One sociological theory suggests that how people dress is indicative of a society’s trajectory. The theory goes like this:
- When the lower class try to dress like the upper class, a society is on the incline.
- When the upper class try to dress like the lower class, a society is on the decline.
In other words, fake Gucci’s are a good sign. Pricey designer jeans with holes in them and unshaven, unwashed celebrities, on the other hand, are a sign of the Apocalypse.
I have wondered if a similar principle isn’t at work among readers. Going theory: A society that “reads up” is healthier and better off than a society that “reads down.”
- Reading up — Reading literature that is more challenging, more complex, more sophisticated, more demanding of the reader.
- Reading down — Reading literature that is not challenging, not complex, not very sophisticated, or undemanding of the reader.
My mother recently did something she always wanted to do: Read Dostoyevsky’s epic The Brothers Karamazov. She was reading up. My daughter Alayna, almost ten years ago, decided to read the Harry Potter series. Up to that point, she had not been a reader. Not only did she finish the series, she moved on to more challenging literary fare. She was reading up.
Which brings me to a trend that continues to puzzle me: Adults who read YA fiction. For if my going theory is correct, the trend of adults reading YA is indicative of a society “reading down.”
Of course, there’s much nuance and many variables to this assertion. It doesn’t necessarily mean that YA is dumbed-down, dumbing us down, or that one can’t grow as a reader until they tackle Dostoyevsky. It also doesn’t mean there’s some magical box that all YA labeled fiction fits into. (For instance, I recently read two YA books that seemed worlds apart — Rick Yancey’s The Monstrumologist was excellent, while the first book in Amanda Hocking’s Trylle series was bloody awful.)
However, what gets me about this discussion is not that there’s room for various interpretations and criticism. It’s the knee-jerk reaction of adults who read YA.
This reaction was in full display in response to a recent article in Slate by freelance writer Ruth Graham entitled Against YA. The provocative subheading was enough to boil the blood of every adult YA fan: Read whatever you want. But you should feel embarrassed when what you’re reading was written for children.
And boil the blood did.
The author’s premise:
The once-unseemly notion that it’s acceptable for not-young adults to read young-adult fiction is now conventional wisdom. Today, grown-ups brandish their copies of teen novels with pride. There are endless lists of YA novels that adults should read, an “I read YA” campaign for grown-up YA fans, and confessional posts by adult YA addicts. But reading YA doesn’t make for much of a confession these days: A 2012 survey by a market research firm found that 55 percent of these books are bought by people older than 18. (The definition of YA is increasingly fuzzy, but it generally refers to books written for 12- to 17-year-olds. Meanwhile, the cultural definition of “young adult” now stretches practically to age 30, which may have something to do with this whole phenomenon.)
The largest group of buyers in that survey—accounting for a whopping 28 percent of all YA sales—are between ages 30 and 44. That’s my demographic, which might be why I wasn’t surprised to hear this news. I’m surrounded by YA-loving adults, both in real life and online. Today’s YA, we are constantly reminded, is worldly and adult-worthy. That has kept me bashful about expressing my own fuddy-duddy opinion: Adults should feel embarrassed about reading literature written for children.
I’ve openly puzzled over this demographic anomaly before — “55 percent of [YA] books are bought by people older than 18” and “28 percent of all YA sales” are to those “between ages 30 and 44.” Asking such questions aloud is not the worst of it; it’s drawing implications like the one I’m making here and the author of the Slate article does, which gets one into trouble. Graham summarizes:
Fellow grown-ups, at the risk of sounding snobbish and joyless and old, we are better than this. I know, I know: Live and let read. Far be it from me to disrupt the “everyone should just read/watch/listen to whatever they like” ethos of our era. There’s room for pleasure, escapism, juicy plots, and satisfying endings on the shelves of the serious reader. And if people are reading Eleanor & Park instead of watching Nashville or reading detective novels, so be it, I suppose. But if they are substituting maudlin teen dramas for the complexity of great adult literature, then they are missing something.
Missing something??? How dare she!
The blowback was fierce.
The article was “hot garbage,” said one author, calling it “broadly offensive to, just, everyone. ” This writer at The New Republic consoled, “You should never be embarrassed by any book you enjoy. And you certainly shouldn’t let some woman you’ve never met make you feel inferior for reading beneath your grade level.” The Modern Mrs. Darcy pronounced Slate was drunk for publishing such nonsense. Flavorwire called it “condescending,” another blogger added “inflammatory… stuck-up.” On the more creative end was the accusation that the critique was actually “sexist.”
And those were the “nice” responses.
Frankly, I’m not surprised by the angry reactions. The Slate article currently has over 3,000 comments, most of them informing Ms. Graham that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about. I suspect the majority of those comments are not from “12- to 17-year-olds.” Once again, it’s the adults who are objecting to the suggestion that they are “reading down.”
So not only are “55 percent of [YA] books… bought by people older than 18,” that very un-young demographic does the majority of belly-aching when their reading tendencies are criticized.
Thankfully, amidst the bristling, comes a few more level-headed responses.
Like Russell Smith at The Globe in his piece The fault in our aesthetic pigeon-holing. Smith correctly points out that part of the problem is in agreeing upon “a plausible definition of what YA is.”
What makes a publisher decide to market a book to a particular audience is not the subject matter but the style. The only thing that unites books in this category is a certain straightforward diction. The narratives, on the whole, are chatty and explanatory. The only thing that makes a book YA is that it is about teenagers and it is written in a very conventional, non-artsy, non-pretentious way. YA is not the place for the oblique or the cryptic. If it is in any way experimental in form, it is not YA.
…The YA category is an entirely new one, and seems to have more to do with readability than with age group or theme. The adult YA readers I know do actually consistently say that they are looking for an easy read, a fun read, an unchallenging read. And they are unashamed of seeking the light and the fun, even defiant about it – populism seems to many like a non-conformist position. (bold mine)
And this gravitation toward “an easy read, a fun read, an unchallenging read,” is, from my perspective, all that Graham was out to skewer. That, and why adults would want to remain there.
Smith concludes:
Sure, love what you love, of course. But please don’t try to argue that criticism of what you love can only be motivated by some sort of classist snobbery, or that any criticism that relies on aesthetic judgment is in some way elitist.
The defenders of YA are willfully, I think, ignoring some important points. It is not ridiculous to point out that the primary appeal of this literature lies in its artistic conservatism. That seems like a legitimate troubling point to me. Nor is it mean or small-minded to criticize art, for as long as there has been art, there has been criticism. (bold mine)
Translation: Some criticism is valid. So why not shut up and listen.
Then there’s Geoffrey Cubbage succinctly framing the response in his title: The YA Readers Doth Protest Too Much.
Once you feel the need to defend YA literature as not just entertainment but as a tool for intellectual challenge, you’re inherently accepting the premise that literature derives value from more than just the entertainment it provides. And that’s a test most YA books — and most books in general, for that matter — fail.
The vast majority of YA books are crap for making you think about the world in deep or significant ways. They just are.
Sure, there are exceptions. But we’re talking about books for teens, here. If serious emotional or intellectual complexity makes it in there, it’s because an editor wasn’t paying attention, not because that’s what publishers think teens want.
That one really moving YA book by an up-and-coming author that made you think in ways you never thought before (and that you’re going to mention in the comments) isn’t what pieces like Slate‘s are talking about, and you know it. They’re talking about the hundreds of other books on the YA shelf that are treacly, simplistic crap, and you can’t pretend those books aren’t there, in vast quantities.
We can argue about what is and is not “crap,” what percentage of the YA market is made up of such “crap,” and whether or not the percentage of “crap” to non-crap is different for the general market to the Young Adult market. But the undeniable point, from my perspective, is that “we’re talking about books for teens.” We’re not talking about books with “serious emotional or intellectual complexity.” Or as Smith put it, “the primary appeal of [YA] literature lies in its artistic conservatism.”
Artistic conservatism. Heh.
Like Graham, I believe “There’s room for pleasure, escapism, juicy plots, and satisfying endings on the shelves of the serious reader.” Not sure anyone in this debate is denying that. The point is, if readers aren’t reading up, they’re “missing something.”
I have a hunch as to why the Slate article provoked such a rabid response, why it was called “hot garbage,” “broadly offensive,” “condescending,” “inflammatory,” “stuck-up,” and “sexist.”
It’s because the author was onto something.
My pushback on the Slate Article is going to be the same pushback I give on your article.
This idea that some genres are better than others is one I’ve fought my whole life and will continue to fight.
Books are mirrors. They offer an insight into who we are at the time we read them.
Books are telescopes. They offer the reader a chance to focus on the details that are sometimes too small to see with the naked eye.
Books are tools.
The value of a book in the life of a person depends greatly on the confluence of the book and the reader’s place in life at the time they read it.
I’ve been more challenged and had more growth from Harry Potter than from _Brothers Karamazov_. Objectively speaking by evaluating each book’s effect on my self that would make Harry Potter the “better book.”
I’m a very widely-read, broadly reading person. As such I think I’m qualified to say that the current attitude of This Book being better because bigger words, serious cover, etc. is elitist nonsense.
The act of reading is what’s important. Just READ. Learn to use the tools. After that, find the books that matter on your journey.
Very well said. I agree especially with “The value of a book in the life of a person depends greatly on the confluence of the book and the reader’s place in life at the time they read it.”
One other note: the YA books I’ve read, by and large, are big on adventure. I haven’t read the angsty ones, so I can’t comment. But I think the appeal has to do with the sensation of wonder and excitement that permeates YA titles. They’re often inventive, sprawling adventures, and there’s a stronger fantasy/scifi element to YA. It’s a refreshing change from the piles of “adult” fiction that crosses my desk — I’m a librarian who processes new books. The bulk of mainstream fiction seems to be variations of “Ace Bicep in his action-packed suspense-filled globetrotting espionage adventure” or “Susie Sweet can’t decide if she should stay with her husband whom she doesn’t love after meeting her old beau while on vacation in Nantucket/foreign exotic locale/Maine/beach country of any kind.”
That is a good a pretty good assessment of some of the books. They’re fun. The angsty ones are often written more for girls than boys, but I did read one by Sara Dessen called the TRUTH ABOUT TOMORROW and I rather liked it. There’s a really cool one for boys (light on the angsty, but heavy on the drama) called Ghetto Cowboy by G. Nealy. It impressed me a lot and had a unique story.
What I find sad about this whole article is that there is a lot of literary criticism attempted at YA books and its often poorly done and generally unfair.
Interesting. I think the reason the Slate article provoked such a rabid response was because it was insulting to many intelligent people and written with the sole purpose of inspiring people to click on it because people crave controversy. (A number of bloggers use this style of writing to draw crowds to their blogs.) And when people who believe they live in a free society are shoved, they like to push back a bit.
I just wish we cold debate things like this and stand up for what we believe in with a little bit more grace than has been shown around blogosphere.
Just for the record… I read YA. I write YA. And I’m more than okay with it. But as always, Mike, thanks for making me think. We can agree to disagree.
CS Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia is written for children, but it challenges the loftiest intellect. We can’t pigeonhole books. A well written YA book can challenge a mind every bit as much as any “adult book.” So I would emphasize your point about quality at the beginning of the article. “Reading up” has more to do with well written than with genre.
Brent, Narnia came to my mind at once, also. Interestingly, Lewis got his share of criticism for writing it. And now adults are receiving it because we read it. Or maybe, because it is middle grade instead of YA, it’s OK. 😉
Becky
I remember watching a documentary on Lewis and they were talking with his publisher, or I think it was the son of his publisher. His response to all the Christian adults (and yes, it was Christians giving him grief) criticizing him was simply, “I didn’t write it for you.”
Well said, Brent. It rests with the quality of the writing.
Brent, you said, “A well written YA book can challenge a mind every bit as much as any ‘adult book.'”
I don’t think anyone is disputing that. The question is whether the bulk of what we consider YA today does / can.
Not everyone reading fiction got all A’s in English, went to college, or can read college-level material. Many readers struggled in school to get C’s in English. We all have different levels of reading comprehension. I doubt they are choosing reading material that is more suitable for those who got A’s.
The same can be said of most adult fiction. Including Christian fiction.
In fact, you could rewrite most of this article substituting “Christian” for “YA” and it would still work.
A few things:
1) I agree with Heather that the Slate article was nothing more than a troll article that worked exactly as it promised on the tin.
2) I agree with Katherine in her take on genre snobbery.
3) You say that the article isn’t talking about “good YA.” I would argue the only way that this argument holds water is if all adult fiction is “good adult” fiction. But frankly, much of what’s published for adults is complete tripe. So, if we’re going to make a value judgement on books, then “good YA” is reading up from “bad adult” fiction. The waters grow ever murkier when we start making these sorts of distinctions. I suspect that what many people would say has great artistic and literary merit, I might dismiss as self-indulgent literary ramblings that have no other purpose than to inflate the writer’s feelings of intelligence. Which of us would be right? Who decides?
Declaring what people should or should not read based on perceived “literary merit” is nothing other than a call for self-censorship.
Completely agree! 😀
Thanks Carla. I was feeling intellectually inferior that I read The Hunger Games but not Fifty Shades of Gray. (Sarcasm directed at the article, not you).
I guess the title is Fifty Shades of Grey.
The British spelling classes it up.
Carla, I would absolutely agree with you that good YA is “reading up” from bad adult fiction. But that begs the question as to whether people SHOULD be “reading up” at all. Which I think is the author’s contention, and one I agree with. Many dissenters appear to keep coming back to the “people should read whatever they want” argument. Is this the approach you take with your kids? I see no problem in saying some literature is better (or worse) than others, and better (or worse) for you. If that makes me a snob, so be it. Problem is I think, if pressed, many of those who object to that post would probably agree.
The irony in you making this argument is that you can replace YA with horror and push the timeframe back to the 80s and 90s and have the same problem. If anything, horror was worse because so many of the books used shock value and squicky sex or violence to hook the reader. Stephen King is really just Stephanie Meyer, and his books were closer to Twilight in how they popularized an otherwise quiet genre.
And horror was consumed by adults in the same way YA is now. You even had the same prevalence in movies; the same hot authors getting adapted, and the same problems with quality that YA movies now suffer. There’s always been popular genres that could be accused of this.
Bottom line: people read what they want. I read epic fantasy (Tolkein and Martin), horror/thriller/suspense (Dekker, King, Koontz), YA (Rowling, Collins). Some people will have enjoyed the same books I’ve read and others won’t. Just read the reviews for some of the most popular books and you’ll see that even the best writers will have people that just didn’t like their stuff.
I don’t see any need to prove my intellect or grown-upness by reading what I would consider boring, plodding books. Just not interested. I want to be taken on an adventure, lose myself, escape. I really don’t read to ponder the complexities of the human spirit. But if that’s the goal of other readers than that’s perfectly okay. I don’t enjoy being singled out for reading YA as an adult. If someone posted an article that said women that read trashy erotica (50 Shades) are unintelligent, the readers would respond with the same defensive posture the YA readers did 🙂
The best part of being an adult is being able to do whatever the hell you want. Basically, what you said, just less eloquently.
I would say the entire publishing industry is about artistic conservatism. That will always be a problem when art is commercialized. Because that applies to all publishing, it surely applies to YA, as well. I don’t know if I want to go into how immature our society is. I mean, I think it is. But I don’t know if that’s related to adults reading YA. I don’t read a lot of YA. My husband reads a lot of the same books my kids like, though. If I had to guess, I would say he reads them because they have adventure and follow classic story arcs and use classic story archetypes (obviously, he’s reading in the fan/sci fi/post-apoc and NOT high school teen dramas).
The vehement response to the Slate article is because it’s so ridiculously off-track. That’s fairly characteristic of Slate. But the reason for that is also a problem with Russell Smith’s article—namely, insisting that YA is necessarily written in a “very conventional, non-artsy, non-pretentious way”.
That is baloney.
I read a lot, as a reader, editor, writer. While some YA is simplistic, a solid percentage of it is actually more complex and experimental than fiction intended for adults. And it isn’t always about teen life or people who are actually teens. Sometimes it’s just incorporating someone’s struggle with “Who am I?”
Daughter of Smoke and Bone. Wake. Chime. I don’t even remember the name of the novel-length narrative poem I read recently, but it was YA, too—and it was unconventional, artistic…and a bit on the pretentious side, but I enjoyed it.
Now, beyond all that, you (and the others) are displaying an ignorance of how YA is a modern marketing invention, intended to help people who like certain types of writing to actually find what they’re looking for.
Case in point: Ender’s Game. It wasn’t shelved in the YA section until recently. When it came out, YA didn’t really exist—and if you read the original quartet, it was quite obviously not written with teens in mind.
Ender’s game was and is middle grade fiction. It won a Newbery.
Ender’s Game was first marketed as adult SF, and it won both the Hugo and Nebula award in 1985 and 1986. YA did exist as a category then, with authors like Paul Zindel, M.E. Kerr, and Robert Cormier writing then, but it tended to be realistic fiction.
Adult Sf then tended to blur the lines between adult and ya. I’m thinking of Anne McCaffrey’s Menolly books and some of the Dragonriders of Pern novels for example.
There’s no question that there are boatloads of YA crap out there. But there’s also boatloads of romance crap, and fantasy crap, and science fiction crap, and action/adventure crap, and mystery crap, and mainstream crap. And, oh God help us, “literary” crap. I’ve found that most people who criticize any particular category of books, do so because they think those books aren’t literary enough. But for me, most literary fiction seems highbrow, puffed-up, self-important, and boring. Long on description, lacking in plot. All characterization, no compelling characters.
Not that there’s no good literary fiction out there. I just think it’s easier to find good storytelling in genre fiction than in literary fiction. And what’s the point of reading a book if it doesn’t tell a good story? And it really doesn’t need to tell 10 good stories… one plot and maybe one sub-plot is enough. Books that try to do too much are as bad as books that don’t do enough.
I’d rather read a book that tells one story well, than one that tries to be overly impressive and ends up telling several stories badly. For me, that’s the appeal of good YA – the simplicity and honesty of the story telling. YA isn’t all I read, not by a longshot. But I’ll never be embarrassed by choosing a well-written book to read, no matter who the intended audience is.
Well, see, I agree with this: “choosing a well – written book to read, no matter who the intended audience is.” But that assumes that some books ARE better written than others. Which opens you, like me, up to the charge of elitism. Again, I don’t see the argument as “All YA is crap,” which some are portraying it as. It’s “Can fiction written for teens really be all that compelling (compelling enough that HALF its readers are NOT teens) for grown-ups?”
Mike, when the article author says adults should be embarrassed if they read YA, that’s another way of saying YA fiction isn’t worth an adult’s time. That’s a pretty blanket statement, don’t you think?
Becky
Exactly, Becky. The moment someone has the audacity to tell others they should feel embarrassed about a choice they’re consciously making AND enjoying is the point where everyone gets their hackles up. For many, everything else in the “article” falls on deaf ears.
I see your point, Mike, that we should constantly strive to be better people, and therefore a better society, but no one cares about that argument once they’ve been insulted for reading Hunger’s Game, Ender’s Game, or The Chronicles of Narnia or whatever stories they’ve deemed appropriate for their reading pleasure.
And another thought… Who’s to say that reading Twilight, Hunger Games, Divergent, etc. isn’t reading up for the people who do? Maybe many of the adults who read YA weren’t reading at all prior to finding the fast-paced, make-you-think, unusually plotted stories YA offered them.
Heather, reading Twilight, Hunger Games, etc. COULD BE “reading up” for some. The question, in my mind, is whether they get stuck at Twilight reading level the rest of their life.
Re: making people feel embarrassed for their reading choices. Here we disagree. I think some people SHOULD feel embarrassed to be reading some stuff, especially as they grow to adulthood. In her recent interview with NPR, the author of this article, Ruth Graham, was asked about the controversy surrounding her article. She answered:
“There have been a few strains to the criticism. One says, you know, actually the best YA is much richer and more sophisticated than I give them credit for. And I think that’s a totally valid argument to have, and that’s a discussion that we can have.
But then there’s this whole other strain of criticism that boils down to how dare you tell me what to read. And I guess I find that a little bit troubling. You know, the job of criticism is to make distinctions between good things and bad things and between complicated things and simplistic things. And, you know, in my – I’m making an argument that YA is more of a guilty pleasure.”
I totally agree that “the job of criticism is to make distinctions between good things and bad things and between complicated things and simplistic things.” Unless we are saying that art and literature are beyond critique, we should be able to say that reading “The Giver” is, in the long run, BETTER than reading “My Hawt Guys” series.
It’s funny how one isn’t allowed to say “there are good things and bad things” from the perspective of morality or Christianity. A lot of the conversations here give just that impression. But actually that is the crux of the discussion, so it isn’t funny after all. What is at issue is that we want to be viewed as intellectuals and artists with a fine aesthetic, which means we critique by those standards–those that give us an air of sophisticated worldliness.
It’s a bit arbitrary to single out YA though. Not like Louis L’Amour, the Ralph Compton books, Lillian Jackson Braun, Mary Higgins Clark, or especially V.C. Andrews are really that different. All of these are in adult genres. Argument could be made for just about any “low” culture book, including things like video game adapations or Harlequins.
I agree 100%; it’s just that in this discussion YA is being singled out as unsophisticated.
Becky, it’s pretty clear to me that the author is not condemning ALL Ya, as I haven’t. The assertion is whether or not the bulk of today’s YA lit is of such a quality as to really challenge / stretch a reader. It’s also interesting to me how so many commenters on this post, when referring to good children’s lit, are mentioning books 30 and 40 years old.
Mike, according to your quote, the author said, “Adults should feel embarrassed about reading literature written for children.” That does not leave room for good YA. If she said otherwise in the article, she certainly backtracked by that statement. It’s categorical.
Becky
THAT. The implication of her statement is that anyone who reads YA of any kind is developmentally stalled. That’s bull.
Sturgeon’s Revelation: Ninety percent of everything is crud.
Actually, this entire argument hinges on the idea that books should be something more than just entertainment. And there are a great many books that ARE more than mere entertainment, that cause people to think differently, or see the world with new eyes. But as a reader and writer of fiction, I would posit that the primary purpose of fiction is not to educate or enlighten, it’s to entertain. What entertains me might not entertain someone else, and I’m OK with that. I certainly don’t feel obligated to be entertained by huge segments of what is available to me, and I don’t expect anyone else to like what I like just because I like it. This is all just argument for the sake of argument, and I’m not at all sure I see the point in it.
A couple observations:
*I don’t see how your mom, reading an adult book, was “reading up.” Unless you’re saying, the old style of writing was better. Or is it that the ideas were bigger?
*Not only does this article call into question adults reading Narnia but also Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn or Anne of Green Gable or A Wrinkle in Time or Alice in Wonderland or . . . Really? Those aren’t worth reading or re-reading?
*I think too many experimenting adult writers, trying to produce “art,” have forgotten that story trumps all. If there’s not a good story, why would someone want to read fiction? YA writers are starting to push the envelop, so now middle grade is becoming the new hot thing. Makes me thing we are losing site of why people read fiction.
#Because a story has young protagonists or is written for a teen audience, a person should not assume the story structure is simplistic and the language facile. That’s one of those generalities, as is the article conclusion, that is based on opinion, not fact.
Becky
Becky, I saw my Mom as “reading up” because 1.) She didn’t read the classics, and 2.) She’d never read a book that long. Two criteria, I think, that would be good for a growing reader. Secondly, I’d like to point out again how commenters on this thread, when defending reading children’s / YA lit, keep referencing titles that are 30, 40, 50 years old! As you did: “Narnia… Tom Sawyer… Huck Finn… Anne of Green Gable… A Wrinkle in Time… Alice in Wonderland.” Why is this?
Mike, I don’t know if you realize it, but you have said your mom read up by tackling a book written more than “30, 40, 50 years” ago, but referencing YA or MG books that are 30, 40, 50 years old somehow is problematic. Why are old adult books an example of reading up but old children’s books are not allowed to be an example of books that challenge adults?
So you want titles of contemporary children’s books that any adult could read and not be embarrassed in doing so? Start with these:
* Destiny, Rewritten, A Diamond in the Desert, The Year the Swallows Came Earlyby Kathryn Fitzmaurice
* Spell Hunter, Wayfarer, Arrow, Swift, Ultraviolet, Quicksilver by R.J. Anderson
* The Wilderking Trilogy and The Charlatan’s Boy by Jonathan Rogers
* The Wingfeather Saga by Andrew Peterson
I’ll say again—readers read because they want good stories. I happen to believe that “experimentation” is killing (has killed?) adult literature. Enter “commercial” fiction—John Grisham and co—followed by YA fiction, started primarily by J. K. Rowling.
It’s unbelievable to me that someone could write an article about children’s literature not being suited for adults, considering the Harry Potter books. They meet your length test for a challenging book, and I happen to believe they are destined to be classics. They rise above a great number of adult books in their depth.
I am not in the least embarrassed about reading them or any of the others in the list above.
Becky
That’s two different arguments, Becky. For my Mom, reading up meant reading the classics, as it would mean for many readers today. On the other hand, you use classic children’s lit to defend contemporary YA. Two very different arguments. And again, the argument isn’t that there aren’t good YA novels out there (an argument which many seem to want to keep making), but whether or not those represents the bulk of contemporary YA lit.
Just to clarify one of the titles I included in my previous comment: Kathryn Fitzmaurice’s latest title is Destiny, Rewritten. Those are not two separate books, but the way I incorrectly punctuated the list of her titles, you wouldn’t know that.
Mike, I didn’t know the discussion was about contemporary YA until you dismissed YA classics as not pertinent. I assumed, since you used Dostoyevsky, we were talking about adult vs. YA, not adult vs. contemporary YA. My mistake.
You might not be lumping all YA into the “dumbing down” category, but I am a little surprised that you don’t seem to understand why a number of us commenting are reacting to the Slate article and its categorical statement that adults should be embarrassed to read children’s books.
Honestly, makes me wonder what books in the category Ms. Graham has read. And if she hasn’t been reading them (being, perhaps, too embarrassed to do so), how can she draw conclusions about the quality?
Becky
Mike, I think your definition of “reading up” reveals a significant flaw in the discussion. Before the conversation can make meaningful progress, those involved must agree upon the definition of “reading up” and “reading down.” In most cases, reading up or down is based upon the readers own education, exposure and reasons for reading. Anyone claiming that reading YA is largely “reading down” without defining the criteria likely deserves rebuffing for making such a blanket, unqualified statement.
Mike, you said:
“It doesn’t necessarily mean that YA is dumbed-down, dumbing us down, or that one can’t grow as a reader until they tackle Dostoyevsky. It also doesn’t mean there’s some magical box that all YA labeled fiction fits into. (For instance, I recently read two YA books that seemed worlds apart — Rick Yancey’s The Monstrumologist was excellent, while the first book in Amanda Hocking’s Trylle series was bloody awful.)”
I think this is where the problem lies: The blanket defense of YA as a whole, as though The Monstrumologist and AH’s Trylle series are comparable.
This quote is crap: “The YA category is an entirely new one, and seems to have more to do with readability than with age group or theme.”
No, no, no, no. The YA category is defined by a teen protagonist. PERIOD. It is told in their POV, as the story happens to them. It’s not defined by an angsty voice or a limited vocabulary or a 9th grade reading level. Is there plenty of YA out there that fits those parameters? Sure. But there’s plenty of adult fiction out there that fits them too.
I believe in YA as a legitimate category, one that has many amazing books. Books that appeal to adults not because they are light and fluffy, but because they are actually deeper and more real-life than many adult books out there. It’s not escapism, but a desire to read books with more rawness and less pretension. It’s not a lack of intelligence or intellectualism…
Insert best quote ever:
“You have to write the book that wants to be written. And if the book will be too difficult for grown-ups, then you write it for children.”
? Madeleine L’Engle
But I can relate to what you’re saying. I really can. As a YA author, trying to find bloggers who will read and review my YA books…bloggers who will read something other than teenage he’s-so-hawt stories….is actually rather hard. But don’t blame the category. And don’t lump all us YA readers in together.
BTW–I stand by Mike in the sense that there are books out there that make me want to gouge out my own eyes because I consider them literary dreck. I do think some fiction is “better” than others.
On the other hand, I totally defend a person’s right to read whatever they want. My writing is probably considered fluff by some readers and writers because it’s not literary. (And if my taste in books reflected my taste in movies, it’d be lots of mindless explosions and cheesy one-liners and I couldn’t care less what people think of me based on that :P.)
Your books fall under what I would call classic storytelling. I can’t imagine it being called fluff because it isn’t.
The kind of YA I would be ashamed to read would be of the “he’s so hawt” and “oh my gawd, I have to make the cheerleading team, lose my virginity to the hawt boy” kind. Of course, that kind of book insulted my intelligence even as a teenager, so it really does boggle my mind that people in their 20s or 30s would want to read it. It smacks of stunted growth. Or something.
Thanks, Jill!
I was just reading your other comment about the kind of YA books your husband reads, and I think you’re spot-on about why he reads them–because that’s exactly why I read YA and MG. Awesome stories, classic tales, fun adventure. I’ve discovered that my favorite fiction is fantasy in that sweet spot right at the edge of MG and YA. Loads of action and adventure, detailed story worlds, completely unleashed creativity, not so much romance.
Jill,
I actually agree with how you argued your point. However, I come from a background of reading adult books/literature at a very young age and right now, yes I do read YA, but I also read New Adult books and I am no longer in my twenties.
I doubt that this makes me or any other person “stunted” in our growth- or dumb. I am far from either of those adjectives. I think most people are reading YA more for fun and entertainment rather than for the art and aesthetics of literature. Although that is quite fine too.
In fact, I think everyone young, old, and older should read at least one classic just to add to their reading repertoire. Not to appear “smarter” but just be to more eclectic and well read.
Thanks!
Yeah, I don’t know that it smacks of stunted growth, either. People have all kinds of reasons for reading what they choose to read–nostalgia, a bit of fun that takes you out of the everyday adult world, etc.
Kat, you wrote: “I believe in YA as a legitimate category, one that has many amazing books. Books that appeal to adults not because they are light and fluffy, but because they are actually deeper and more real-life than many adult books out there. It’s not escapism, but a desire to read books with more rawness and less pretension. It’s not a lack of intelligence or intellectualism… ”
I’m not sure I can agree with you. Do we really know adults are reading YA because it’s “actually deeper and more real-life than many adult books”? How do you know it’s not “escapism”? How do you know it’s a “desire to read books with more rawness and less pretension”? These may be reasons YOU read YA. But they could be the same types of generalizations that YA defenders claim are being made about them. I think there’s legitimate reasons to consider whether some (many?) adults read YA because it’s 1.) Trendy and 2.) An easier read.
Yes, those are the reason *I* read YA. And some of the people I know. Does that mean it’s everyone’s reasons? No, of course not. I’m just saying, it cannot be generalized that all people who read YA are doing it for brainless reasons.
Of course lots of adults read YA because it’s trendy and light–well, they read the trendy and light YA because it’s trendy and light. These are not people reading The Monstrumologist, or Far, Far Away, or The Rithmatist, or The Goblin Wood, or Tyger Tyger….*These are people that would be reading trendy and light stuff in the adult market, of which there is plenty, if they chose an adult book.*
Again, it’s not a question of YA vs adult, it’s a question of deeper vs lighter reading. Don’t blame the category.
I kind of agree with Mike here. The problem is that books like The Monstrumologist probably would have been published by adult imprints back in the day. However, it seems that traditional fantasy and sf have declined among adults, while the YA audience became bigger. So adult fantasies will submit to YA imprints if they can.
You can see the difference between writers who write for both genres. Charles De Lint’s YA books are different from his adult novels, even though his YA books are pretty literate and mature for the category. Books by Dianna Wynne Jones or Garth Nix probably could have done well as adult novels, and Le Guin’s Earthsea books as YA. The definition between genres is very porous these days.
Ah, so here we go with the YA debate- what an excellent post, Mike!
First of all, YA books are written by– adults.
Second, plenty of readers are just now catching on to YA books because it has something they miss: nostalgia of being a teen, romance, angst, the heart of family…and many of these concepts can be found in most adult literature as well. Have you read Ellen Hopkins’ books?
Third, my own personal experience is that I grew up reading adult literature actually. I loved Kate Chopin, Dostoevsky, Shakespeare, the Bible, Octavia Butler…but one day I picked up a Christopher Pike book not realizing it was kind of YA/NA(New Adult) and I fell in love with it.
Sure there were no complexities or hard to pronounce words in it- or maybe some extremely profound meaning.
But it was deep in my opinion, it was entertaining for a while, and I made friends based off the books I’ve read.
My point is this: Maybe we are digging into this a bit too much. Everyone is different. Maybe a person really is “dumbing down”- we should ask why.
Me? I read up and down anyway: whatever is good, I’m all for it.
I never met The Wind in the Willows or the Bastable books till I was in my late twenties, and I do not think I have enjoyed them any the less on that account. I am almost inclined to set it up as a canon that a children’s story which is enjoyed only by children is a bad children’s story. The good ones last” (CS Lewis Of Other Worlds, p. 24).
And
it certainly is my opinion that a book worth reading only in childhood is not worth reading even then” (page 38).
Sally, you’re arguing / implying a point that I don’t believe anyone is making. 1.) That there’s no quality children’s lit and 2.) That adults can’t enjoy it.
could you state your point in one clear sentence for those us who have been dumbed down from years of reading simplistic YA books? 🙂
I think your point is that reading YA is reading down. I disagree with that categorical opinion. I agree with Lewis’s point. Books that are good for children–a reading up for children–are also good for adults.
I’m typing on my phone so you are all spared my usual long response. Just had to jump in and say our God is still working miracles today. I agree with Kathleen Coble on an issue. Yee haw
And I meant Katherine. Not Kathleen. Doh
stupid cell phone. …mumble, mumble, mumble harumph.
I stumbled upon this article from The Washington Post that somewhat makes your same argument, Mike, but also dispels the ideas in the Slate piece.
The author of TWP article sums up her thoughts with:
“To simply give up on romance novels or young adult literature as hopeless categories of fiction, fit only for the weak-minded or young and incapable of improvement, is to embrace a kind of snobbery and rigidity about what is worthy and what is not. A hopeless belief in love and a happy endings is not the only perspective that’s adolescent.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2014/06/06/no-you-do-not-have-to-be-ashamed-of-reading-young-adult-fiction/
But she thinks the Narnia series “tells us that growing up means the expulsion from paradise.” Yikes. What a dumb thing to say. I’m sorry. But really. How could anyone read that series and think that’s what it was about?
So did I read your article right? You agree with the people that would call YA or children’s books reading down?
I’m pressed for time, so my comment won’t be as extensive as I like. However, I want to partially recant my earlier comment, “… I was feeling intellectually inferior that I read The Hunger Games but not Fifty Shades of Gray (sic) …” (Can I “sic” my own quote?)
I read the Slate article, and it didn’t come across as snarky and condescending as I thought it would. And as someone who writes and reads mostly YA, partially agree with her. I see why she singled out YA: because of the trend of adults reading YA. However, there’s so much shlock out there, she could have as easily singled out popular fiction versus literary fiction.
The point is that simply we should be trying to stretch ourselves as readers, no matter what our preferred genre is. Graham could said the same thing less offensively, but she probably wouldn’t have gotten as much as a response.
Whenever you get into a discussion such as this, the charge of elitism is inescapable. A similar discussion took place on apologist Randal Rauser’s Web site, though the discussion was about superhero movies. You can read it here:
http://randalrauser.com/2014/05/is-it-elitist-to-lament-the-popularity-of-superhero-movies/
Oh, and btw, every time I comment on your blog, I sign up for email notifications for further comments, but I am not getting them :(. They’re not going to spam or anything. Have you changed any settings on your blog? Is anyone else having this issue here?
I’m also not getting responses via email
I’m having no trouble getting the emails.
Becky
On the topic of what the author the Slate article said about YA being written for 12-17 year olds, that’s not entirely true. It’s *marketed* to that age range, based almost purely upon the age of the protagonist. While there may be YA writers who do write for 12-17 year olds, I bet you’ll find that many write with adults in mind as well, even as their books are marketed to a younger audience.
Good point, Thea. I may not be remembering this correctly, but I think J. K. Rowling is one of those who said she didn’t intend to write for children—she was just writing. But clearly the books were marketed as children’s books. Then as they grew in popularity and controversy, more and more adults read them, and liked them. I could be wrong, but it seems to me the Harry Potter books sparked both the popularity of fantasy and YA books.
Becky
I’m actually a little surprised that you of all people talk about “reading up,” I’ve read your collection of short stories, Subterranea. Careful Mike, all authors live in glass houses.
Not sure what you mean, Tim. But I would never have pursued publishing if I was fearful that someone might say my writing totally sucks.
Someone mentioned Ender’s Game. Card wrote that for adults, in case you didn’t know that. It was completely co-opted by younger audiences. So Mike, is that reading up or down?
Wow, I stand corrected. All these years I’ve thought Ender’s Game was a Newbery book. I had it on my shelf with all my other Newbery books. Hmm…
Wonder where I got that idea?
Ender was repackaged for YA, and has been so for a long time. If you didn’t read it in the eighties, you’d be forgiven for not knowing.
I think the reason why is due to Redwall by Brian Jacques. It too was originally marketed as adult fantasy, but it positively exploded when it was repositioned for YA. I think that series showed the power of the YA market.
If you want Orson Scott Cards acceptance speech for a lifetime achievement you can get it from the American Library Association. Card says that he wrote Ender’s game to show how willing Adults are to sacrifice their children to ideologies. The book had been around a while, and then he started getting letters from kids in “gifted” programs. The amount of these letters kept growing, so much so, that Tor gave it a different cover and ISBN. The book grew in popularity.
I wrote my Master’s thesis defending children’s and YA literature, so the criticisms offered by you and your quotes are nothing new. I find it ironic that your blog failed to mention that not only are adults defending the literature (something that is fairly new by the way), but it’s always adults “dissing” the genre as well, usually by classifying it as second-rate genre fiction. None of this should surprise anyone because it’s adults that hold the power in our society. So the demographic stats cited should surprise no one.