Fantasy Book Club discussion

I am a high school teacher who writes novels on the side. I've always wanted to try my hand at novel writing, so I took about a year and really worked on creating something special.

My goal in writing my novel, LARP: The Battle for Verona, was to create an entertaining YA novel that also taught a lesson. As a teacher, I see lots of kids being bullied, or, they are treated poorly by their peers because of their interests. LARP addresses both of those issues without being preachy.

So, my question to everyone is...because YA novels are geared toward teens, is it important for there to be a lesson in the novel, or should the novels just be entertaining?

As long as you avoid being preachy - this is really hard sometimes - life lessons are OK. 99% of YA will stop reading a book the moment it start preaching.

Many (probably the vast majority)of the readers will be reading for the story or enjoyment, so they actually miss the lesson/message that you are trying to convey. They also might see your point and understand the lesson, but forget about it, ignore it, or not act on it because they did not read the book in order to learn a lesson.

Most of them will judge the quality of the book and their enjoyment on the story, plot characters, etc., not the important life lesson.

I taught the Hunger Games a few years ago, and as I was teaching it, the thought occured to me that the novel really doesn't have a purpose, other than to entertain. Because of its popularity, I really think the author missed a chance to use her art for a bigger purpose.

I think part of the method in doing it is like teaching...the best teachers can teach a lesson without the kids knowing it. It's better to use examples, character behavior in this case, than to come out and state the important life lesson.

I dunno, I got some lessons from the hunger games.

Katniss came from district 12, which is on the poorer side of things, and ends up kicking ass. Some of the other districts have children who expressively train to survive the games, yet she still wins. This is a lesson in Where you come from doesn't determine the outcome, you can still overcome.

And on the flip side of that, there's Don't forget where you came from. Even after winning and becoming entitled Katniss doesn't become inflicted with Bieber-ism.

Family comes first: Katniss sacrifices herself to save her little sister

There are others I'm sure, I can't think of them now, but Katniss is just an all around badass of good values honestly :D

Jess...I don't know, seems like she's a bit selfish to me, in the way she treats Peeta & Gale.

Yes, a bit selfish, but I didn't see anything wrong with it. Katniss doesn't need to immediately begin mooning over a character because he expresses feelings towards her.

She does manipulate Peeta during the games, but it shows she's strong and clever enough to use anything to her advantage to survive. In the end this turns into a partnership of survival.

She's an imperfect teenage girl growing up in an extremely harsh environment, having her be a perfect role model in this situation would have been implausible and detracting to the story.

I don't think Katniss is selfish towards Peeta and Gale--I think she's conflicted. As far as her actions toward Peeta during the games, she's trying to save both of them. Remember the kiss? She was trying to get medicine for Peeta, not score points for herself.

I think the series has valuable lessons for all of us. Most importantly, it reminds us that even if we are lucky enough to avoid the harshest consequences of a corrupt society, we still pay an unspeakable cost. The world of the Hunger Games counts on people to care only about their own existence, to let go of any compassion for others. It does everything it can to desensitize them. People who accept atrocities inflicted upon others are easily controlled, not only because they fear to challenge the status quo, but also because they lack connection with their fellow man.

I think the series has particular value to YAs because it asks us who we want to be: Peeta, someone willing to sacrifice his life for someone he loves; Katniss, someone willing to do what it takes to save her sister (but still wanting to help others, if she can); or a contestant from Districts 1 & 2, someone who's embraced self-interest to the extent that they will happily take out anyone in their way.

Full disclosure, I am a bit of a Hunger Games hater. A few years ago when I taught it, I literally read it 4-5 times a day. When you read it that much, you really see the inconsistencies and lack of character development.

Wow, great comment! That's what I tried to do in my book, by taking the least likely heroes, and making them the ONLY people who could save the same society who ridiculed them. I don't have a blatant message of acceptance, or anti-bullying, but it teaches the idea through the story. It also asks the question of "who, or what, is most valuable in society and who, or what, gets to make that distinction?" Lead by example, I guess.

So it does sound like the story involves a life lesson.

Yes it does, but I guess my original question was addressing whether or not that type of content is necessary. Or a good idea.

I certainly don't believe it's "necessary". As an adult, I read books purely to be entertained. Why should teenagers be denied that privilege? Also, who gets to decide which life lessons "our" young people should be learning? It's been a long time since I was a teenager, but I can remember being specifically repulsed by anything that I thought was supposed to be telling me what kind of person I should be.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that many teens may turn to books as an escape from a world that is already feeding them life lessons that they are tired of hearing. I am convinced that the world of teenagers is completely different from the world of adults, and for us to presume to tell them what is important for their survival seems to ring rather hollow at times. At least it did for me. I can think back on the life lessons that older people attempted to teach me and, as it turned out, the world was a much different place by the time I had a chance for anything I learned as a teenager to impact my life. In many cases I feel fortunate that I was bull-headed enough NOT to listen to certain life lessons!

It probably depends on what the life lesson is that you're trying to impart, whether or not it will be accepted by teens, or even whether it should be.

I like to look at this from the opposite direction. How does one write any book without some sort of correction to protagonists flaw? Should they remain the same, never learning anything for 100,000 words.

Doesn't sound entertaining to me.

Rebecca...awesome, very well put! The unexamined life isn't worth living, right?

I don't think of corrections to a protagonist's flaw as being a "life lesson" though. That just seems like a character arc. I thought you meant like….hmmm….trying to think of a good example here….

How about "The Karate Kid"? (the 1984 original) I'm showing my age here, but this was one from my age group that was probably supposed to have been teaching me "life lessons". As a teenager at the time, I could smell that "life lessons" bit a mile away and thought it stunk to high heaven. Would not have touched it with a ten foot pole.

Of course, now, the adult me would probably think it was great (maybe). It seems like I've seen it at some point in the past and thought it was "okay". But that's just an example of what I'm talking about. Stuff that we, as adults, think is supposed to be so inspiring may not seem that way to teens, who are living with a completely different set of challenges than us, and for whom "wax on, wax off" may just not cut it!

Sorry, I'm being such a rebel. For some reason, this thread takes me back to the "good old days". I'm sure I have not a leg to stand on where concerns the values of the younger generation, as I do not have any children and wouldn't know what to do with them if I did! For all I know, the kids today are begging for guidance from old people :)

If anything stands out from me from this thread that would be an appropriate life lesson it would be your last statement: "The unexamined life isn't worth living." That's a life lesson I could get behind 100%.

@Denise:

I don't think of corrections to a protagonist's flaw as being a "life lesson" though. That just seems like a character arc. I thought you meant like….hmmm….trying to think of a good example here….

I disagree. The inclusion of material speaks for itself. If every single religion in your book is a sham and a sense of representativeness is also present in the book, saying that no message about religion is being communicated is silly. If the protagonist is violent and rapey but is never corrected and always gets his way and is never challenged in the narrative, then a message about the efficacy of those traits is also being communicated.

A moral does not need to be stated explicitly for it to exist.


Stuff that we, as adults, think is supposed to be so inspiring may not seem that way to teens, who are living with a completely different set of challenges than us

Life lessons were never bothersome to me or any of the teens I knew/know. The problem is when a book has nothing interesting or beautiful or challenging about it besides the life lesson.

It's fun reading books purely for entertainment purposes but I don't think it hurts to have some life lessons thrown in too. I find that when I write a story, whether its about; an unlikely heroine struggling with where her loyalties lie or about a bloodthirsty vampire seeking redemption, I always try to incorporate some underlying message.

I like having readers believe that on the surface, a story appears a certain way, but as you continue reading, it may suggest that there's something much deeper and complex going on. I don't know... I guess I just like to make people really think about what they're reading.

I feel that as long as you keep it subtle and its not too overwhelming and in your face, there's no harm in integrating some sort of life lesson into your story. :)

Thanks Denise...I think that every book should have that as a theme, at least in terms of character development. If the main characters are static, then the book is a bore, right?

Baelor...you're right. The lesson is often found in the last chapters, when the character arch is complete.

Justin wrote: "I think that every book should have that as a theme, at least in terms of character development. If the main characters are static, then the book is a bore, right?"

Exactly my point. If the book has no theme, what is it about? "Debbie is sitting in her room ... something happens ... somebody fixes it ... Debbie returns to her room."
Yawn.

The theme allows you to say something. It doesn't have to be profound, and it shouldn't be preachy. I don't see how that would turn anyone off, but everyone is different. The fact that my novel has an underlying theme will turn some off, I guess, but it has a life lesson in that the protagonist learned to stand up for herself, something every young person must do at some point. I'm not going to stop writing in this way.

I think every novel has a "message" of some kind- at least the good books. I think, though, that that message should be less about "teaching" and more about "expressing". I don't read to be lectured. But neither do I want to read something that has little to no point or purpose. Otherwise its not a story, it is a sequence of events. It is important to ask yourself "Why am I writing this? Why does this deserve to be read?" It doesn't necessarily have to be about teaching a life lesson, but there should be some kind of message or point that the author (you) wants to get across. Otherwise why would I waste my time reading it?

Heather...yep. As a writer I have learned to trust myself. That took a while for it to happen, but once I did, my writing dramatically improved.

I'm turned off by books with heavy handed messages and will stop reading them. But I do love books with subtle messages that make me think. But don't tell me 'how' to think. If that makes sense. I'm a fan of 'show' and not 'tell'. Don't tell the reader why bullying is wrong. Show the reader.

As for books having meaning vs not having meaning. I hate those kinds of arguments. I've had to defend my reading choices to those who think reading fantasy is a 'waste of time'. I cannot believe that reading any book is a waste of time. Reading teaches us to look at the world around us in a different way and to understand others than ourselves. Every book has something to teach the reader. In my opinion anyway.

I tried to keep it subtle in my book. There's no preaching, just a fine example of accepting people who are different.

The Hunger Games had plenty of messages..
The general theme was the devastation caused by war, (nobody wins, even when they DO win.) and about fighting for what you believe in-- and
fighting for your loved ones freedom/safety, no matter the risk to your own life!

I believe that it was a good thing that Katniss could be selfish, sometimes people need to be ruthless, to do what needs to be done in such an intense and life threatening situations, as hers was. Besides, she was very unselfish when it mattered most (eg. Defending and feeding her family/Peeta etc..)
It also makes her seem more humanly flawed and thus more relatable to a young adult fan base.
It's also the mark of a good book if there didn't seem to be an overt message, subtlety is key, as others have mentioned already. Readers want to be "shown" not "told."
You can lead the metaphorical horse to water, but then the horse decides if it wants to take a drink:))

People need to connect and sympathise with a protagonist; that is, if a writer wishes for there to be any concern regarding their potential fate.
They need to seem relatable.
If you make them too goody-goody and flawless then no teenager (nor any reader for that matter) will to be interested enough to read their story.

It seems pretty strange to me to think one can write without advocating or expressing a certain worldview. Life itself is the lesson, if we pay attention to the experience of living and are humble enough to learn from it.

Here's the problem: we have a tendency only to listen to the parts that interest us or that we're comfortable with. We tend to ignore the parts that make us uncomfortable...like those niggling doubts and pangs of guilt we feel deep down when we know we've done or are doing something we shouldn't or the discomfort of associating with people who remind us of human weakness, frailty, and mortality. Either that or we're fascinated by the ugly and depraved, which is another issue altogether.

In my experience, such as it is, people are fine with storytellers getting up on a soapbox, unless the story makes them uncomfortable about their own priorities and life choices. Now, if a storyteller has an agenda and is so set on expressing a certain point of view or promoting a certain point of view that it warps their perspective and they become fundamentally dishonest with themselves or refuse to take a broader and more accurate view of the issue or can't truly empathize with people who believe just as fervently the opposite, that's a big problem. But I think some authors who've been pretty "preachy" in their own way at times--like Bradbury and Orwell and Swift and Dickens and others through the ages--have also done hugely important work in revealing the uglier sides of society to us in a constructive way. In that sense, I think it's sometimes important for storytellers to say what others won't and, yes, make a dartboard of human pride and pretension so that we can see ourselves more truly and justly.

I think too many stories today have thematic content, but it's either dumbed down and so simple or inapplicable to our lives it's virtually meaningless (different is good, it's bad to kill, rape, bully, etc.) or it's a totally directionless, formless, useless goo. Don't the best authors discuss things on a much more sophisticated and interesting level? If morality were really as simple and cookie cutter as popular media would like it to be, would we have the serious problems we do in our world? Authors have a responsibility to dig deeper than that, to offer more than popular platitudes. The real question is whether the author is authentic and drawing from life or just the author's own prejudices and agenda.

The other trend I see in today's writing is a kind of nihilistic pseudo-realism. (I call it pseudo-realism because stories along these lines, in my experience, are so dark and gritty that they don't account for the good things in life. Good luck or fortune that comes from nowhere. The genuine goodness in many people. The many beautiful things about life and people. The checks and balances inherent in nature, society, etc.) Read this stuff too much and you'll wonder why anyone would even bother living if life is as bleak and cruel and people so depraved as these authors paint it. I think the best stories never forget hope; they fan it. They inspire us to try to be better and not to give up when we fall short.

So should stories include a lesson? I think they will naturally, on multiple levels, if the author really tries to get at the truth. And to the extent the author really tries to dig into and discover truth, the richer the thematic material and the story probably will be. But I think the best stories are constructive and mark a path forward. They're not to stroke anyone's ego, but to help us experience things in a way that will inform our perspective and enrich our lives and relationships.

If anyone here is interested, I'll send you a free PDF of the novel in return for reviews here on Goodreads and amazon. Just send me a private message with your email address and I will send it to you.
Or you can buy a copy for the super low price of 99 cents on amazon and bn.com. Just sayin'. :)

So true Stephenie:)