Janet Gaylord Moore

I enjoyed it quite a bit... but I would have loved it half a century ago, when it and I were young. I'd have done the exercises, gone to the encyclopedias (my favorite at the time was World Book, as Britannica was too heavy and Br. Jr. was too childish) for more information about all those names, and more pictures, too. Even now I've submitted a wish for a copy on paperbackswap, because the openlibrary scan is not the easiest to use.

It's awfully concise. Almost every page could be a source show more for a 'lesson' for a homeschooling family, or anyone who isn't getting a satisfactory education in the principles and concepts of art at school. There is extensive back matter; the text and illustrations comprise 109 pp. in the edition I read.
---
July 13: I got a copy from a university and in the original hardcover it's a wonderful book, much easier to read, with the pictures much better reproduced. I mean, I knew it would be better, but how much better I did not anticipate.

At this point I also agree more with Manybooks that it could strike some as better suited for, say, college students. I still believe youngsters would have to be motivated, and would have to have access to it for a length of time, but it does seem a daring choice for Newbery recognition.
---
Still can't rate, as so much depends on what the reader hopes to get out of it. Excellent for many, but without universal appeal imo. show less

An introduction to art and how to interpret it for kids.
I admit to skimming most of this one. It's fairly awful, honestly. The text is both pompous and bone dry and would turn most adults off pursuing an interest in art appreciation, not to mention kiddos. There really must have been slim pickings in this year for the Newbery, to justify giving this an Honor.

I don't have an extensive knowledge of art books, but as someone who knows little about art, I'm a good audience for this book, an introduction to art appreciation and one of the few non-fiction Newbery Honor winners (1968). The text is understandable, terms are well defined and explained, and Moore's included examples from great works and masters make her points clear. Moore includes activities that an interested reader can attempt for further insight. She quotes Giacometti at this point: show more "I make a head to see how I see, to know how I see, not to make a work of art." Moore includes a lengthy bibliography divided topically. Finally, for those who are interested in the treatment of nudity in a child's book, Moore does discuss two examples of nude models (both a back view) and there are a few other undiscussed examples. These are not essential to the text, and could easily be skipped, or other examples found as a substitute. show less