I feel they have downfalls with both. I've noticed for most writers they either struggle with one more than the other and excel more with one or the other. I have never liked books that held my hand and gave me a play by play of exactly what was going on without letting me draw my own conclusions from the character's words and actions. I don't want the author's omniscient point of view. A good example of this is rhetorical questions the characters voice in order to try to get the reader to ask that question. That is lazy and poor writing. An author should be writing in such a way that I am already asking these questions without having them hand fed to me. To me, this is also a good indication the author assumes their audience is too stupid to think for themselves. Another thing that bothers me with YA fiction is that it is rife with bland characters and characters with "special snowflake" syndrome. Both of these extremes drive me up a wall. The bland characters who are dull and lifeless don't feel like real people. Characters who are outstanding at everything they could possibly partake in or be are equally unreal. I want characters to reach out and grab me and make me pay attention. I want characters I fall in love with because they are broken and beautiful all at once just like real people I love. A big issue I have with a lot of YA plots is a trope known as the broken Aesop. I could go on for paragraphs but I think that link to tv tropes will be much more concise. I do often think about what was lacking when I finish a book. I feel it helps me to become a better writer by learning what I can do to improve something. Basically what I mean by a character lacking is that they do not feel like a real person. Hope that clarifies my response.
How about the styles in YA fiction. Some of the ones I read have simple details and directly comes to the main point of the story.
I agree. But I think it's important to not encourage or facilitate this. While we want to engage them with a fun read, we should combine elements of both worlds. SOME backstory that's interesting with lots of "candy" to help the main text of the narrative flow. We need to help these adolescents with their overall growth, not just cater to their tastes! (hope that doesn't sound mean) :redface:
It depends on the type of story, but I usually imagine cities or suburbs for urban fantasy, moutnains, forests and kingdoms for High fantasy, and epic fantasy can be completely outrafeous as for setting and i would still beleive it so long as it was convincing. (aka: floating islands, tears in the fabric of the universe to another realm, etc.) as a teen reader myself i do not mind a fast-paced book, but i also like it when the author takes the itme to describe things in detail so i am not unpleasantly shocked by something in the setting.
I would love for it to shows us how the characters would interact with the vast world. As you know, not many younger adults get to explore the world to only their limits. So seeing how they would react to either a fantasy world of freedom, magic, and fighting. Or one that has broke out into a full out war would be interesting. I would like there to be a compelling story without there being a love interest. That would be satisfying. I would like to see them just exist in this giant world. Maybe play on their past in this world up until the main events.
You sir, deserve an award. I think 1984 and Brave New World should be more imposed into the public schools, it opens the eyes of readers if they pay attention.
The problem is that really... what becomes popular is rather random. On one hand, we do have stuff like Twilight, but on the other hand, we have books like a Song of Ice and Fire sell well. Granted, the latter isn't YA, however it does illustrate something doesn't have to be dumbed down to sell well. Additionally, I think a thing to consider isn't the depth itself, but how its presented. Not in writing style itself mind you, but rather, if such depth is forced onto the reader, whether they want it or not. Course, I'm not sure if I should be advising on this, seeing as how I'm so far outside the norm when it comes to interests it gets disturbing...
You may have been reading only kids or YA books so far and so only encountered poor writing skills in somewhat popular books. Nowadays the YA book world is in a completely chaotic state and that makes it impossible to set any standard on the qualities a book has that makes it sell many copies.
I also read some books aimed to adults written in sample sentences like James Patterson. I don't know if it is bad to have a lot of bestselling teen novels like that. But as long as many people buy them and read them, the company can still make a profit, and that doesn't sound bad at it.
Of course it is not bad for the companies. They no longer have to search for a great author when they can just find a lazy inarticulate hack like Patterson (my opinion of him) and sell air for gold. The problem lies in literature. As things are the level will keep dropping and more and more awful novels will start emerging.
Do you think teen literature is better than mainstream teen fiction? I usually read genre fiction novels because literacy books that focus on characters in real life bores me. I usually read books that has me interests like zombies, aliens, and unusual natural diasters.
As a Youth Services Librarian, I implore you: No more vampires, please! Unless you can add something extraordinary to the mix.
Essays, journals, memoirs, diaries, documentaries, histories, scientific papers, photographs, biographies, textbooks, travel books, blueprints, technical documentation, user manuals, diagrams and some journalism are all common examples of non-fiction works. Fiction literature is a narrative or other communicative work whose assertions and descriptions are not presumed to be factual. To kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men are both fiction novels.
