Young adult literature

P

ProdigalHorn

10,000+ Posts
Don't know if any of you had been following this, but there was an article a couple of weeks ago talking about the problem with young adult literature becoming too lurid, too dark, too bloody, too whatever you want to insert. That turned into accusations about sensorship, book-burning, intolerance, etc...

Meghan Gurden, the original writer, wrote this in the WSJ today. She also links the original piece if you want to see what she said.
The Link

In reply to:
 
In a micro way, in your own family, you are a FOOL if you do not protect your children by steering them toward what you want them to become, to grow into, the character you want them to have, and conversely to steer them away from influences that will confuse, degrade, debase and harm them.

We have the First Amendment, and rightfully so. We have minimal censorship, and rightfully so. As a consequence, however, the library (grocery) shelf is stocked with food, plus poison, plus disease, plus addictive destructive substances. You wouldn't serve your kid a plate mixed with poisonous options (I hope), so take some care about the kid's beliefs along the way, too.

It astounds me to hear parents say that they want their kids to grow up and "believe whatever they want to believe" and "become whatever they want to become." Really?! You have no opinion what you prefer your child's beliefs and character to be?

So, I agree with the writer, who thinks some meal planning for ingestion by reading is a good idea. People are pushed off of being lovingly protective for fear of being labeled overprotective.
 
On one hand I agree with the article and believe that children are pushed too far into the adult world too quickly.

On the other hand, I'm not so worried about the pre-teens sitting around reading books. Do you know what I was doing at that age?
wink.gif
 
My son's favorite book series was called the Hunger Games, set in an awful future in which children participated in a reality "survivor" game in which the object was to kill all the other kids and remain a survivor. In later books it turned into a brutal rebellion. Funny thing though, the books were good and overall I think they pointed the way to a more aware, less violent future.

I was raised on Grimm Fairy tales (which I would not read to my kids when they were little). Cinderella, Hansel & Gretel,Snow White ... man talk about some nightmares put in writing.
 
Most good children's stories have a fair amount of violence.

The linked article seems concerned about topic rather than narrative content and arc. Having dark topics is not necessarily problematic if the overall story points toward some light.

I don't think parent who say they want their kids to grow up to be whatever they please, etc., mean they don't care if they end up raising John Wayne Gacy. I think they just mean that the narrower holds of our nation's past support for conformity is anti-thetical to their idea of allowing the child to explore options.

Nothing wrong with expressing concern over the content/topics/graphics, etc., of culture aimed at and consumed by children, both one's own and those of others. People are too easily up in arms. Still, the best answer is to provide other options that are better. Fussing over what you don't like rather than trumpeting what you do like trends toward censorship regardless of intent.

I used to read books like the Executioner and the Death Merchant -- incredibly violent and propagandistic. That was when I was 9 or 10 and had my own money from slinging papers. Mad Magazine, fantasy **** that was violent, fairy tales that were violent (I loved Grimm's Fairytales -- Fitcher's Bird and **** like that was not only dark and violent, but grotesque -- and always moralistic). I weeded through that stuff and all of it was subordinated to real-world principles and values. I imagine this is true of almost everyone, but I could be wrong.

I just want my kids to read and enjoy the process. I am much more worried about the internet, the narcissim of our society and its public digitization of the personal and private.
 
Maybe I'm being a dick, but this author seems a bit out of touch. I don't see any valid examples or references that really try to prove her point. Just that "Hey, there are some popular books out there right now that have mature subjects. And some folks are worried."

Lord of the Flies, The Invisible Man (Ellison), East of Eden, Catcher in the Rye, The Chosen etc were just a few of many "dark & disturbing" books i had to read in middle school (circa late 80s).

And some of my classmates' parents screamed to the board for making their little Johnny or Jenny read this "smut". So the heck what? I see it as an interesting litmus test for the reader. If reading one of those books triggers something it shouldn't, then great. Now the parent can go help that child.

Life is likely just as screwed up now, as it was decades ago. There's just more reality TV, facebook & twitter to bring to life.
 
Accurate, I think there's a big difference between that kind of violence and the kind of subject matter she's talking about. Outside of a few guys who decide to take up larfing, I'm pretty sure Tolkein isn't desensitizing anyone to what at the moment are still fringe socio- and pyshcological issues.

Why don't we take one section of this and look at it, since people seem to be comparing apples to oranges here.

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
It is an interesting hypothesis and maybe somewhat true. But, publishers are for profit businesses. They are going to publish and market what sells.

I realize the tale of the mother in a bookstore was anecdotal, but it seems overly simplistic to me. I googled young adult novels and found hundreds of books that arent at all disturbing. Each was available for free in the library. Is there a trend towards more violent stuff? Maybe but only because it sells.

A mother saying she couldnt find anything of value for her kid in a bookstore is simply a bad mother or wasnt really looking for a book.
 
I get instilling values in one's children. I think most people do this, though many people don't have systematic experiences or minds, so the threading of the quilts they pass along, so to speak, can be a little frayed.

Anyway, a book about self-mutilation that is written with classic narrative arcs and tropes in mind, executed with skill and talent and hard work, not to mention a discerning editor, and avoids simple observations is quite possible a hell of a book and worth a young person's time. I am not in the least concerned about topical issues where school reading lists are concerned. I just don't want my kids wasting their time on poorly written, poorly considered books when there are so many great pieces of writing available.

I assume that we all would like our kids to be able to come into contact with, even ingest, offensive ideas while maintaining a balance rooted in the values that are considered most important. That is the kind of 'thinking for self' that I am interested in instilling in my kids. I am not sure that wanting to keep one's 14 year old son or daughter away from a book that has some sex and 'fringe' activity is necessarily an expression of values so much as an expression of fear.
 
Would I assume correctly that you would want to keep your 14 year old away from sex and "fringe activity" ?

If so, would you try pretty hard to accomplish that result? And if yes to that, too, would that be motivated from values or from fear?

Not trying to be cute about it, and I think I probably agree with you that if my 14 year old was a wide reader and showed growing wisdom, I wouldn't flat out try to prevent any reading of literature that included sex or drugs or crime or whatever. Still, if I could only have one of the options, either an overly protected sheltered kid who avoided teenage sex and drugs or a brilliant worldly young intellectual who got mired in those things, I would take the sheltered kid every time. So, I am saying there is content and influence I want to limit, even if it comes wrapped in wonderful arcs and tropes (!).
 
I find it far more disturbing that my friends who are parents of adolescent girls have a difficult time finding clothes that don't make their daughters look like streetwalkers.

Libraries are full of classic literature, such as Louisa May Alcott, that deliver a wholesome message. I'd imagine these books also are available in bookstores and online.
 
The interests of the young often enter the lurid and horrifying. They (and I, in my time) attend the slasher movies. I think the writer may be shortchanging the ability of a "young adult" to distinguish between what thrills them in fiction and how they choose to behave.

I find the drug/tobacco parallel an interesting story but don't think it applies to this issue of the content of books. In the cases of tobacco and drugs, adults model this behavior all the time. Using tobacco and drugs is also not necessarily evil in the sense of those evils reported portrayed in these books. Those vices don't equal self-mutilation, suicide, murder, or sexual abuse.

I don't fault parents for keeping an eye on what their children read and seeing how it impacts their children. How could a good parent do otherwise? But I don't sense nor am I convinced by what I read above that current books have the power over behavior suggested by the author.
 
Hmmm...interesting topic.

I don't think adolescents are all that different from adults when it comes to their aesthetic instincts, except that they are not developed cognitively to the point that they are as receptive to the subtler sorts of symbolic or thematic connections as adults would be. Therefore the content (the connections) are by nature more physical, more obvious, and more extreme.

Even so, most of my favorite adult literature, which can be incredibly subtle, deals with the same sorts of things. Hamlet touches on incest, adultery, and murder, and concludes with four characters dead on the stage. Flannery O'Connor's "A Good Man Is Hard to Find" narrates the killing of an entire family. Another story ends with a child committing suicide. Another ends with a retarded girl being abandoned at a diner. And O'Connor was a devout Catholic, who was a devoted critic of moral relativism.

It's an old debate. And it always ends with the following truth: literature, even great literature (and perhaps especially great literature) cannot be regarded as offering humanity any sort of guide to moral behavior. If we use the great literary characters as moral guides, we will end up as vain and selfish monsters. It is instead a device that allows us insight into the range of human experience that we would otherwise have a hard time accessing and appreciating. It allows us to know what humanity is, for better or worse.

But I also understand where the lady is coming from with her article, and I'm not unsympathetic to the view that literature has the capacity to mold our values. Indeed, I believe it does exactly that for kids who lack moral direction from their parents.

And therefore it looks like to me that we should hold off on allowing all kids to read all types of literature. Instead, here is what we will do: For those that come from homes with solid moral instincts, they will be allowed to read "dark" things. They have the moral framework in place that will allow them to put the "darkness" in its proper context. For those kids who lack moral direction from home, they will be directed to books that deal with more mainstream content, and which might serve to reinforce those values that will allow them to be contributing members of society.

I see no other way to go.
 
I was reading The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant in 7th grade. Rape, Death, Despair, you name it.

If preteen stuff is as the article says, I'll just have my preteen skip the YA crap and go straight to adult reading.

The real danger is in the cell phones and texting at that age, not in reading adult targeted novels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top