Young adult "problem novels"

[burundi]

There's an interesting article in Salon about the prevalence of "problem novels" in young adult literature. Barbara Feinberg has written a book aruging that these novels can be too traumatic and provacative for young teenagers, but that librarians and teachers love them, more so, in fact, than the kids who are assigned them as reading. (I haven't actually read the book, just the article, so I maybe misrepresenting her thrust.)

I'll admit that as a young reader, I didn't care for novels like Dicey's Song or The Bridge to Terabithia ("problem novels" that I remember from my youth), but that I loved Lloyd Alexander, Susan Cooper, L.M. Montgomery, etc. I'm fully aware that this is a matter of taste, though. As an adult, I still prefer historical and speculative fiction to realistic fiction.

I was curious as to what librarians and/or other YA fiction readers thought about this. In reading the article, I wasn't clear what Feinberg thought the solution should be. I would argue that the answer (if this is really even a problem) would be to recognize the literary merits of other kinds of YA literature--fantasy, adventure, etc--and to promote those as equally valid books for kids to read.

[Elza B]

I'll have to read Feinberg's book. From an outside glance, though, I'd have to say that I disagree with her that the books are contrived and have no real impact. As a kid, I read just about anything I could get my hands on from any genre (still do). I liked the 'real' stories - Dicey's Song and Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry were two of my favorites - both 'problem' stories. Books like these taught me how to deal with issues in a constructive way - whereas the fantasy books were a great escape. The fact is, kids relate to them whether they see it or not at the time.

I'm currently finishing up a young adult novel that would be considered a 'problem' novel and getting ready to shop it around for publication. My 'heroine' (I hate that word) has some extenuating circumstances in her life, but what kid doesn't? While a kid may not identify exacrtly with her life, my hope is that they'll take away a little piece of her with them and apply it to situations in their own lives. If all they get out of it is a good read, that works, too. But I hope it goes beyond that for them. I don't consider it a lesson, I consider it a story. But if they take some sort of advice from it, even better.

I read a young adult novel as an *adult* that actually helped me come to terms with an event in my childhood. The novel was called "Speak", about a teenaged girl who'd been raped. While our situations were similar, they were not exact, but to see it put into words that this character was thinking things I'd always thought, I finally believed that I hadn't done anything wrong. I'd always been *told* that I hadn't done anything wrong, but being told by someone who'd never been there, and seeing my thoughts in the book, I finally felt validated. A fantastical story wouldn't have been able to do that for me.

Ava

[Ghanima]

It sounds like she wants us all to shit sunshine and rainbows, if you'll forgive my language. I read plenty of these books as a young girl and loved them. I loved "Tiger Eyes" and "Forever" and "Bridge to Teribithia" and "Old Yeller" and "Where the Red Fern Grows" and "The Chocolate War" and "I am the Cheese" and all those teen tearjerkers/gutwrenchers. Kids are curious about the pain and suffering in life, but adults are reluctant to tell them about it. These books allow kids to explore these feelings. I think the theory that these are bad for kids is full of shit. However, I do think that only good can come from educating yourself about what your child is reading.

[lorene]

I'm with avabeth in her assessment that the books are neither contrived nor without impact.
As both a former "problem" adoolescent myself and someone who currently provides therapy services to adolescents, I would say that these books absolutely have their place. I, too, read "Speak" and appreciated its message, as well as feeling that young girls facing similar issues would appreciate it.
There are so many young women facing problems that they can't or won't speak about (incest, cutting, body image problems---just to name a few) for fear that they are "weird" or to blame or whatever, that I think anything which helps them feel less alone is beneficial.
My only caveat to this is books which may somehow glamorize problems. When I was in high school, the book The Best Little Girl in the World (about an anorexic teenager) made its rounds, and I think there were more than a few cases of wanna-be anorexics for a perod of time. But that's going to happen no matter what, IMO.

[Judith Prietht]

Judy Blume's books were sort of nothing but "problem novels." I'm sure one of the first times I read about the Holocaust was in Starring Sally J. Freedman as Herself; Deenie was all about a girl with scoliosis and her special washcloth; Blubber was mainly about bullying and body image[/b]; and It's Not the End of the World was about divorce. While I also read a lot fantasy novels (Lloyd Alexander, Susan Cooper, Tolkien, etc), I felt that the Blume books in particular (and I'm sure there were others around like Bridge to Terabithia that I can't remember now) provided some honest and truthful depictions of what the world was like for a typical young girl. And while I may not have been going through the same things that some of the protagonists in those novels were (my parents were and still are married, but I certainly had friends whose parents were getting divorced or were divorced; and we all knew bullies and had probably been on both the giving and receiving end of that kind of behavior), the Blume books did give me perspective on what other people might be going through.

I'm also intrigued about reading Feinberg's book.

[RealityChuck]

From the feedback I've seen, Sandra Scoppetone's problem novel, Trying Hard to Hear You, was extremely important and influential to a lot of gay teenage readers. It was one of the first YA novels to feature gay characters, and for a lot of young people, it was a revelation.

It's a favorite of mine, but for different reasons: I'm in it.

[burundi]

Good points all. It also occurs to me that much of the current adult literature can also be classified as "problem novels"--people dealing with divorce, death, family trauma. If they're popular with adults, why wouldn't they be popular with teenagers?

I do think that critics, both of YA and adult literature, tend to place a higher value on realistic rather than fantastic fiction, which I find wrongheaded, but that may be a rant for another thread.

[delphica]

I haven't read her book, and I probably should, although I disagree with her arguments as they are presented in this article, as well as another review I read in the NYT.

I think it is nothing short of hilarious that Feinberg rails against Walk Two Moons, yet mentions that her favorite book growing up was A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. I think ATGIB is an excellent book, really, one of my favorites as well, but it's far from a sugary sweet book free of problems. On the other hand, I'm a little amazed at her negative view of WTM, which also contains many "problem" situations, but is one of the best written YA books of the past two decades, in my humble opinion. I could understand her position a little better, I think, if she were looking at YA problem novels that were all problem wrapped up in poor writing, and there are some of those around. But WTM? The quality of the writing is excellent, and it uses a very tightly crafted reverse reveal structure that most authors probably wouldn't bother with for a YA audience. I think it works remarkably well. And I say this as someone who isn't a huge fan of the book -- there are other books I enjoy more, but objectively looking at the quality of the literature, I have to give it extremely high marks.

Big snicker at the line in the review that mentions that YA problem novels are "often the recipient of the American Library Association's annual Newbery Award -- the highest honor given to children's chapter books." I have been meaning for a while now to start a thread about this -- are problem novels over-represented in the Newbery Awards? I don't think they are ... I mean, they ARE represented but so are non-problem books. It's like saying "Books are often the recipient of the Newbery Award." Well, yeah.

I guess at the end of the day, I think there might be some merit in looking at how often so-called problem novels are assigned in schools. But Feinberg's tone throughout the article just makes me think she's crabby.

[Chronos]

What, exactly, is a "problem novel"? If it's just "novel where the protagonist faces a problem", then you're pretty much at "every damn novel ever written by anyone but Hemingway". I mean, in some novels, the problem is that someone's parents are getting divorced. In some novels, the problem is classmates make fun of a kid's weight. In some novels, the problem is that the evil arch-wizard wants to kill the protagonist to further his plan of world domination. Now, personally, if you ask me, I'd consider that Voldemort guy to be a lot bigger problem than someone snickering at me on the playground. What's the distinction, here?

[Rysler]

Originally Posted by burundi

too traumatic and provacative for young teenagers...I do think that critics, both of YA and adult literature, tend to place a higher value on realistic rather than fantastic fiction, which I find wrongheaded, but that may be a rant for another thread.

Problem novels are what adults think teens should be reading. Generally, that is the only opinion that matters in the classroom. Librarians don't have a stake in the instructive use of the problem novel, we simply make note of the trend and stock the books next to fantasy, comic books, horror, non-fiction, series, and romance. Scholars (English majors, teachers, and librarians) like to study problem novels because they're so obviously meaty, but they're not the defining mark of YA. Perhaps a little over-represented, but my Ph.D. student was doing her dissertation work on Sweet Valley High. I did some work on hurt/comfort romantic structure in YA horror. A librarian's job is to understand what kids want to read and give it to them. Long gone are the days when librarians cared about the should.

Problem novels have plenty of detractors, myself included. I hated them growing up. Bridge to Terabithia and Where the Red Fern Grows were scarring and haunting, and even reading The Chocolate War as a graduate student revolted me. That doesn't mean I think they should be pulled from the shelves--obviously, some kids liked them. I read my share of traumatic stuff I did like, such as Go Ask Alice and all the books about kids dying (Lurlene McDaniel). So there's no accounting for taste.

Chronos, consider it more of a "coming of age" novel. Here is a pretty good definition, which has the problem novel as a subgenre of realism. Yes, almost every YA story is a coming-of-age-while-facing-a-problem tale, but I think the setting and style matter more than the plot. So realism is the delineator.

[Podkayne]

Originally Posted by Chronos

What, exactly, is a "problem novel"?

From the article:

They're known as "problem novels," a catchall term for hyperrealistic children's and young adult (Y.A.) novels with issue-laden plots.

I'm out of touch with what they're asking kids to read these days, but when I was a kiddie, I recall having quite a variety of reading material presented to me.

I loved Bridge to Teribithia. We watched a tv program in class where you watch a guy draw pictures that illustrate the story as it is read allowed (Anybody know what show I mean? I can't seem to hit the right keywords at Google. Damn, that was a good show.) and I checked it out from the library at least three times after that. And I'd never had to cope with death and dying in my life, actually. It was just an amazingly good book.

[Zsofia]

Some of them, particularly the more badly written of the genre do promote imitative behavior - I'd roll my eyes and never say that, but after Slam Book made the rounds we all made our own for the express purpose of saying cruel and nasty things in them.

On the whole, I both agree and disagree with the article to the extent that teachers and others seem to think that heavy books are more valid young adult literature choices, while fantasy and other choices are maybe seen as more childish. Which is silly. (How many times have I reread Susan Cooper over the decades?) But I see these books as a way for young people to deal with issues that nobody wants to talk about, and I'm all for them - I'd just hate to see them emphasized as "better literature" than the rest of what's out there.

It seems to me that "young adult" literature is a terribly mixed up genre to start with - there's a lot of excellent books in there, and a lot of total and utter crap. Some of the best really ought to be in the younger set, but gets stuck up there because it's "controversial", and some of the rest of the best of it gets put in the general stacks because that's too "controversial". I love that they still read Go Ask Alice, though - I saw a woman buying it for her daughter in the bookstore a few weeks ago and thought, no! No, no, no, it's no fun if your mother buys it! You're supposed to pass it around in secret, what's wrong with you people?

[Rysler]

Originally Posted by Zsofia

You're supposed to pass it around in secret, what's wrong with you people?

My friends and I totally did that! At slumber parties in elementary school, we'd read passages to each other, and knew we could all end up like her if we weren't careful. Discussing it with my mom would have been so uncool.

[kellner]

Originally Posted by Zsofia

No, no, no, it's no fun if your mother buys it! You're supposed to pass it around in secret, what's wrong with you people?

We read that in school (in German,) in seventh grade I think. Around that age learning about German literature wasn't a priority yet, so a translated book with an obvious message that allowed some discussion was just fine.

[Podkayne]

Originally Posted by Zsofia

It seems to me that "young adult" literature is a terribly mixed up genre to start with - there's a lot of excellent books in there, and a lot of total and utter crap.

With apologies to Theodore Sturgeon, 90% of YA literature is crap.

[Judith Prietht]

Originally Posted by Zsofia

You're supposed to pass it around in secret, what's wrong with you people?

Just like my copy of Forever, where I highlighted all the saucy bits and paper-clipped the pages for easy reference when we surreptitiously passed it around class! Until we got caught, that is, and I was ratted out.

[Zsofia]

Oh, yeah, we passed "Forever" around too with the sex bits highlighted. (Actually we folded down the bottom corners of the pages with the good stuff.) I picked it up a year ago to see if it was as racy as I recalled.

Answer: no. It's depressingly responsible and upbeat. I think any kids reading it today would totally roll their eyes at that being a Naughty Book.

[Judith Prietht]

Ralph: lamest phallus-naming ever.

[Helena]

Originally Posted by Podkayne

We watched a tv program in class where you watch a guy draw pictures that illustrate the story as it is read allowed (Anybody know what show I mean?

Either Storybound or Cover to Cover. I think the same guy was on both.

[Rysler]

I never even bothered reading Forever. I wasn't allowed to by my mother until I was already reading Judith Krantz and Harlequin romance, so what was the point?

[jsc1953]

Originally Posted by Rysler

A librarian's job is to understand what kids want to read and give it to them. Long gone are the days when librarians cared about the should.

It seems to me that there's a disconnect going on...the campaigns to get children to read always emphasize the fantastic -- reading as a way of transporting you to distant places & times, etc etc; when what YA's (and, apparently, their educators) want to read are books about kids exactly like themselves. Does this jibe with your experience?

[burundi]

Rysler, that's an interesting website. I'm kind of amused that adventure stories are listed under realistic fiction, though. Uh-huh, Treasure Island's very realistic...

delphica, I'll have to read Walk Two Moons. I've never heard of it before, but it sounds worth checking out.

I heard somewhere that fiction is can be either a mirror or a window, i.e., that you can see your own life reflected in it or that you'll be exposed to completely new perspectives/situations. Maybe that's why these novels are so popular among teens. For some, it's a mirror; for some, it's a window.

The Salon article didn't make it clear what Feinberg thought should happen with "problem novels." Does she think publishers shouldn't produce them and libraries shouldn't stock them? Should teachers stop assigning them? That seems foolish, because there are many well-written ones and obviously they certainly hold many students' attention. Does she just want writers to cheer up?

[burundi]

Oh, and RealityChuck, you can't tease us like that. Is there really a character based on you in the novel?

[Rysler]

Originally Posted by jsc1953

It seems to me that there's a disconnect going on...the campaigns to get children to read always emphasize the fantastic -- reading as a way of transporting you to distant places & times, etc etc; when what YA's (and, apparently, their educators) want to read are books about kids exactly like themselves. Does this jibe with your experience?

Well, YAs don't want to read realistic books as much as educators want them to -- that's where the disconnect lies. I'd say the readership of "crap" is much higher than the readership of good books.

However, I agree with your point. One reason I stopped reading "adult" books and started reading below my reading level in high school was the lack of characters I could identify with. I'd read Ender's Game and tried to make the leap to science fiction and couldn't do it, because all of science fiction wasn't about little boys.

Realistic/relatable depictions of the youthful mindset are cloudy. The sexuality and peer relations and problem solving in Christopher Pike's Fall into Darkness is probably as realistic as anything by Judy Blume or Robert Cormier. And while the settings in Ender's Game and Harry Potter are fantastic, being bullied and struggling with school are real experiences. I think the idea that works best is "Put yourself in a fantastic/compelling situation," rather than having things be too fantastic or too realistic.

Having splashy colors, fantastic adventures, coolness, promises of darkness and emotion and titilation are probably just attempts to harness short attention spans, and like "problem novels" themselves, are an adult's interpretation of a child's desires. In my opinion, the best way to get a teenager to read anything is to treat them like an adult.

Uh...does that answer your question? I just talked myself in a circle.

burundi, how is Treasure Island not a realistic adventure novel? I don't recall any speculative aspects. No magic, no spaceships, no vampires. It might be historical fiction, but it wasn't written that way. It's a plausible survival story, which fits into the classification as defined. Maybe not an authoritative definition, but I find it a reasonable working definition, which suits Chronos's needs.

[jsc1953]

Originally Posted by Rysler

...I think the idea that works best is "Put yourself in a fantastic/compelling situation," rather than having things be too fantastic or too realistic.

Having splashy colors, fantastic adventures, coolness, promises of darkness and emotion and titilation are probably just attempts to harness short attention spans, and like "problem novels" themselves, are an adult's interpretation of a child's desires. In my opinion, the best way to get a teenager to read anything is to treat them like an adult.

It just feels like the YA fascination with realistic/problem novels is somewhat solipsistic. I would tend to steer a YA toward something that wasn't about a time, place or people just like these times, this place, and me, as the best way to a mind-expanding experience that reading is "supposed" to be about. (I'm not a librarian nor an educator, so take my opinion FWIW.)

[wonder9]

Ya know, my problem with those problem novels is this...

THERE ARE OTHER KINDS OF BOOKS OUT THERE.

How can kids be expected to develop a love of reading if the only books that seem to be sanctioned by schools, librarians and teachers are the heart-rending, difficult, borderline adult, often bitter, rarely funny...

Classroom teachers tend to use these problem novels as the focus of their literacy program. If the only books that you are exposed to are these, why would you consider reading another book? The stories aren't bad, it's the unremitting focus on them as the only 'valuable' reading a kid could do. That any book a kid reads should have gravitas. Let's get some comedy in there, some fantasy, some stories with no MESSAGE. Just for a change.

[Guinastasia]

I remember all of us passing around My Darling, My Hamburger, (that and the V. C. Andrews incest fests) in 7th-8th grade. It has everything-sex, pregnancy, abortion and

SPOILER:

A girl pulls a thumb tack out of a bulletin board she's pinned to, by a guy who's trying to rape her, and shoves it into his neck!

[RealityChuck]

Originally Posted by burundi

Oh, and RealityChuck, you can't tease us like that. Is there really a character based on you in the novel?

Yes. Not only me, but many of my friends. The author based all her characters on the cast of a summer play we did. The character descriptions quite clearly indicate who was who, if you knew the group (so much so that she outed a couple of the guys). The plot was made up, but the location, the fact that we were doing "Anything Goes," and even some of the dialog were taken from real events.

My character was "Walt Feinberg."

[Eureka]

Originally Posted by delphica

Big snicker at the line in the review that mentions that YA problem novels are "often the recipient of the American Library Association's annual Newbery Award -- the highest honor given to children's chapter books." I have been meaning for a while now to start a thread about this -- are problem novels over-represented in the Newbery Awards? I don't think they are ... I mean, they ARE represented but so are non-problem books. It's like saying "Books are often the recipient of the Newbery Award." Well, yeah.

I think you are missing her point. At least, the problem as seen by the professor of my Young Adult Literature class is that Newberry awards are supposed to be given to the best Children's chapter books and are often given to Young Adult books. Is this the end of the world? Maybe (probably) not.

How does one define a child for the purpose of defining children's chapter books? It seems like the definition I was given goes up to age 14. How does one define a Young Adult? I don't know what the bottom edge of YA-hood is(though it is younger than 14), but the older edge is 28, depending on the definition. While I read a lot of YA novels the first six months of being 29, it was caused by the course, not by interest in the novels. Though, reading YA novels made me aware that there are many enjoyable novels I wouldn't have thought about reading on my own, so I've read several since the course ended.

Still, many of the YA problem novels that win the Newberry are not aimed at 14 year olds. Perhaps some 14 year olds, but not neccesarily the average ones. My professor sees this less as a problem with any one award winner and more of a problem as a trend seems to form. It is ok to blur the line between children's and YA novels or YA and adult at the line of the individual doing the reading.

But if librarians, parents and teachers are pushing Newberry winners heavily, there should perhaps be a clearer understanding of what the intended audience of each book should be.

[Rysler]

If you look at the list of Newberry Medal Winners and Nominations, most of the books that I can identify are aimed at the late elementary/middle school age. 8-14. Some of the books, like The Giver, might be aimed at the high end, but they mostly look like children's chapter books to me. What am I missing?

[burundi]

Rysler, I didn't mean to knock the website, which I do think is very interesting and helpful for the purposes of this discussion. It's just that when I think of realism in books or movies, I think of "problems/situations/life as many people can reasonably expect to face it," not just a lack of the paranormal. Treasure maps and Long John Silver just don't fit in that category. I guess a more recent example would be Holes, which I think is a wonderful book, but I wouldn't classify as realism. Obviously, YMMV, and it's really not an important quibble to me.

Originally posted by jsc1953
It just feels like the YA fascination with realistic/problem novels is somewhat solipsistic.

I see where you're coming from and to some extent I agree with you, but teenagers are known to be the slightest bit self-absorbed.

[Judith Prietht]

Originally Posted by wonder9

Ya know, my problem with those problem novels is this...

THERE ARE OTHER KINDS OF BOOKS OUT THERE.

How can kids be expected to develop a love of reading if the only books that seem to be sanctioned by schools, librarians and teachers are the heart-rending, difficult, borderline adult, often bitter, rarely funny...

Classroom teachers tend to use these problem novels as the focus of their literacy program. If the only books that you are exposed to are these, why would you consider reading another book? The stories aren't bad, it's the unremitting focus on them as the only 'valuable' reading a kid could do. That any book a kid reads should have gravitas. Let's get some comedy in there, some fantasy, some stories with no MESSAGE. Just for a change.

I can sort of see your point, and I suppose I'm of the opinion that parents have an obligation to supplement what their children are assigned in school by teachers and librarians. As much as I disagree with what Feinberg's saying in the article (and again, here's the caveat that I haven't read her book yet), at least she took the time and interest to check out her son's reading list and try to find out what he was so disappointed in. I think that's admirable. In my admittedly idealistic notion, I'd like to think that parents have the time and desire to read or re-read summer lists and assigned school lists with their kids, and then be able to discuss what's going on in the books. I know that this is probably a rather unrealistic fantasy, but all I'm trying to get at is that I think it would be a shame if the only books a child is exposed to are those on assigned reading lists.

If anyone has any information, I'd love to know how librarians and teachers actually go about compiling reading lists for children and young adults. Which is probably a topic for another thread.

[Eureka]

Originally Posted by Rysler

If you look at the list of Newberry Medal Winners and Nominations, most of the books that I can identify are aimed at the late elementary/middle school age. 8-14. Some of the books, like The Giver, might be aimed at the high end, but they mostly look like children's chapter books to me. What am I missing?

Two obvious possibilities occur to me. One is that I am being a parrot, and repeating something which appeared to be a reasonable criticism by someone I respect but I don't know enough about the books to judge fairly. The other possibility is that the key phrase in your comment is "that I can identify." I have no idea how many of the books you can identify or which books are more appropriate for older audiences.

[Zsofia]

Newberry books are supposed to be an age group down from Young Adult. That being said, there's definately been a sea change in the Newberry Awards in my lifetime - when I was a kid a Newberry book was much more likely to be fantasy, for example, or really different in some way. Now, while they might be fantasy or historical they tend to have a certain pattern to them - impoverished nonwhite child comes of age in politically correct manner. They're still pretty much garaunteed to be good, don't get me wrong - I especially liked A Single Shard from a few years ago about a poor medieval Korean boy who learns to be a potter, and of course Avi's still writing Newberry books - but there's a certain sameness to those chosen for the award these days. It's hard to imagine Lloyd Alexander and Susan Cooper winning nowadays. (For that matter you might ntoe that Garth Nix has not won any for his most excellent [b]Sabriel, etc, books - which seem much more like "old fashioned" Newberry books.)

Dosen't matter anyway, Newberry books are in that "intermediate reader" range. Although some of the best of them [i]should really be young adult books. Interesting to note that some of the same books are in both sections, sometimes with different covers - I assume older kids don't want to be seen reading a "kid's book".

[dropzone]

I suppose I was fortunate because my for-school reading went directly from Catholic Reading texts to Steinbeck and Hemingway, though The Pearl and The Old Man and The Sea were slogs for twelve-year-olds accustomed to the short, simple stories in our texts. I am only familiar with Problem Books because my daughters read them, not always because they have to. But I wonder something: What is the appeal, especially to boys? I don't want to read about Female Complaints now; why would a seventh grade boy want to read a Judy Blume book? But unless we expand the definition beyond the point of usefulness by including Harry Potter and Treasure Island the authors are mostly women writing mostly for girls. Is this an accurate impression?

[Rysler]

There are plenty of problem novels for boys. Holes, apparently (I didn't realize it was a problem novel), and novels by Rober Cormier and Gary Paulsen. Boys are a target audience, but a much smaller one, because boys aren't seen as reading as much (because they have less to read). Feinberg's article agrees with you, and my young adult lit course put a lot of emphasis on enticing boys to read.

Teachers and librarians want boys to read, but the connection is harder to make. Even the books on that list geared toward a masculine audience are more "adventure" than "problem." I mean, if a boy had read Treasure Island and wanted to read something else like it, I might direct him toward Hatchet, or vice versa, but I agree that there's no way to leap from that to Forever. It makes a lot more sense to recommend The Golden Compass or Terry Brooks.

YA literature does not equal the problem novel. The problem novel is just one of many genres, and this course, seems to have excellent book lists. I have no idea what the criteria are for choosing. Anything.

[Dung Beetle]

The links are greatly appreciated, Rysler! My to-read list expands.......

[Rysler]

Originally Posted by Dung Beetle

The links are greatly appreciated, Rysler! My to-read list expands.......

You're welcome!

[dropzone]

Thanks! My twins (15 and fresh), well, their older sister (19) still likes the Problem Novels (worked for two years in the children's section of the public library and read them all) and has moved into the adult equivalent, Chick Lit, especially Brit Chick Lit. One twin is another Anglophile and is sorta following her path plus anything by or about the Beatles and supernatural stuff (we saw it coming, this is the one who wore black all through second grade). The other twin is a slower reader but enjoyed Ella Enchanted when she was forced to read it. She thinks she likes mysteries and now I have a list!

[Bryan Ekers]

In my day, the biggest problem was Henry Huggins being late for his paper route, or Gardenia eating all of Eddie Wilson's pies.

And that's the way it was and we liked it!

[Don Draper]

Originally Posted by Rysler

Well, YAs don't want to read realistic books as much as educators want them to -- that's where the disconnect lies. I'd say the readership of "crap" is much higher than the readership of good books.

I'd say you just put you're finger on the inherent problem (pardon the pun) with such YA literature. "educators want them to" - - even as a 13 year old, when I read Go Ask Alice and the Outsiders, I could pick up on the condescending tone of the writing. These books don't deal with problems in a realistic way. Rather, they are simplistic morality tales designed to coerce kids into behaving in the way adults think they ought to act.

Cecil himself did a column exposing Go Ask Alice as a fake diary written by an adult, one who obviously had very little first-hand knowledge of young people in general, let alone young runaway drug addicts. The authors of such books don't seem to think much about the kids they are writing for; they seem to think they'll swallow any B.S.

IMO, kids can tell they are being written "down" to; meaning that they can spot a hoax, and realize when they are being preached at.

[Don Draper]

Originally Posted by Rysler

Well, YAs don't want to read realistic books as much as educators want them to -- that's where the disconnect lies. I'd say the readership of "crap" is much higher than the readership of good books.

I'd say you just put you're finger on the inherent problem (pardon the pun) with such YA literature: "[what] educators want them to [read]" - - even as a 13 year old, when I read Go Ask Alice and the Outsiders, I could pick up on the condescending tone of the writing. These books don't deal with problems in realistic ways. Rather, they are simplistic morality tales designed to coerce kids into behaving in the way adults think they ought to act.

Cecil himself did a column exposing Go Ask Alice as a fake diary written by an adult, one who obviously had very little first-hand knowledge of young people in general, let alone young runaway drug addicts. The authors of such books don't seem to think much about the kids they are writing for; they seem to think they'll swallow any B.S. ("Alice" in particular is riddled with factual inaccuracies - namely that drug abuse can cause teenage girls to think lesbian thoughts! 'oh the horror!')

IMO, kids can tell they are being written "down" to; meaning that they can spot a hoax, and realize when they are being preached at. It explains why the 'Harry Potter' series was such an unexpected success - these books aren't written 'down' to kids; and aren't written with an agenda in mind.

[Don Draper]

Oops. My bad. Cecil didn't write a column on "Go Ask Alice" - I read about on the "snopes" urban legend page:

http://www.snopes.com/language/literary/askalice.asp

Just thought I'd correct that.

[Justin_Bailey]

Originally Posted by Judith Prietht

If anyone has any information, I'd love to know how librarians and teachers actually go about compiling reading lists for children and young adults. Which is probably a topic for another thread.

I can handle this one.

Reading lists are usually compiled in a bunch of different ways:

• Favorites from the librarian's YA-hood
• Suggestions from publishers
• Suggestions from teachers
• To round it out the library's teenage staff are asked what books they're reading

[Justin_Bailey]

Oh and discussions with other librarians too.

[delphica]

Originally Posted by Eureka

I think you are missing her point. At least, the problem as seen by the professor of my Young Adult Literature class is that Newberry awards are supposed to be given to the best Children's chapter books and are often given to Young Adult books. Is this the end of the world? Maybe (probably) not.

Don't you hate when you read threads in the morning before work, and then you don't have a chance to jump back in the conversation until the end of the work day?

I really do think her point was that the Newbery Award is dominated by "problem" books as opposed to ... I don't know, fun loving books or something. I think the phrase "problem" book is troublesome, but I'm trying to use it in the same sense it was used in the article -- but the longer this thread goes on, the stupider I think the term is!

However, I agree that the target age of the Newbery winners does seem to be creeping up, although I feel it's still safety within the "up to and including 14" range stated in the ALA guidelines. Still, it's been a while since a really solid book for younger readers got the nod from the Newbery committee. I would say that Shiloh is probably the most recent (1992) winner that's aimed a little younger.

[stpauler]

Originally Posted by dropzone

What is the appeal, especially to boys? I don't want to read about Female Complaints now; why would a seventh grade boy want to read a Judy Blume book? But unless we expand the definition beyond the point of usefulness by including Harry Potter and Treasure Island the authors are mostly women writing mostly for girls. Is this an accurate impression?

I remember I use to sneak off to the bathroom in 2nd and 3rd grade with my sister's Judy Blume books. "Otherwise Known as Sheila the Great", "Superfudge", and "Are You There God, It's Me, Margaret", were a beginning introduction into the world of secret and guilty pleasures. To be honest, I don't remember a lot of them as it's been 20 years except that Judy Blume thought that it was possible to cover a toilet seat with toothpaste to the point that someone wouldn't notice it. It didn't work too well for me.

[dropzone]

Okay, maybe Judy Blume, who is known to be funny, is not the best example but my daughters know all they have to do to stop dad from asking more about what they are reading is to describe some of the Girl Stuff (and you know what I mean) in it.