YA fiction talks about bad stuff, guys

[naomi_jay]

I'm probably the last person to stumble upon the Wall Street Journal's article about YA fiction not being all about unicorns and rainbows, but if you haven't read it, you really should. And then you should read Jackie Kessler's wonderful response. I'm quite intrigued by all this, particularly since, you know, I just self-published a book rife with young people taking drugs, swearing profusely, and beating each other up. Ahem. I just don't know where to start, and I won't go on a rant, because Jackie Kessler pretty much says everything I'd want to say (only far more eloquently), but if I was going to add something it would be this:

I've said before I think if something happens in real life, it's worth discussing in fiction, so that applies to all the things the WSJ would prefer kids weren't reading about - self-harm, sexual abuse, sex, drugs, drinking, whatever. Because, you know, these things do happen and are happening and will happen, and pretending they don't doesn't help anyone. Rather than "normalising" these issues, YA books that deal with them can help kids (and adults) face their issues and seek out help. Rather than pretending this stuff doesn't happen and sweeping it under the rug, people should be encouraged to discuss and debate these issues, and then maybe the awful statistics Jackie Kessler lists in her post would be different.

Comments

[dwg.livejournal.com]

Basically, yes to all this. I tried to make my own post on the matter, but it keeps turning into a big ranty mess of swearing and >:| emoticons.

And I'm particularly irritated that the WSJ article comes off as, "b'awww, people aren't writing things in accordance to MY personal taste!" to which my kneejerk reactions are "fuck off!" and "why don't you write your own?" because I am from the Internet School of Flame War Arguments.

The real sticking point with me is the whole notion that books about topics like underaged sex, drugs, self-harm, sexual violence, etc. may be "normalised" when it already is. People are affected by these things every day, not just directly but friends/family too. The idea of either keeping people away from "dark, dark stuff," or promoting some kind of Stepford idealism isn't going to help anyone, people should be allowed to read whatever they want and it's mission accomplished if they can find a story they can relate to.

(I may not like some of the books out there, but that's my problem and nobody else's.)

[spiderling.livejournal.com]

AW is all up-in-arms over this. It always dies out quickly. People need to remember fiction is escapism! While a lot of all the bad things happen IRL a lot of it also DOESN'T. Fiction doesn't generally influence a lot of behavior (maybe philosophy gets to people- or the exact right thing at the right time) but just reading about drugs has never made anyone go out and do it.

[naomi-jay.livejournal.com]

Word. The minute someone starts decreeing what is and isn't okay to read, I start getting paranoid Orwellian anxieties.

[naomi-jay.livejournal.com]

I'm sure in a week or so, nobody will be talking about this anymore, but in a way that's a shame because I do think it's an important debate (the idea that we shouldn't be exposing teenagers to certain facets of life, that is).

On the other hand, I totally agree that reading about something doesn't necessarily make you do it. Reading Go Ask Alice never made me want to try drugs or prostitution, and reading Forever didn't make me want to shag my brothers. People just get things so ass-backwards sometimes.