Volume 33 Nº 2 - May 1997

Drawing the Line: Defining Children's Picture Books

Stephanie Owen Reeder

The Australian children's picture book is a multifaceted beast. From the intricacies of Graeme Base's books for all ages to the child-centred simplicity of Alison Lester's books for preschoolers; from the telling social commentary of Gregory Rogers's books for older readers to the exploration of scientific principles in Pamela Allen's artfully designed books, the last 25 years has seen the production in Australia of picture books for every taste, every age range and every occasion.

However, whilst finding an Australian picture book to suit a particular reader is not difficult, defining the picture book is. A survey of the literature shows that, whilst a commonality of factors is considered - physical format, age range, complementarity of text and illustrations, narrative quality and so on - there is still some disparity and lack of clarity in defining exactly what a picture book is.

What is a picture book?
Some definitions of the picture book are tight, controlled and exclusive, only recognising illustrated story books which are a perfect combination of text and pictures; others are all-embracing, welcoming any children's book with pictures into the fold. However, three distinct categories emerge.

The first category is the picture book: books which rely heavily on the pictures to tell the story or to carry the message. This includes wordless picture books, alphabet, counting and concept books, and other books with minimalist text which would be fairly meaningless without a visual accompaniment, rather like the soundtrack of a movie without the pictures. Such books are designed primarily for the very young child.

The second category is the picture story book: books which are an artful and carefully designed package utilising both pictures and text as complementary aspects of the storytelling process.

The third category is the illustrated book: books which are a combination of text and pictures in which, though important, the illustrations are not essential to the telling of the story but rather play a largely decorative role, breaking up and representing, rather than interpreting and extending the text.

So, while the picture book is, first and foremost, a work of fiction containing text and accompanying illustrations, a number of other factors - including age range, subject matter, complementarity and narrative elements - have traditionally been used to define a picture book.

Historical Treatment
Historically, picture books have been regarded as books for the young child - babies, preschoolers, the pre-literate and the newly literate - books to be read aloud, pored (and pawed!) over and shared between adult and child. In A History of Australian Children's Book Illustration (1982, p. 123), Marcie Muir defines the picture book as follows:

It is usually a book for young children whose attention might not be held by a long and involved story, and on whom the book makes its impression as much by its visual impact as by its verbal - such books being intended to be read aloud.

The Children's Book Council of Australia took a similar approach, defining picture books in its Picture Book of the Year award category as books 'for the younger reader' (Alderman 1983, p. 70). Thus, in 1970, Annette Macarthur-Onslow's Uhu, which was clearly in picture book format, was awarded the Book of the Year award because of its intended age range.

From 1982 on, the age range approach was extended with the introduction of the Junior Book of the Year award. In its inaugural year this award went to the picture book Rummage by Christobel Mattingley and Patricia Mullins. This tradition has continued with picture books such as My Place (1988) and Pigs and Honey (1990) winning the Junior Book award. The CBC has also shown some ambivalence towards alphabet books, with Animalia (1987) and ABC of Monsters (1977) recognised in the Picture Book of the Year awards, while Patricia Mullins's V for Vanishing won the Eve Pownall Award for Information Books (1994), selected on its subject matter rather than on the fact that it was a picture book.

However, in keeping with publishing trends during the 1990s, which have seen the production of picture books such as Way Home, First Light, Grandad's Gifts and The Wolf, the Children's Book Council has changed its policy. In the Awards Handbook for 1995, the description of books to be considered for the Picture Book of the Year award no longer carries the designation 'for the younger reader'. Instead, it says:

Picture Book of the Year awards will be made to outstanding books in Picture Book format in which the author and illustrator achieve artistic and literary unity, or, in wordless books, where the story, theme or concept are unified through illustrations.

Reviewing
The Children's Book Council's largely aged-based approach to picture books was echoed in the two major Australian journals which review children's literature - Reading Time and Magpies. Both journals, whose audiences are largely teachers, librarians and parents, took an age/reading level approach to the organisation of reviews of picture books, despite the fact that Reading Time's section for the very young was headed 'Picture Books'. However, the journal now takes a more genre-based approach, with the Picture Book section including reviews of books for all ages.

This recent approach to picture book reviewing reflects changes in both publishing and the award system. It is also more appropriate than an age-based approach as the picture book genre has its own special criteria, of which age-range or reading level is but one small part. Apart from that, age range can only ever be indicative, for each child is different and brings to the reading of a book individual perceptions and levels of understanding which are not restricted by chronological age or measurable reading levels.

Treating picture books as a genre, and having them reviewed by persons who have a clear understanding of and expertise in the genre, should lead to more informative and effective reviewing.

Developing a Hungry Eye
Children's literature critic John Rowe Townsend (1974, p. 309), writing about the reviewing of picture books in the 1960s and early 1970s, commented:

The discussion of picture books unfortunately is not high; and their reviewing is less satisfactory than that of fiction. Such difficulties are inherent in a mixed art-form, and are particularly acute in this one. Most children's book reviewers are ill-equipped to assess graphic art. It is not in fact necessary that a reviewer should be demonstrably qualified in the fields of both children's literature and the visual arts - a requirement which at present would result in a spectacular shortage of reviewers - but it is necessary that he should be informed of and receptive to current work in both fields. There is a great need for better reviewing and, over and above that, for the serious and considered criticism of picture books.

Academics Busbin and Steinfirst (1989), who conducted a content analysis of reviews of picture books in major American children's literature reviewing journals, found that, on average, only 25 per cent of a picture book review actually dealt with the illustrations as opposed to the text. The situation in Australia would appear to be even worse.

Illustrator Donna Rawlins, having undertaken her own survey of reviews of picture books, came up with the even more depressing figure of 10 per cent of review space devoted to the pictures. Rawlins claims that Australian reviewers deal in detail with the text of the book, the story told, but only deal in passing with the illustrations. It could be argued that, as the illustrations in a picture book contribute a significant amount to the telling of the story, by discussing the story, reviewers are indirectly discussing the illustrations. However, this does not detract from the fact that, in general, the actual attention paid in reviews to what and how the illustrations contribute to the telling of the story leaves much to be desired. Echoing Townsend, Rawlins (1994, p. 136) says of reviewing picture books:

It is hard, but it can be done really well, and it doesn't take a degree in art to review picture books. It just takes a hungry eye.

However, before it is possible to develop that hungry eye and effectively review and evaluate picture books, the critic or reviewer must have a clear definition of just what a picture book is.

Defining Elements
Age Range
To return to the historical approach, should age range be one of the main criteria for a children's picture book? Should books for the older reader be classed as 'illustrated books', not 'picture books'? Equally, should books for the very young - books which deal with alphabets, counting, shapes and other things dear to the preschool child - be classed as concept books and also be excluded from a study of picture books?

Publisher Margaret Hamilton had very definite ideas about picture books back in the 1980s. She did not believe that they were only for young children. She believed that they could be enjoyed by, and even be especially written and illustrated for, older children, adolescents and adults. Talking of age range, Hamilton (1987, p. 13) said:

I do not agree with slotting books into hard and fast age groups and I do not think you can slot children into these age groups either. I think children read a book and take from.