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

[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...