ROBUST discussion

Is it just me being over-sensitive (since it just so happened that one of the books I launched on the Kindle is my only book with young adult crossover) or is there in the ebook field an inordinate number of adults reading young adult books?

When did the classification come about? Previously whenever I have browsed in store, YA would be under adult fiction. Now there are shelves and shelves of strictly YA books apart from the children and adult book sections.

A few years ago, when the movie came out, we read the Philip Pullman series His Dark Materials, and I couldn't believe the material that was being offered up, apparently to children. I thought they were books for adults with children as characters. (I still don't see why teenagers -- who're sensitive about the gradations -- should want to read about younger children as characters.) But that was just a gut reaction; I don't know anything about YA books and their conventions. The only reason I wrote even one book with a YA crossover element is that a young editor with an interest made a point of meeting me and guiding my hand.

I don't know when YA became a classification, but I was publishing YA novels in the '80s and there was a store section for them.

A few years ago, before ebooks became so popular, Publishers Weekly ran an article about YA books crossing over to the adult section in bookstores, often hitting the shelves in both areas. The article was talking about the growing number of adults reaching for YA, and also the growing size of the advances for YA books.

So adults reading YA isn't new, and isn't related to an infantile interest in electronic gadgets. How disappointing. I'm big on electronic gadgets, I liked the Pullmans, and I was looking forward to my second childhood reading the Famous Seven and the Secret Five, not to mention the Rev Aubrey's Little Engine Who Could.

Ah that would be Famous Five and Secret Seven....I had them all and would have kept them but my father chucked them out when I left home.

YA seems to be all the paranormal stuff these days, including sci-fi fantasy books.

I've been reading this genre for 30 years now. Most of the stuff I read can be found only on the YA shelf which I find highly amusing as every time I go in on a weekend to one particular bookstore, I can be found crawling on my knees looking at the titles on the bottom shelf along with a contingent of 16yo kids. I've been asked if I am buying for my teenager. The looks of hilarity I get when I say no, for myself are hysterical.

I wasn't allowed to read Enid Blyton. My mother didn't think it 'appropriate'.

I started reading adult books when I was 11. The junior library at school was considered too junior for my reading age, so I was given permission to get books from the senior library - but I had to hide most of them from my mother, who definitely wouldn't have thought them 'appropriate' (though most of the inappropriateness went straight over my head)! Now I'm catching up on my childhood and reading (and writing) YA. I like the simplicity and the pace of it.

Katie, I was pretty much the same except I started reading adult content around 8 or 9, first time I sneaked LOTR out of the library. The librarian was super cool though, she insisted that for every book out of the adult section I had to take a book out of the children's section too. And she allowed me to have 12 cards at a time which is unheard of these days.

And why would your mother think Enid Blyton wasn't appropriate? I'm shocked....:)

And why would your mother think Enid Blyton wasn't appropriate? I'm shocked....:)

Such naughty, rude and disrespectful characters!

About thirty years ago, the politically correct tried to get Enid Blyton excluded from British schools as elitist and racist. I don't imagine they had much joy.

When I first became a member of GR I had no idea what a young adult book was. The only reason that 'I think' a book would be considered a young adult book is because of the age of the characters. I am a young adult, but I enjoy reading everything! I even still read goosebumps often. I have no clue why all of a sudden young adult books have become so popular.

I should think Young Adult Literature is books that appeal to the 13-19 year olds.

Not pretending that defines much....

When I was publishing YA novels, the general "rule" was to create a main character that's about two years older than the target audience. The age of the target audience began at 11. I sought somewhat older readers, thus my main characters were sixteen or seventeen.

Patricia Sierra wrote: "When I was publishing YA novels, the general "rule" was to create a main character that's about two years older than the target audience. The age of the target audience began at 11. I sought somewh..."

I thought and am doing the same thing with the first book that I am trying to write. But I am mainly trying to inspire younger readers to start reading. Hopefully it works :) My book is targeted at 11 to 14 year olds and the ages of my characters are about 19. So, I am hoping that it is not too far fetched (age wise) for the younger readers. I don't think I am ready enough to entertain the adult readers of the world yet.

Kerra, my guess is that 19 is a bit too old for your target audience.

Ok :) thanks! I will try to tone it to a little bit more of an older crowd then.

Maybe that's doing things backwards. It might be best to write the book you want to write, then decide who your market is.

Yeah, I think that would probably be a better idea too. Seeing how that it probably won't be publish for another year or so :) Thanks for the advice! Very much appriciated!

I don't remember a YA section in bookstores or libraries when I was a young teen. I do remember trying to get my hands on adult books whenever I could, but I loved to read. I think today's YA books are especially good for young teens who might not enjoy reading in school. These books expose them to characters roughly their age and show them reading can be fun. This reminds me of books like Hatchet by Gary Paulsen, a survival story about a young boy. I imagine this book and others like it have helped many kids become avid readers.
It is common these days to talk about how many distractions there are to keep kids away from books, but I think it is also true they have many more choices in books.

The YA section in my day? Science Fiction. lol

Claudine: I can relate. I was looking for Beautiful Creatures at the library in the YA room which is designed with low shelves, interestingly shaped benches and throw rugs. Needing to get closer to the lower shelves to find the book (darn bifocals) I almost sat/fell on the floor when encountering a serpentine bench!
Loved the book by the way...
Claudine wrote: "I can be found crawling on my knees looking at the titles on the bottom shelf along with a contingent of 16yo kids."

Andre Jute wrote: "...is there in the ebook field an inordinate..."

I think that 'Twilight' and 'Harry Potter' introduced a lot of adults to a snappier, faster-paced style of writing.

I know that a lot of the modern fantasy books are GLACIAL in terms of pacing. 'Wheel of Time' is a good example. 12 books and no where near finished! A cast of characters that requires a score card to follow.

Plus women don't have the time to read these huge tomes - so they have to find short works they can squeeze into crazy-busy days.

Personally - I think that 'coming of age' stories are boring. I had a wonderful 'wasted' youth that gave me a very different perspective on life. I've gotten ageist - a 20 year old writer has nothing to teach me about life. I could tell them stories that would curl their hair. LOL

Makes me a cynical old broad - but I'm happy.

As to why so many adults are reading YA today, I can only speak for myself. Much of it is well-written like Pullman, it is fast-paced, the stories are fun and, most important for me, it doesn't get bogged down with romance or long sex scenes which have little or nothing to do with the story. That is not to say it is the only thing I read - I love the classics like Austen and Thomas Mann - but, when I'm just looking for something fun and simple on a quiet afternoon, YA usually fits the bill. The truth is I find most so-called modern adult fiction (with the exception of fantasy) poorly written, the stories ludicrous or pretentious, and, frankly, just plain boring.

K.A. wrote: "Andre Jute wrote: "...is there in the ebook field an inordinate..."

I think that 'Twilight' and 'Harry Potter' introduced a lot of adults to a snappier, faster-paced style of writing.

I know..."

While I agree that it's the writing style of the YA books (not necessarily snappier, fast paced) that is the draw for adult readership I do not see that the final volumes of Meyer's Twilight and Rowling's Potter series, numbering in pages over 700, as being short works; or for that matter the Eragon books of Christopher Paolini.

If the writing is excellent most of the women I know will make the time. A perfect example is the books of Diana Gabaldon. I am frequently loaning my copies to woman working full time as teachers with families. We women are fantastic multi-taskers learning to read doing almost anything or existing on less sleep if the book is addictively just plain good.

As to coming of age stories being boring I will leave that for another time. My reply is being brewed like a fine cup of tea or as my Dad's home-made beer used to do.

I am also reminded of a comment I heard more than 30 years ago during a favorite female minister's sermon---When you're through learning you're through.

Margie - I agree that 'when you're through learning, you're through.'

I'm at a point in my life when I can learn more from my peers than from tweens fresh out of college...unless we are talking about IT and other technology where I pick their minds freely and without hesitation.

I will not go to a 16 year old girl to learn about love for instance. (Think Bella in 'Twilight' - the child is clueless.) A woman whose been married for 40 years - she could teach me a thing or two.

It is all perspective after all. Not the age, but the mileage.

I know very little about publishing for instance - but I would rather learn from Dean Wesley Smith than from Nathan Blandsford.

K.A. wrote: "Margie - I agree that 'when you're through learning, you're through.'

I'm at a point in my life when I can learn more from my peers than from tweens fresh out of college...unless we are talking..."

I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree.

I can most certainly remember being sixteen and loving someone; it was great. I would only want a woman who has been married for 40 years to teach me something if she still loved her husband and he her with the same amount of love as when they were sixteen. I would not expect the love to be the same kind as time and shared experiences would alter it but that depth of feeling and passion would still need to be there.

I will be 60 in a few weeks and while "mileage" (experience being the best teacher and all) is a part I still know in my mind and heart that all my students ages 4 to 14 can teach me if I am open. Obviously I "know" more than they do just because I have been alive longer, been exposed to more of life's twists and turns, world events, education, etc. but it's the little things which can turn into an "aha" moment. To me that is where perspective comes into play; they see the world through different eyes. I want to "see" as many different ways as I can for as long as I can.

Nicely put Margie! This seems to say that the age (or the era) of the person we are studying/reading about/hearing from is really not important, it is either the message they bring, or the message we take from the encounter.

Margie wrote: "I want to "see" as many different ways as I can for as long as I can. "

My understanding is that the characters in the book have to be young adults (loosely defined at 13-22) for a book to be a YA work. Otherwise pretty much anything is up for grabs.

I don't read a lot of it myself. I started with adult books at 12ish and never went back. Though Harry Potter and the Golden Compass did make it to my shelves, that's because I'm an avid fantasy reader, and YA or not, those are major fantasy works of the last two decades.

So, I'm a bit stumped on the appeal of the YA book for the adult reader.

But I wonder if part of the appeal of writing them is that you don't have to pack as much work into building a pre-set character. Take Harry Potter, because he's eleven at the start of the books, JKR didn't need to do a whole lot with him. She could start him as an almost blank canvas and then spend the rest of the series filling that canvas in.

If she had picked Dumbledore for her main character, that wouldn't have worked. He'd need a fully worked out and realized back story, or he wouldn't have felt like a real person.

One of my friends is a YA writer, and she really enjoys getting to relive (vicariously) that first kiss, and the first love, and the becoming a person thing. So I suppose that too may be part of the appeal of being a YA writer.

Or maybe there's the justice of getting to go back and do it again. Lots of YA stars geeks, and then those geeks get magical powers, making them suddenly better/stronger/more interesting than the popular kids. I could see how reliving that vicariously would be fun, too.

Keryl: a couple of thoughts on your thoughts. I also don't read a ton of YA now and started adult books at a very young age, but good writing, and a well crafted story, YA or not grabs me. I think that is the appeal of some YA books to me: like Suzanne Collins's Hunger Games trilogy (I am up to book three) and the Pullman books, the Eragon series or Harry Potter books. I won't try to force that logic on my love of the Twilight books, but I do really like them too. I am a bigger fan of Stephenie Meyer's The Host, her adult offering though.
Keryl wrote: "don't read a lot of it myself. I started with adult books at 12ish and never went back. Though Harry Potter and the Golden Compass did make it to my shelves, that's because I'm an avid fantasy reader, and YA or not, those are major fantasy works of the last two decades."

K.A., tweens aren't young people "fresh out of college." They're nearing their teen years, but they're not quite there. They're "between" (or "tween") the age when they're considered little kids and when they're considered teenagers. Generally speaking, tweens fall into the 9-12 age group.

Hmmm - we have a dialect issue.

My understanding is 'tweens' are young people in their twenties.

The age group you refer to are pre-teens.

I'm glad we have compared definitions. I will adopt yours for the sake of clarity.

I don't remember ever distinguishing between books for teenagers as we were then and books for adults. At some point, I just slid over from reading Billy Bunter to reading from the adult shelves. I might at one stage have distinguished the trashier scifi as for the less voracious readers among the teenagers whereas the good scifi stood higher up on the shelf. I don't remember any fantasy below the Tolkien quality level; the stunning expansion of fantasy happened when I was already an adult.

I remember that J F Cooper and Jack London stood on the lower shelves with Rider Haggard and R L Stevenson, so there was clearly a gradation in the librarian's mind.

Patricia Sierra wrote: "...tweens... [are] "between" (or "tween") the age when they're considered little kids and when they're considered teenagers. Generally speaking, tweens fall into the 9-12 age "

That's my understanding of the term's definition as well.

Where did this comment go? K.A. wrote: "'BUT' a four year old child - barely more than a toddler - has something to teach you about life?"

Absolutely. My son, who is not yet four, teaches me plenty about life. That's one of the greatest gifts of parenthood, if we are open to receiving it. I can, among many other things, learn about myself and my purpose through my child. This is true even if I have already lived a varied, challenging, rewarding, educational and enlightened life.

I deleted it because I didn't want to get into an argument.

Ah, okay. I thought maybe the interweb gremlins ate it.

K.A. wrote: "Andre Jute wrote: "...is there in the ebook field an inordinate..."

I think that 'Twilight' and 'Harry Potter' introduced a lot of adults to a snappier, faster-paced style of writing.

I know..."

I agree completely. 20 yos can only make me laugh or bore me---oh yea, sometimes make me nauseous.

Glad I'm not the only cynical old broad!

Young girls are the worst - constant histronics - makes my stomach turn. Self-centered, catty, greedy and unable to accept people for who and what they are.

I worked in a rehab - everyone hated it when the population was mostly 20-something females. The constant bickering was so disruptive.

I can't help but mention that we all were once 20-somethings, probably just as annoying to our 'elders' as they are to us now. We could help them to be less self-centred and to appreciate and accept people for who and what they are by accepting and appreciating who and what (and where) these young girls are in their own lives.

But isn't that the point of the slew of YA books out now? The hero is always flawed, his soul mate too. Together they find acceptance and love and the world is still rosy and full of sunshine. All about how being different and being accepted for what and who you are.

(I gotta admit it makes me want to puke!)

Don't hurl that nine foot duke over my blue suede shoes!

Okay, that's my giggle for the day. Let me put on my serious face and get down to work.

There was an interesting thread on Amazon a few months ago, in which people basically confessed which characters from literature they would like to grab by the throat and shake some sense into. The way this thread has turned reminded me of those confessions. Because, together, those confessions point to the way that cheap literature, of the kind that makes Claudine want to puke, is in fact inspired by great literature.

Who wouldn't want to shake Tess by the throat?

(Duck, Andre! But it's true, it's true!)

Sjm wrote: "I can't help but mention that we all were once 20-somethings, probably just as annoying to our 'elders' as they are to us now. We could help them to be less self-centred and to appreciate and accep..."

You couldn't help yourself? Of course you could have, but I'm sure you wanted to get your 2 cents in as well--no harm in that.

I can't tell you (well actually I can, and will) how emphatically I disagree with you. Coincidentally, there was an op-ed piece in today's NY Times, the writer of which also appears to disagree with you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/opi...

I believe he would have been more adamant had he not been worried about the PC crowd getting their panties in knots.

Yesbut.

Irene, would you like a small side bet that if you two were to write for the YA market, Sjm will sell more copies because her readers will claim she understands them better.

It's a grand thing to be able to look at your readers from the inside out.

And even grander to be able to look at your characters from the inside out.

Irene, can Brooks possibly be serious when he says, "Nearly every sensible middle-aged person would give away all their money to be able to go back to age 22 and begin adulthood anew"?

And what does he mean when he calls today's crop of graduates the most "supervised generation"?

Patricia Sierra wrote: "Irene, can Brooks possibly be serious when he says, "Nearly every sensible middle-aged person would give away all their money to be able to go back to age 22 and begin adulthood anew"?

And what do..."

You will have to ask Brooks those questions--only he can tell you whether he is serious or what he meant.

Of course, only Brooks can give the definitive answer. I was hoping you'd share your opinion/interpretation.

Irene wrote: I can't tell you (well actually I can, and will) how emphatically I disagree with you. Coincidentally, there was an op-ed piece in today's NY Times, the writer of which also appears to disagree with you"


Irene, I don't know that the author you cited would disagree with me. There's nothing in that article that supports that theory. I'm also not sure what it is that you're disagreeing with about my statement. Do you disagree that you were once 20 and naiive or that the younger ladies could benefit from a little dose of tolerance from those of us who are now older and wiser?

Tolerance yes - but 'learning' from them - no.

There is a huge difference between TEACHING them and LEARNING from them.

I can treat other's with compassion - and teach them to see life from a different perspective. Most of the time I needed to be very firm with them. The first thing they needed to learn was that I wasn't a pasty they could run over.

The Op-Ed was talking about the way the Babyboomers 'hovered' over their kids. They are known as 'helicopter' parents, who over-protect their kids in the strongest sense of the word.

At 20 years old I had already been on my own for more than 3 years. I had my own job, apartment and car - I paid my own bills and insurance. I was in college for IT and doing fairly well. At 21 I was assistant Tmanager at a bar.

I learned to take care of myself because it was expected of me. So I wasn't a typical 20-something.

And the generation before you was even more independant at a younger age. For instance, my dad was born in 1938. The eldest son in a family of 4, at the age of 12 (his sister was a few years older but not yet working) he was booted out of the house to find work to support his mother and siblings after his father died. Without education, he rose to the position of a factory manager overseeing hundreds, has developed an amazing work ethic that still keeps him working odd jobs at companies at the age of 73. He walked to school in the blinding snow for miles unlike other, later generations who claim that distinction when it was less snow and less distance.

Each generation before us had it worse, independent younger, working younger, doing things at a younger and younger age that parents of today's generation would never consider letting their children do.

There is one major flaw in the article Andre. There is no way on this planet that I would want to go back to being the sniveling pathetic 22 year old I was. This quote from that article sums it up for me -

"Most people don’t form a self and then lead a life. They are called by a problem, and the self is constructed gradually by their calling. "

Without my life experiences from the age of say 15 to 28 I would not be the person I am.

The YA books available today are all about vamps and werewolves. They bore me. I do enjoy the YA books of earlier eras though, they seem to have a much deeper depth of character and perseverence than the new wannabe Stephanie Meyers and JK Rowling crowd.

My mother was born in 1924 - which explains everything. I had my first job at 12.

The vamps and were-critters are to the new generation the aliens and super-powered characters of the 80's.

"Stranger in a Strange Land" - "Witch World" - "Pern" - "I, Robot" all seemed to hit the same nerve.

I wouldn't go back either - my ignorance was appalling as were the conditions I lived in. Poverity sucks.

Which is a poster I once had. There was a man with a rolls royce outside the Department of Education. I put it on my desk as I was working two jobs and going to school.