A review by drtlovesbooks
Eyes Wide Open: Going Behind the Environmental Headlines by Paul Fleischman
4.0
First, this is a great book for exposing YA readers (middle- to high-school) to the world of facts and research. I highly recommend it if for no other reason than that.
The following are responses from a class for which I read this book:
Dr. A: You brought up the various types of pieces Fleischman has created, as well as the issue of the design of this particular book. While I found Eyes Wide Open to be interesting in its visual business, it's definitely going to cause some YA readers to have fits as they try to navigate it. It actually felt more like a web site with the links exploded than a book; in fact, I think it would work a lot better as an interactive piece than as a static text.
One reason is that it would allow readers to roll over or click through to find definitions or examples, rather than having them splashed across a page or stuck in a margin.
Another reason is that making the piece digital would allow the author to embed videos and links, rather than simply referencing them and hoping the audience will go track them down.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, by making this a static text, Fleischman has given up the ability to keep the information updated, outside of publishing revised editions. There were several points while reading this book that I found myself going, "Wait, that's not true - that decision was overturned/that issue was decided a while ago", or "But what about ___ from last year?" I am not a super-informed environmentalist, but I found myself wanting to see an updated version of this work that would include follow-ups on some of the points raised, particularly regarding the rise in the use of solar and window energy, and the relatively rapid spread of electric vehicles. If this was a digital property, though, the information could not only be amended quickly and easily, to keep YA readers up to date with the latest developments in these important issues, but it would also allow for expansion on particular topics, and the introduction of new topics as they come up.
Nevertheless, this is an interesting, engaging, and important YA book. It is very accessible, and to my mind, it provides an excellent introduction to both environmental issues and information literacy.
Sarah - I like your Smore, particularly the image you chose for the background - juxtaposing a mountain with a city nicely captures the content of this book!
I also agree that the section on gauging the reliability of sources that is included at the end (in addition to those same elements being woven throughout the work) is noteworthy; I plan to specifically share those last few pages with my students to help them think about the nonfiction sources of information they consult.
Later this year, my 8th grade students will embark on an action research project in which they must identify a problem that affects one of the communities to which they belong, create a plan for attempting to fix or reduce that problem, and then carry out that plan and report back on their results. I wish I had access to a range of books like Eyes Wide Open that covered a variety of issues, like economic disparity, ocean dumping, animal shelters, and the other perennial favorite topics that students gravitate towards, because EWO does such a fine job of, as you said, talking with, rather than down to, its audience.
I must admit that there were places where I felt EWO was a bit preachy, and it was clear that Fleischman was advancing his own personal opinions; but he did so by marshaling facts to his cause, and providing his sources so that readers could follow up on his claims and decide for themselves how much they could take his ideas at face value. He even provided some links to opposition sources so readers could do their own comparing and contrasting, and ultimately deciding. I suppose this is an answer to the first part of your second discussion question. As to the second part, I would say that facts are facts; in and of themselves, they are not political. It's what people try to do with those facts that makes them political. To that end, I think the claim that there needs to be "fair and balanced coverage" of issues is ridiculous, and in itself is a political ploy. To say that we need to cover both sides of the climate change debate is to say, "While we have informed and settled science from professionals in the area on the 'Yes, it's happening' side, we need to give equal time and weight to the nonscientific side that 'has a hunch' that climate change is not really happening." Anyone who does this is picking a side, and it's not the scientifically proven one.
“These smug pilots have lost touch with regular passengers like us. Who thinks I should fly the plane?”
The New Yorker, December 27, 2016
I think comedian Patton Oswalt summed up this issue rather nicely:
The following are responses from a class for which I read this book:
Dr. A: You brought up the various types of pieces Fleischman has created, as well as the issue of the design of this particular book. While I found Eyes Wide Open to be interesting in its visual business, it's definitely going to cause some YA readers to have fits as they try to navigate it. It actually felt more like a web site with the links exploded than a book; in fact, I think it would work a lot better as an interactive piece than as a static text.
One reason is that it would allow readers to roll over or click through to find definitions or examples, rather than having them splashed across a page or stuck in a margin.
Another reason is that making the piece digital would allow the author to embed videos and links, rather than simply referencing them and hoping the audience will go track them down.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, by making this a static text, Fleischman has given up the ability to keep the information updated, outside of publishing revised editions. There were several points while reading this book that I found myself going, "Wait, that's not true - that decision was overturned/that issue was decided a while ago", or "But what about ___ from last year?" I am not a super-informed environmentalist, but I found myself wanting to see an updated version of this work that would include follow-ups on some of the points raised, particularly regarding the rise in the use of solar and window energy, and the relatively rapid spread of electric vehicles. If this was a digital property, though, the information could not only be amended quickly and easily, to keep YA readers up to date with the latest developments in these important issues, but it would also allow for expansion on particular topics, and the introduction of new topics as they come up.
Nevertheless, this is an interesting, engaging, and important YA book. It is very accessible, and to my mind, it provides an excellent introduction to both environmental issues and information literacy.
Sarah - I like your Smore, particularly the image you chose for the background - juxtaposing a mountain with a city nicely captures the content of this book!
I also agree that the section on gauging the reliability of sources that is included at the end (in addition to those same elements being woven throughout the work) is noteworthy; I plan to specifically share those last few pages with my students to help them think about the nonfiction sources of information they consult.
Later this year, my 8th grade students will embark on an action research project in which they must identify a problem that affects one of the communities to which they belong, create a plan for attempting to fix or reduce that problem, and then carry out that plan and report back on their results. I wish I had access to a range of books like Eyes Wide Open that covered a variety of issues, like economic disparity, ocean dumping, animal shelters, and the other perennial favorite topics that students gravitate towards, because EWO does such a fine job of, as you said, talking with, rather than down to, its audience.
I must admit that there were places where I felt EWO was a bit preachy, and it was clear that Fleischman was advancing his own personal opinions; but he did so by marshaling facts to his cause, and providing his sources so that readers could follow up on his claims and decide for themselves how much they could take his ideas at face value. He even provided some links to opposition sources so readers could do their own comparing and contrasting, and ultimately deciding. I suppose this is an answer to the first part of your second discussion question. As to the second part, I would say that facts are facts; in and of themselves, they are not political. It's what people try to do with those facts that makes them political. To that end, I think the claim that there needs to be "fair and balanced coverage" of issues is ridiculous, and in itself is a political ploy. To say that we need to cover both sides of the climate change debate is to say, "While we have informed and settled science from professionals in the area on the 'Yes, it's happening' side, we need to give equal time and weight to the nonscientific side that 'has a hunch' that climate change is not really happening." Anyone who does this is picking a side, and it's not the scientifically proven one.
“These smug pilots have lost touch with regular passengers like us. Who thinks I should fly the plane?”
The New Yorker, December 27, 2016
I think comedian Patton Oswalt summed up this issue rather nicely: