Young Adult Fiction! discussion
The Classroom-(gen. discussion)
>
YA = classics?
date
newest »

message 1:
by
jacky
(last edited Aug 25, 2016 11:59AM)
(new)
Aug 15, 2007 05:08AM

reply
|
flag




And while there were no series like "The Babysitters Club" and so forth in the 70s, it just isn't true that "The YA novel as we know it has only been in existence for the past twenty years," nor is it true, as you suggest, that there was a dearth of good YA novels in the 70s into the mid 80s, so that adolescents were obliged to read books written for an adult market. If you read a YA book like, say, "The Lottery Rose," which was originally published in 1976, or "Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret," which was originally published in 1974 or so, I don't think you'll find them all that different from the YA published within the last five years or so.


Yes, that was what I was commenting on.
I personally find that annoying and inaccurate. There are a lot of amazing classics, but I don't agree with automatically calling them YA literature just because we expose students to them. For example, I am not an expert, but did Harper Lee write To Kill a Mockingbird for young adults? I want to say no, but I have never actually researched it. But I think we can safely say that most "classics" were not written for young adults because books were not marketed to that age group. So, I tend to get a little annoyed / disappointed when others jump to the classics when YA is being discussed. I'd rather hear about books where the author was writing deliberately for young adults. If I was interested in classics, I'd start a conversation on classics.
Does anyone else feel this way?

I don't know what the reason for it is, but I can speculate: we want kids to read "quality" literature, and we tend to think that anything written years ago that people are still interested in publishing must be "quality." Those books are usually free of things we might think of as inappropriate for children, so we tend to default to them as things we'd like children to read. A lot of YA books now are fraught with "danger" to some people -- there was that recent example of the Newberry book that was banned from many libraries because the author had the audacity to use the word "scrotum" -- so people sort of look for safe books to refer to, ones that don't have anything mildly objectionable in them.
Don't know if that's at all clear, but that's my take on it.


But, I won't say that classics aren't "dangerous." Huck Finn has racial tensions and lacks morals, some say. Ethan Frome has suicide. And, I even had a parent tell me that she didn't think the Scarlet Letter was appropriate for her freshmen because she didn't think the conversation on sex out of wedlock it started between her and her son was right at that time. (Those three are just ones I use in my classroom). I think many of the classics also have content that can be called objectionable, but since they are classics, we aren't as worried because someone has stamped them as "good" literature.



I agree, though, that classics are often assumed to be young adult--but I think it's often by people who just are not familiar with the evolution of young adult literature over the last, let's say, 30 years. The fact of the matter is that writers and publishers are just producing more (more fluff and more quality stuff). In my experience it's often adults whose sole experience of young adult literature growing up was Nancy Drew et. al. who assume that what's out there is just entertainment, and that for "real" substance one must go to the classics.


I haven't read any of the Gossip Girl books, but with a horrid review like that now I am dying to see what is so bad about them. :)

I read Sweet Valley High books when I was that age, and the raciest it ever got was making out. I know times have changed, but I can't imagine what YA lit is going to evolve into.

Oh, and as an aside, I didn't realize that my copy of Fahrenheit 451 was an edited version. How is that for irony!


when i read it again a couple of years ago ((at 22)) i picked up on the censorship aspect, but i still carried the television issue.
i guess i'm glad i read it at a younger age the first time, because it was a lot of fun to read it a second time and pick up on all the things i just didn't get the first time around.

when i read it again a couple of years ago ((at 22)) i picked up on the censorship aspect, but i still carried the television issue.
i guess i'm glad i read it at a younger age the first time, because it was a lot of fun to read it a second time and pick up on all the things i just didn't get the first time around.

The above definition would answer why books like To Kill a Mocking Bird are classified as YA.

Another issue I find is that there are "Young Adult" novels quite suitable for tweens who are good readers - where "Young Adult" seems more tied to reading difficulty than subject matter. Then there are definately "Young Adult" novels I wouldn't consider suitable for tweens, even if their reading level is good enough. So I'd also add reading level as something (often wrongfully) considered when classifying kids, young adult, adult.
I think there are many novels classified as "Young Adult" that publishers/booksellers just don't know what to do with - just as what often happens with Sci-Fi/Fantasy. I often find adult Fantasy shelved in the kids section - as though the workers in the bookstore were unaware of what the book was, and just guessed. (Am I the only one tempted to sometimes reshelve books I find miscatorgorized in chain bookstores? :D)
It's too bad, because I think many good books are missed because they're shelved as kids books, when really they either are not, or are interesting enough that adults can enjoy them too.

I wonder if any of this is trying to entice young adults into reading more - offer better variety with some of the older variety as well. Not a bad idea I suppose, but I do have to say that it really irks me when this happens at the video store and my kids assume that because it's in the cartoons it's okay for them to watch.... but that's another message board.....
