Calling Caldecott, the Horn Book-housed blog all about the most prestigious award in picture books, is back up and running (click here to visit).

Over the coming months they’ll examine a bunch of books that are knocking collective socks off.

It reminded me of a conversation I had with an illustrator at the most recent ALA Annual. We were talking about Caldecott, and specifically the idea of non-artists critiquing art. This illustrator thought there should be more guidance for those on the committee. Maybe adding a member who was an expert or some other way for the committee to have more facility when it comes to discussing art.

It’s a debate that’s been going on for a long time, probably since the award was created. It’s interesting to think how it would change the Caldecott.

To the illustrator’s point, I think there is a varying degree of art-specific expertise among the Caldecott committee – some folks come with a lot of previous experience, others less so.

In defense, I would say the committee members do work hard to educate (or refresh) themselves on all things illustration before and during their service. Members are provided with a reading list (see page 24 of the Caldecott manual) of excellent resources to help expand their knowledge.

What do you think? Should the Caldecott committee have more artistic guidance?