I have heard this before about other award-winners, including recipients of the prestigious Newberry Medal. I have just finished reading THE MIDWIFE'S APPRENTICE, a book by Karen Cushman, who previously had won a Newberry for CATHERINE, CALLED BIRDY.
Both books are set in the Middle Ages, and although the world they depict has its share of brutality, the books' two heroines, one a young lady and one a homeless village girl, don't engage in much derring-do. There is no magic. No sword fights, no quests, no battles, no deaths except from natural causes. "We recommend Karen Cushman," the librarians said, "but mostly those books are read aloud to classes by teachers."
All this has raised a question in my mind: Do kids consistently choose different books for themselves than adults would choose for them? Is that why Harry Potter and Katniss Everdene, but not Catherine called Birdy, became best-selling icons? And if what constitutes a really, really good book is not the same as judged by adults and by kids, then which should a writer be considering in shaping his or her story?
I have a YA novel coming out in November: FLASH POINT, from Viking. I wasn't much aware of this question while I was writing it. And now I don't know the answer--or how much appeal the novel might have to either audience--although it seems to me that I was trying for both. Now I'm wondering if that may have been a mistake, in that it may not be possible. The things they want in fiction seem very different.
7 comments:
I don't think that most adults and kids are looking for different things, per se. There are lots of adults who've read Harry Potter and The Hunger Games and love them (and then buy them for the kids they know).
Maybe the difference is in what's popular vs. what gets awards?
My own personal bias says Anju's onto something. I wonder if the Newberry committee--and librarians--has fallen into the trap other award committees have of valuing "literariness" over telling a good story. The whole literary/academic community seems to have lost track of the fact that one can tell a good story--one that has a plot and external-to-the-characters action--and still write "well," too. If kids are voting with their feet as it were when it comes to these books, librarians and YA award committees ought to be paying attention, not blaming the customer for liking the "wrong" things.
I have 2 teenage daughters who are voracious sci-fi/fantasy readers, as am I. I've read most of what they recommend to me, while they read very little of what I recommend to them. From what I've seen (and what I remember of how I read when I was in high school), they want books that are easy to get into quickly. They're not willing to wade through a lot of world-building before the action starts. Black-and-white plots (and characters) are preferred, too - I find I can predict the endings of their favourites when I'm halfway through the book.
Which doesn't mean I don't enjoy reading them - I do, some of them quite a lot. But they definitely fall at the easier end of the reading spectrum.
Alas, as Chris says, they want the easy-reading spectrum.
I recommend Allen Steele's APOLLO'S OUTCASTS, just read, also due out November--Heinlein for the 21st.
Among the best adolescent fiction that I've read is Philip Pullman's HIS DARK MATERIALS series. More intricate and exciting than Harry Potter and Hunger Games, and one feels that Pullman spent much time and energy in developing the plots and the characters.
I find this a very important question. One that I wish more publishers or authors were trying to answer. Who are authors really writing for if not for the youth of today? Who needs to satisfy the critics anyway?
I just listened to Richmal Crompton's earliest "William" stories (see Librivox.org).
She intended her stories to be for all ages, it seems, and this works well. William is funny also for adult readers.
If your story is good -- and accessible (that's the crucial thing) -- both audiences will buy it.
Post a Comment