is the tag.

Correct: “I like cheese,” said Marty.

Incorrect: “I like cheese.” Said Marty.

“Said Marty” doesn’t make a lick of sense all by itself because it’s not a complete sentence. So, the “gift” (the “what is said”) part of the sentence is not punctuated as a complete sentence either. You can’t separate the tag from the gift or you won’t know who gave it to you. That’s why you use a comma.

This is pleasantly complicated when the thing that is said is a question or an exclamation.

“I love cheese!” screamed Marty. AND “Do we like cheese?” screamed Marty.

You have a dialogue tag (screamed Marty), so there is really only one sentence (“screamed Marty” can’t stand alone), but you have no comma because of the exclamation point and question mark. The dialog itself is punctuated to show the emotion or question, and the end punctuation is a simple period.

Some more examples:

Correct: “Martha Stuart, I’ve had it!” Cindy cocked the gun and aimed it at Martha’s chest. Two separate sentences, no dialog tag. Both sentences are punctuated individually.

Incorrect: “Martha, you are too much,” Cindy squinted past the glow from Martha's blowtorch at the exquisite gold-foil centerpiece. Two separate sentences, no dialog tag. These should be punctuated individually, with a period at the end of the dialog instead of a comma. Fix: “Martha, you are too much.” Cindy squinted at the exquisite gold-foil centerpiece.

Correct: Herbert didn’t know how long he’d waited. “What time is it?” he asked. Even though the dialog ends in a question mark, it is followed by a tag, so the “he” isn’t capitalized. This shows that the tag goes with the “gift.”

Incorrect: Herbert twiddled his thumbs. He glanced at the clock. “What time is it?” He finally asked. “He asked” can’t stand on it’s own. Even though there is a question mark (end punctuation) just after it, “he” should not be capitalized. Fix: Herbert twiddled his thumbs. He glanced at the clock. “What time is it?” he finally asked.

Correct: “We gather together on this blessed occasion,” the pastor droned. Dialog tag, one sentence. Comma and lower case.

Correct: “We gather together on this blessed occasion.” The pastor paused to sip from a cup beneath the podium, then continued by saying, “The joining of these two kids who really should have known better.” First sentence is not followed by a dialog tag. Second sentence (“The pastor ...”) becomes a dialog tag for the dialog that follows it, and so it ends in a comma.

Incorrect: “Why, Cindy, is that thing real?” She asked over the deafening alarm bells. “She asked” is a dialog tag and shouldn’t be punctuated as a separate sentence. Fix: “Why, Cindy, is that thing real?” she asked over the deafening alarm bells.

Correct: “Why, Herbert, is that a new style from Spain?” She glanced down, then back up to his eyes and smiled sweetly. “Or did you forget your pants?” No tag; all three are separate sentences and are punctuated independently.

Correct: “Velma, my dear,” he intoned, “you are a sore for sight eyes.” Dialog tag interrupts a sentence. Separated off with commas.

Correct: “I see you haven’t been taking your medication,” Velma quipped. “You really should seek help, Daryl. Professional help.” Tag applies to the first phrase of dialog. The second phrase is a new idea/thought/sentence. Period comes after the tag in this case.

Oh, and as an aside, do avoid using intoned and quipped and such. Said is almost always best. Unless you're being silly.

On Homesick


Homesick: My Own Story by Jean Fritz. 1982.

The story of Fritz’s childhood in China. A memoir for children full of fun stories and written in an accessible fairy-tale tone. Rich detail, vivid storytelling, a likable protagonist. There is very little difference between this work of nonfiction and many of the novels I’ve read. Though I’ve yet to read a quote as fun as this one:
“A cat is a cat. There are no foreign cats, no Chinese cats, no capitalist cats, no Communist cats. Just cats.” --Yan Sze-Fu
Love it! Although I'd guess my cat is a Union cat ...

Bizarre and Creepy: Perfect Middle Grade


Skellig by David Almond. 1998.

Chapter 1 thoughts: The protagonist is sort of grouchy, but the toilet in the dining room made me laugh. Now on to the rest of the book:
  • Psychological honesty: Michael’s emotions aren’t simple I like this I don’t like that. He can love and hate simultaneously, feel compassion for and horror at the creature in the garage at the same time. So often I’ve had critique partners comment on my work—"But he called the baby stupid and now he’s praying for her to get better? Inconsistent!" they cry. When are we ever, any of us, consistent? 
  • Description: “The red sauce below his lips was like congealed blood” (29), or, “I thought of his wings and of the baby’s fluttering heart” (99). It just doesn’t get better than that! 
  • The art teacher says you get better at drawing by drawing. The same goes for writing—Michael got braver and bolder, and I think Almond shows incredible bravery and boldness by writing this book that any (most, anyhow) writing teacher would dismiss as too bizarre for words. Owl-angel-men, Persephone, dying infants, and adorable britishism like blinking and bloody and knocky down. 
  • Repetition of ideas, phrases, the whole is unpredictable as anything, yet feels choreographed, like a complicated and beautiful dance. 
  • Enough of these books that make me cry like a blinking baby!!!!

You Mean Women Won Rights? News to Me.


If You Lived When Women Won Their Rights by Anne Kamma. Scholastic, 2006.
Now here is a compelling and well-told story! Kamma never loses her narrative thread, she includes quotes and details, and she keeps the details to those that ground the story or move it forward. She, in short, finds a plot and develops it. Aside: This is exactly what I want to do with my project.

Anyway, the language is simple and straightforward, yet it doesn’t sacrifice artfulness for a sterile informative tone (like some hideous books on sea turtles I read first semester), rather the tone is engaging, the voice consistent. An important book!

Another Reason My Yard is Full of Holes


How to Dig a Hole to the Other Side of the World by Faith McNulty. 1970.

Second person, a how-to booklet on digging to the center of the earth and beyond. Fact meets fun. The fantasy element combined with scientific detail make this a favorite and true classic. But hey, my copy didn't come with a CD!

That aside, my kids frequently dig holes around the yard, and they truly are trying to break through to the earth's core. So far we've gotten not much beyond two feet. But hey, when you're only four feet high, that's not bad!

On a Tightrope


The Man Who Walked Between the Towers by Mordicai Gerstein. Roaring Brook, 2003.

I love Mordicai Gerstein. I have since I got his book on Noah for my children. His art, his prose, his creativity—delicious. This story is likewise gripping and written in the same tender tone. Gerstein keeps the story moving forward with a clear dramatic arc. Philippe had a goal, obstacles to that goal, and a plan to achieve it. Well done to Philippe and Gerstein!

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *