Why YA?

[Heliotrope]

The tendency for adults to be portrayed as flat stupid (in a lot of pop culture aimed at the youthful market, not simply YA books which I have minimal knowledge of) is kind of mind-boggling in a pandering way, or as you say, the adults just don't exist.

Only because I've done a bunch of research into the market (and keep in mind, I'm doing MG, not YA... so slightly different), this is a pretty important trope for a reason and goes as far back as the trombone-voiced invisible adults in Charlie Brown.

Think of it like technology. In any modern day horror or adventure story in order to achieve tension, the first thing the writers do is eliminate the technology... any ability that the characters have to access the outside world. So in a horror this means they will lose their cell phones or the computer system will go down, or it will be the technology itself that is the problem. Or, in large scale horror like The Walking Dead all technology will be eliminated completely. This gives the characters that sense of isolation, that inability to access help easily, the inability to band together in big numbers, etc... basically it creates more challenges = more conflict = more tension = more story. The same goes for outdoor adventure stories, wilderness survival stories, you get the idea.

With kids, adults are the like the equivalent of technology. If kids can just turn to adults all the time, then where are the challenges? What is the conflict... "Mrs. Watson, Joey is teasing me." "Joey, go the principles office, you are suspended." THE END.

Basic analysis but you get the idea. When a MG or YA story is filled with smart, competent adults then it takes the onus off of the young characters to do their own problem solving. They become passive instead of active, simpling asking for help from older, wiser adults all the time. When you give your story the Charlie Brown effect (eliminating the adults by making them either clueless, absent or downright invisible) then the story is focussed on the active participation of the young characters. Their choices, their mistakes, their obstacles, etc.

Does that make sense?

Many MG or YA books have amazing adult role models, but you will see that once the climax comes, just like in an adult horror or adventure story, something will happen that will eliminate that resource (like Dumbledoor's death) so that the young character is forced to act on their own. To take what they have learned and apply it independently without the help of their mentor.

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

Only because I've done a bunch of research into the market (and keep in mind, I'm doing MG, not YA... so slightly different), this is a pretty important trope for a reason and goes as far back as the trombone-voiced invisible adults in Charlie Brown.

Think of it like technology. In any modern day horror or adventure story in order to achieve tension, the first thing the writers do is eliminate the technology... any ability that the characters have to access the outside world. So in a horror this means they will lose their cell phones or the computer system will go down, or it will be the technology itself that is the problem. Or, in large scale horror like The Walking Dead all technology will be eliminated completely. This gives the characters that sense of isolation, that inability to access help easily, the inability to band together in big numbers, etc... basically it creates more challenges = more conflict = more tension = more story. The same goes for outdoor adventure stories, wilderness survival stories, you get the idea.

With kids, adults are the like the equivalent of technology. If kids can just turn to adults all the time, then where are the challenges? What is the conflict... "Mrs. Watson, Joey is teasing me." "Joey, go the principles office, you are suspended." THE END.

Basic analysis but you get the idea. When a MG or YA story is filled with smart, competent adults then it takes the onus off of the young characters to do their own problem solving. They become passive instead of active, simpling asking for help from older, wiser adults all the time. When you give your story the Charlie Brown effect (eliminating the adults by making them either clueless, absent or downright invisible) then the story is focussed on the active participation of the young characters. Their choices, their mistakes, their obstacles, etc.

Does that make sense?

Many MG or YA books have amazing adult role models, but you will see that once the climax comes, just like in an adult horror or adventure story, something will happen that will eliminate that resource (like Dumbledoor's death) so that the young character is forced to act on their own. To take what they have learned and apply it independently without the help of their mentor.

Heliotrope just explained it perfectly.

 

[FifthView]

But in Harry Potter, the kids are not acting alone, not even after Dumbledor dies at the end of the penultimate book. Doesn't the final book start out with a wedding party, many adults assembled? (Hope I am remembering correctly.) And then at the end those members of the Order of the Phoenix and teachers of Hogwarts are fighting against Voldmort’s army at the school. One memorable scene there has Ron’s mother slaying what's her name. And throughout, it's understood that the Order is fighting, even if often off-screen. So for me this is different than the ”Adults Are Meh” approach.

 

[Holoman]

People are confusing Middle Grade with Young Adult.

Adults being useless is an MG trope, not a YA trope. This is for 8-12 year olds. You can see it clearly in things like Percy Jackson and the first couple of Harry Potters, where the protagonist is too young to really do anything contributory unless the adults are useless. If the adults in HP are too adept then Harry wouldn't even need to do a thing, the adults would have sorted out Quirrell and the basilisk. These are MG books, not YA.

It isn't possible to have a young protagonist that actually is instrumental in a story unless the adults on his side have some serious limitation meaning they can't solve the problem for him.

You can clearly see the shift when HP goes YA, and the adults stop being useless, when Harry actually has enough maturity and ability to challenge other adults in a believable way.

 

[SeverinR]

Dah, I read the first line and was like, What is MG. So I went looking. Found it and came back and you pretty much defined it if I had read further.

One of the findings was a publisher that said he would reject manuscripts that didn't target the right audience, YA vs MG. But he would definitely have canned HP. Because I do agree with you it does start out as MG, then progresses to YA. (Of course, publishers/Lit agents are looking for a reason to get rid of most of the stuff cluttering their inbox/desk.)

 

[Heliotrope]

But in Harry Potter, the kids are not acting alone, not even after Dumbledor dies at the end of the penultimate book. Doesn't the final book start out with a wedding party, many adults assembled? (Hope I am remembering correctly.) And then at the end, those members of the Order of the Phoenix and teachers of Hogwarts are fighting against Voldmort’s army at the school. One memorable scene there has Ron’s mother slaying what's her name. And throughout, it's understood that the Order is fighting, even if often off-screen. So for me this is different than the ”Adults Are Meh” approach.

Yes, this is true. OK, let me explain using Stranger Things (because I know you are a fan).

The writers of Stranger Things did a great job of writing for all audiences.

If we were to dissect its major plots we would see that there is something for each age range. So the three young boys (middle schoolers *wink wink*) would be the MG plot. Nancy, Steve, and Jonothan would be the YA plot and Wynona Ryder and the Sheriff would be the adult plot.

Notice in the MG plot adults are essentially non-existent or pretty clueless, or like you pointed out the evil-bad guys. In the Middle-Grade plot the only adults involved are Mike's mom and dad, who come and go and are totally clueless that there is a little girl hidden in their basement. They don't question Mike too much about stuff, and the writers set it up so that Mike and his friends are pretty much unable to turn to them for any support as they wouldn't believe them anyway. Even when the bad guys show up at his house he asks his mother if they "are having any work done" but he doesn't explain to her what the situation is.

At the end (SPOILER ALERT) the cop and Winona Ryder help them with El, but then they leave them alone in the school to do their own thing, thus giving the writers the chance to give the kids their own battle. This is so classic MG. Parents are either non-existent or too far away to be of any use. This keeps the story revolving around the kids.

Now, with Nancy and Steve and Jonothan, things are pretty much the same, though there is more of a focus on the relationship with Jonothan trying to look after his mother, and Nancy trying to navigate her relationship with Steve and her relationship with her mother. This is typical YA. The parents are roadblocks to the goal, but they also need protecting. Parents or adults are usually more actively involved (like at the end of Harry Potter) but when push comes to shove the teenagers must ultimately act on their own to get anything done, so the same things happens for them at the end of the show as for Mike and his gang. The parents are too far away to help, so Nancy, Steve and Jon are forced to fight the monster in the house alone.

 

[FifthView]

Helio,

Those are accurate descriptions of what's happening in Stranger Things, but I don't think they are the whole story.

ST actually has active adults, although in this case it's only three helpful adults. (I'm including the science teacher ) We can look at each individual plot thread, but not a single one of those threads is THE plot or THE story.

And it's not uncommon for groups to break off and pursue their own objectives, even in non-YA stories. How many stories featuring adults as MCs will have those adults beating their heads against uncaring or ineffectual or antagonistic police forces, friends, spouses, etc.? It's not just a feature of YA fiction; I doubt it's actually absolutely required for YA. IF we are only considering adults who are absolute buffoons vs adults who are Gary Stus and Mary Sues able to solve anything easily, then those may seem the only two options and #1 would be the obvious choice. But adults are imperfect, lack information, make mistakes, have faults, and so forth, and I see no reason for eliminating them from the story in order to bolster YA stories. (Not that good stories without believable populations of adults are impossible, however.) However, as I wrote earlier, I may not be the ideal target for those marketing YA.

MG stories are different, I think, if for no other reason than that realistic stories featuring characters in that age group are likely to be too horrific for those readers. I mean, there's a fantastic element. What good is a slingshot and stones against....?

I like the way ST handled the three age groups. But I don't want to spoil the show for anyone who hasn't watched it, which makes discussion a little difficult.

 

[Heliotrope]

^^^^ Is EXACTLY what I'm trying to say

And it's not uncommon for groups to break off and pursue their own objectives, even in non-YA stories. How many stories featuring adults as MCs will have those adults beating their heads against uncaring or ineffectual or antagonistic police forces, friends, spouses, etc.?

^^^ Is so perfectly what I'm trying to say. As writers, we have to use everything we have, and we have to write to our audience. Kids want books about kids being heroes. Young teens want books about teens being heroes. MG, YA and adult books are all exactly the same, they just use different avenues of creating tension/conflict. In a MG we want the Middle Grader to be the hero, so we make that possible by eliminating help and forcing them to do it on their own... but that is no different then YA or Adult... it is all the same.

So this is why it drives me crazy when people comment on the "dumb adults in YA"... because are there not dumb adults in adult fiction? Yes. Do writers of adult fiction not take away the heroes resources when he needs them the most? Totally.

 

[FifthView]

Helio,

Are you saying there's no difference between YA and MG and Adult fiction?

One of the things driving me in this discussion is that I don't want use of young protagonists to automatically chuck whatever I write into the YA category, even if my MCs in a given project are all in that age group. That adult fiction, or fiction written for adults and intended to be read by adults, doesn't lose that potential. Of course, I think this is a given, but if we are saying that MG, YA, and Adult are essentially the same but simply with different ages for MCs, that's the implication.

I think it's that extreme for adult characters, that if they exist they must absolutely fall into one of those categories I gave earlier, that irritates, more than that some adults are represented as unhelpful and/or antagonistic. Maybe there's more to it, like the particular type of reaction to those adult figures. There are other features, like immature thinking patterns, obsessions, and so forth, for the young characters that add to the sense of pandering to a younger mindset, and not simply that adults are all caricatures.

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

On Goodreads "young adult" means "books with a protagonist between the ages of 12 and 18."

But, I don't think it's as much about a particular age as the maturity and the stage in life of the character. If you wrote a book about a society where people are considered by 15, and your main character was 16, but married and functioning as an adult in society, the characters age wouldn't make your book a young adult book.

A young adult book is one written FOR young adults, not ABOUT young adults, in my opinion .

 

[Heliotrope]

Ahhhh, I see, I think we are talking about two different things here.

You are talking about having young characters in your fiction without it being considered YA, and I'm talking about writing from the YA perspective.

You are talking about doing a GRRM type of scenario, where there are characters of all ages represented, and I'm talking specifically about writing for YA audiences, with only young characters.

I think you are talking about writing something like ST, where I'm talking about how, when writing a MG novel, my novel would be centered around Mike and crew, eliminating the older cast plot lines entirely.

I'm NOT saying there is no difference between MG, YA, and adult fiction (obviously), but what I am saying is that at the end of the day the goals are the same. Write to your audience, give them the experience they want, create a protagonist they can identify with or at least are interested in, give that protagonist conflict that the reader actually cares about or understands.

MG, YA, adult writers have to go about these goals in different ways, but at the end of the day the goals are the same.

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

The "all adults are clueless/ineffective" trope is something I see in MG. in YA I don't recall ever coming across anything like this, probably because the MC's are nearly adults. They don't depend on adults, they more often than not provide for and take care of themselves.

 

[Heliotrope]

A young adult book is one written FOR young adults, not ABOUT young adults, in my opinion .

I think ^^ is exactly right.

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

Something I've noticed: as a general rule, the MC in a YA book is a year or so older than the targeted audience. Most YA characters are about 17. 18 seems to be too old. Even though I doubt a 17 year old and a 22 year old are that different mentally.

(My characters are 14 and 17 at the start of the story, and 17 and 20 by its end...also, both are basically functioning as adults and one has a pregnant wife. Do I break the rule? I don't know.)

 

[FifthView]

Ahhhh, I see, I think we are talking about two different things here.

You are talking about having young characters in your fiction without it being considered YA, and I'm talking about writing from the YA perspective.

You are talking about doing a GRRM type of scenario, where there are characters of all ages represented, and I'm talking specifically about writing for YA audiences, with only young characters.

Well no, not precisely, since I've also been talking about Harry Potter, eh?

I think this goes back to something mentioned in the OP:

I imagine adults are less likely to enjoy YA fiction while I think most young teens and up are perfectly capable of/willing to pick up a non-YA book.

I was certainly one of those young teens, although at one point as a teen I was reading more science fiction than fantasy. Most of those SF novels featured adult male main characters. [Incidentally, did younger people nowadays like Guardians of the Galaxy?] I'd say that the vast majority of the novels I read as a teen did not feature teen MCs, although some did. (So, for examples from fantasy, besides reading the Thomas Covenant series, I was reading the Belgariad.) And I'm not sure those that featured some young protagonist would be considered YA these days.

I don't think I am a particular oddball, but I'd have to survey teens throughout the years to see if anything's changed. I know Sawyer Fredericks, who won The Voice at the age of 16 was asked what he was reading, and he responded that he was reading GRRM's ASOIAF.

So what does it mean to "target" the YA audience by writing the types of stories that are being described in this thread?

 

[Demesnedenoir]

17 and 22 are often a huge difference. The brain continues to mature until (at least) 25. The 22 year old me was very different than 17 me, damned near different people, and even after cognitive maturation experience continues to change the brain's outlook on life.

Something I've noticed: as a general rule, the MC in a YA book is a year or so older than the targeted audience. Most YA characters are about 17. 18 seems to be too old. Even though I doubt a 17 year old and a 22 year old are that different mentally.

(My characters are 14 and 17 at the start of the story, and 17 and 20 by its end...also, both are basically functioning as adults and one has a pregnant wife. Do I break the rule? I don't know.)

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

17 and 22 are often a huge difference. The brain continues to mature until (at least) 25. The 22 year old me was very different than 17 me, damned near different people, and even after cognitive maturation experience continues to change the brain's outlook on life.

Well, if you look at it that way....I guess people change throughout their ENTIRE lives.

 

[Russ]

Something I've noticed: as a general rule, the MC in a YA book is a year or so older than the targeted audience. Most YA characters are about 17. 18 seems to be too old. Even though I doubt a 17 year old and a 22 year old are that different mentally.

(My characters are 14 and 17 at the start of the story, and 17 and 20 by its end...also, both are basically functioning as adults and one has a pregnant wife. Do I break the rule? I don't know.)

Biology aside, in the modern world a 17 and 22 year old in first world countries are vastly different based on social/cultural influences.

 

[Holoman]

Something I've noticed: as a general rule, the MC in a YA book is a year or so older than the targeted audience. Most YA characters are about 17. 18 seems to be too old. Even though I doubt a 17 year old and a 22 year old are that different mentally.

(My characters are 14 and 17 at the start of the story, and 17 and 20 by its end...also, both are basically functioning as adults and one has a pregnant wife. Do I break the rule? I don't know.)

Oh you'll be different. When you're 22 you'll look back at your 17 yo self and think "what an idiot"

 

[Heliotrope]

FV, I'm unsure if we need to debate the merit of providing a variety of texts, with a variety of characters in a variety of situations at a variety of reading levels to people of all ages?

Obviously, teenagers read adults texts, as do kids. Hell, I read The Accidental Tourist when I was in fifth grade and got a hell of an education from some of the Dr. Romance books on my mom's bookcase

But it didn't make the Fear Street or Goose Bumps or Nancy Drew books any less engaging.

Edit: I teach seventh grade. Last year I had:

- 1 girl with autism who liked to read My Little Pony story books.
- 1 reluctant reader who had never found a book he liked who read War Horse ten times after I gave it to him.
- A group of around 5-6 kids at a grade 3 reading level who were still reading Diary of a Wimpy Kid.
- A group of 5-6 kids who had already finished Harry Potter and Percy Jackson when they were only 8 years old and had now moved onto GOT.
- A group of very religious students whose parents previewed all the books they read and were limited to a small selection of parent-approved novels.
- A group of students who preferred to read magazines and Video Game manuals.

You get the idea.