Mundane secrets of the YA-YA authorhood

[prog]

Here is a troll for my kid-lit friends: What defines a young-adult (or even childrens') novel? I mean, what makes a given work of fiction YA versus, er, "grown-up"? Is it just a matter of PG-13-or-lower content with (usually) young central characters?

Comments

[magid.livejournal.com]

just a matter of PG-13-or-lower content with (usually) young central characters?

Actually, I've read YA books that have dealt with things like rape, abuse, murder, etc, so I wouldn't go by content as much as by central characters. Still, there are books that libraries classify as YA that I wouldn't, for one reason or another.

[queue.livejournal.com]

I found this. Elsewhere, I found that "Young Adult Literature" means anything intended for people ages 12-18.

[ex-colorwhe.livejournal.com]

Yep, I'd go with 11-18, but yeah. But I don't quite agree with some of the things in that link. "Not predictable" is a characteristic of type of lit, not age of intended readers. If a story (YA or adult) is archetypal, for example, predictability is not a problem. (Hmm, some readers/editors might use predictability as a quality marker, too, but again this wouldn't be related to YA-v.-adult.) And when too much concern is paid to keeping YA lit shorter than adult lit or keeping its language/diction/syntax "parallel" with what YA's use, you lose the potential of literature to push readers farther than they have yet gone.
I suppose if you used this parallel language business to guess whether a book in front of you was YA or not, you'd have good odds; I just hate to see authors limiting language and length in advance.

By the way, in case it sounds like I'm anti-slang, I'm not at all. I love slang used well. I just don't like when vocab and complication of syntax gets cut off due to assumed-to-be-low YA interest and skills.

[magid.livejournal.com]

Some of the most wonderful YA books pay no attention to those length/language general indicators. Joan Aiken's books have a huge range of words most kids won't have run into before, but frankly, that's how you learn new words. And Mildred Taylor's books (to choose just one author) are not short at all, and rightfully so.

Somehow, when I read those guidelines, they seemed to be more describing the writing-mill series books (Nancy Drew to Babysitter's Club to Animorphs, etc) than anything else. My favorites seem to break at least one of those rules each...

[ex-colorwhe.livejournal.com]

There's no hard-and-fast rule. As magid says, though, it's not about PG-13 ratings; YA books do have rape, murder, abuse, violence, and -- yes -- sex. Not as much sex as adult books, but some. (Not enough, says YA critic/editor Michael Cart, and I tend to agree with him.)

That said, though, here are a few general guidelines:
1)YA books usually have a narrative viewpoint that is not too far in the future from when the narrated story took place. Maybe simultaneous with the story, maybe a few months or a year later. If some of the story took place when the now-YA-narrator was a smaller child, by all means the YA viewpoint can look back years; but compared to the latest part of the story told, the narrator (or implied narrator) is not usually much older. Compare this to many adult books that have teen protagonists but are told with the perspective of many years of hindsight.

2)YA books often end with a bit of optimism, a slight implication of hope for the future rather than the opposite. Not always, by any means (Chocolate War is a notable exception, and there are more), but often. This doesn't mean Neat Sweet Perfect happy endings, but in the sense that most books end with either "and all hope is lost" or "there is still hope," YA books often include the hope.

3)YA books tend to have story. As opposed to some pomo adult novels that have a lot of description and setting and philosophizing but not much plot. jadelennox can address this better than me.

Hope that helps. :)

[jadelennox]

Mostly, I agree with everything colorwheel says (not surprisingly). It is important to remember that these are general guidelines, not hard and fast roles. For example, To Kill a Mockingbird (not necessarily written for young audience, but certainly primarily read by younger audiences these days) is a nostalgia book, and clearly violates rule 1. And I'm sure I can come up with explicitly young adult books that don't end with hope. I can't remember -- does Smack end hopefully? I can't recall. Oh, here's a good one: Letters From The Inside (although it could be argued that the book is hopeful, and it allows the possibility of redemption for at least one character). And Cormier always claimed his books were hopeful, but I'm not sure I agree.

In any case, I would still call (1) and (2) the big indicators. As for (3), I think that's true, but I think it's a current fashion thing. I believe that you could violate (3) and still have a YA book (though not necessarily a children's book), far more easily than you could violate the first two and still have a YA book. I just sent a review in for a pair of novellas that violate (3), and they were definitely YA -- though different. Personally, I'm a big fan of plot, and it's one of the reason I think children's books are usually better. Talented and artistic authors for adults seem to feel required to write plotless rambles which drag and drag; talented and artistic authors for children are free to write plots, with actual events and dialogue, and they don't have to put a sexual abuse victim in every story if they don't want to.

Link to follow in a sec...

[tahnan.livejournal.com]

Although these seem like (perhaps) necessary but not sufficient conditions to identify YA books. For instance, "YA books usually have a narrative viewpoint that is not too far in the future from when the narrated story took place"--are all YA books from a limited narrative view? If not, does, say, Hitchhiker's or Stranger in a Strange Land meet this criterion, since the "viewpoint," such as it is, is more or less simultaneous with the story?

And of course I can name any number of books that end on optimistic notes, which I would not think of calling YA. (Stranger, say.)

[ex-colorwhe.livejournal.com]

And of course I can name any number of books that end on optimistic notes, which I would not think of calling YA

No, it doesn't work in the other direction: I didn't mean that most optimistic endings are YA, I meant that that most YA books have optimistic endings. And it may not be "most," just "more than not." Of course there are exceptions -- much Cormier, Postcards from the Edge, etc. But since there are no hard and fast rules, I was trying to identify general trends.

I don't know Hitchhiker's or Stranger well enough to comment on them -- and don't quite understand your question about them anyway...

[prog.livejournal.com]

I'd argue that a movie could contain all those things but present them in a way that wouldn't sink its MPAA rating past PG-13, but I'm not thinking about movies too much here so it's kind of a moot point. :)

Your first point is interesting to me, and not something I have considered. I imagine it applies only to first-person narratives, yes? Are these especially common in YA-lit?

[ex-colorwhe.livejournal.com]

Actually, it can apply to third-person and even second-person (a few of which have come out lately). It 's certainly about the character's point of view, but third-person limited can sometimes be as close as first-person. And even if the narrative voice sometimes includes other perspectives, when it gets back to that character's voice, there is still the question of whether or not there are years of hindsight.

Movies, well, I don't know from movies.

[rserocki.livejournal.com]

I was going to write a carefree response, but I feel a bit meek after reading all those thoughtful and literate posts. Isn't Catcher in the Rye considered a YA story? Yet it has the f* word. (I think it is a very good YA book, though. I'm mentioning the book because by some definitions, it would not be a YA story.) I saw The Lord of the Rings in the YA section at an airport bookstore. Although I don't have much of an opinion myself, I wonder sometimes if a book is classified as YA simply by virtue of where a bookstore decides to put it? Or who the publisher decides to market the book towards? Or what the writer says? (e.g. "Yeah, this book has plenty of cursing on every page, blood, guts and sex, but I'm saying it's meant for YA and I'm sticking with this label.") I saw a DVD for the graphically violent Watership Down cartoon in the children's animation section of Tower Records, and learned it was there by virtue of being rated PG, content notwithstanding.

[jadelennox]

Oh, an enormous amount of what characterizes a book as genre depends on the publisher's marketing, a little depends on who chooses to read it, and almost none depends on authorial intent. Adult books (by authorial intent) become children's constantly, by virtue of publisher choice (some editions of LotR), teacher choice (To Kill a Mockingbird) or reader choice (Ender's Game). Sometimes adult readers claim children's books (Harry Potter; Stinky Cheese Man).

Cussing's got very little to do with it, these days. Plenty of YA lit has graphic descriptions of incest, so George Carlin's seven words are pretty mellow.

And you can't blame me and colorwheel for flaunting our otherwise worthless degrees in ChLit whenever someone asks us to do so. ;) We get so few chances to use them!

[cookieboyginge.livejournal.com]

slightly to noticeably larger typeface.

i do not think that Catcher in the Rye was intended exclusively, or even primarily, for an 11-18 yr.old audience.

i am not always very helpful.
(hi. j.)