Why are YA novels immediately recognizable as YA novels?

[haertig]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Of course, in the US, it's called middle school...

Back in my day, it was called "Junior High". So they're twiddling with near-synonyms in school names too - just like with juvenile, adolescent and young adult in book names.

In general, I think they are trying to find a name that sounds less negative or offensive, for the sake of better marketing. You see the same thing with describing different ethnicities - words that were once totally acceptable for describing a group of people are now taboo and may get you yelled at or beaten for using (and I'm not talking about the obviously derogatory terms, I'm talking normal, innocent conversational terms).

Young adult sounds more grown up than adolescent, which sounds more grown up than juvenile, which sounds more grownup than child - at least to someone currently in that age group.

The cool thing about getting old (like me), is you can enjoy the childish stuff again, without shame. In books, and other stuff too. As good as the movie "Saving Private Ryan" was, given a repeat viewing choice between that and say, "Tremors", I'd pick Tremors every time. Yeah, juvenile - but fun. And nowhere near as emotionally draining as Ryan.

[BookCat]

Originally Posted by lumpynose

I was disappointed to discover that those kids books weren't really written by Victor Appleton, and no doubt the same is true for the "author" of the Nancy Drew series, and the others but they had a stable of authors that they used.

Enid Blyton was accused of this because of the vast number of books she wrote. She always denied it. Both as a child of around 8 and as an 'old' adult I've read and enjoyed her 'Mystery' series.

I think YA and New Adult - especially the latter - are silly terms. I was reading D H Lawrence, Shakespeare, Dickens and Hardy etc by the time I was 15-16. Admittedly, I chose their shorter books (Tale of Two Cities, Under the Greenwood Tree) and the 'naughty' ones (Lady Chatterley, which really bored me at that age) but I tried, even though this wasn't for school. On the other hand, during the holidays between doing my O and A levels, I read all of the Paddington Bear books!

YA? We hadn't heard of YA.
We used to get up early, before we'd gone to bed, be beaten over the head with the Complete Works of Shakespeare, sent to school with no breakfast . . .
But you try telling the young of today, they just won't believe you!

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by BookCat

Enid Blyton was accused of this because of the vast number of books she wrote. She always denied it. Both as a child of around 8 and as an 'old' adult I've read and enjoyed her 'Mystery' series.

I think YA and New Adult - especially the latter - are silly terms. I was reading D H Lawrence, Shakespeare, Dickens and Hardy etc by the time I was 15-16. Admittedly, I chose their shorter books (Tale of Two Cities, Under the Greenwood Tree) and the 'naughty' ones (Lady Chatterley, which really bored me at that age) but I tried, even though this wasn't for school. On the other hand, during the holidays between doing my O and A levels, I read all of the Paddington Bear books!

YA? We hadn't heard of YA.
We used to get up early, before we'd gone to bed, be beaten over the head with the Complete Works of Shakespeare, sent to school with no breakfast . . .
But you try telling the young of today, they just won't believe you!

Yep, I read Moby Dick in the 8th grade and had Shakespeare every year in high school (8th grade through 12th grade, elementary school was 1st - 7th, we didn't need no stinkin' middle school/junior high!). Of course, I also read the kid's editions of various Jules Verne and Victor Hugo books in grade school, in addition to the usual Hardy Boys, Three Investigators, Encyclopedia Brown and the like.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by haertig

...
The cool thing about getting old (like me), is you can enjoy the childish stuff again, without shame. In books, and other stuff too. As good as the movie "Saving Private Ryan" was, given a repeat viewing choice between that and say, "Tremors", I'd pick Tremors every time. Yeah, juvenile - but fun. And nowhere near as emotionally draining as Ryan.

Amen! All those years of pretending that I was buy books for my niece and nephew, when it was really going to my secret stash of kids' books (hidden in a bookcase in my bedroom closet)! If you wanted to go to a Disney movie (before Disney movies were cool for adults) you had to borrow a couple of kids to go with you so people wouldn't just assume you were some sort of perv.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Right. Which is basically my entire objection in a nutshell. It's pointless as a descriptor.

Yes, I know all subgenre's are fuzzy and unclear, but it least they give a general idea as to what kind of content can be expected (scifi, fantasy, horror, thriller, etc...). The only thing the YA label brings to the table is: "expect young protags." That's it.

"What's the book about?"
"Youth."
"Good to know. Thanks."

It's not even a (sub)genre. Which is another aspect of my beef: it's being used like a genre/style when it's nothing but a marketing term that is largely useless to the reading world at large. People (youth included) look for books about something.


Agreed. Hence my complete unwillingness to acknowledge its usefulness to readers

It's not meant to be useful to readers.
That's why the tag has no defining story traits.

In many ways, the YA tag is the opposite of genre tags:
Genre tells the consumer (something of) what to expect in the story.
YA tells retailers who to expect in the customer base and where to shelve them.

It is meant to be a marketing highlight but it also has a ghettoi-izing component, hence the complaints by authors, since a lot of readers see YA as a warning not to expect a serious, deep story.

[DiapDealer]

So in short: YA is a message from Publishers to Retailers to shelve these books where they can be noticed by readers who may or may not be the right age to read them, and would probably notice them had they been shelved in the standard genre stacks they were already used to perusing for new material anyway (what with being "readers" and all). That about the gist?

[lumpynose]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

It's pointless as a descriptor.

Yep. My (internal) rant about a pointless descriptor was product. Companies no longer make shampoo, plastic silverware, masking tape, etc., they make product. Blech.

[JustinThought]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I never understood why the word "Adult" was used in YA in first place. They're clearly targeting adolescents not adults (though many adults--myself included sometimes--enjoy the stories as well). Why abuse the word "adult" when the perfectly apt "adolescent" is available (and is a perfect description of the intended primary target audience)?

It's all in marketing. To attract the adolescent reader, you have to make them "feel" bigger--hence the misuse of the word "adult" in the genre. Adolescents would probably eschew anything marked as "young teen" or "teen." --well, those few who are still able to read anything longer and more involved than a FB post, that is.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

... you had to borrow a couple of kids to go with you so people wouldn't just assume you were some sort of perv.

And petting zoos. I always wanted to go in there and pet the goats. But there was a long dry spell where disapproving glances kept me out, between the ages of 8 and 60. But now I can pay my money, proudly walk in there solo, and pet those bovidae!

[maddz]

Originally Posted by haertig

And petting zoos. I always wanted to go in there and pet the goats. But there was a long dry spell where disapproving glances kept me out, between the ages of 8 and 60. But now I can pay my money, proudly walk in there solo, and pet those bovidae!

Thanks for that, now I think I need brain bleach. A certain very naughty statue found at Pompeii popped into my mind.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by JustinThought

It's all in marketing. To attract the adolescent reader, you have to make them "feel" bigger--hence the misuse of the word "adult" in the genre. Adolescents would probably eschew anything marked as "young teen" or "teen."

I was with you until

--well, those few who are still able to read anything longer and more involved than a FB post, that is.

Which had a very 'get off my lawn!' vibe.

[hildea]

haertig, I'm curious: You said you can identify YA books within the first paragraph. Did you get my samples right?

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Can't say that I've ever seen any book labeled "middle grade".

I'm guessing you've had little or nothing to do with kidlit, then? Middle Grade is a standard publishing industry term across the USA, UK, Australia.

https://www.writerscentre.com.au/blo...grade-fiction/

[meeera]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Right. Which is basically my entire objection in a nutshell. It's pointless as a descriptor.

Yes, I know all subgenre's are fuzzy and unclear, but it least they give a general idea as to what kind of content can be expected (scifi, fantasy, horror, thriller, etc...). The only thing the YA label brings to the table is: "expect young protags.[...]

It's not even a (sub)genre.

Of course it's not a genre or a subgenre - all genres and subgenres (except perhaps erotic fiction and the goriest of dark horror) exist within YA and middle grade fiction. They are a marketing category based on a demographic. That doesn't make them descriptors useless to everyone.

[Thasaidon]

Originally Posted by BookCat

YA? We hadn't heard of YA.
We used to get up early, before we'd gone to bed, be beaten over the head with the Complete Works of Shakespeare, sent to school with no breakfast . . .
But you try telling the young of today, they just won't believe you!

Luxury!