Criticizing YA-ish sensibilities is puzzling to me. What marks something as grown up? And why is that inherently better? I feel like if I could really understand that, I'd understand a lot more about people in general. In any case, that's one of my favorite stories by you. I read it in an anthology (was it in the Firebirds anthology?), and it was one of the ones that stuck with me.
Thanks! It was in New Magics, a Tor antho for YA, and in the Hartwell Best of for that particular year.
YAish means a happy ending--everything neatly resolved, without the horror and pain of a "real" story. Well, someone else can write that story, it takes all kinds, as I said. (Though the Filboid Studge approach to literature--that pain and horror and despair are somehow good for you, wiser, smarter, does puzzle me.)
Oh, yes, it was New Magics where I first encountered that story. I remember that whole anthology as being particularly good. I think Patrick Nielsen Hayden and I must have similar taste.
YAish means a happy ending--everything neatly resolved, without the horror and pain of a "real" story.
See, this is what troubles me. I've read many a non-pain-focused adult book with a happy ending in my time, and hope to read many more. But, having said that, I do confess that there are certain stories (and some of the ones I can think of off the top of my head did not end happily, as it turns out) I've read and thought, "This is clearly for kids." Usually that thought comes because something about the story feels false, though I can't always pinpoint what it is. I wouldn't put your story in that category at all (nor any of the other New Magics stories), but I'd like to work out where the line is for me, and what leads other people to draw that line a lot higher than I apparently do.
That's a question I've been pondering since this story first came out.
The most obvious divide (or so it seemed to me) is at wish fulfillment--the implication being that kids like that, and adults don't. Of course we know that that is not necessarily true. So then we have to define types of wish fulfillment. Then there is that divide between what adults think kids ought to like, and what kids actually like; the obvious examples being a handful of names that consistently win awards and plaudits for their grim realism and emotional pain . . . and kids don't like them. Then there is that divide between what one set of adults like, and another set avoids.
Not that kids like happy happy happy all the time. Not the least. Emo-drama is a popular item in the YA world. There is a great deal involved with what type of pain, how it all ends, the feeling you get during the book and what you come away with . . . the type of story and how it is handled, yadda yadda.
"I do not want to put down a story or book and feel worse than I did when I picked it up. Every so often I read a dystopian downer (I tried The Wind-up Girl at WFC) but so far, I haven't found any better insight in dystopias, any profound wisdom. Just a lot of bitterness, anxiety, fear, despair, sometimes grim courage aware of the pointlessness of effort, the powerlessness of the individual against entropy. I can get that from listening to ten minutes of the news. Or my own nightmares."
I thought that was extremely well said, and just wanted to add a hearty endorsement of that sentiment. I used to enjoy Greek tragedies when I was in my early 20s. Nowadays I don't want to experience a movie or a book that, as you say, makes me feel worse by the time I finish.
I guess there must be a thrill of some kind in plunging into the grim downer. Or maybe a sense of virtue. There's definitely in some critics a strong sense of moral superiority--which is kind of funny in a tweaky way.
All that you said. There is a sense of "moral duty" to some of this reading, a (incorrect) sense that you can't tell a "real" story or "do good" unless the story/book/movie is dreadfully grim. I think it's echoed in some of the criticism (and certainly in awards ceremonies). But I don't think grim=important is necessarily the case. I think you can have a serious moral dimension, address very serious issues, without going for serious grim. In fact, you can do it with comedy. And people are much likelier to swallow the message if their noses aren't constantly rubbed in shite.
I used to have a much stronger appetite for this sort of dystopic thing when I was younger. At one point in my life, I used to love a good wallow in the grim. It made me feel involved (and probably virtuous). But life and the news has too
( ... )
My experience is similar to yours. I was far more interested in dark and grim stories and films in my teens and early twenties, but as I grow older I have less tolerance for relentlessly dark and grim fiction. I don't know whether it's as someone above said - the older you grow the more experience you have with pain and the bad things in life in general - or whether I'm just turning mellow with age (I hope not).
I've also observed this tendency in the works of some writers. They start out writing extremely dark and depressing stuff, but as they age their work gradually becomes more hopeful.
I think the grim can be more interesting when one is young--one is testing one's limits, and also perhaps feels that it is somehow more meaningful (if not more daring), but as time goes on, it loses that lure of the shocking.
Comments 72
Reply
YAish means a happy ending--everything neatly resolved, without the horror and pain of a "real" story. Well, someone else can write that story, it takes all kinds, as I said. (Though the Filboid Studge approach to literature--that pain and horror and despair are somehow good for you, wiser, smarter, does puzzle me.)
Reply
YAish means a happy ending--everything neatly resolved, without the horror and pain of a "real" story.
See, this is what troubles me. I've read many a non-pain-focused adult book with a happy ending in my time, and hope to read many more. But, having said that, I do confess that there are certain stories (and some of the ones I can think of off the top of my head did not end happily, as it turns out) I've read and thought, "This is clearly for kids." Usually that thought comes because something about the story feels false, though I can't always pinpoint what it is. I wouldn't put your story in that category at all (nor any of the other New Magics stories), but I'd like to work out where the line is for me, and what leads other people to draw that line a lot higher than I apparently do.
Reply
The most obvious divide (or so it seemed to me) is at wish fulfillment--the implication being that kids like that, and adults don't. Of course we know that that is not necessarily true. So then we have to define types of wish fulfillment. Then there is that divide between what adults think kids ought to like, and what kids actually like; the obvious examples being a handful of names that consistently win awards and plaudits for their grim realism and emotional pain . . . and kids don't like them. Then there is that divide between what one set of adults like, and another set avoids.
Not that kids like happy happy happy all the time. Not the least. Emo-drama is a popular item in the YA world. There is a great deal involved with what type of pain, how it all ends, the feeling you get during the book and what you come away with . . . the type of story and how it is handled, yadda yadda.
Reply
"Well, the parents finally passed the test! We can let them in under Section // of Book //, which let Uncle Henry and Aunt Em into Oz."
"They didn't pass. They kept the wand away from the kids for a long time. They weren't even honest about it."
"Let's let them in on probation."
"Do the kids want them in? Wouldn't that be like your parents watching you in the swimming pool?"
[....]
Reply
Reply
I thought that was extremely well said, and just wanted to add a hearty endorsement of that sentiment. I used to enjoy Greek tragedies when I was in my early 20s. Nowadays I don't want to experience a movie or a book that, as you say, makes me feel worse by the time I finish.
Reply
Reply
All that you said. There is a sense of "moral duty" to some of this reading, a (incorrect) sense that you can't tell a "real" story or "do good" unless the story/book/movie is dreadfully grim. I think it's echoed in some of the criticism (and certainly in awards ceremonies). But I don't think grim=important is necessarily the case. I think you can have a serious moral dimension, address very serious issues, without going for serious grim. In fact, you can do it with comedy. And people are much likelier to swallow the message if their noses aren't constantly rubbed in shite.
I used to have a much stronger appetite for this sort of dystopic thing when I was younger. At one point in my life, I used to love a good wallow in the grim. It made me feel involved (and probably virtuous). But life and the news has too ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I've also observed this tendency in the works of some writers. They start out writing extremely dark and depressing stuff, but as they age their work gradually becomes more hopeful.
Cora
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I'm not into dystopias either! I want to feel better after reading a book.
Reply
Leave a comment