Yes, I actually won a book via a little Twitter contest that Harper Collins ran the week before last. (What? You're still not on Twitter? Look at the things you're missing out on!) It arrived yesterday:
This sweet little volume is a collection of poems accompanied by whimsical drawings. And it's...warped. Think Shel Silverstein meets Tim Burton.
Of course, I grew up LOVING Shel Silverstein, and I can still recite several of my favorite poems from Where the Sidewalk Ends. So I can't deny that some of the poems in Forgive Me, I Meant to Do It made me smile.
They're not of Silverstein's ilk, to be sure. But they're amusing, and it was just plain FUN to receive this in the mail yesterday and sit down to read it.
The age listing on this book is "8 and up", and I have to admit I don't agree with this. Some of these poems are just...well, too "wrong" for an impressionable young mind. Wrong, as in Snow White turns ugly, leaves the dwarves, and goes off with the witch. And the Beast sort of...um...eats Beauty.
Wickedly funny on a certain level. But for an 8-year-old? Not so much. I wouldn't run out and buy this for my favorite lil' niece or nephew if I were you. (I have an 8-year-old niece. I would not let her have this book, and I'm pretty sure my sister wouldn't either.)
Still. A free book in the mail is enough to make me smile on any day.
How do you feel about age listings on books? What makes a book "okay" for an 8-year-old or a 12-year-old or "14 and up"? If you write MG or YA, do you think about the age range of the children for which you're writing stories?
Discuss! And I'll see you all on Monday.
*Edited to add: Please see Josh Getzler's comment in the comment box to further this discussion!*
This is a great question, Ms A, and it's very relevant these days. When I was just in England for the London Book Fair, I was talking with an editor who mentioned pretty casually that in British bookstores there really is no distinction between MG and YA--it's all in one area of, say, Waterstone's. In contrast, if you go to B&N, not only are they strictly divided--early readers, 8-10, 10-13--but also then the Teen section is often outside the B&N Jr. section. Let me tag onto Authoress's question (if I may :)), and ask which version do you like better.
ReplyDeleteHappy Friday!
Josh Getzler
My local B&N has a walled-off section (separated by a row of bookshelves and decorated with cartoon characters) just for young readers. Inside those walls are everything from picture books to MG. The YA section is all the way at the other side of the store, tacked on to the adult fiction section. In between is the non-fiction and all the tables offering board games and puzzles, coffee table books, and bestsellers. I like it this way.
ReplyDeleteMy daughter is just getting to the age where she's becoming interested in YA books, and she's excited to find books that appeal to her in the regular section of the store, rather than in the little kid department. I think it really helps parents make good choices that are appropriate as far as subject matter and reading level go, as well.
My kid might be a fairly advanced reader, but that doesn't mean she was ready for the issues raised in a lot of YA books. They simply raise questions that most 11-year-olds aren't interested in yet, regardless of their reading level.
Tough question. My own reading was not much censored as a kid, and we've done our best not to censor our children's reading (with one or two notable exceptions). I sometimes feel that the continued partitioning of books into smaller and smaller categories is a Bad Thing, that it can unintentionally limit readers (not just kids, either) by encouraging them to stick too much to a particular group.
ReplyDeleteA few years ago I got the Tender Morsels audio CD from the Young Adult section and was shocked beyond belief. After a brief battle with the library, I learned that even though the CD was recommended for 14 and up (I'd sooner hand my 14-year-old a Maxim) and the YA section was for patrons age 12-18 (it would certainly be educational for a twelve-year-old), that I was probably just old-fashioned and against the first amendment.
ReplyDeleteI told them I was not for censoring books. The author could write any thing they dang-well please. But I felt like sneaking an adult book into the kids section was the equivalent of showing a Cartoon Joe Camel smoking a cigarette. I'm sure many will disagree with me, and some of you probably loved Lanagan's book. For all I know it won an award.
But you can be sure I'll be accompanying my teenagers to the library until they're eighteen.
It depends on the individual child. At the age of eight, I would have been fascinated by the book and my daughter would have been, as well. My son, on the other hand, is about to turn eight, and he's more sensitive, so I wouldn't allow him to read it.
ReplyDeleteAs to divisions in book stores, I'm fine with YA seperated from the other children's books because the issues teens deal with are more closely related to adults than children. I just hope stores don't further divide children's from MG because there's such a wide range of reading interests and levels among children, and we don't want to stifle their reading through age segregation. My son reads both chapter and MG books because he's a second grader on a fifth grade reading level, and that's not entirely unique. There are lots of children who need the flexibility and variety that having a more inclusive section can give them.
I think a lot of it depends on the child, and on the parents. My kids have all read certain books that many other parents wouldn't dream of letting their kids read. The difference is that I read with them, sometimes before I give them the book, sometimes aloud to them, and we TALK about things that need talking about. My kids have all read the Hunger Games books, and they are 7, 8, and 10. We read them aloud. We talked about the situations, the conditions. We discussed sacrifice, and friendship, and political unrest. I put things in context. I answered questions. I listened. It is what works for our family. But I wouldn't presume that this would be appropriate for all children or all families.
ReplyDeleteThis class is especially relevant for me: my final exam in a children's literature class is next week, and this question was discussed almost every week.
ReplyDeleteMost of it depends on the individual child. I was reading things at age 8 that most of my classmates were saying they'd never recommend to children younger than 12. (Have you ever read A Tale Dark and Grimm? It's a bunch of fairy tales strung into a loose narrative, how they were originally told-- with death, and blood, and so forth. Horrified my classmates when they learned it was recommended for age 8, but I shrugged and agreed.)
Should parents be watching what kids read? You bet. Should parents be restricting what kids read? Possibly-- to a point. But if they're curious about something enough to read it, they'll probably read it whether you want them to or not. School libraries don't restrict the books in their collections, and middle schools will have some YA, but the softer stuff.
And there is soft and hard YA, though bookstores and libraries don't make that distinction. Tamora Pierce, Diane Duane, Vivian Vande Velde, and Kristin Cashore come to mind an the 'softer' side, and they're all fantasy writers because that's what I read/write. Tamora Pierce is sometimes classified as MG, which itself says something. There are others. The protagonists question-- and often outright defy-- authority, make mistakes, strike out on their own, and have to deal with the consequences. Relationships occur, but if there is sex, it's only implied or happens off-page. If there's swearing, it doesn't include the worst words, and tends not to occur very often.
I really appreciate that BN separates the YA from all the other children's literature. That way, my daughters can have free rein in their section. We have talked about recognizing the difference between real life and fiction and it's an ongoing discussion. I want them to be able to read to their heart's content, as much as possible. We'll see how it goes.
ReplyDeleteI was an uncensored, voracious reader as a child. When I was in the fifth grade, I went to a school that was only for fifth graders (this was public school and it was pretty awesome). One would assume that everything in a fifth grade school library was appropriate for fifth graders, so I checked out books as I pleased.
ReplyDeleteThus, I read my first sex scene. I was horrified. I'm fairly certain in retrospect it wasn't that graphic, but I wasn't ready for it. And it sort of gave me the feeling that I couldn't trust something I loved. Like being bitten by the family dog. I almost stopped reading. Luckily, my uncle got me into Star Wars books which (at the time) were all pretty much PG-13. I read Star Wars books exclusively until my seventh grade year--a year I simultaneously discovered Harry Potter, The Dragonriders of Pern, and the Wheel of Time. (Two of those series I probably couldn't have handled in fifth grade, but I was able to by the seventh).
I think books should come with content warnings. As a kid I wanted warnings. I refused to read any book that wasn't recommended to me by someone else until I was in college. Because you can't trust book locations in the store. Many adult books are ok for your kids to read, and many "teen" books aren't. And you can't tell by looking at the book which is which.
When I think about how easily I could have picked up A Game of Thrones at the bookstore, when I was a kid, it nauseates me. Thank goodness ASOIF didn't become popular until I was in college. (And btw I still wish that book had a content warning before eighteen year old me picked it up. I wasn't ready for that much excessive violence and sex even at that age.)
So yes, I'm pro content warnings or ratings of some kind.
I think the age designation is important for the under 10 crowd as they are still at a stage where the books need to be written with the learning reader in mind. However, once the kid is 12 and over, in my experience anyway, they gravitated towards the adult books in their chosen area whether it be Stephen King or Dean Koontz etc. I rarely saw a young person in my class choose a YA book - often simply because it was labeled such. THey were far more likely to grab an adult book especially in the areas of sci-fi, horror, and fantasy. I think the age designation is interesting because young readers are so vastly capable of reading at a sophisticated level (themes, language, etc) that is rarely reflected in YA. I think YA is more likely to appeal to a 12 year old than a teen reader who has already explored the adult world of books.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI applaud TZ for her approach to responsible parenting. I wish my parents had taken the time to discuss literature with me
ReplyDeleteI am fine with age listings.... it helps people make safe choices for their little ones.... but what about those old choose your adventure books??? Could it have two different ratings.... depending on what path you took???
ReplyDeleteIn my English class I am used to the groans that inevitably come before "WHY DO WE HAFTA READ THAT?" I notice a difference when we have library period once a week. The boys are heavy into genre stuff like science fiction while the girls tend towards the relationship books etc (if I can call them that). The girls have no problem with YA and seem to prefer it while the boys positively loathe it. When I asked why I got the usual eye-roll and grunt followed by the catch-all explanation of "'Cuz it's stoooopid!' But, further probing allowed me to glean that they want to read characters who are like them and their friends, talk like them, think about the same things they do and engage in the same behavior. They find that in adult books with a teen character, not in YA books. It is hard to argue because they do have a point. One need only eavesdrop in the cafeteria to hear what they actually talk about and how it is in another universe than what YA books portray.
ReplyDeleteI've never censored what my kids choose to read (they are 17, 10, 6 and 3).
ReplyDeleteThey gravitate towards books they're interested in. I don't think many children would sit there reading something they found horrifying or beyond them in terms of understanding. When they go to the library, they pick out something they like the look/sound of.
If my 6 or 10 year old picked up something like Suzuma's Forbidden (which I thought was incredible) I'd expect them to discard it pretty quickly because it's not something they'd be interested in, or able to understand emotionally.
My point is that children have minds of their own. The only value I can see to putting age brackets on shelves is to direct adults who are buying gifts for kids who aren't their own to something that may be suitable. Kids themselves know what they like, what is 'suitable' for them. They don't need to be restricted, and they don't need to feel bad if they are 13 and want to read something that's been designated 8-12.
Incidentally, the only book I've ever been so disturbed by that I put it down, was Atwood's A Handmaid's Tale. I was a youngish adult at the time. I read many other works by Atwood after that and thought they were wonderful.
The point there being that people censor themselves, they know their own limits. Children are small people.
Very relevant question! Even though I don't have kids, I'm still quite sensitive to what the kids in my life are exposed to. If I don't know the book, I have found it best to get a copy from the library and pre-read it before buying as a gift. It didn't used to be that way, but so many YA books these days are more "R" rated than what I would consider kid/teen fare, and I am anything but a prude!
ReplyDeleteLike Ryan, I also complained to my library about a supposed YA item and said it should be moved to the adult section. To start with, the book was just poorly written and shouldn't have gotten published. I also bridled at the male author's female MC and his version of how the average teen girl dresses (like a pole dancer) and trolls for sex (wishful thinking on his part). But what bothered me most was the casual sex and extreme drug and alcohol use without consequences. The kids regularly got drunk, blacked out and woke up naked somewhere, or got drunk/high and did scary stunts with cars and boats and no one ever got hurt. In real life, you'd have bodies, pregnancies, and STD's, but in the book, kids didn't even get hung-over. The human brain isn't fully matured until around the age of 25; telling bored and impressionable 13-year-olds it's okay to chug beer and water ski is not a good idea.
I don't know why publishers, and the advertising world in general, seem to be in such a hurry to make our kids "mature". Let them be kids, let their minds wander and grow and explore at their own pace. There's plenty of time for sex and violence, what some sadly consider the "real world", as they get older and are better equipped to handle it. Maybe if we feed them positive reading/viewing material instead of negative, the next generation will be happier and make the world a better place!
I second DJ's observations. Children are not just mini-adults and the science now backs up the fact that the brain is indeed not fully formed until the early 20's. Until then, they do have less impulse control and less ability to evaluate consequences. I reccently got to visit a high school - someplace I had not been in about 20 years - as a guest speaker. When I was in the room, I looked around and I was a bit shocked. I thought 'why, these are, these are......children!' The boys looked so young and unformed, the girls a little more mature but still children. (And this was high school). And then I thought, these are not the same people that the media portrays - which I think is a function of getting 20 and 22 year olds to play Grade 10 students in movies and TV etc. It gives us the impression that our "kids" are far more mature and worldly than they in fact are. I think the age designation is good for books and I agree that if you are going to show bad behavior then at least show the consequences of it. One of the most odious things I ever saw in my life was a presenttion on MTV last year of the thankfully short-lived series SKINS. Judging from that, every teen was into drugs, drinking, meaningless sex, theft etc...and that is not the case. Hopefully it never will be or Lord help us all! :)
ReplyDeleteAnd I know this is off topic, but in response to last week's discussion about proper spelling and punctuation, I remembered a strip from a favorite comic, "Stone Soup" by Jan Eliot. In it, seventh-grade Holly is complaining about her English classes and how it's not needed in these days of computers. But Aunt Joan, a writer (of course!) proved the power of punctuation by moving just one comma:
ReplyDeleteWoman, without her man, is nothing.
Woman, without her, man is nothing.
Right there with ya, Owl! I hate reading how adult actors have to have their gray hairs touched up to play "teenagers"!
ReplyDeleteI would like to chime in on spelling to respond to what DJ is saying. Lazy (and I am guilty) does not cut it. There isn't a kid in the world who does not know that you have to type an internet URL EXACTLY or you get nothing. So, if they can manage to type www.blondebimbosanddipsydudes without missin a letter then they can, damn it all, learn to spell properly. We now return to regular programming.
ReplyDeleteDolphin- you're right! My husband can't spell for beans, yet he gets every Harley-Davidson site correct!
ReplyDeleteWe won't tell him about the blonde bimbos one...
DJ and Owl, I loved your posts on today's teens... the stories were hilarious and so, so true. Every time I see a 16-year-old behind the wheel, I'm a bit astounded we allow them to drive!
ReplyDeleteOn the topic of reading--my ten-year-old son frankly devours The Hunger Games and Kane Chronicles books, which I would have found scary at that age. However, a "sports-themed book" about a 12-year-old with divorced parents really bothered him because of the heavy emotions (divorce) and because "the kids were using bad words." So personal levels of sensitivity do matter--what one kid can tolerate/enjoy, another will not.
That book sounds a lot like Roald Dahl's REVOLTING RHYMES--a set of reimagined fairy tales, in which Cinderella's Prince cuts off everyone's heads, Snow White steals the magic mirror to help the dwarves' improve their gambling streak, etc. Not kid's fare, but entertaining nonetheless.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I think age guidelines are helpful in terms of giving readers an idea of what kind of content they will find when they open the book. The kinds of things younger (MG) readers are experiencing are vastly different from those of older teens, so I think the MG/YA distinction is useful. I'm not sure the detailed breakdown Josh mentioned is necessary, though.
I don't mind the age distinctions and I think they can be helpful for some parents/children. What I find difficult right now as a parent is dealing with my son (10) who is at the crossover stage from middle grade to YA. Because of the way our bookstore and (to a lesser degree) library have the books separated, he's confused on where he should look.
ReplyDeleteFor example, the YA section in the bookstore is across the store from the "kids" section, so he rarely goes over there because *most* of the stuff he reads is in the MG books. At our library, book 1 of a series he devours was in the "independent readers" (ie--MG) section but when he went looking for book 2, it wasn't there... it was in the teen (YA) room.
Then again, I'm not big on censoring reading. Like Christine (and some others), I let him read Hunger Games without a thought, and he tends to be much more traumatized by things that more closely resemble his real life. Hunger Games we talk about, but anything too "contemporary" with themes of death and divorce and pain? He'd be a mess. Still, if he wanted to read something like that, I'd let him because he's old enough that he's allowed to confront the things that scare him. There's not much safer way to do that than books.
As a kid, and even now, reading books on difficult subject matter have always lead to a sense of validation. While my own difficult situations might have been different than those suffered in the books I read, the common sense of having survived somthing was there. I got to chip away at my own grief and loss by reading how others did it. I would never want to keep my kids from catharsis in this way. And the kids who don't have difficult circumstances at home? Those kids might need these books even more because it teaches them empathy.
ReplyDeleteAlso - sometimes it takes dramatic books to draw certain children to reading. I wasn't going to read the Hunger Games with my ten year old. Not so much because of subject matter, but comprehension. She finally wore me down, though, and I'm so glad she did. We read straight through all three books and now she's reading Graceling on her own. This was a kid who wouldn't touch a book with a ten foot pole.
So after all that rambling - I think mostly parents know what their kids can handle. But sometimes they are too protective, and over-protection never serves the child.
Honestly, I find age designations on most forms of media needless and a bit annoying.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a kid I was allowed to read anything I wanted to, and I did. For the most part I read appropriate things, and when I didn't it was me who realized they weren't and set the work aside without anyone telling me to. In this way, I learned personal discernment from a very early age and it has kept me in good stead since.
When I was young, I read a lot of adult literature. Now that I am older, I read mostly YA.
As for my own children, I let them read whatever they want and have found I can trust their judgement in what they can handle and what they can't. For example, my daughter has always been more sensitive to dark themes than my son, and she censors herself appropriately on most occasions. When she doesn't she realizes it without me telling her and adjusts her choices the next time.
Perhaps my children are unique in this ability, but I don't think so. I think it is a matter of talking and training and knowing thyself.
The book in your post is something I probably would have loved at 8 and so would my kids.
Remember, fairy tales were originally very dark before modern lit trends and Disney changed most of the endings to be rainbows and sunshine. The point of fairy tales long ago was mostly cautionary- a way for adults to warn themselves and their children of real dark things around the hearth-fire at night, but in a way that alluded to the danger instead of naming it outright which might call it forth.
As the mother of a seven year old, I'm always looking for age appropriateness when it comes to literature ad TV. But I also try to see what my daughter finds comfortable and I'm right there with her reading or watching to discuss or turn off as needed.
ReplyDeleteWho establishes the ages on books? I've been reading a lot of MG and YA books to educate myself for my own writing. I picked up one of Gantos' Joey Pigza books and was a bit put off by the content. His father's a recovering alcoholic who left the family and returns with suspicious amounts of money. He pumps Joey full of soda in the morning to get him going. Joey's father also tries bribing him with money. It's for 10 and up. My oldest son probably read some of these when he was that age. I didn't used to screen his books before he read them. It made me wonder how he dealt with the depiction of the father.
ReplyDeleteI'm running into the age problem with my own writing. Kids read up, but kid characters need to either behave on target for their age or above to be believable. But the kids actually reading the book may be several years under the character's age.
Parents need some sort of age information. It's impossible to read every book yourself first. Now that I'm reading many of these books, I know whether to pass them along to my kids. I also rely on book reviews to weed out anything inappropriate.
I agree that kids do self-select out of books sometimes. My oldest son started the Twilight books at age 11 and I warned him that he wouldn't be reading the final one. He stopped reading before he even finished the first one.
Although flawed, the age ratings do serve a purpose.
I would have hoped you would have prevented your child from reading Twilight because it is very bad writing :)
ReplyDelete@Liz & Jasmine - Twilight is better as a trilogy anyway :)
ReplyDeleteI know a lot of eight and nine year olds would love this book, just as they love Roald Dahl, Andy Griffith (if you don't laugh when you read his "The Very Bad Book" there is something wrong with you) and numerous other authors. I honestly think it depends on the mental age of your child and they can deal with a lot more than most adults give them credit for.
ReplyDeleteKids see things from a different perspective (my kid would think it was nice that the witch finally had a friend in Snow White) and quite frankly, a lot of undertones an adult picks up go straight over most children's heads.
A good example is old TV shows. I watch reruns of shows I used to watch as a kid and laugh more now than I did then because of all the "adult" jokes I had no idea about as a child. Books are the same. I read a Dr Suess book the other day, my kid saw it as an adventure, I saw it as an allegory to life.
As far as Twilight goes, I would prefer my daughters did not read it because the main character is an incredibly bad role model for them. But if they want to I wont stop them because they will find a way to read it anyway, at least if I know about it we can also discuss it.
I think the age divisions are there for parents who want to have some assurance that their children are not going to be exposed to anything beyond their ability to comprehend. I am sure that holds true for MG but may not always be the case with YA - many authors seem to now be into the 'shock and awe' style of writing where they think portraying children as drug-addled, foul-mouthed, sex addicted trolls is a slice or reality. The truth is that kids come in all shapes and sizes and with all levels of morality. You can no more control what your child reads than you can control what they see on the internet when you are not over their shoulder. I think the YA designation is rapidly morphing into a Harlequin romance type sub genre for tween girls. No boy I know even considers reading YA but girls go squeeeee over it - because the vast majority of it is their dream - a self-absorbed, cynical, snarky female MC who has been put upon by the world and yet can kick ass literally and figuratively. So, really YA has become a sub genre of women's fiction.
ReplyDeleteAs a single parent of two boys (ages 15 and 13) I lament the loss of books for my kids. They loved Hardy Boys from aout age 9 to 12 but now have out grown them. There is very little YA for them - it is all about girls and, boys just don't want to read a book about girls. I try to find some strong male characters by giving them books like The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton but those are about a world that is so far in the past that it has little relevance to them now. I wish we could have books about growing up that did not hinge on the MC's hatred of her parents (so common) and it disturbs me as a mother. I would like to see some books for boys in the YA category but that does not seem to be coming anytime soon. As far as the big stuff is concerned,,, Harry Potter was great but it is over now, Hunger Games is entertaining as long as you think it is cool that teenagers are killing one another (not a value or situation I want to share with my children) and Twilight, as was said earlier, is just so badly written as to be laughable. What is a mom of boys to do?
ReplyDeleteKids love over-the-top humour and hideous characters. That's made Dahl a best-loved writer (and South Park a popular show). It's not new, the Warner Bros cartoon have been entertaining the past three generations of kids with anvils falling on heads and ravenous Tasmanian Devils.
ReplyDeleteSo the Beast ate Beauty...? Most eight year olds would find what you describe hilarious, particularly if he farted afterwards. Others might turn up their noses at it. And of course, others may find it disturbing. It depends on the child.
I think a greater proportion of 8 year olds might be disturned by it if it was written in a scary way.
I suggested to my 9 year old he wait for a few years before reading the final three Harry Potters, due to concern he might find the violence and deaths of beloved characters disturbing. He went ahead and read them anyhow and although saddened, was not upset.
I think that kids are desensitised to violence in the media to a great extent.
I salute you for this question as I wear my teacher hat. It's so tricky to match kids to books. I teach 5th grade and the students read the range from Ramona to Hunger Games. It all depends on the kids intellectual and emotional niche.
ReplyDeleteMy son is a voracious reader - now 16 - and I like the idea of separate areas for children's/MG and YA as long as the decision regarding which books a child reads is still in the hands of the child's parents. I've let my son read adult Sci-Fi for years - he read ENDER'S GAME at eleven - but he was ready for it and I'd read it several times and could discuss it with him if he had questions.
ReplyDeleteMy general rule for sci-fi/fantasy (until he turned 14) was that if it was shelved in adult I had to have read it first. I read widely, so this wasn't a problem. Actually, he liked it because he was able to say "is this good?" - he hates reading books with unsatisfying endings, and he saw my rule as more of a guard against wasted time than a restriction on what he could and couldn't do.
I think every child is different, and ready for different things at different points, but I certainly felt better about letting my son roam in the bookstore when he was little knowing he'd only see age-appropriate things in his section.