![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
juushikaButchering titles in the subject line so that I can fit my final batch of Krauss into a single post! Like Sendak, there's absolutely books I missed or skipped. But this was a robust deep dive. Moreso than Sendak, Krauss has a distinctive style. The word "declarative" I picked up from cover copy or somesuch and then preceded to overuse in 3+ reviews, but it so well summarizes her style. She doesn't just appeal to childlike sensibilities, she inhabits and invites them: an encouragement to come, be more child, willful and creative and strange. It's made the best books age well, both over the years & for an adult audience.
The other interesting thing about her work is the redraws/posthumous publications as they relate to her relationship with her artists, discussed piecemeal previously and below.
Title: Big and Little
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Mary Szilagyi
Published: Scholastic, 1987
Rating: 2 of 5
Page Count: 30
Total Page Count: 329,380
Text Number: 1174
Read Because: reading the author, ebook borrowed from Open Library
Review: After reading And I Love You, redrawn by Steven Kellogg, I wondered how a different illustrator would change such a sparse text, and the answer is: a lot—but also that these illustrations, by Mary Szilagyi, just aren't very good. They have an unrefined texture and a muddy, bland aesthetic. Kellogg's illustrations overwhelm the text but also enrich and transform it, changing the theme (arguably into something more concrete, although I appreciate that in Big and Little the narrative is directed by the child, not a parent) and building more substantial connections between the panels. This version is smaller, quieter, but honestly it's unremarkable.
(This interview with this interview with Marc Simont, who illustrated a number of Krauss's books, indicates that she was particular about her illustrations. My impressions is that the quality of both the original and revised art varies, so the objective values are up for debate—but I'm curious what she would have thought of these posthumous revisions existing at all!)
Title: The Happy Day
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Marc Simont
Published: Harper Collins, 1995 (1949)
Rating: 2 of 5
Page Count: 35
Total Page Count: 329,460
Text Number: 1176
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: A routine example of a repetition-focused children's book, which isn't a format that ages well for an adult reader. The illustrations could enliven it, but they're only adequate—too soft around the edges, and also relying on repetition, which mimics the text and so feels samey. That said, I'm sure this is fine for a very young audience, and the single spot of color on the last page is an effective trick.
Title: The Backward Day
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Marc Simont
Published: 1950
Rating: 1 of 5
Page Count: 40
Total Page Count: 329,795
Text Number: 1178
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This has an unapologetic childlike playfulness, and I appreciate the rest of the family joining in; the art is adequate, if unremarkable. But I wish it were more fully realized: it ends just as soon as it gets going, and so mostly feels tedious—not weird or fun or an impetus to play. (This is probably another that's too young for me to appreciate.)
Title: The Happy Egg
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Crockett Johnson
Published: HarperCollins, 2005 (1949)
Rating: 1 of 5
Page Count: 40
Total Page Count: 329,835
Text Number: 1179
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This is similar to The Carrot Seed, but less successful. Where The Carrot Seed has attitude and persistence, this has hope—it's a blander theme that makes for an unmotivated narrative, which is a problem in such a sparse and simply-illustrated book. (I feel like Krauss benefits from messier, more dynamic art, like Sendak's; I like Johnson elsewhere, but his collaborations with Krauss underwhelm me.) That said, this is probably intended for a much younger audience than what I've been reading.
Title: Open House for Butterflies
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Maurice Sendak
Published: HarperCollins, 2001 (1960)
Rating: 3 of 5
Page Count: 50
Total Page Count: 329,885
Text Number: 1180
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This is very much a successor to A Hole is to Dig, but the conceit here is life lessons rather than definitions. It's often charming, and it's very much on the children's side, particularly in their play, their understandings of the world, their selfishness and needs. But it's less successful than A Hole: it feels less distinct and it lacks the conflicting, complicating definitions and cumulative details in the art which make that book greater than the sum of its parts. This still has great parts! but nothing extra, nothing that makes it remarkable.
Title: Roar Like a Dandelion
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Sergio Ruzzier
Published: HarperCollins, 2019
Rating: 2 of 5
Page Count: 50
Total Page Count: 331,655
Text Number: 1187
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This is bad, but that's primarily the fault of the art, which is in a style I'm not fond of—but more importantly the animal-protagonists undermine the invitation to the reader in Krauss's declarative, playful, profoundly childlike text. And there's so much potential in that text, but some panels are underwhelming and some, like the always-naked duck that can't "undress to match trees in winter," fail completely.
(This was published posthumously and I'd love to know its backstory! Or any info at all, really! Why don't we talk about this sort of thing for children's authors/books? The issues is particularly interesting given Krauss's aforementioned particularity re: her illustrations. I'd love to know how & why a book is redrawn or published posthumously, and it can't help but feel both like a celebration of Krauss's legacy and a discredit to her vision—which is all the more ~problematic~ an issue given the way that gender and sexism motivated her reputation within the communities of the era. Would that there were robust wikis for this the way that there might be for authors and novels.)
The other interesting thing about her work is the redraws/posthumous publications as they relate to her relationship with her artists, discussed piecemeal previously and below.
Title: Big and Little
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Mary Szilagyi
Published: Scholastic, 1987
Rating: 2 of 5
Page Count: 30
Total Page Count: 329,380
Text Number: 1174
Read Because: reading the author, ebook borrowed from Open Library
Review: After reading And I Love You, redrawn by Steven Kellogg, I wondered how a different illustrator would change such a sparse text, and the answer is: a lot—but also that these illustrations, by Mary Szilagyi, just aren't very good. They have an unrefined texture and a muddy, bland aesthetic. Kellogg's illustrations overwhelm the text but also enrich and transform it, changing the theme (arguably into something more concrete, although I appreciate that in Big and Little the narrative is directed by the child, not a parent) and building more substantial connections between the panels. This version is smaller, quieter, but honestly it's unremarkable.
(This interview with this interview with Marc Simont, who illustrated a number of Krauss's books, indicates that she was particular about her illustrations. My impressions is that the quality of both the original and revised art varies, so the objective values are up for debate—but I'm curious what she would have thought of these posthumous revisions existing at all!)
Title: The Happy Day
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Marc Simont
Published: Harper Collins, 1995 (1949)
Rating: 2 of 5
Page Count: 35
Total Page Count: 329,460
Text Number: 1176
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: A routine example of a repetition-focused children's book, which isn't a format that ages well for an adult reader. The illustrations could enliven it, but they're only adequate—too soft around the edges, and also relying on repetition, which mimics the text and so feels samey. That said, I'm sure this is fine for a very young audience, and the single spot of color on the last page is an effective trick.
Title: The Backward Day
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Marc Simont
Published: 1950
Rating: 1 of 5
Page Count: 40
Total Page Count: 329,795
Text Number: 1178
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This has an unapologetic childlike playfulness, and I appreciate the rest of the family joining in; the art is adequate, if unremarkable. But I wish it were more fully realized: it ends just as soon as it gets going, and so mostly feels tedious—not weird or fun or an impetus to play. (This is probably another that's too young for me to appreciate.)
Title: The Happy Egg
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Crockett Johnson
Published: HarperCollins, 2005 (1949)
Rating: 1 of 5
Page Count: 40
Total Page Count: 329,835
Text Number: 1179
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This is similar to The Carrot Seed, but less successful. Where The Carrot Seed has attitude and persistence, this has hope—it's a blander theme that makes for an unmotivated narrative, which is a problem in such a sparse and simply-illustrated book. (I feel like Krauss benefits from messier, more dynamic art, like Sendak's; I like Johnson elsewhere, but his collaborations with Krauss underwhelm me.) That said, this is probably intended for a much younger audience than what I've been reading.
Title: Open House for Butterflies
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Maurice Sendak
Published: HarperCollins, 2001 (1960)
Rating: 3 of 5
Page Count: 50
Total Page Count: 329,885
Text Number: 1180
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This is very much a successor to A Hole is to Dig, but the conceit here is life lessons rather than definitions. It's often charming, and it's very much on the children's side, particularly in their play, their understandings of the world, their selfishness and needs. But it's less successful than A Hole: it feels less distinct and it lacks the conflicting, complicating definitions and cumulative details in the art which make that book greater than the sum of its parts. This still has great parts! but nothing extra, nothing that makes it remarkable.
Title: Roar Like a Dandelion
Author: Ruth Krauss
Illustrator: Sergio Ruzzier
Published: HarperCollins, 2019
Rating: 2 of 5
Page Count: 50
Total Page Count: 331,655
Text Number: 1187
Read Because: reading the author, hardback borrowed from the Wilsonville Public Library
Review: This is bad, but that's primarily the fault of the art, which is in a style I'm not fond of—but more importantly the animal-protagonists undermine the invitation to the reader in Krauss's declarative, playful, profoundly childlike text. And there's so much potential in that text, but some panels are underwhelming and some, like the always-naked duck that can't "undress to match trees in winter," fail completely.
(This was published posthumously and I'd love to know its backstory! Or any info at all, really! Why don't we talk about this sort of thing for children's authors/books? The issues is particularly interesting given Krauss's aforementioned particularity re: her illustrations. I'd love to know how & why a book is redrawn or published posthumously, and it can't help but feel both like a celebration of Krauss's legacy and a discredit to her vision—which is all the more ~problematic~ an issue given the way that gender and sexism motivated her reputation within the communities of the era. Would that there were robust wikis for this the way that there might be for authors and novels.)
no subject
Date: 2019-10-11 09:17 pm (UTC)