One of the things I've noticed in my YA reading? The books can be as complex, as dark, as fundamentally dystopian, as anything written for adults. You cannot point to Feed and think otherwise; it was the most grim & unrelenting book I think I read that year. In fact, I would go so far as to say that most of the edgy stuff being written in genre in a realistic way? YA.

I am not sure I would ever reread Feed -- I don't mind dark, depressing, grim, but I like, in that darkness, something that gives hope - some message that there is always hope, no matter how bad it gets. It doesn't -work- as hope if it's sugar-coated, or the answers are too easy, however. Imho.

The reason I think a lot of adult sf/f writers are writing YA is because editors are asking sf/f agents if they have any YA on their list.

Feed is one of those books that broke the rule for me that dark books need to have hope to work--because in general I think the whole point of darkness in fiction is to show where the hope shines through. But I loved Feed anyway. But I do think it's the most depressing book I have ever, ever read.

And yeah, I think that YA in general tends to be darker than adult fiction, partly because teens are actually more comfortable with dark books than adults, for various reasons.

To be fair (and to be balanced about this), I do know that some excellent YA books have been written by adult writers (Sharon Shinn's YAs come quickly to mind; there are others as well). But it does seem that on a regular basis another adult writer will come along and decide they need to write a YA book without knowing the genre at all.

Edited at 2008-03-14 04:47 am (UTC)

Ah yes: Feed.

That book that recycled adult fears of new technology platforms and forced those fears on technophile kids. I bet that once upon a time people wrote books about too much reading driiving you mad (actually, I believe that is the diagnosis for Ermengarde in A Little Princess).

I have read a huge amount of YA fiction and (in the past three years) 434 YA sf novels so far, and they are far too often tripe of the kind Nancy Kress describes. Yes, there is good stuff out there, but for someone wandering the shelves at random it can be hard to spot it.

What did you make of Valiant?

I wouldn't argue that Feed could be called as much an adult book as a YA one (I also take it to be less about the tech itself than about how we respond to the media in general, in the U.S. at least), but Valiant to my mind is in no way tripe, and is very much aimed at YA readers.

Wow... a dark book that isn't hopeful! Sign me up :D!

Thanks for the rec, ladies. I will see about reading Feed!

Would you mind making this post public? I was planning to write on this very same topic at my PW blog on Monday, and I would love to use this as a jumping-off point.

Okay, gave it another read-through and did some compressing, so I think I'm comfortable with that ... I'll go ahead and unlock it in just a moment. :-)

Edited at 2008-03-14 04:39 am (UTC)

Thanks very much!

I assume you've seen John C. Wright's comments on the subject?

I haven't actually. Do you have a link?

I do!

The salient quote is this (he's comparing his book to one of Holly Black's):

Nor is this book anywhere nearly gross enough to qualify for YA status. To win awards in YA fiction, one needs to describe rapist elfs sodomizing boys with thorn bushes, or a father having sex with the ghost of his little son he murdered. Incestohomopedonecrophilia, we might call that: One needs special names to describe the new perversions. I wish I were making those examples up.

The entire (insufferable, imo) interview is here; this quotation is from near the end:

http://www.scifi.com/sfw/interviews/sfw15037.html

And further commentary here (note comment at end):

http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/006391.html

Enjoy!

...well all right then! I think I will steer clear of quoting or linking to that in my entry; no need to pour gasoline on the fire. Thank you for enlightening me, though. *headshake*

Right. I'll go there when I feel my rantiness burning down to unacceptably low levels. :-) (Clearly, he doesn't understand the full range of YA writing either, either.)

Yanno, I'd happily put either Valiant or Magic or Madness (the following year's Norton winner) up against much of adult genre writing to be judged in terms of quality prose and quality story, any day.

I'm not sure that Project Runway really counts as trashy tv (although I haven't seen it myself). I mean, after all, it's about making haute couture -- oh wait, aren't designer clothes also part of what the Gossip Girls books (which I haven't read and am unlikely to read) are about? Heh.

I'm kind of surprised this particular author even *wants* to write YA, since she's obviously not comfortable with the subject matter in many YA books (and yes, the things she's not comfortable with are in many YA books). Assuming teens can't (or shouldn't) read books with subject matter relating to sex, peer cruelty, violence, drugs, or general non-picket-fence issues is blatantly ignoring what goes on in the average high school today. Sure, not all YA books should be gritty slices showing the darker side of teen reality, but why criticize the ones that are?

SO TRUE!

So...I'm uneasy with this particular kerfluffle. I don't actually see any underestimation or disapproval going on in Kress's entry here. I just see surprise, which doesn't seem to me like a particularly strange response to encountering something you don't expect.

What we have here is a writer who was apparently asked to consider writing something. Because she wasn't real familiar with what's currently going on in that field, she's trying to familiarize herself, and she's finding stuff she didn't expect. So she's asking for more information. That's all. What's wrong with that?

I do see your point, but ...well, two things I guess. The first is that this reaction happens regularly among adult SF/fantasy writer, and so kind of gets old fast, when the books aren't exactly hidden.

And the second, larger issue is that I think she started (but I could be wrong) writing YA before beginning this research, not after.

Well, three issues, I guess. The third is the underestimating of teens, the forgetting what it instinctively felt like to be a teen (important to writing YA), and the lack of intuitive understanding that of course what teens read is going to be varied.

Some of this, I think, really should be intuitive--maybe not all, but if one is shocked a YA book might have an edge, well, maybe it's understandable not to understand the genre (but really, why all the expecting it to be radically different from adult--we're not even talking kids books here, but books for teens), but it's definitely problematic to go into writing teens without having at least some understanding of teens, or, at the least, memory of what it feels like to be a teen oneself.

And I guess I did get an edge of "it shouldn't be this way" in the posts; mileage and readings of them may vary, of course.

Edited at 2008-03-14 01:55 pm (UTC)

I do understand the gets-old-fast point, but...when you're dealing in something that's often misunderstood, that just kind of goes with the territory. Sure, it gets old to constantly have to explain your job or hobby or whatever. But if you're going to keep doing it instead of just opting out (of the explanations, not of the activity), you still have to deal with the folks you're explaining it to on a case by case basis. It's old for you, but it's new to them, so treating them like they really should have known better isn't entirely fair.

(Which isn't to say you were doing all or even most of the stuff I'm talking about. In this comment and my previous one, I'm thinking of the kerfluffle in general more than your post in particular.)

Can't speak to the second point; got no knowledge there. But...diving into something new and discovering it's more complicated or otherwise not exactly what you thought isn't unusual. It happens to pretty much everybody in pretty much everything.

I'm not saying that I necessarily think Kress isn't making any mistakes here. It just...the backlash seems a little defensive and a little blown out of proportion, to me.

I had the same sense Janni had, that Ms. Kress was appalled by what she read and thinks that books aimed at teens shouldn't have an edge. Even though edgier has become the norm for all sorts of entertainment, from books to TV to movies, we must retain an aura of sweetness and light for books aimed at children.

I applaud that Ms. Kress wanted to research YA books, but basing opinions on one story is ridiculous. Talk to a good YA librarian and go home with a dozen titles that represent the wide range of YA books that are available.

We'll have to just agree to disagree about the tone thing, but re: your second paragraph, it looks to me like Kress agrees with you. The last paragraph of her YA Shock entry begins, "The only way I'll know is to read more YA."

And it seems she has. I looked and a recent entry in her blog mentioned something about "Gossip Girls", which made me cringe. (And apparently they also made her cringe.) I do still wish she'd talk to a YA specialist.

There's a post a few pages back in which she mentions reading two Scott Westerfeld books (and really liking one of them). That, combined with Valiant, makes me think she's getting some good info from somewhere. But yah, checking in with a librarian is always a double-plus good idea.

Oh, I'm so with you on this one. The reaction to Valiant, in particular: "OMG, is ALL YA like this? Oh, dearie me!" It reminds me of a typical reaction to SF: "OMG, it's all tentacled alien spaceships, isn't it!"

She's a great writer, though. Maybe she'll figure it out.

And, you know, one adult writer has that reaction, sure, but I hear this conversation going on over, and over, and over again.

And that so many of them can't get past that to see how well-written a book like Valiant is only makes it worse--because they would get past it just fine if this were a book written for adults rather than for teens.

I like sartorias' take on books like these, actually--that of course they're not for every kid, but they're just right for some kids.

Which, really, is how adult reading works, too--not all books are for all people, but among adults, no one has an issue with that.

Edited at 2008-03-14 01:59 pm (UTC)

Here's where I'd have to politely disagree with you, Janni.
I used to belong to a book club (think suburban housewives that read Oprah picks) and it was such an eye-opening experience in terms of how people read books. One woman would see a character as manipulative and horrible while the rest of us related to her, or half the group would cheer on a woman that cheated on her husband while the rest hated her. Some of these discussions got incredibly heated: "How could you possibly be human and think that," etc. All of this, of course, was discussed without the slightest idea of what the author's intention might of been, and for very little thought to the writing quality or story execution. It was a truly fascinating look at how a person's opinion of a book is more a reflection of their beliefs and not any merit (or lack thereof) of the book.

I said all that to say this: people do care about the content of so-called adult books.

Perhaps the trouble lies with the fact that some adults refuse to see teens as their own people with their own ideas and opinions and boundaries. Meaning, "I'm your mother and I will decide what you read and oh-my-god you're not reading that smutty drivel in my house" instead of letting the teen make that decision for his or her self.

Huh. I'd never run into adults who had opinions about what other adults should read, but that's just me--I don't doubt that your experience here is different, at all, and it's fascinating to realize, actually.

Perhaps the trouble lies with the fact that some adults refuse to see teens as their own people with their own ideas and opinions and boundaries.


I think that's a huge part of it, yeah.

Sadly, I often do. Adults scoff at other adults who read romance, or chick lit, or sci-fi, or (insert maligned genre here).

Heh. I see this author hasn't changed a bit. Used to be that way about adult sf&f until Nebula was achieved, out loud and in public on convention panels.

I guess you can give a point or so for consistency.

That's why I always ask those who know YA, care about YA, and write YA any YA questions I might have.

I can't check the 'yes' box on any of those three categories, thus I ask them my YA questions.

I'd probably be closer to 'yes' if I spent more time with the audience that YA is intended for. But the few people I know who are that intended audience don't read YA. So, thus again, why I ask the people who know.

Love, C.

i'm open-minded about teen fiction, but even i'm not in favor of the gossip girls. :-) (it was one of those things i refused to sell at the bookstore. frankly, it didn't need me pushing it to sell, and therefore, it didn't matter much.) i'm not in favor of any story where females act like shallow b*tchy barbie-tarts -- i don't give a damn what designer clothing they wear, or what high-priced boarding school they attend in the process. but hey, it's not like i was knocking the books out of their hands either. i only hoped that their brains didn't get too rotted before they hit the good stuff like, oh, holly black. ;-)

i may not write y.a., but i read it. i'm pro free speech. and yes, i'm behind teens learning to be adults by learning with adult issues via fiction. but everyone has things they like and things they don't, and not everyone has to agree with me. that's part of makes the world interesting -- people not all thinking exactly the same.

Oh, I agree with you that I'm not in love with the Gossip Girls books personally (or rather, the knockoffs I've read--I don't think I've read the books themselves, so can't really have an opinion about them), but like you say--I still feel like teens have a right to read them. (And I'm not shocked-I-tell-you-shocked that they exist. :-))

I think, perhaps, instead of reading the YA chic lit, she should take a look at the YA fantasy/sci-fi. I'll admit I'm not a fan of "Gossip Girls" either, but I read tons of YA fiction and know if I'll like something or not just by reading the back . . . heck, even by the cover. I see girls giggling or any sort of "fashion" illustration, I run the other way. But if there's some nifty illustration with fantastical elements in it, then I'll probably like it.

(Though still glad I picked up and read the back of "Uglies" in spite of my initial instinct towards the cover.)

If she feels that there are certain things she isn't comfortable putting in her YA novel, then no one's forcing her to put it there. It irritates me more that there's this tone of, "Everybody's doing it, so does it mean I have to do it, too?" I guess I've just always believed write what you yourself feel comfortable with. "Steady Beat" and "Jane's S.O.S." don't have sex in them or anything truly horrifying (other than someone dying a brutal, bloody death in one scene . . .), but I still feel they make their own individual points and aren't lacking for it.

And you're right, kids and teens are perfectly intelligent, reasoning being, which is why I feel that the older I get on the outside, the younger I'd rather feel on the inside. :) I'd hate to ever grow up. ;)

I'm so irritated I can hardly type. The amount of sanctimonious idiocy over there is so strong, I'm going to suffocate. I can't comment over there because if I did I'd offend all of them. I'd like to refer them to L'Engle's Camilla, published as YA in the '60's, which has gthe maincharacter complicit in her mother's extramarital affair. Honestly. I hate to see otherwise intelligent people(I know the writer slightly) lose all logic like this.

A remarkable number of people who are rational and interesting when talking about adult books become suddenly irrational as soon as "children" are involved. (Neverminding that teens aren't exactly children, which is a whole other issue many adults also don't understand). I keep wondering, don;t they remember being kids and teens themselves?

I *do* read a lot of YA, but tend to fall in the anti-Gossip-Girl camp. I didn't like those kids in high school, so why would I want to read about their adventures now? (Same goes for A-list and Clique. Granted, I've only read reviews, synopses, and cover matter--but I would have put them down as a teen myself, and my taste hasn't changed that much.)

But given that almost all of the readers I swap books with at my library are teens, I figure it's just a matter of taste. :) As for your overall point, I think you're absolutely right. If you want to write a certain type of book, it's best to be familiar with the genre and love it--unless you're J. K. Rowling, in which case you can apparently get away with not ever reading any fantasy and still make a fortune writing it.

They're not really to my taste either. It's the notion of being shocked they're out there that gets me to being ranty; why should one be surprised there are books like that out there for teens, any more than that there are for adults. Like you say--a matter of tastes. (And, okay, I don't watch much TV, but it's hard to believe there's anything in YA that's edgier than what teens or adults are regularly watching at home on same.)

Yes, the shock is definitely surprising. I mean, before YA became as prevalent as it is today (I feel like this is a "back in my day" statement coming), most teens jumped straight into the adult section. I was very, very lucky to have a great YA section (maybe eight shelves of it) at my public library, and a wonderful children's section before that. Most of my friends were reading the Dragonlance novels by sixth grade and Piers Anthony not much later than that--or, at the other extreme, "trashy" romance novels. Teen readers have *always* read adult material, so it doesn't make any sense that "adult" themes wouldn't appear in their books.

But then, I think of YA readers as mostly teens and mature younger readers. One of my favorite parents at the library has a nine year old who has started picking up YA titles here and there--but the mom likes to check on content before taking them home. I ended up skimming through all of Shannon Hale's Goose Girl to check on themes (I'd already read Princess Academy and felt safe on that one). And I have to say that if a parent wants to be involved in what their kids are reading, enlisting the help of a local librarian who reads and loves YA is probably a good way to do it.

And I rarely have problems with individual parents being involved in their kids' or teens' reading, precisely because at any age, we are all so different.

And yeah--not only do teens read adult books, they watch TV aimed at folks older than them, too. I think it's the rare YA book that's actually edgier than what teens are seeing elsewhere, yet it's the YA books that everyone seems to be shocked by--even though with a book, it's easier to simply filter/tune out the things one isn't ready for.

Since we have all our graphic novels in the teen room at the library, they get quite a lot of aghast reactions as well... ;)

You got quoted in PW: http://www.publishersweekly.com/blog/860000286/post/1610023361.html

Yes, I just saw that! :-)

I think some of it is also a basic misunderstanding of what YA *is*. I had a friend who was asking for "YA recommendations" for her 10 year old daughter. I then understood why she had so many problems with the proposal for my book. I had to explain to her that what was going on in my book was more in keeping with the movie SCREAM than with HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL.

Reading the blog post linked, I got the idea that they had no idea what they were talking about. Heinlein's juveniles (which I *love* as I also love VALIANT) are MG chapter books. They are incredibly short compared to most modern YAs, and they are named at cub scouts more than Eagle Scouts. YAs are not for "children" -- they are for teenagers, high schoolers. These review journals that have been lambasted for not "warning" about mature content say the age range is 10th grade and up.

Yes, tenth GRADE, not ten years.

It's total BS to think that sex or violence is somehow "new" to YA. (Or even something that has arisen in the last 20 years. The blog Jezebel commonly reviews "classic" YA novels that the bloggers read in the 70s or 80s, and there's some SCARY stuff going on there. When I was a YA, I didn't read Christopher Pike (which had sex, and swearing, and drugs, and abortions, and affairs, and murders, and cannibals) until I was in middle school. If my reading skills had gobbled up the MG offerings in the library or the book store BEFORE I hit my teens, there were plenty of more innocent offerings, or adult classics, or etc.

High schoolers are reading the Scarlet Letter, The Crucible, Hamlet, the Iliad, The Sun Also Rises, Wuthering Heights. In SCHOOL. There's sex and violence all over the place. they are expected to read, analyze, and comprehend these mature adult books on an adult level. And yet, in their entertainment reading, they are supposed to stick to the kiddie pool? Right.