Before focusing on the novels of MT Anderson, this article makes a very valid point about teen reading. Don’t underestimate it.
Now, the title to my blog post is slightly skewed as what Anderson is pointing out is the intelligence of teenagers and how they don’t need separate books whereas I’m saying don’t underestimate the genre. But I think the two go hand in hand, you think?
Do not underestimate teens. I think that’s the crux of the argument and the rest is just details. No, they haven’t lived as long as you and no, they don’t have the worldly experiences you do but that doesn’t mean they need their works stripped down to simplicity to understand. Do I think teens need their own book category just for them? No. I read Interview with the Vampire (please don’t sue me) when I was 11. I also knew how to mummify a corpse when I was ten. So no, it’s not necessary.
But not every teen is an advanced reader and if we didn’t have that middle ground between middle grade and adult, kids would be going from Goosebumps to Stephen King. Some do not have that kind of reading capacity. Others do. That’s also not to say YA is for the slower readers. Bite me if you think that. The majority of my TBR pile is YA. It fits my patience level. But it provides a stepping stone. For those that run screaming from a novel that’s 600 pages in an 8 point font with a 3 millimeter margin (me), there’s the equally stimulating but much fat-trimmed YA.
So, I ask again, do teens in general need their own category of books? No. But the pre-teens do. As do the teens that just don’t want to read mainstream adult fiction. Or the adults with the short attention spans that enjoy reading without the pomp and meandering. It’s like taking a stair or two out of your staircase. It’s still manageable walking up and I’m sure a lot of people could do it, but there are those that can’t, or those that simply don’t want to. YA is a stepping stone. While all teens don’t read it, many (and many younger readers, and older) do so I don’t think it’s an obsolete category.
Now that we’re done not underestimating the teenagers, lets not underestimate the genre, ok? Now that I’m involved, it’s irks me like a cat with it’s tail on fire when people say something to the likes of “it’s not supposed to be deep.” *headdesk* I saw that as a defense of Twilight. “Well, it’s not supposed to read any better. It’s for teenagers.” *twitch*
Twilight is poorly written. Piss poorly, I might add. The Anti-Twilight Lexicon is run by teenagers, 14 and 15 years old. They are capable of recognizing giant plot holes when they see them. What makes people think that they could be in the minority? Only the psychotic Twihards believe this is the best thing ever written. Even the more stable fans readily admit it’s mediocre writing, at best. This is not what YA is. YA is Cirque du Freak or The Dark is Rising. Or Night by Elie Wiesel. Yes, there’s still Gossip Girls and the any number of equally superficial teens books that are out there (I’m still working on that series post!) but they are not representative of the genre.
For the love of god, stop thinking otherwise.
If you think YA is lighter fare, then read some of it. I mean really read it and see just how dark it actually is. So the font is bigger and there aren’t as many pages. Does the unnecessary description of a bird farting on a volcano to create Hawaii make an adult novel that much better? Or perhaps it’s just a matter of pacing? People like me don’t like to read slogging description that’s more of a means to illustrate how great of a writer the author is. I much prefer plot and pretty much immediately. It doesn’t mean it’s simpler, it’s just 90/10 lean as opposed to 75/25.
It’s getting to a point when I’m starting to get offended when people belittle YA. Maybe it’s because I write it. You think? People think it’s just easier to write. To that I say, what’s the secret? I have 287 pages of Diamond Crier sitting upstairs waiting to be edited. It’s YA. So that’s supposed to be “easier”?
How about this: don’t underestimate anyone or anything. It’s how people lose wars, by underestimating their enemies. The same reasoning goes for expectations. If you set your expectations too high and get disappointed when something doesn’t live up to them, you have no one to blame but yourself. Equally so, when you underestimate teenagers or YA and they turn around and make an ass of you by blowing you out of the water, you’ll have no one to blame but yourself. So don’t underestimate. Give them credit. Give us credit. All YA might not be glorious prose, but neither is the adult stuff.
I used to think that YA as a genre was a waste, not because I disliked the books in the genre, but just because I felt that they all could be considered either children’s books or adult books and there wasn’t really a need for the third genre. I’m not sure that I’ve completely changed my mind on this point, simply because many YA books (as you mentioned) ARE being read by people both younger and older than teenagers.
But I have come to appreciate the distinction because I find myself enjoying books of that genre. When I worked at a library and found myself with some free time, I always gravitated toward the YA section to browse, and would often end up with an armload of YA books to read. Some books, like Markus Zusak’s “The Book Thief” are only in that category because of the age of the protagonist, not because the book itself lacks depth, or maturity, or darkness.
To conclude… I like YA. I still think it’s a bit of a misnomer to call those books “Young Adult” though, as the good ones have much broader appeal.
I agree with you Sarah. I think, at this point, it’s a technicality that YA exists, for the sake of separating the reading level. In reality, YA is not at the same level as adult. Other than that, I know a few titles myself that could right sit on the adult shelves.
I think if people were to get over the “embarrassment” of shopping in the kids section (actually, the YA in the Barnes and Noble I go to is just outside of the kids section), they’d realize that they’re missing a lot.