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

[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.