I'm not a fan of Twilight, let's get that out of the way from the start. I can respect it for being successful, but I have no love for the story or the writer. For the longest time I hated what Twilight did to the Young Adult literature. Every where you turned there was a new YA paranormal romance starring a brooding vampire with a cardboard thin personality. But recently, I found two series of books that have rekindled my faith in YA literature, and even with vampires as the main focus. Thought I'd share.
The House of Night series by P.C. Cast & Kristin Cast sucked me in from the beginning and kept me coming back. I read through the entire series that's out so far in about two weeks.
And The Morganville Vampires series by Rachel Caine. This series actually throws vampires back into the role of *Bad Guy* instead of brooding hero, which was a pleasant change.
Give 'em a check sometime, especially if you're looking for life after Twilight.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
According to a meta-extention of twilight's own paranormal theory, there should soon be a humongous upswelling in werewolf literature to keep the vampire literature population in check.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
I'm hoping that the upcoming Friedberg/Seltzer movie Vampires Suck will clear all this vampire nonsense up and set things straight.
...
...
Oh, who am I kidding?
Posted by 0Megabyte (Member # 8624) on :
I was surprised to find a joke in the preview of that movie that was funny.
The whole "chihuahua" thing.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
There usually is ONE thing that's funny.
"Law of Averages", I guess.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Let The Right One in was a great vampire movie if you're into foreign art-house.
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 12368) on :
It was Ann Rice and Joss Whedon who started this whole trend of the emo Vampire. Really, Stephenie Meyer is their fault.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
On the subject of Edward Cullen and Joss Whedon, I came across this gem of a video:
As for Stephenie Meyer, I think she's a victim of Romeo and Juliet syndrome. She's so invested in star-crossed lovers that she missed why vampire fans really love vampires: its the danger. I never believed for a second that Edward would ever be slightly tempted to eat Bella. Evil!Edward would have been awesome though.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
When I was a kid, well, Vampires killed people.
They sucked their blood, spat out their souls, and we thanked them for it.
In my day the vamps sucked up all the virgins. That's why we did that free love thing in the 60's. Not for "Love" or "Peace" but to save the gals from the vampires.
In my day, the only way to kill a vampire was to stake it with virgin pine, cut off his head, stick 3 cloves of garlic down its bleeding neck, and then set the whole body on fire with 10 gallons of high octane heavily leaded gasoline.
And even then the dang thing would come back in the sequel.
You kids and your sparkly emo-vamps make me sick.
Now get off my lawn!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think y'all are missing the point that the Twilight vampires are not vampires first. The vampire thing is a tool, and one she adapted for her purpose. You're acting like the tool was the point.
You want her to tell a different story. I see that a lot - getting mad at shows and books because they don't tell the story you want to hear.
That's nonsense. You want that story? Write your own. You don't want to read the story the author/creator told? Then don't. This isn't difficult.
---------
Same for "who would beat Edward Cullen in a fight". They are fighting the wrong battle - Edward was intended to be a lover, not a fighter. Put the three vampires up to the general public and figure who would get picked as favorite lover, and Edward would leave them in the dust.
It's funny how Twilight is forcing all these other stories to define themselves against it. One method is to bash it outright. Another is to change the venue of competition. None of them matter to the Twilight Juggernaut, because it was never intended to belong to the world of vampire fiction in the first place. I suspect that's part of why it's done well.
Hate it as a love story, you've got a legitimate beef. Hate it as a vampire story, and you're missing the point.
[ August 08, 2010, 07:09 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
Kath, two problems.
1) Twilight has become the most popular stories centered on vampires. So if I write my own several people respond, "That's not a vampire story--the vampire doesn't sparkle like they are supposed to."
2) We can argue against her choice of theme to use as a love story center. She choose Vampire, because they are sexy and mysterious and epitomize the abstinence only education we wish on all our teen daughters. However the vampire by its nature is usually the opposite of abstinence only. They usually devour their loves, use them and leave them rotting husks or mindless pawns. That is a more interesting love story.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Neither of those are problems. She hasn't crippled your ability to write, and I don't have sympathy for complaints that her telling her story makes it harder for you to tell yours. Secondly, you don't actually know why she chose vampire. You have chosen to impose motivations upon her, but you don't know. So you are making up motivations for her and then criticizing her for them. That's just wishful thinking.
quote:However the vampire by its nature is usually the opposite of abstinence only.
You know they aren't real, right? That there is no such thing as a vampire's true nature?
That's just trying to make your version of the story the true one. Since vampires aren't real, that's really funny.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
It seems like anything that teenage girls like gets immediately blasted whether it is good or not. Of course this is often justified since many such things are nothing but shallow fads but in this case, I disagree.
Oh, I agree that anyone that went into a movie theater or picked up a book expecting a "Vampire" story or horror story was going to come out disappointed. That doesn't change the fact that anyone that is NOT looking for a typical vampire story and loves a good romance will find find the series quite compelling.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:Hate it as a love story, you've got a legitimate beef. Hate it as a vampire story, and you're missing the point.
I'd like to point out that quite a few people who have problems with Twilight DO in fact hate it as a love story. I am one of them.
I think it is at its heart a story about obsession. Bella is so obsessed with Edward her obsession consumes her. Witness the "chapters" after Edward leaves her that are just blank pages - showing that her entire existence is about him and when he is gone she is nothing. That is a dangerous, disturbing message to send - this is upheld as an "ideal" love and I find it nothing even close to ideal. I find it dangerous and scary. And sad - that a girl would think love is losing your entire sense of self and subsuming your own personality into his. No thank you.
Edward is controlling, a stalker, and downright creepy even putting aside the vampire thing. So I would say my objection to Twilight has nothing to do with being disappointed with the type of vampire he is, but rather the type of boyfriend his character portrays. Not exactly the type of boyfriend I want my daughters to have someday.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:I'd like to point out that quite a few people who have problems with Twilight DO in fact hate it as a love story. I am one of them.
....yes. I know. That's why I wrote what I did.
*rereads self* How did you get an objection to not liking it as a love story from what I said?
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
Why can't I just hate it for any reason that seems convenient?
Heck, I hate it just because I don't think the author deserves the bajillion bucks.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Can I still hate twilight because it's badly written codependency porn or
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Oh, I didn't. Sorry if it came off that way.
The Twilight thing just pushes my buttons...I dearly love young adult literature, and think some of the best writers anywhere are writing in that genre....and to have Twilight be the torchbearing work for the genre right now depresses me.
And to see so many middle school students carrying the books arond and mooning over Edward and talking about how they would be happy if they would "just find their Edward" makes me incredibly sad.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: And to see so many middle school students carrying the books arond and mooning over Edward and talking about how they would be happy if they would "just find their Edward" makes me incredibly sad.
How much do you think the books build up this sort of romantic nonsense vs. just recognize and distill the moony stuff that's going on with teenage girls anyway?
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
I think scifibum has a point. It's the grown women mooning over Edward et al that creep me out.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Why can't I just hate it for any reason that seems convenient?
You can, it's a free board.
But I find hating any art form for reasons other than the art itself to be a shame. Belle has legitimate problems with the work itself, (reasons I actually agree with but that didn't stop me from enjoying the series) and that is fine. But hating it because it's popular or because it inconveniences your own writing or other such things seems rather shallow to me.
Wagner was a despicable human being, but I can still respect his music.
80's music has been vilified over the last few decades but if you can make the effort to be objective, some of it was really quite good and innovative.
I had no desire to read the twilight series since I'm not particularly fond of vampire stories but I was out of work, bored and my roommate had the series and insisted I read them. To my surprise, I actually enjoyed them. Though I admit, I think the first movie told the story much better than the book did.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
"They usually devour their loves, use them and leave them rotting husks or mindless pawns"
Considering how consumed Belle becomes with Edward, this description actually fits the story. It just is disguised as a good thing.
Posted by Endless Orion (Member # 11017) on :
It's not just teenage girls though, who swoon over Edward. I've seen a disturbingly vast number of middle-aged mom's who are more avid about the series than some of the teens. I had an ex-girlfriend once explain the nature of Edwards love and it came across as sounding like how you'd excuse domestic abuse. "It doesn't count as hurting her if he loves her and is just trying to protect her." I remained unconvinced.
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 12368) on :
The modern male in America (and in much of the West) has developed a neutered personality as a result of gender integration in the work place. Work environments had to be made safe for women which meant instituting policy and practices aimed at reigning in "maleness." But of course there is no way for a man to just leave the sort of personality a male is required to carry around the work place back in the office: it necessarily infects a man's whole being and he consequently becomes to his wive/girlfriend/women in general a neutered being lacking the male dynamism to which the feminine is instinctively drawn. No wonder grown women are obsessing over Edward Cullen and the Twilight story: they see in Edward Cullen the male dynamism they so long for in their husbands and in Bella the submissive position they'd rather assume if only their men were worth submitting to.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Yuck.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Mooning over Edward . . . hmmmm. There was a hefty crowd of young adults -both sexes- in the theater with the latest flick absolutely going bonkers every time Jacob appeared on screen. Booing Edward. Making clucking noices at Bella.
Common sense hasn't completely died. *grin*
Except perhaps for Jacob, continuing to moon after Bella.
*BOOK SPOILER ALERT*
I have no idea how the movie makers (and the readers and movie-goers) will deal with the creepiest aspect of it all, though -- that wierd werewolf "bonding" with little girls (or half-girls), and "waiting" for them to grow up . . . *shudder*
That's gonna cause some interesting stinkums, if you ask me . . . especially given certain past practices, given up or not.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
I wouldn't be surprised if that gets cut out of the movie.
Posted by Endless Orion (Member # 11017) on :
Isn't the point that Jacob won't fill the role of lover until later in her life, and is more or less just a guardian figure until that time occurs? I'm sure they'll find a way to tone it down or twist it to make it more acceptable. Team Jacob would flip out if their idol lost his happy ending.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
Yeah, but its the going from a position of "guardianship" to a position of "lover" that freaks me out. He'll be an authority figure during her developing years which has some serious squick-worthy issues. But the ending also implied she wouldn't have a choice. In my head, the girl grows up, hates Jacob, and kicks him to the curb in favor of a guy who treats her like an equal, respects her independence, and has an actual personality.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: But the ending also implied she wouldn't have a choice. In my head, the girl grows up, hates Jacob, and kicks him to the curb in favor of a guy who treats her like an equal, respects her independence, and has an actual personality.
I didn't get that at all. The impression I got is that the women do have a choice but why would they chose someone else when the guy that imprinted on them would always be exactly what she needed? It's the guy that is having all his choices taken from him.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
I don't know about other people, but I could not date/marry a guy who did everything I wanted them to. For example, it'd be cool to date a guy who had the same taste in music as me but only if he liked it for his own personal reasons, not because I liked it. I have a couple of gal pals married to really submissive husbands and its painful for me to watch them interact. I watch these girls demand more and more, waiting for the guy to stand up and say "no."
This is probably why I prefer "Pride and Prejudice" to "Twilight." There's something much more romantic about a guy who is devoted to a girl even when she's brazenly independent or has some irritating character traits, etc. There's something powerful about loving someone even if the relationship isn't perfect. People in real life fight over radio stations, where to live, in-laws, etc. Conflict is part of the real world, but its uncommon to find someone who can rise above it for you.
There's nothing romantic to me about loving a guy just because he does everything I ask or enjoys everything I enjoy because I enjoy it.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I love this team jacob / team edward stuff. i wish i had come up with team necrophilia / team bestiality.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
I prefer to refer to them as "Team Sparkly" and "Team Six Pack".
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*laugh*
quote:I don't know about other people, but I could not date/marry a guy who did everything I wanted them to. For example, it'd be cool to date a guy who had the same taste in music as me but only if he liked it for his own personal reasons, not because I liked it. I have a couple of gal pals married to really submissive husbands and its painful for me to watch them interact. I watch these girls demand more and more, waiting for the guy to stand up and say "no."
Now this I completely agree with. I tend not to worry about the implications of people's fantasies. I don't think most people are idiots and will recover fine from their swooning. And Edward, as awful as he is, seems less damaged and crappy at relationships than Ender, who was MY stupid, impossible teenage fantasy.
But boring I can't forgive. I read Twilight about a year before the whole thing exploded and with no preconceptions - it was given to me to read by my adorable almost-mother-in-law - and so I can remember exactly what I thought: Edward is completely boring.
I dated someone once who put me as his whole world in a similar way, minus the domineering stuff. It was not fun - turns out that I am with myself all the time, so being with someone whose only interest was myself was way more self-indulgent than I enjoyed.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Right. Edward and Bella are the type of couple to go:
"Where do you want to eat?"
"I don't know. Where do you want to eat?"
Ad infinitum.
If Edward ate, anyway.
-
The thing that bothers me most about the Jacob/Renesmee issue is wondering when, exactly, he switches from guardian to boyfriend? What's he going to say?
"Sorry, Ren, honey, but were not doing anything inappropriate until you're eighteen."
Then she throws a fit because she's, you know, thirteen and wants to play kissy-face with a real boy, and what's a guy to do when he's had his freedom of choice taken away?
This is something I really wish Meyer had thought out more carefully.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Well, if it is need based (versus want), then you could argue he wouldn't be able to take advantage of her because that isn't what she needs.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It reminds me of The Time Traveler's Wife.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
Isn't the plot of Twilight essentially about a girl that struggles with necrophilia and bestiality?
I will admit I read all four books. They were far from the best books I've read, but they are young adult novels.
I think we could actually blame J.K. Rowling. Rowling took the supernatural and made it relatable to children. Werewolves, wizards, centaurs, giant spiders, giant snakes, giants, and witches became cool. Once the Harry Potter craze took hold, other authors wanted to capitalize on the fad. Then came Percy Jackson, Twilight, The Vampire Diaries, and all of the other supernatural YA fiction in bookstores now.
I went into Border's on Saturday and was amazed at the amount of trash I saw on the shelves of the YA section. It seems like 90% of the books are about vampires, werewolves, or wizards.
I did see one book that looked pretty interesting though. Has anyone read "The Hunger Games?" I was thinking of picking it up but all they had was the hardcover, and I'd rather read the paperback.
As for vampires Post-Twilight, I don't want pretty boy emo vampires. I want ruthless, urge driven, murderous vampires that jump you when you aren't expecting it and tear your limbs off while they suck your blood.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
All of which says you are looking for vampires. Meyer's hero is a lover first and a vampire incidentally. It simply isn't the same kind of story.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Geraine, I know a lot of people who think Hunger Games is awesome - me, I couldn't get past the fact that it was written in present tense. It drove me crazy. It felt contrived, and very awkward.
That may not be a problem for you, but I wanted to make you aware of it. If you're like me and can't stand that type of writing ("Oh, if I make it present tense it will feel so real! and heighten the suspense!" ) you may not want to spend the money on it.
To be fair, my daughter (17 years old) loved it and the present tense thing didn't bother her.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: All of which says you are looking for vampires. Meyer's hero is a lover first and a vampire incidentally. It simply isn't the same kind of story.
I guess that is my problem with it. The vampires in Meyer's book had feelings. I want vampires that are more feral, though I know traditionally they have been portrayed as having a certain sophistication to them.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle:
quote:Hate it as a love story, you've got a legitimate beef. Hate it as a vampire story, and you're missing the point.
I'd like to point out that quite a few people who have problems with Twilight DO in fact hate it as a love story. I am one of them.
I think it is at its heart a story about obsession. Bella is so obsessed with Edward her obsession consumes her. Witness the "chapters" after Edward leaves her that are just blank pages - showing that her entire existence is about him and when he is gone she is nothing. That is a dangerous, disturbing message to send - this is upheld as an "ideal" love and I find it nothing even close to ideal. I find it dangerous and scary. And sad - that a girl would think love is losing your entire sense of self and subsuming your own personality into his. No thank you.
Edward is controlling, a stalker, and downright creepy even putting aside the vampire thing. So I would say my objection to Twilight has nothing to do with being disappointed with the type of vampire he is, but rather the type of boyfriend his character portrays. Not exactly the type of boyfriend I want my daughters to have someday.
Also, it is a "love" where she does not have to do anything. No messy sex - or messy human body anything. She doesn't have to put up with any human frailty She can behave badly - doesn't matter. It is extraordinarily selfish.
Posted by adenam (Member # 11902) on :
It isn't fair to blame J.K. Rowling for the annoying books that have gotten published in YA. Her books were good.
I liked The Hunger Games and really liked the Gregor the Overlander series also written by Suzanne Collins. Though the Gregor books are more middle grade than YA if you're specifically looking for YA.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
I really enjoyed Hunger Games and myself and the rest of my bookstore coworkers are very much looking forward to the third book which comes out this summer. The present tense does take some getting used to, but the cliffhanger at the end of every chapter makes it hard to put down. I'd also recommend The Maze Runner by Daschner (hope I spelled that right.) It's like Lord of Flies meets Lost. The Uglies series by Westerfeld starts off well, though I wasn't as impressed by the sequels.
None of those are YA vampire books though, but there is decent stuff out there for teens. But I spent a few years reading YA when I was a preteen in the mid-nineties so supernatural isn't a new thing. Just another fad that will eventually fade and die before making another comeback during the next decade.
Posted by daventor (Member # 11981) on :
I actually read and enjoyed all the Twilight books, despite their flaws (and the idea of any girls basing their concept of the perfect guy off stalker-Edward is disturbing). Still, the oversaturation of vampire romance is kind of irritating and I'm wondering when we're gonna finally see the craze die (I'm hoping that that soon we'll have a huge emo-vampire backlash and get hit with stories with old-school PURE EVIL vampires).
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'm not going to condemn a fantasy of wanting to be loved unconditionally. That's why it's a fantasy. It's very harsh to call someone selfish for wanting to be loved without being forced to perform, have sex before she's ready, or contort to someone else's expectations.
----
A friend whose taste I respect (and who is a clever, published writer) recommended Hunger Game to me last night. I may need to put it on the list.
[ August 10, 2010, 01:25 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Hunger Games was definitely an exciting read and a great idea. I found it very hard to put down. The second book was IMO not as pure as the first, and exposed what I thought was a bit of a stock universe that the author hadn't ever rendered in enough detail. I was actually a bit disappointed at the direction she took the plot. But I'll read the third book when it comes out. Gotta see what happens.
Posted by Speed (Member # 5162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: It was Ann Rice and Joss Whedon who started this whole trend of the emo Vampire. Really, Stephenie Meyer is their fault.
As far as young adult writers go, William Sleator will always be my favorite. And I did read a few Darren Shan vampire apprentice books before the whole Twighlight thing happened. Looking back, those weren't all that great, but I remember a time when vampires weren't cool. I miss then
My little sister read Hunger Games, and said it was great.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
I've only read the first Twilight book, and have no interest in the rest. I'll say this, however: it really is a true vampire story. Look at all the people in this thread saying Edward and Bella's relationship is squicky: that's great, that's exactly how a vampire story should make you feel.
It's just that all the sexual kink is sublimated. This story is no less creepy and twisted than Bram Stoker. Twilight hits all the proper notes, thematically.
The quality of the writing is an issue, of course, but come on: they are YA. It isn't meant to be compared against Salmon Rushdie or Thomas Pynchon.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
I agree with you Foust but it's a shame you haven't read the rest. The quality of the writing goes up tremendously IMO. Still not talking Shakespeare here but considerably better.
Posted by Jake (Member # 206) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust: The quality of the writing is an issue, of course, but come on: they are YA. It isn't meant to be compared against Salmon Rushdie or Thomas Pynchon.
It's a mistake to assume that the quality of writing in fiction aimed at young adults is mediocre. Authors who get placed in this publishing category run the gamut from embarassingly bad to fantastically good.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jake: It's a mistake to assume that the quality of writing in fiction aimed at young adults is mediocre. Authors who get placed in this publishing category run the gamut from embarassingly bad to fantastically good.
Heartily agreed. Anyone who thinks YA = bad writing should be forced to read E.L. Konigsburg. Start with Silent to the Bone. Then go read Laurie Halse Anderson's Speak.
If those aren't enough to convince anyone that YA can and frequently does mean excellent writing, I have more! Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
I don't mean to imply that all YA writing is bad, but there is a genuine chasm between Amazon's sample pages of Silent to the Bone and, say, the the first chapter of Midnight's Children.
It isn't so much about bad and good, but recognizing that there is a difference between a tasty meal at TGI Friday's and a full course meal at a five star restaurant. I enjoy both in their own way, but one requires a whole other level of craft and artistry.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I completely disagree with that.
TGIF is oversalted crap. That isn't a difference in complexity, that's a difference in quality.
Come up with an example where both restaurants are excellent but serve different types of food, and you'll have a better analogy.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
I'm with kat. I think the attitude that you can serve young people mass-produced crap is prevelent in YA publishing and marketing, but I think that that is unfortunate. The standards for good YA fiction should not be lower than standards for other literature.
How are kids supposed to appreciate good writing if they're not exposed to it? Good YA novels should have the highest expectations for craft and artistry while dealing with subject matter that is appropriate to the age of their audience.
Posted by Uindy (Member # 9743) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: I love this team jacob / team edward stuff. i wish i had come up with team necrophilia / team bestiality.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust: but one requires a whole other level of craft and artistry.
Completely and totally disagree.
People who say things like this generally look down at SF&F too. Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: I'm with kat. I think the attitude that you can serve young people mass-produced crap is prevelent in YA publishing and marketing, but I think that that is unfortunate. The standards for good YA fiction should not be lower than standards for other literature.
Even if the standards are the same, there is plenty of garbage sitting on the shelves of every other section in the bookstore. It doesn't matter what the genre is or even what art form we are talking about, some is better than others.
Remember, publishing is a business. Imagine a publisher reading through the slush pile trying to find something that might make a few bucks. He reads one that is very well written and a fascinating story but it's an obscure tale dealing with religion and family relationships. He thinks, "boring, will never sell." But then he reads another one. This one is not very original and full of flaws but it is an exciting tale about vampires full of sex and murder. "This I can sell" he thinks and you get what we have now. A few good books buried in a pile of derivative slush trying to latch on to Twilight's coat tails.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
None of which changes the fact that the attitude of "you shouldn't expect it to be high quality, after all it's YA" is a crying shame.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: None of which changes the fact that the attitude of "you shouldn't expect it to be high quality, after all it's YA" is a crying shame.
Absolutely true. Every genre has its gems. While I personally wouldn't know, I suspect even the romance section has some excellent writing on its shelf somewhere.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: I'm with kat. I think the attitude that you can serve young people mass-produced crap is prevelent in YA publishing and marketing, but I think that that is unfortunate. The standards for good YA fiction should not be lower than standards for other literature.
How are kids supposed to appreciate good writing if they're not exposed to it? Good YA novels should have the highest expectations for craft and artistry while dealing with subject matter that is appropriate to the age of their audience.
I agree with this. I remember one of the first YA books I can remember reading that left an impression on me was "Rifles for Wati."
This book was a civil war novel like The Red Badge of Courage. While I appreciate Red Badge of Courage, Rifles for Wati had a more "human" touch to it. I could relate to the characters. It was well written.
Then I started reading trash like the Goosebumps series.
I think a good gauge (for me anyway) on whether a book is trash or not is if I go back and read it down the road. I haven't read any of the Goosebumps books more than once, but have read Rifles for Wati four or five times over the years. I've read Ender's Game over a dozen times, and I still enjoy it every time I pick it up.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
quote:The standards for good YA fiction should not be lower than standards for other literature.
But here's the thing: the very fact that a YA category exists is a sign that something different is going on. Why not just write a novel about a teenager and sell it as a regular book?
Are the best contemporary YA novels comparable to novels read by the young in the past, such as Tom Sawyer or Lord of the Rings?
Populist taste can be just as reactionary as Harold Bloom-style canon worship.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
quote:The standards for good YA fiction should not be lower than standards for other literature.
But here's the thing: the very fact that a YA category exists is a sign that something different is going on. Why not just write a novel about a teenager and sell it as a regular book?
Because booksellers absolutely INSIST on assigning every book a niche. Most YA authors didn't set out to write a YA book. They just set out to write a book! That decision was their publisher's and/or that of the various book distributors, marketers, and sellers.
And I will point out again that every argument you have made about YA can be -- and has been -- made about SF&F.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
Most of the good YA books are there because the publisher didn't know what else to do with it. If it doesn't fall easily into a normal category but would have some appeal to younger audiences, to the YA shelf it goes.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I'm dealing with this problem right now with the publishing industry. I tend to write teenage protagonists in very dramatic or adults situations, books that I wouldn't want a preteen to read. But the fact that it might get categorized as YA without my control makes me hesitant to submit these. I know that kids might pick up a more mature novel and read it on their own, and there's nothing I can do about that. But I don't think I could intentionally sell something when I know it's going to be marketed to children.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
quote:Because booksellers absolutely INSIST on assigning every book a niche
A large percentage of that list covers a correspondingly small number of themes. Young people finding their way in life, through a series of hot button issues: you mother's lesbian partner, eating disorders, abusive fathers, body image, high school social status.
There also seems to be a large number of fantasy books trying to ride the coat tails of Harry Potter and Twilight.
If the ALA's list is representative, than quirky, unique books are not being unfairly pigeonholed by publishers: there actually is a "YA" aesthetic, just like there is an "indie" aesthetic in movies.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote: there actually is a "YA" aesthetic, just like there is an "indie" aesthetic in movies.
Yep, there is. However, the interaction between publisher, author, reader, publicist, etc, is a bit more complex than what has been covered here.
Just because a book is on the ALA list of best books for YA readers doesn't mean it is a strictly YA book. While there are authors who write to middle-grade and YA audiences, it cannot be said that EVERY author does so.
My 13 year old son just read Hunger Games. I was astounded at how he was drawn into the story! That didn't happen with the Percy Jackson books, nor the Potter books.
Apparently this book is a big hit with the late middle school early high school crowd - both boys and girls.
I have some qualms with the themes of the book, and the ending will make you want to throw the book through the window ( at the author). If you like dystopian type stories, you will like the Hunger Games. If you're like me and you don't like such stories, you will have a tough time suspending disbelief well enough to lose yourself in the book.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) you may not want to spend the money on it. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)