The year of living snobbishly
I've been thinking of fandom lately. I had an interesting discussion with a friend on how when we were young, being a fan meant analyzing the product one was a fan of, which most often meant finding faults in it. The writers/producers/directors/editors just didn't get this or that right or didn't have a very good understanding of the characters and how they should act. These days the act of being a fan appears to have gone back to the era of The Beatles, when fans don't seem to discuss the object of their fanaticism, but simply indulge in breathlessly extolling its virtues and accusing everyone who doesn't agree of elitism, bad taste, stupidity, or a delightful combination of those.
What I'm talking about is obviously Young Adult fiction.
I'm not pretending to be any less of a literary snob than I am. Because I am. And I'm not pissing on YA as a genre, though I don't think much of it, what with being a literary snob. The problem I have with YA is grown people reading it. And not even grown people reading it, because hey, I can read Remo novels in the privacy of my own home and enjoy them. What I have a problem with is grown people reading literature geared toward teenagers, and seemingly thinking nothing of it. Indeed, promoting them as something everyone should read. Indeed, becoming unnecessarily aggressive when it is suggested that YA is for young adults, not for people old enough to have an offspring of young adults.
Why do fans of YA get to reserve the right to pick and choose and say "It's not all stupid like Twilight", when those with opposite views have no such rights?Ok I'll get right on reading all of Laurell K. Hamilton's books before reading any other innovative pieces of YA fiction. Also every Harlequin romance ever published because those def aren't for kids.
I guess to someone the above seems like a very compelling argument in favor of YA... But I seriously doubt it ever comes down to a choice between Harlequin romance novels and YA novels. It hardly ever comes down to a choice between some Joanne Harris or Tom Clancy novels and YA novels. Still, there are arguments like the following, apparently in favor of reading YA, because literature for grown up people is bad.I'm sick of trying to find an adult book that isn't
- a mother with grown children finding herself after having a midlife crisis
- chick lit where the girl is a socialite, a model, working in the modelling, magazine or film industry behind the scenes, big on shopping and cute little lunches with "the girls" or all of the above put together
- how the family pet taught the family to laugh and love again
- journeying abroad and finding oneself
etc.
I don't remember ever reading a novel that fell in any of those categories, and I've read a few novels. But then again, I don't walk into a bookstore and stand there dithering in front of the bestsellers, where ones options are limited to novels about shopaholics and the myriad reincarnations of The Da Vince Code. I have a vast library at my home from which to choose (when in doubt, read some Martin Amis), and when I get new books, I look for new stuff from the authors I like, as well as stuff from authors who seem interesting. And it's never a detriment to a novel to have been awarded or shortlisted for a Man Booker Prize...
There's also the numerous "So teens shouldn't read and learn about this or that that's superbly portrayed in metaphors in this or that YA instant classic?" arguments, which miss the point entirely, so I'm not even going to discuss them. Then there's the "Well excuse me for wanting to know what my child reads so I could have meaningful conversations with him" argument, which also slightly misses the point, the point being that it's one thing to read the same novels ones teenage son or daughter reads to have more common ground, and a whole different thing to read nothing but literature geared for teenagers and excuse oneself by saying it's better than anything else available. And then there's this argument here:I guess this applies to the classics, too, huh? I mean, To Kill A Mockingbird is clearly off limits since it is told from a child's perspective, right? What about Catcher in the Rye? Huckleberry Finn? Treasure Island? The Adventures of Tom Sawyer?
Riiiiight.
What I'm talking about is obviously Young Adult fiction.
I'm not pretending to be any less of a literary snob than I am. Because I am. And I'm not pissing on YA as a genre, though I don't think much of it, what with being a literary snob. The problem I have with YA is grown people reading it. And not even grown people reading it, because hey, I can read Remo novels in the privacy of my own home and enjoy them. What I have a problem with is grown people reading literature geared toward teenagers, and seemingly thinking nothing of it. Indeed, promoting them as something everyone should read. Indeed, becoming unnecessarily aggressive when it is suggested that YA is for young adults, not for people old enough to have an offspring of young adults.
Why do fans of YA get to reserve the right to pick and choose and say "It's not all stupid like Twilight", when those with opposite views have no such rights?Ok I'll get right on reading all of Laurell K. Hamilton's books before reading any other innovative pieces of YA fiction. Also every Harlequin romance ever published because those def aren't for kids.
I guess to someone the above seems like a very compelling argument in favor of YA... But I seriously doubt it ever comes down to a choice between Harlequin romance novels and YA novels. It hardly ever comes down to a choice between some Joanne Harris or Tom Clancy novels and YA novels. Still, there are arguments like the following, apparently in favor of reading YA, because literature for grown up people is bad.I'm sick of trying to find an adult book that isn't
- a mother with grown children finding herself after having a midlife crisis
- chick lit where the girl is a socialite, a model, working in the modelling, magazine or film industry behind the scenes, big on shopping and cute little lunches with "the girls" or all of the above put together
- how the family pet taught the family to laugh and love again
- journeying abroad and finding oneself
etc.
I don't remember ever reading a novel that fell in any of those categories, and I've read a few novels. But then again, I don't walk into a bookstore and stand there dithering in front of the bestsellers, where ones options are limited to novels about shopaholics and the myriad reincarnations of The Da Vince Code. I have a vast library at my home from which to choose (when in doubt, read some Martin Amis), and when I get new books, I look for new stuff from the authors I like, as well as stuff from authors who seem interesting. And it's never a detriment to a novel to have been awarded or shortlisted for a Man Booker Prize...
There's also the numerous "So teens shouldn't read and learn about this or that that's superbly portrayed in metaphors in this or that YA instant classic?" arguments, which miss the point entirely, so I'm not even going to discuss them. Then there's the "Well excuse me for wanting to know what my child reads so I could have meaningful conversations with him" argument, which also slightly misses the point, the point being that it's one thing to read the same novels ones teenage son or daughter reads to have more common ground, and a whole different thing to read nothing but literature geared for teenagers and excuse oneself by saying it's better than anything else available. And then there's this argument here:I guess this applies to the classics, too, huh? I mean, To Kill A Mockingbird is clearly off limits since it is told from a child's perspective, right? What about Catcher in the Rye? Huckleberry Finn? Treasure Island? The Adventures of Tom Sawyer?
Riiiiight.