Each chapter examines an aspect of plastic pollution with profiles of "planet protectors," kids and adults who are involving in recycling or eliminating waste, clips of adult artists and scientists involved in plastic recycling and repurposing, and ending with a hands-on project to eliminate waste and plastics. Like all National Geographic titles, it's copiously illustrated with photographs and divided into browsable sections with short, easily-digestible reading bites. Back matter includes additional ways to recycle and minimize plastic waste, an index, and photo credits.
There is one major problem with this book in particular and that is with the profiled kids and scientists. There are 7 "planet protectors" and every single one is white. Two are white women and one is a white family. One of the white women is a teen and is shown with her two friends (male, white) and her mentor (male, white). The white family (mother, father, preschool daughter, toddler son) talk about their low-waste lifestyle, but there is no mention of the adults' jobs and the interview is solely with the mother, Katelin, who appears to do all the work of eliminating waste in their family. Of the other people shown, there is an unnamed Philippino family, shown watching a volunteer installing a plastic bottle "lightbulb" in their home and four unnamed boys who won a science competition (two are Black, two appear to be Asian or biracial). Two scientists, teen Angelina Arora and "National Geographic Emerging Explorer" Arthur Huang are also briefly profiled. Arora appears to be a person of color.
This leads into my complaint about books like this in general and that is that they simplify an extremely complex issue and are also incredibly privileged. There is one brief section that talks about uses of plastics in medical technology, but otherwise plastic = bad. There are no sources for the science behind the statements made about plastics, no discussion or comparison of the resources used in recycling or in creating and cleaning reusable packaging as opposed to creating single-use plastics. For that matter, it's assumed that single-use plastics are just that - single-use. There is no reference to disabled people who need accommodations and packaging that is seen as "wasteful" and no discussion of the economics behind the use of plastics.
The profiled Leblond family is a good example of this, starting with the opening statement "For the Leblond family, reducing plastic from their day-to-day life isn't just a priority; it's a lifestyle." There is not the smallest reference to how that lifestyle is funded or the privilege that goes into it. They compost - meaning they have access to land, tools, and information. They purchase from the bulk section of the grocery store and visit specialty stores instead of a "chain grocery." That means access to multiple food sources, including a grocery store with a bulk section, farmer's markets, etc., the funding to shop weekly or even more frequently, access to storage, and the knowledge, tools, and time to prepare food. Katelin Leblond makes their own toothpaste, body cream, and sunscreen and her family uses specialized bar soap and bar shampoo. Again, they have the funding and access to ingredients, knowledge, time, and tools to create their own personal products.
Is it "bad" that they live this way? No! Recycling is great. Minimalizing waste is great. Compost is awesome. But these books need to acknowledge the inherent privilege in being able to choose a no-waste lifestyle. Some other examples would be the sections urging kids to demand their parents recycle their e-waste - where I live, the closest recycling plant for e-waste is 40 miles away and many items cost money to recycle. The detailed information on how and what to recycle is great - if you have access to recycling facilities. One of the projects is making your own reusable lunch bag out of a pair of old jeans. For this you need jeans - that are still in reasonably good condition - a hot glue gun and scissors. You also need to be able to pack a lunch to start with and either have something that doesn't need refrigeration or attend a school with somewhere to store your lunch. Finally, they suggest packing a reusable water bottle and metal utensils - which assumes the funds to purchase these materials, access to refill your water bottle at school, and a way to either clean or package your utensils to take them home (and replacements for when, inevitably, kids lose them.)
The privilege inherent in these types of books goes a long way towards explaining why all their "planet protectors" are exclusively white, predominantly male, and have an implied privileged background. It keeps the audience for these books solely to a privileged class that can afford to follow the suggestions and also further ostracizes kids in poverty or with dysfunctional family structures. I don't know what the solution is and I don't know what a better book would look like - but I know I haven't yet seen one.
Verdict: If you're a public library with a privileged and waste-conscious audience, this would probably be something you'd want on the shelf. If you serve schools that like to have recycling campaigns or focus on minimizing waste, it would probably supply useful ideas. But if you're looking for a solidly science-based resource on recycling and plastics or a resource that is inclusive to kids from all backgrounds, this isn't it.
ISBN: 9781426339103; Published 2020 by National Geographic; Review copy provided by publisher; Donated to the library
No comments:
Post a Comment