Sunset without shadows

 

Let me start off by saying I’ve read more YA in the past three years, than I did as a young adult, or teenager, or adolescent or young person or whatever it is we’re supposed to call homo sapiens between twelve and eighteen. That said, the total number of YA books I’ve read all of is probably under twenty five.

 

Cory Doctorow is both right and wrong. What is he right and wrong about? Well, he states that teen sex belongs in Teen Lit, and it that he’s right. What he’s wrong about is why. He’s got a limited, and some might say prudish reason for s-e-x being in books. While it is a passable reason, my disagreement is more in the manner of scope than kind.

 

Sex belongs in literature[a], because art imitates life. Sex is not only the most hardwired form of human interaction it is one that occupies the attention of most humans on a pretty regular basis. Despite the best efforts of quacks who call themselves psychologists, the entire Victorian Era, various religions movements large and small, and others more motivated more by ick than facts sex is going to continue to be a part of peoples lives in ways that the small minded don’t approve of. While one can argue that teens have no business having sex, it’s really not a very good argument. It’s an activity with both social and biological pressure driving one towards it. It’s an activity that well is enjoyable and when you come right down to it is the only interaction between equals or near equals that is necessary for the continuation[b] of the species.

 

Further, the inclusion of sex in literature, can be used for a number of reasons. Not simply to push a characters or writers agenda or ideology, or to provide boogeyman stories about the dangers, but to present some of the reason why a teen might, or might not choose to have sex. Despite the positioning of some[c] simply because a writer chooses to have a character choose sex, or not doesn’t mean they are encouraging young adults to do the same, regardless of the consequences, assuming there are any, to their activities. It’s no more true that a writer who’s two sixteen year old characters decide to slip between the sheets is advocating that others do so than it is one they have one character kill another, consume an adult beverage, get into a fight, or take some more aggressive risk.

 

So in the simplest, shortest terms I can muster: Sex belongs in books for young adults because it’s a part of their lives, possibly in a way their parents would approve of, possibly not, but so are drugs, death, bad hair and early morning classes, regardless of anyone’s opinion of them, and taking that important an interaction entirely out of the landscape of human behavior is like painting pictures of sunset without shadows.

 

 

 

 

 

Scintillate. I hate this word in all it's shapes and forms.

I shall post three links.

These links are not safe for work.

I repeat NSFW!

The first is a link to something every  writer, editor, and agent should be required to read yearly.
http://ww3.telerama.com/~joseph/cooper/cooper.html
The second is a review and critical analysis of a history on American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War.
http://iwt.blogspot.com/2007/09/gigo.html
The third is a video that is just plain funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3xuZeFABdI

I'm always amazed by the weird things that people name their children. While people across the country have plunged deep into the well of weird and decided to call their children things like “Lexus” or Nicolas Cage naming his son “Kal El”, or Cher and Sonny naming their dear daughter “Chastity”, i can sorta forgive all of those. I mean seriously, they all exude the a quality or status that is in the right time and place admirable. That said, until very recently i thought celebrities had the worst naming habits. Seriously, with Demi Moore and Bruce Willis who otherwise appear to have a clue naming their children; Rumer Glenn, Tallulah Belle and Scout LaRue and Frank Zappa bestowing the positively abusive names Moon Unit, Ahmet Emuukha Rodan, Dweezil, and Diva on his brood it makes George Foreman giving all his sons the same name seem positively tame. Not to be out done Paula Yates entered the rings swinging and corked her bat with these lovely names; Heavenly Hiraani Tiger Lily, Fifi Trixibelle, Peaches Honeyblossom, and Pixie.

But alas, I am wrong. It seems the cruelest group of namers alive are the people who bring writers into the world. Really, how else do explain the never ending string of people who clearly read the submission guidelines on my website and then enter their names as “From Website” in the subject line?

Two words i wish never to see next to each other again;

• Undulating
• Rhythmic

and any of their conjugations.

Diminutive.

Really, i find this word nearly as horrifying in relation to books as i do the word Prologue. The reason for the near omniscient loathe i have for those words is that they are usually used in such a bad way as to drag down the quality of everything around them. In this case we have an author who's novel has been consistent in its use of plane language, very few words more than five to seven letters, and none you wouldn't expect you nine or ten year old grade level reader to breeze through. Its therefore jarring to have a character who hasn't said or thought a single polysyllabic use this word four or five times in the space of a chapter or two.

BAD!