Right when I pulled the book out of the box, I began reading it. Though I was not expecting it to be written in verse, it had a nice flow and my excitement continued to build, especially with the beautiful illustrations by Kadir Nelson.
I found myself feeling swept away by Joe Louis' story and loved the description of his personality, humility, and perseverance. Yet, somewhere along the way, I started to notice something that bothered me about the book. I realized that while Joe was typically mentioned by name, his opponent, Max Schmeling, was more often than not referred to as "The German" or "Hitler's German", rather than by name.
It made me wonder more about the back story of the matches between Louis and Schmeling. When I did a quick web search on Schmeling, the first site to come up was the Wikipedia reference. Albeit it is necessary to take Wikipedia sources with a grain of salt, and this particular one even has a notice that the article needs additional citations for verification, I knew that it would at least help to orient me a little bit more to get the context of the book. I also skimmed Louis' page.
In Schmeling's description, I noticed the explanation of how he was portrayed in the United States as well as in Germany, in contrast to who he really was as a person. I was most interested in the following sentences, that did not have any citations,
The clash of politics, ideals, and countries that often symbolically accompanied his biggest fights only took place within the perceptions of the audience; they had nothing to do with what happened in the ring. Instead of being respected for his multiple accomplishments in the ring, he spent much of his life derided in the USA as a Nazi and dismissed in Germany as a disappointment. It was only in his later life that his status as a fighter, apart from his cultural symbolism, could be clearly analyzed.I am not sure if digging deeper and doing more research would support these claims or not, but these sentences made me wonder about the angle of the book. I also thought about how for me as a reader, the way it was described in some ways took away from what I otherwise would have enjoyed as Louis' story and his triumphs. By almost always referring to Schmeling as "The German," instead of treating him like an individual person, it created an aversion to the book. Yet, I wanted to like the book. I wanted it to be a celebration of Louis and who he was without the questions over Schmeling's portrayal. There was also so much more to love about the book's layout, such as the fun author/illustrator bios on the back flap with the boxing ticket.
Trying to sort through my conflicting feelings about the book, I reread it, as well as the jacket flap information, and part of a sentence stood out to me, "[...] for much of America their fight came to represent the country's war with Germany". That is when I started to think about the angle of the book as showing it through the perception of many at the time, rather than today looking back. I was able to set aside some of my aversions to the references of "the German". It also made me consider the teaching points to discuss, such as perspective, a curiosity to uncover multiple sides to a story, the power of words, and reliability of narrators.
On Amazon, the recommended age range is 4-8; though, I can see it as being appealing to older readers. Because of the illustrations and the various avenues for analysis, the book is lending to thorough discussions and debate. Aside from learning more about Joe Louis, students can talk about perceptions, representations, and shades of truth.
Must be grades 4-8...I was thinking ages, but it's above their interest level! It sounds like a very good book for discussing perspectives. Interesting to come "out of yourself" and realize that not everyone is seeing the same thing.
ReplyDeleteDonna,
ReplyDeleteIt acutally says ages 4-8, and on the Booklist review it says grades 1-3. The text is brief, so younger students would get the general idea, but I think conceptually it has a lot to offer for older students.
Mrs. V,
ReplyDeleteLove the post. You truly engaged with the text, wrestled with it and stuff. The best readers dig in like this. So thank you.
I really went back and forth about how I would approach the book. My main agenda was, of course to explore Joe and this particular fight, and to show how sometimes a singular sporting event can become so much more than a sporting event. It can become politically historical. And I took the point of view of racially-charged America (during that particular era), trying to show how a black man, at least for a moment, became the hope of even white America. In taking that POV, I tried to be true to America's view of Nazi Germany at the time. S was "Hitler's German," a symbol of Hitler's "master race." Sometimes things are way too simplified, I agree. But in all my research it seemed to be the mindset of the country. It was no longer two men fighting. It was the black American against the "master race."
I'm not doing too great of a job explaining this here. But I wanted to pop my head in real quick to thank you for really digging deep with the book. I can only hope it leads to many more discussions like this!
matt de la pena
Matt,
ReplyDeleteIt is nice to have the confirmation that you were writing with the intent to show the perception at the time and the impact it had based on how many viewed it at the time. I always love to hear behind the scenes insights from authors, so thanks for stopping by!