Should YA books have a ratings system?

ETA (05/22/12): If anyone's interested, both Gayle Forman and Kiersten White have written fantastic posts about this same GalleyCat article. I encourage you to check them out!

Earlier today I read an interesting article from GalleyCat about YA books and how BYU professor Sarah Coyne thinks ratings might help parents decide what's appropriate for their kids to read. The article is pretty vague on what kind of rating system would be appropriate, but it seems to imply something similar to the MPAA ratings.

Now, this rating system would be awesome for two reasons: 1) it would allow readers to easily avoid certain content, and 2) wary parents would be able to purchase new books for their kids on short notice. Unfortunately, this ease-of-access comes with a pretty large downside. 

A ratings system based directly on "inappropriate" content encourages censorship. Many YA authors want to tell stories about dark and gritty things, but writing books is also a business. If high ratings on dark books mean that they won't sell, then we will see self-imposed censorship. And if we know anything about teen books, we know that there needs to be variety. Some kids need the reassurance that the world is not all puppies and rainbows. 

And despite all this clamor, there are resources that concerned parents can access right now. That's what book blogs and teen lit librarians are for. People critique for content all the time, and with the advent of smart phones, it's not difficult to get this information on short notice.

Of course, almost all media operates under a rating system nowadays, so I don't find it too surprising that I keep hearing about this potential rating system for YA books and I can see the value in it. However, if YA books had to be rated, I would personally prefer something similar to the current rating system for manga. Unlike other rating systems, this one focuses on targeted age groups along with specific content. This would help parents keep their younger teens from reading material written for a slightly older audience, which I think is the biggest issue at hand.

The thing about YA books is that the audience is really broad. There's a huge difference in maturity level between 13-year-olds and 17-year-olds, and it's really easy for adults to forget that. Because of this maturity difference, younger teens and older teens inherently want to read about vastly different things. And because everything is shelved together, it's super easy for a younger teen to pick up something that would be more appropriate for an older teen to read.

So theoretically, an age-based rating system would help protect younger teens without imposing censorship in the same fashion as a content-based system. Happy medium? Maybe? What do you guys think? If it makes parents more comfortable, should YA books have a rating system? Do you think it makes a difference on what kind of rating system is used? Or have I missed something important and would every rating system would lead to censorship? Tell me what you think in the comments.

The book your book could be

I don't know about you guys, but lately I've been reading a lot of different books that seem to rely on elements that are heavily important in my own WIP.

I'm not saying that these books are anything actually like my WIP. Because they're not. Really. But there are similarities that are easy enough for me to notice. Maybe they take place in a desert or maybe the main character gets debilitating headaches. Either way, reading a book like that is kind of a glimpse into the book my book could be.

And it freaks me out.

Every published book has something good to it--something that makes people like it and makes them want to buy it. So a lot of the time, when I'm reading these kinds of books, I lose all perspective. It goes something like this:

Hey, this is kinda similar to my book. Cool.
He/she/it wrote my book! D:<
And he/she/it wrote it better than me~!
And he/she/it is published!
Why am I not published?!
*cries in a corner*

See? Completely irrational. I mean, it's not like I've even queried or anything. Of course I'm not published yet.

Unfortunately, my sense of melodrama tends to stick around until I finish reading the book. It's difficult to be rational and remember why I love my book when I'm in the middle of being seduced by another.

So I guess I just wanted to remind everyone: don't be irrational about your WIP, especially when it comes to published books. Your WIP might be like something, but it's not that thing. It will never be that thing--your story will be brilliant and sparkling all by itself. So don't go changing your writing in response to similar books, okay? That would be stupid, because you should always be writing what you want to write.

Now that the PSA is out of the way, tell me, how do you feel when you read published books that share an element with your own WIP? Do you take as a challenge to write something similar, but better? Or do you have a mini-meltdown like me? Tell me in the comments!

Local libraries and e-books

Okay, remember last month when I talked about my feelings on the Kindle 3 after having one for a year? Well, something has changed since then and now. Something that is worth telling you guys.

My local library started lending e-books. And I love it, for several simple reasons:

• It's easy. You think pirating books is easy? Well, checking out an e-book is easier and 100% legal. All you do is select the book of your choice, and, if you're using a Kindle, download it through Amazon like any other e-book.
• You don't have to go to the physical library to check books out. As long as you have a computer and wi-fi access for your e-reader (3G is apparently out for now), you can check out books from anywhere and at anytime your heart desires.
• As such, you don't necessarily have to live near your library of choice, as long as you have a library card. Maybe your nearest library is over an hour away? Well, it's not a whole lot easier to support it. Maybe you're going on vacation? Well, support your local library from across the world!
• Your library books expire on their own. That means no more worrying about getting your books back on time and no more overdue book fees.

Of course, several of these things are a bit troublesome for the future of libraries. There's a lot of debate going on about whether libraries should have to pay for multiple e-book licenses, whether they should have to buy new licenses after a certain number of lendings in order to compensate for traditional book "wear and tear," and how they are going to survive without the funds provided by overdue book fees.

I don't have any solutions for these problems, but I can definitely say that I love the convenience of checking out an e-book via my local library. It doesn't seem like a feature that would be going away anytime soon, so I guess I'm curious as to what you guys think.

So how do you feel about the e-book revolution in regards to the traditional library? Should libraries be treating e-books the same way they treat normal book checkouts? And, of course, have you ever checked out an e-book from your local library, or are you still waiting for it to offer the service? Tell me your thoughts in the comments.

One year with a Kindle 3

About a year ago I got a Kindle 3 and joined the world of e-books. Despite appearances, I was a bit wary about having an e-reader. Why? I just happen be one of those tactile people who like collecting things, so the idea of hardcovers arranged neatly on my shelf is a happy one. Either way, I thought I'd give you an overview of my thoughts after a year of e-reader happiness.

The good:

• E-ink. As a person who gets migraines from eye strain, this is a Big Deal to me. Screw backlit LCD screens--when you want to be reading something for hours on end, e-ink is the way to go.
• With programs liks calibre and DownloadStory, you can read nearly anything on the Kindle, including fanfiction and unpublished manuscripts. I love being able to do this.
• Reading while eating, crocheting, etcetera is now completely possible. Without, you know, crumbling up the pages of your book or losing your place.
• Say you secretly love romance novels, but you don't want anyone else to know. With an e-reader, you can now read your romance novels everywhere with complete anonymity.
• Kindles come with a built-in dictionary. This is fabulous.

The bad:

• With the black and white screen, it's not quite the same as having a gorgeous slip cover or colored ink. Then again, if you care about that kind of thing, you'll probably be buying hardcovers anyway. I still do when it matters.
• You can't really get a book signed. I mean, if I'd purchased the e-book version of The Fault in Our Stars, I wouldn't have gotten a hanklerfish. And I like my hanklerfish.
• Honestly, the Kindle's organization system is a little lacking. There are no nested folders, you can't directly delete anything from a collection, and it a bit wieldy to even get things into collections.

So, do you have an e-reader? If so, which kind (Kindle, Nook, Kobo, etc?) and what do you think about it? Has your e-reader replaced traditional books for you, or do you still indulge in the occasional hardback? Tell me what you think in the comments.

Printz award book challenge

ETA (01/09/12): Well, after some more digging around, it looks like there isn't a year-long challenge specifically for Printz award books. So . . . I'm going to host one just because I want to. :) Go to the tab at the top of the blog or click here to check it out.

Haha, so I had this brilliant plan to host a reading challenge, and throughout all of my research on the matter I didn't succeed in finding a challenge that overlapped my own idea until about two days ago. Sigh.

Anyway, the challenge I was going to create was about Printz award books. In simple terms, the Michael L. Printz award is named for a librarian who was super active in the Young Adult Library Services Association and is pretty much THE young adult book award. If you read YA, you've probably see the seals before--they're giant, metallic P's:

Now what does this have to do with my reading challenge that isn't?

Well, I've only read three Printz winners (Ship Breaker, Going Bovine, and Monster) and six honor books (Stolen, The Monstrumologist, The Book Thief, The House of the Scorpion, The Body of Christopher Creed, and Angus, Thongs, and Full Frontal Snogging). As of right now there are 12 winners and 45 honor books. I obviously need to read some more of them. And if I need to read some more, there's a good chance that YOU should too.

I'm not hosting it anymore, but if you're interested in tackling some of the Printz award books too, check out The Printz Project. It's a perpetual challenge instead of a year-based challenge, but it definitely deserves a little attention.

So, have you guys read any Printz winners or honor books? If so, which ones and what did you think about them? Also, what kinds of reading goals are you planning to tackle in 2012? I'm planning on reading some more Printz books, but the only definitive challenge I'm going for is the Goodreads 2012 Reading Challenge. Tell me what you're up to in the comments!

Book turnoffs

Well, today's post is a wee bit late as last night I succumbed to something called The Migraine. Wooo. So I'm really quickly going to talk about something that's been on my mind lately.

A while ago I talked about reading "meh" books and how I usually finish them. What I didn't talk about where those niggling story elements that alienate me right off the bat. The, shall we say, book turnoffs? We all have them--specific topics that we don't care to read about because we can't relate or we think they're boring or, well, any number of reasons.

My list is pretty short, but here, check it:

• Paranormal hunting. Hunting demons, hunting werewolves, etc, etc, etc.
• FAERIES IN NIGHTCLUBS. Or really, nightclubs in general.
• Mean Girls style high school drama. More specifically, super cliché Mean Girls high school drama.
• Vampires. I didn't even care about vampires before they were cool.
• Too much satire. I just can't handle it.
• Books that start with someone waking up and their morning routine . . . who cares?!

That's not to say that there aren't good books about these topics. Because there are! There are always exceptions, and I've read some of them. The DUFF has wonderful nightclub scenes, Before I Fall is a fantastic book full of mean girls, and Sisters Red is my favorite book about hunting things to date. And, of course, I'm sure there are some fantastic vampire books out there . . . I just don't go looking for them.

So what about you guys? Are there any specific elements that throw you out of a story? Do you try to give those elements a chance, or do you drop the book as quick as possible? Also, do you have any recommendations for me in regards to my turnoffs? Tell me in the comments!

Do you finish "meh" books?

If you peruse the book/writing blog circles, you've probably seen this sentiment: There isn't enough time to be reading bad books.

In theory, this makes sense. I don't know about the rest of you, but I generally know pretty quick whether I'm going to like a book or not. Maybe it's the language or the elements of the story, but it only takes a couple chapters for that "off" feeling to set in. As Maggie Stiefvater said last Wednesday, writers start a book out with a certain number of "gimme points." Every time the author does something that irks the reader, they loose points, and the instant those points run out, the book gets dropped.

Now me? I'm pretty forgiving when I read a book. There are only a handful that I never bothered to finish.

You see, I always have this slight hope that things will get better by the end. That maybe if I read one more chapter, something awesome will happen. That somehow the book will wrap up so beautifully that everything I was feeling "meh" about in the beginning will fade away to nothingness.

Sometimes this happens, but very rarely. In my case, that's how I felt about Cassandra Clare's The Mortal Instruments. Even though I couldn't get into City of Bones, I forced myself to read the sequel, City of Ashes, and was happily surprised by how much I liked it. Needless to say, I've been on the bandwagon ever since. But only because I pushed forward.

Which makes me curious about what you guys think. What books have you read lately that you couldn't get into?  And how long does it take you to put down a book? Are there any story elements that turn you off immediately? Or do you always push through to the end, even when you could be reading something you enjoy more? Tell me in the comments.

On Shakespeare in high schools

I have an issue with Shakespeare.

It all goes back to my high school education. I remember years of Shakespearean learning units where we stared at blueprints of the Globe Theatre and read Romeo and Juliet aloud in class. I remember being forced to write mediocre sonnets and write essays on soliloquies that I only half understood. Most of all, I remember my teachers would consistently telling my class one thing, "Shakespeare is the one of the greatest writers of all time."

And that's where my issue comes in, because that's where my high school education cut off. There was no actual explanation of why Shakespeare is considered so highly. We spent so much time studying the plot of the plays, that we completely glossed over any sort of deeper meaning.

Some would argue that it's not necessary for high school students to get into the whys of Shakespeare. After all, the only reason that Shakespeare is taught in grade school is to expose young people to as much classic literature as possible. Why go into detail when many people will never use it past high school?

Personally, I think going into detail would help students actually enjoy studying Shakespeare. And I'm talking from personal experience as a kid who used to detest Shakespeare. When you start analyzing what King Lear has to say about humanity, it becomes a lot more interesting than the simple interpretation of a kingdom full of crazy people and traitorous kids.

Shakespearean plays did one great thing for literature: they caught the essence of humanity in a time period where people didn't want to explore what it meant to be human. They are some of the first works of thought provoking literature.

Just look at a handful of Shakespeare's great plays: Hamlet is all about indecision and the consequences of ones actions. The Tempest questions what it is to be human and what it means to grow older. Falstaff from the Henry IV Parts One and Two is considered one of the greatest Shakespearean characters because his attitude is so mercurial. It doesn't matter whether the play is a tragedy, a comedy, or a history--so many of them are deeper than they first appear.

Teens can understand these kinds of things. Teens know what it's like to be in love and to be betrayed. Teens are just starting to discover who they are and Shakespearean plays speak to all of those raw and real emotions.

Now I went to a public high school, so maybe I didn't experience the pinnacle of modern grade school education. Maybe some schools do a better job teaching the Shakespearean plays. Maybe it's just a lost cause and we should keep looking towards college degrees to educate us on Shakespeare. Either way, I want to know what you think.

Should high schools develop better teaching methods when it comes to Shakespeare? Or am I just being super idealistic? How was your education of Shakespeare? Was it good or bad? Tell me your thoughts in the comments.

Let your e-reader save your eyes

I know that many of you aren't sold on e-readers yet. There are various pros and cons, but we aren't going to wade through that quagmire today. Instead, I'm going to tell you an awesome feature of e-readers that doesn't involve reading books. And no, it's not games.

Right now I'm entering editing mode. The first thing I always do before tackling a major edit (after leaving my work to marinate for a while) is to re-read it. It's really helpful to go over everything one more time before whipping out the red pen and making things bleed. That way I don't accidentally try to cut important information or develop a plot point that is better trashed. Doing a once-over helps me visualize the work as a whole.

But, as many of you know, re-reading a manuscript on the computer is an eyestrain nightmare. Blame your LCD screen. Why? Because computer screens are shifted towards the blue end of the color spectrum, which also happens to be the end that our eyes have the most trouble focusing on. Your eyes have to work harder than normal and it causes all sorts of painful nightmares.

Eyestrain and I know each other very well. We are at war. But this time I won the battle.

To avoid reading all 102,000 words of my draft on my laptop I transferred the entire thing to my Kindle. Not only is it cool seeing your words as an e-book, you won't be sucked into the black hole of over-eager editing, and you won't get blinding computer headaches. Yay!

Those words on the Kindle? Yeah, those are totally mine.

I'm not sure about the Nook or other e-readers, but if you have a Kindle this is pretty easy to do. You can follow the helpful instructions at Amazon or use Calibre to convert documents and keep them organized. It's all pretty simple and it's definitely worth the effort.

How many of you guys have e-readers? Have any of you read manuscripts on them, or do you just focus on published works? If you don't have an e-reader, is this the kind of feature that might sway your opinion on them? Tell me in the comments.

Crush your writerly woes and read!

I feel like every time I have a lot of stuff to get done, the books that I reserved at the library weeks ago finally come in. And they all do this at once, despite the fact that the internet told me that there were 8 holds on one book and only 3 on the other.

This, of course, isn't me complaining. I'm always good with multiple piles of books cluttering up my desk. I mean, books are awesome and writers should read as many as they can get their grubby fingers on.

It astounds me that some writers don't read. If you want to study craft, the best way to go about it is by reading books. They don't have to be books in your genre or age group--just books in general. Reading is one of the best things you can do to make yourself a better writer because it shows you what publishable writing looks like.

And I know, the excuses are endless. Here is what I have to say to them:

• I don't want anything to influence my writing style (is that 100% a bad thing? really?)
• I would rather spend time with my own novel (uhh, self-centered much?)
• I'd rather do something completely unrelated when not writing (yet you want people to read your book?)
• I don't want to spend the money on new books (libraries! or free e-books!)

Frankly, these are all ridiculous (if you didn't get that from the snarky comments). You should be reading. A lot.

And to help motivate you, I present the idea of a reading goal. Turn reading into a competition and leave your fellow readers wallowing in the dust. There's nothing like the schadenfreude of crushing the unworthy!

Ahem.

Having a goal always makes things more exciting. There are a bunch of great reading challenges on the net, like the ebook challenge, the global book challenge, and the YA debut author challenge to mention a few. Personally, I'm participating in the Goodreads 2011 Reading Challenge and am aiming for at least 50 books this year.

So, what do you guys think? To read, or not to read? Have any of you set a reading challenge for 2011? If so, how are you doing on it? If not, well, it's never too late to start! Tell me your thoughts in the comments.

YA lit and first person narrative

I've noticed a trend lately. There's a good chance you've noticed it too if you read YA literature. It doesn't matter the genre really, this trend seems to fit any category. And no, it's not vampires.

It's first person narrative.

I suppose I should back up for the possibility that some of you have no idea what I'm talking about. Quick rundown time! First person, second person, and third person are the three basic types of point-of-view narration in writing. Here are the differences:

First Person: I like squid because they are cute.
Second Person: You like squid because they are cute.
Third Person: Sarah likes squid because they are cute.

I dare you to say Mr. Bobtail Squid isn't cute.

Now for some real life application: First person takes place in the head of a character. Second person is generally limited to Choose Your Own Adventure novels and instruction pamphlets. Third person is outside of a character's head and can take the form of a narrator. Ultimately, first person is really intimate, second person pulls the reader into the action, and third person can zoom in and out of narrative focus.

Now let's get back to what I was saying.

I don't have anything against first person narrative, but it's starting to feel like whenever I pick up a new YA book, it's always in first person! Maybe it's because it's so easy for people to relate to something written in first person, or maybe it's because all of the current writers happen to really like first person. Either way, first person narratives are really popular right now and I'm curious about the whys of the matter.

Personally, I've always felt that third person has a delightful flexibility. First person is fun to read and write too, but I usually stick to third. Which is maybe why this whole first person narrative explosion is confusing to me. I'm biased. So I'm turning the question to you guys.

Are you partial to the first, second, or third person narrative? Is one better than the other? Why? Do you like to write in one and read in another? Or doesn't it make a difference? Please tell me in the comments.

Books and e-books can coexist!

You've all heard about the great war of Pixels vs. Paper. There are numerous battles were people argue about the merits of e-books and physical books. There are lots of claims that e-books are going to ruin publishing and that the hardcover is going to die a horrid death. As someone with a Kindle and two six-foot-tall bookshelves, I dare to make the claim that books and e-books can live together happily.

Which is better?! Hardback? E-book?

If you ignore all of the drama around the publishing industry itself, the main issue with e-books is aesthetics. Sure, they're cheap and portable, but they're not pretty, they don't smell like paper, and they don't look impressive on your bookshelf.

Surprisingly, the same things can be said about paperbacks. They're cheap and portable. But they're not really pretty, they don't have the crisp paper thing that hardbacks have, and they don't look nearly as sexy on the shelf. Yet, no one is really convinced that paperbacks are a sign of the book apocalypse.

In fact, paperbacks and e-books are so similar that I agree with Eric over at Pimp My Novel. E-books aren't going to kill hardcovers. Instead they're going to replace the mass market paperback.

And is that really a problem?

Many of you are screaming, "Yes! Yes! of course it is! Yes!"

For me, not so much actually. I find that the things I buy in paperback are usually the things I'm less attached to, and it's been the same for e-books. I demand that my epic, multi-part sci-fi fantasies to be in hardcover, but that's about it. For example, I bought hardbacks of The Hunger Games Trilogy even after reading them on my Kindle.

I guess I just want everyone to realize that owning an e-reader isn't going to suddenly convince you to buy everything in e-book format. Maybe you want physical books, and that's perfectly fine. People just seem to forget that there are options and you can have all of them. Hardcovers and e-books live together in my household and it's working well.

If you're curious about e-books, go check out the e-reader displays at Best Buy or Staples. Or maybe look into the free Kindle Reading App, since it's not like you need an actual e-reader to read e-books.

What do you guys think? Agree? Disagree? Understand what I'm trying to say, or still think e-books are devil spawn? Tell me in the comments. I want to know.

Keep the spoilers underwraps

A book I've been anticipating recently came out. Unfortunately I was exposed to a giant spoiler about the ending, which irritates me beyond belief.

Now when I say "spoiler," I'm not talking about something obvious. I mean, everyone knows that in a romantic comedy the couple is going to get together by the end. No. I'm talking about the big spoilers. The "Luke, I am your father" spoilers. The spoilers that convince you to re-read the book so you can see all of the hints that you missed the first time.

I hate spoilers. The thing is, I'm kind of a plot whore--I lose the will to go on if I know how things end. I really don't understand why you would want to read the last page of a book before even starting it. Sad thing is, I'm sure that I'm not the only one.

I'm telling you guys this because I want you to realize that spoilers can ruin a book. Or a movie, or a video game, or anything else. Spoilers ruin things.

There are a bunch of authors out there that are so gracious about this. Even if their book came out months or years ago, they still censor their thoughts and words. Sure, this might have to do with the fact that they want you to buy their book and read it, but everyone else should be responsible too.

Just because you're not the author doesn't mean you shouldn't treat their works with respect. Reviews without spoiler warnings and obnoxious comments on Twitter aren't helping anyone. In fact, they're probably hurting your chances at connecting with people.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, be careful. Be considerate. Remember that not everyone has read the book or seen the movie.