What is the range for characters in young adult novels?

I have no clue about the genre, but it strikes me as not unlikely that even if an 18 year old could have an adult job and life, the book would still not be YA, because the protagonist is functioning as an adult.

However, is there some reason why a book about a 23 year old adult wouldn't fit just fine in some other genre?

 

Some publishers recommend the character to be ages 16-18 to be considered for a young adult. Age 23 would be in the New Adult fiction range. That is what I read about.

 

YA can be a convenient way to categorize books that don't really fit in any other genre. Just a sort of story about some stuff that happens to some people... not a thriller, not written in a literary style, not SF/F, not a romance... can be hard to market. If it can be presented as YA, that helps with the marketing.

But, yeah, the age limit is the kicker.

 

I agree with @BayView on this. Young adult means 'still at school' and there isn't much room to stretch that much further.

I know it can feel a bit silly but it's all about the shape of someone's life at that age. The rhythm of their life revolves around school. It's where they make friends and meet other kids their age, it's what gets them up in the morning whether they like it or not. They have to worry about not getting caught by teachers and parents, not just by police. It's a very unique and self contained phase of life, you know?

The point of writing a 'character just like you' is that you know a lot of things about their life already when you open the book. You might not know how they think and feel about that, you might not know the fine details. But just the fact that your character is someone the reader might meet at school gives them an immediate connection. They share the same worries, the same pattern of life.

The second you step outside of that then it becomes rather tenuous. Even for someone who is 18 and at college; it's a whole new world. Living in dorms, instead of with parents for example. You meet a much wider variety of people doing that, you suddenly have money of your own and are buying your own groceries. And of course in a lot of jurisdictions at 18 you can go to bars and that's way outside what most teens experience. That doesn't mean it couldn't be done but it'll be a lot harder to work with.

I really feel that if you are going to write a YA book then it needs to have characters who are at least school age even if it's not set inside school. You need the pattern that they get up and go to school, they come home and do homework (or not) and are trying to fit their fun stuff in around that. You need to have parental relationships in the book, something that is a huge part of every teens life. And it may sound cynical but for those readers; you need to speak to their experience to get them interested. Teens are brighter than most people give them credit for but they are still young and inexperienced and just haven't experienced what life outside school is like yet.

 

Couldn't the book just be self-published as a slice of life or a drama possibly with it's current age of character though? America needs to branch out into more genres anyway imo.

 

Typically I think like 10-18. No older than 18. If they're older than that its no longer marketable as YA. The thing that makes YA books YA is that they appeal to young adults, meaning MCs that are they're own age. Look at some of the most popular YA books: Harry Potter age 11-18. Katniss age 16-18. Divergent cast 16-18, Percy Jackson age 12. Bella Swan age 17-18.

 

It's a strange one because, as has been pointed out, 'young adult' in publishing means something very specific. In general conversation, a person talking about 'young adults' could feasibly be talking about a 21/23-year-old. But in publishing, no - the label very strictly ends at 18.

 

This is one of the biggest things that bugged me about Twilight. Edward was born in 1901 and Bella was like 16/17 when they fell in love he started stalking her and whatnot. Well, that and Edward lived through two world wars and not only didn't serve in either of them, and, as far as I can remember doesn't even mention either one of them.

 

To be honest the age difference wasn't my biggest complaint; it was the way that Bella hurts herself to get his attention. I mean, age difference is one thing but that is something terrifyingly unhealthy.

Hey teenage girls; if the guy you're crazy about doesn't love you back throw yourself off a cliff so he'll have to come and save you!

 

I thought she was just supposed to be base jumping to make herself feel alive. Edward was the one who thought she was killing herself because a vision of someone jumping off a cliff with no context is, well. Cause they said the people on the reservation did what she did all the time and no one got hurt.

Anyways, I find the most popular YA that have a fantastical setting don't focus as much on ages as they do hard scaling structures.

Examples are things like, class years in Harry Potter, Power Groups like in Percy Jackson, Traveler Ranks like in Pendragon, or Days in Keys to the kingdom. In all of those the characters are different ages. Quite a bit of the Pendragon books have the Characters as adults.

But these well defined power categories tend to be popular in YA. Lets call them what they are. Various interpretations of the concept of power levels like Anime have. Perhaps that is predisposing them to that way of thinking, but undefined or murky lore like in lotr, and Shannara I find plays better with adults than in the YA section.

 

Yeah, that whole Native American thing. Yeah, that was just somewhat less that not racist. Kind of offensive really. Seriously, the conflict of Native American Jacob being the one that Edward had to defend Bella against is just... scary brown man come to take your white women, so white guy comes, and of course wins. Not to mention her fixation of just skin colour. God knows how many times she used the phrase "russet coloured" in lieu of an actual description of someone. Like the only trait that matters is the colour of their skin. Anyway, rant aside.

I think YA has a real advantage when it comes to fantastical settings just for the reason that your characters are not hardened, jaded, cynical adults. They work really well as Watson characters in the milieu that is the world. Basically they're entering into the adult world with either no, or a bad idea of how that world works and this is good for the reader because it means that there's a reason for all of these fantastical elements to be explained to them through the main characters and usually by some sort of mentor figure who usually is a hardened, jaded, cynic who gets extra points for having substance abuse problems that they then abandon with no real struggle after their faith in humanity is restored by the pluck and courage of the protagonist.

 

You forgot that if its an adult novel then their has to be an indie pixie girl who scoffs at his cynicism and has wisdom beyond her years (aka she took a first year philosophy course). Bonus points if she has a fatal coughing sickness. Triple points if its cancer, especially if you introduce it with the clinical name and not just call it x cancer.

"I have Small-cell carcinoma." She says specifically so the MC has to ask her what that is. Just say lung cancer you pleb.

 

I realize that this is off-topic from the OP, and I'm not sure if you were being serious or sarcastic, but... you really don't see the value of being specific in something like that if it's a part of the plot?

 

I've never seen the TYPE of coughing sickness be very relevant to how it operates in the story so not really. I've not read every book in the world, but the only reason people seem to choose lung cancer of any kind is so they can have the "Fuck it I need a smoke" scene. Other than that it only exists to cause the sick girl to have a medical crisis at a dramatically appropriate moment. This is pretty much any coughing sickness.

Les Misérables (Mysterious Victorian Illness), Kite Runner (Cancer), Laura and the Silver Wolf (Leukemia? I think), The End of the Affair (Incompetent writing) does it hilariously stupidly. Look, if its adult fiction, I don't care what you have. You cough on screen and you are done. Doesn't matter what you have, it all acts the same. Thing is the illnesses in all those books/movies is different, but they all have the same 2 symptoms. You wouldn't know they where different if they didn't tell you though. You cough and then say you are fine, you just signed your death warrant.

 

Okay... that's not really what I was asking. You said:

My question was: You don't see the value of defining the type of cancer if it's part of the plot?

I ask because the choice you used in your example (small-cell) would be relevant in the case of someone dying from it, and there would absolutely be a point to naming the specific type instead of just saying 'lung cancer'.

And I understand the references you're making, but that also wasn't the question.

 

Let me abbreviate that.

My answer was: "It never is"

 

Interesting (and quite short-sighted) answer. Good to know how you think though.

 

Interesting, passive aggressive answer.

Look, if you wanna bother me for making fun of the wealth of hack plot in the world, this isn't really the place.

 

It's not intended to be a passive aggressive answer, and I wasn't bothering you for making fun of hack plots. I was pointing out that, when a main part of the plot, there is relevance between something like small cell lung cancer and non-small cell lung cancer. Also, that it's shortsighted to claim an absolute of 'it never is'. Just because you haven't seen it or thought of it yourself doesn't mean it doesn't or can't exist.

 

Hmm, perhaps I misinterpreted a genuine question about whether I consider plot relevant information need to know. As for literally considering it impossible, I have seen it done. The Plague Years, though mostly non-fiction is usually read as a novel. Its written like one. I was speaking in a connotative way. Let me unabbreviate.

When I said "It never is" I meant over all, in the archive of cultural artifacts for which the depiction of incurable illnesses are concerned; the nature of the illness is usually (but not with an absolute amount of certainty) irrelevant to the plot outside of a bid for sympathy or an attempt to lampshade bad philosophy. I am physically aware of the fact that examples are in existence, somewhere on earth. However, in general/as a rule/taken as a whole or how ever else you wish to word applying an over all principal that is generally but not perfectly applicable, it is not done for reasons other than those mentioned above.

Thats the last I will say on that because we are hijacking a thread that, as you mentioned before, has nothing to do with this. So if you wish to communicate to me about that something that isn't relevant to the thread, my mail box is always open for questions, concerns, or general tom foolery. But this thread is about making your YA fiction relatable to the target demographic of the writings of that genera, we have gone on too long.

 

It was just a question, not an attack. I don't really feel the need to continue talking about it as I don't think we're likely to land anywhere near the same page, but I appreciate you taking the time to clarify. /threadjack

My apologies @MilesTro

 

It was so she could hear Edward's voice, wasn't it? She only heard him when she was in danger, so she kept putting herself in danger.

 

To be honest it reads really unhealthy no matter how it's framed.

 

What it read was boring. The only reason I read it was because I read Ann Rice and said it was better, and my sister said it was not possible, so we traded. I got Twilight, she got my Ann Rice books.