Reviews for Secret of the Andes

The average rating for Secret of the Andes based on 2 reviews is 3 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2016-06-24 00:00:00 Sammy Davis This book gets negative attention because it beat out Charlotte's Web for the 1953 Newbery Medal, and looking through the lens of time it's easy to say that it probably should have gone the other way. But that happens quite often, even with major awards like Booker, Pulitzer, National Book Award, and others; the best book doesn't always win. But this is not a bad book at all; it's quite good. I read it as a young boy and loved it, although not as much this time. What makes this a good children's book is that it teaches about a foreign culture, one that is disappearing and most of us know little about. In this story it's about the Inca's and passing their knowledge of culture and history on to the young generation through a boy named Cusi. It's his story, his life in a high Andes mountain valley, and his teacher/guardian Chuto and their herd of llamas. It's a coming of age story that teaches lessons about diversity, inclusion, family, and native culture. The prose has a soft, lyrical flow that probably doesn't translate that well to today's youth, but it's not very long and it's certainly worth reading. 3.5 stars 1953 Newbery Medal Winner

Review # 2 was written on 2017-11-25 00:00:00 Pierre Leveille Yes, I do indeed most appreciatively realise that the general writing style and modes of literary expression shown in Ann Nolan Clark's Newbery Award wining 1952 novel Secret of the Andes are poetic and evocative. But while I have definitely much enjoyed the general descriptiveness of the author's presented narrative, especially of the South American countryside, of Peru and the Andes Mountains (and also have not found Secret of the Andes all that tedious and monotonous in set-up and scope, as in particular some readers who have had to read the book for school seemingly do), I still have not been able to with no reservations and questioning enjoy Secret of the Andes wholeheartedly, as I actually do find the entire concept of the novel (and especially the consideration and question of its very authorship) more than a trifle off-putting and open to criticism and debate at best. For while and indeed, as author Ann Nolan Clark has claimed, the stories of North and South American indigenous populations, of indigenous children, do need to be told, do need to be presented, why do they usually end up being related not only by outsiders, but also often by outsiders, who although they generally do seem to mean well, still often if not even in the majority of cases, tend to show auras of (at lest to and for me on a personal level) palpable patronising paternalism, and at times even moral and cultural superiority? Because while The Secret of the Andes might well be interesting and readable, approachable enough as a story, as a tale in and of itself, I for one always do rather painfully and strangely feel that I am not only an outsider looking in, but also an outsider looking in with an authorial eye of feeling somewhat superior and advanced compared to the main characters, compared to Cusi, Chuto and the other Incas, the other Native South Americans, as someone who feels as though author Ann Nolan Clark while definitely having and demonstrating much legitimate affection and even love for her characters (and especially for young Cusi), for the Incas, also seems to at the very least unconsciously (and often even consciously) be textually, narratively, culturally above and beyond them in some manner (and while reading Secrets of the Andes, it does really and truly often seem to appear that the author, that Ann Nolan Clark with her writing, at least thematically strives to indicate that somehow only she, and I cannot help but consider only white non Native American writers, would be, and are able to tell the stories of the Incas and other native populations, that without them, without non indigenous authors, these stories would never even be shown and recounted in an acceptable and literary enough manner). And while Cusi's story, as related by Ann Nolan Clark in Secret of the Andes is most definitely compelling and readable enough, not only do I as a reader never really manage to feel all that personally close to him as a character, I do (as mentioned previously) also tend to have the very uncomfortable realisation that while I am definitely supposed to have a positive attitude towards Cusi, that I am supposed to both like and appreciate him as a person, as a human being (and yes as an Incan), that I am also supposed to consider him as somewhat of an unfortunate of birth and history, as someone in need of outside (and with outside I mean non indigenous) support and help (which feels rather or at least it can feel rather uncomfortable). So therefore, while I do understand and feel for Cusi in this novel and while I have also enjoyed reading about him and his life, his development, his journeys, I for one would definitely have enjoyed reading about Cusi considerably more, if Secret of the Andes had been penned by an author of indigenous, of Incan background or even if Ann Nolan Clark had not even whilst indeed seemingly meaning well, even whilst attempting to paint a positive picture of the Incas, shown so much a tendency to annoying paternalism, and gently smiling patronising, and yes equally, if in Secret of the Andes, there were a trifle less details and rhapsodising about Cusi's pet llama Misti, as it does become more than a bit monotonous and frustrating to constantly be reading about her, and the fact that Misti continuously appears almost to be more human than llama (and more wisdom-imbued than many humans), that she even often seems more Incan, more in tune with Incan culture and its legacy than Cusi, than the main protagonist of Secret of the Andes).