18
OPINIONS THE REVIEW
ST. JOHN’S SCHOOL
At their best, Young Adult novels are inspirational, with characters that represent the complexities of teenage life, which begs the question: ILLUSTRATION | Jennifer Lin
Why are so many YA books today so cliche? By Annie Jones & Sophia Jazaeri
Y
oung Adult fiction is having an identity crisis. The genre has long provided teenagers entertaining social commentary à la Suzanne Collins’s “The Hunger Games” or S.E. Hinton’s “The Outsiders.” But after the dizzying success of the Twilight quadrilogy, YA authors learned that, in order to go mainstream, they need not speak to the tumultuousness of adolescence — they just need to hit the right tropes: enemy-to-lover cliches, fake dating plots and relationships in which partners are centuries apart in age. Cramming “The Book Thief” onto the same shelf as “Ugly Love” makes the genre nearly undefinable. The simplest description makes the most sense: Young Adult works aim to represent teenagers and our experiences. The early 21st century popularity of “The Maze Runner” and “Divergent” inspired a new obsession with YA, convincing publishers that they could profit on anything employing teen angst and normalizing sadly under-developed writing. Bestsellers like Tehereh Mafi’s “Shatter Me” (2011) seem to have received little to no editing. Who can forget such gems as “Raindrops are my only reminder that clouds have a heartbeat” and “His lips his lips his lips his lips his lips." At their best, YA novels are inspirational, with characters that represent the complexities of teenage life. Books like Angie Thomas’s “The Hate U Give,” and even pre-teen fiction like Rick Riordan’s Percy Jackson series, introduced millions of kids to heavy-hitting topics like disability, racism and homophobia. Who can forget the scene in “The House of Hades” in which an important queer character is outed by Cupid himself? Before reading
YA Recs from The Review Staff Six of Crows by Leigh Bardugo The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins Keeper of the Lost Cities by Shannon Messenger
The Heroes of Olympus Series by Rick Riordan Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger Eliza and Her Monsters by Francesca Zappia The Hate U Give by Angie Carter Scythe by Neal Shusterman Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson An Unkindness of Ghosts by Rivers Solomon
it, we did not know that kids our age could even be queer, and this spark, this connection, was shared by thousands around the world. Wanting to see yourself on the page, represented in some positive way, is universal. Teenagers may love the F. Scott Fitzgeralds and Mary Shelleys of the world, and we can engage with their literature as meaningfully as adults can, but those authors do not represent us. If we criticize YA, that’s because it is so important to us, and we want it to reflect teenage experiences. YA does not have to be trashy and half-baked — despite what publishers may think. Adults struggle to understand what teenagers truly care about, so authors and YA critics double down by discussing tired, albeit profitable, tropes. As a result of years of neglect, much of the most popular YA is completely soulless, and nowhere is this clearer than in dystopian novels. “Divergent” and “Shatter Me” have underdeveloped themes about the environment and independent thought, coming across as simplistic slogans: Climate Change Bad or Freedom Good. Every single one of the more than 80 “Warriors” books (a series of books about wild cats) — and their respective manga spinoffs — have more substance than Roth or Mafi could dream of. Readers can sense when an author is passionate about their story; it shines through on the page. Apparently, publishers don’t think teenagers can tell the difference. Only when authors and publishers truly understand the importance of YA can they see its next renaissance of Nico DiAngelos and Starr Carters. For now, publishing houses will continue to promote mostly uninspired novels that assume their audience cannot handle real-world issues, and the next generation of pre-teens will not have those life-changing revelations from books written just for them. They deserve better.
Overdosing on graphic content: How television for teenagers pushes the envelope too far By Cameron Ederle & Ella Piper Claffy
P
arents of teens in 2008 didn’t know how good they had it. Fourteen years ago, teenagers would curl up on their couch and watch the latest episode of “Gossip Girl,” an envelope-pushing series on the newly formed CW Network. Set in the world of elite Manhattanites, the show drew the ire of parents who decried it as mind-blowingly inappropriate. As the show is described at the beginning of every episode, the “scandalous lives of Manhattan’s elite” pale in comparison to the goings-on in current shows marketed to teens, like HBO’s latest culture shock series “Euphoria.” The series centers on Rue Bennett, played by Zendaya, a recovering teenage drug addict who surrounds herself with other delinquents. In just the first episode of “Euphoria,” teenagers shoot up heroin and a graphic scene depicts a transgender student sexually assaulted by her classmate’s father. As the show continues to bombard the audience with explicit content, it becomes apparent that “Euphoria” seeks to incite a
reaction rather than convey a deeper message. In fact, when we look at what aspects of “Euphoria” have been incorporated into pop culture, it is the fantastical cinematography and whimsical makeup that have gained the most traction. We gravitate toward elements that place our TV counterparts in a dreamlike world that we would like to inhabit. The relevant messages in “Euphoria” about friendship, recovery and not letting failures define us are lost in the troubling and salacious content. For decades, parents have feared that their children will emulate whatever they see on screen. But today’s teenagers enjoy “Euphoria” in spite of its graphic content — not because of it. While shows like “Gossip Girl” may have been considered scandalous a decade ago, they now offer the contemporary teen a dreamy escape. Even though the characters face problems in the original “Gossip Girl," they confront those problems at lavish penthouses, Parisian ateliers and afterschool trips to Bergdorf’s department store.
Teens can unwind with shows like “Gossip Girl” by engaging in the cartoonishly unrealistic plots of families who hire actors to steal trust funds or the time an anonymous donor dropped off $30,000 worth of champagne at the Constance Billard St. Jude's School. Although “Euphoria” is no more realistic than “Gossip Girl,” the conflicts it presents hit too close to home for many high school students. Our generation is constantly reminded that we live in an imperfect world with seemingly unresolvable issues we are all too aware of. It can be exhausting when real-life demons haunt your entertainment, too. And with the multitude of media outlets available, teen-oriented television shows bear less responsibility to comment on societal issues. In another 14 years, we might look back on shows like “Euphoria" and wonder what all the fuss was about. For now, teenage entertainment should hold on to the dreamy escapism that defined it in 2008, rather than lose its identity to vapid shock tactics and empty commentary.
Reviews for GOSSIPGIRL (2007)
A NASTY PIECE OF WORK -NEW YORK POST
MIND-BLOWINGLY INAPPROPIATE
-PARENTS TELEVISION COUNCIL
EVERY PARENT'S NIGHTMARE -BOSTON HERALD