Disabilities in YA 2016 discussion
THE BIG DISCUSSION!!!
date
newest »


Okay, I guess that was it. It's easier for me to answer some specific questions while reviewing so if you have any questions about this book, I'd love to answer/discuss!
I also have read Everything Everything, and I agree with you, it's difficult to place.
In some ways I feel it's a negative representation (MAJOR spoiler): (view spoiler) but at the same time it could be seen as positive (view spoiler) .
Everything Everything is definitely worth a read, whether or not it's positive it is a good book.
It's also possible for a bad book to have positive representation, I just finished reading Not If I See You First which is about a blind girl, and I really didn't enjoy it at all, but the portrayal of the blindness was not a problem, it was actually probably the best written part. Unfortunately I found the rest of the book quite juvenile and boring.
Did anyone else read Everything Everything?
In some ways I feel it's a negative representation (MAJOR spoiler): (view spoiler) but at the same time it could be seen as positive (view spoiler) .
Everything Everything is definitely worth a read, whether or not it's positive it is a good book.
It's also possible for a bad book to have positive representation, I just finished reading Not If I See You First which is about a blind girl, and I really didn't enjoy it at all, but the portrayal of the blindness was not a problem, it was actually probably the best written part. Unfortunately I found the rest of the book quite juvenile and boring.
Did anyone else read Everything Everything?

I've seen blog comments from Asian, and bi-racial Asian/white people who do like Everything Everything for its representation of a bi-racial Asian/white character. So there is that.
Discussing everything everything is particularly tough because the whole reason I would hesitate to call it positive is a massive spoiler. I wouldn't go as far as calling it positive, but I did enjoy it. I think it does bring up some good discussion points as well.
When I first read it I was struck by similarity to Maddie (even though we have very different conditions, mine is nowhere near as serious). I felt the way Nicola Yoon described Maddie as a mostly positive person, but also someone who has good days and bad days with her disability, was very realistic. There was one bit in the book in particular that hit very close to home where Maddie has a day when she re-realises that this is the rest of her life, she will never get better. I had many of these moments myself, and it doesn't get easier when your body is your own enemy.
I would still recommend Everything Everything to people, if only for the discussion it brings. It's also pretty quick to read, and was well written.
When I first read it I was struck by similarity to Maddie (even though we have very different conditions, mine is nowhere near as serious). I felt the way Nicola Yoon described Maddie as a mostly positive person, but also someone who has good days and bad days with her disability, was very realistic. There was one bit in the book in particular that hit very close to home where Maddie has a day when she re-realises that this is the rest of her life, she will never get better. I had many of these moments myself, and it doesn't get easier when your body is your own enemy.
I would still recommend Everything Everything to people, if only for the discussion it brings. It's also pretty quick to read, and was well written.
I just read the review on disabled kidlit and I found it very interesting, and it was pretty much what I expected to be said. I very much imagine if you had a condition similar to Maddie's the ending would be disheartening. Do we think the end outweighs the rest of the book?
I think I will go with Jennifer, the author of the review, on this one- but I'm very torn because I feel Yoon does capture the nature of disability well, and in a positive light. I don't believe she intended for it to be ableist, but I suppose authors never do. Everything Everything might be one of the most confusing books in YA to place for disability representation (which I had predicted when I put it on the reading list, I thought it might be divisive!)
Any more thoughts? Did anyone else read anything good/bad?
I think I will go with Jennifer, the author of the review, on this one- but I'm very torn because I feel Yoon does capture the nature of disability well, and in a positive light. I don't believe she intended for it to be ableist, but I suppose authors never do. Everything Everything might be one of the most confusing books in YA to place for disability representation (which I had predicted when I put it on the reading list, I thought it might be divisive!)
Any more thoughts? Did anyone else read anything good/bad?

From the interview it does seem as though the choice to make Maddie have SCID was a plot devise more then a want for diversity in books, which is sad because she does mention diversity and leave out disability (maybe not purposely, but still).

I haven't read Everything, Everything for the same reason. Also, a friend spoiled me on the big twist, and I'm glad she did, because it seems to me like a huge problem with a book that could otherwise offer some good representation. But again, I haven't read the book, so I won't get caught up in trash-talking it!

As far as the other discussion points, I'd like to see more fantasy with characters who have disabilities. Other genre stuff, too - horror, romance, etc. (Particularly horror where the characters with disabilities don't die or turn out to be the villain!)

I ended up reading Otherbound, and I was happy because it is fantasy and sci-fi. And as far as I remember, this might be the first time I've read one with the main protags being disabled.
There really needs to be more in fantasy

Most teenagers struggle with insecurity and other issues and it would be interesting to know, whether teenagers with disabilities think that their experience is different from the norm. Do they feel like their disabilities make their teenage years especially hard? Do they feel like their disabilities define them or are their disabilities not such a big deal after all? Maybe they consider their disabilities just one of the many problems they struggle with.

I think it's great how The Adoration of Jenna Fox represents a variety of disabilities. However, I feel like the characters are not always very realistic. I feel like Jenna should be a little more angry and confused than what she is in the book. Well, she is angry and confused, but considering she's a 17-year-old girl who doesn't remember almost anything about her past, she could be angrier. I think she could rebel against her parents a bit more. (view spoiler) I also wonder why Jenna never asks her parents about her past. She never asks them what her favorite food was or who her friends were...or anything similar really. Asking the parents would be the easiest way for Jenna to learn who she used to be, so it's a little weird she doesn't do it. She obviously wants to know about her past, but all she does is watch home videos and hope her memories will return.
Quite a lot of authors now employ sensitivity readers who have the same/nearly the same disability as the character, to make sure it is accurate and not offensive. Maybe more authors should start doing this. Though if Yoon had done that for everything everything maybe the story wouldn't have gone the way she had planned, and wanted to stick with that.
I recently went to a talk with Sarah Crossan, author of One about conjoined twins. She said she originally wanted to write a book about one twin deciding she no longer wanted to be connected to her sister after falling in love, but then did some research and found out that conjoined twins hardly ever feel that way, they like the connection and live normal lives regardless. After that her story changed dramatically (though I don't know how dramatically, because I haven't yet read One).
I think this illustrates how authors must be willing to change the book when they research disability and find out things they didn't know, they can't make the disability be what they want it to be to work for their story.
Disability should be a defining characteristic but not a plot point.
This was to no one in particular, I'm just rambling on....
I recently went to a talk with Sarah Crossan, author of One about conjoined twins. She said she originally wanted to write a book about one twin deciding she no longer wanted to be connected to her sister after falling in love, but then did some research and found out that conjoined twins hardly ever feel that way, they like the connection and live normal lives regardless. After that her story changed dramatically (though I don't know how dramatically, because I haven't yet read One).
I think this illustrates how authors must be willing to change the book when they research disability and find out things they didn't know, they can't make the disability be what they want it to be to work for their story.
Disability should be a defining characteristic but not a plot point.
This was to no one in particular, I'm just rambling on....
Other talking points;
-What do we think about the way popular media (magazines, tv, movies) are portraying disabilities?
-If you could talk to authors who want to write realistic disabled characters, what advise would you give them?
-Does a book have to be happy to be 'positive representation' for disabled people, or does it only have to be realistic?
-What would you like to see more/less of in disabled YA fiction?
Any discussion, opinions and thoughts are fine, but no offensive language is allowed AT ALL!
If you want to post something with a spoiler then please use the goodreads coding for spoilers, look at the (some html is ok) page on desktop.
i.e. Harry Potter Spoiler! (view spoiler)[wow dumbledore was a bit of a douche canoe sometimes, right? (hide spoiler)]
and thats it! Have fun! I really hope we can discuss this together!