The Homework Never Ends Constantly I think of things I can’t complete

In Which I Am Ridiculed For Being Smart

(This post and its title are mostly tongue-in-cheek.)

Last night, I was thinking about Animorphs. While my mate was trying to fall asleep, I rambled on about Yeerks, annoying teenagers, 'those Kri-Kan/Klingon/Proud Warrior Race Guys', and that time Marco found an ant in the shower. Oh lawd, is dat sum nostalgia?

Today I called Mom. "Remember those years when I was obsessed with Animorphs?" Her answer was something like, "Uh, duuuuuh?"

So this morning, I went to my favorite ebooks channel on IRC, from which I have built the entire library that many of you have claimed is impressive. It's a so-so place; there are fun and irritating people there. I try not to strike up conversations for fear of being poked in the ear obsessively by an idiot I'll never meet again, but since I live with a man who doesn't read for pleasure, I sometimes get starved for like-minded conversation and take the dive.

I perused the @search results carefully. An op helpfully pointed me to a forum about Animorphs. That's when I made my only mistake of the morning.

<FekketCantenel> I'm a little concerned about actually sitting down and reading these
<FekketCantenel> since I'm very particular about only reading good books
<FekketCantenel> and these are YA
<FekketCantenel> ^ not good books
<FekketCantenel> with the singular exception of Megan Whalen Turner's Thief series

I can back this up.

1. Having been a book-devouring young adult at some point, I've read quite a bit of YA fiction. We visited the library during our weekly grocery runs, during which I would grab three or four books from the YA section, usually fantasy. By the time I switched to reading ebooks, I had become intimately familiar with the YA section. The kicker: With few exceptions, I can't remember any of these books. Of these exceptions, half of them were memorable because they were extremely bad. The vast majority of the ~thousand books I read during that ~five-year period were completely forgettable, cookie-cutter puddles of drool.
2. I've done five years of freelance work for a freelance editor. That doesn't sound nearly as impressive as I'd like, but believe me: It gives you a little insight into the publishing industry. You see teenaged and middle-aged amateurs who want to break in and become big names; they want to be the next Stephen King (yay!) or Dan Brown (shudder!). You then get two kinds: Those who are in complete denial and try to write an adult novel despite having no skill, experience, or interesting ideas, and those who recognize that they need practice and a paycheck and decide to write YA.
3. From my writing and editing experience, I've seen one exception. Megan Whalen Turner perfectly fits this picture I have in my head of an amateur writer who wants to get some practice . . . so she writes fantasy stories for her teenaged children. It almost fits the 'only create something you yourself would use' philosophy; it says, 'only create something your own children would enjoy'. It humanizes your goal.
4. YA fiction is, by its very nature, meant to be a cross between children's and adult fiction. The problem is that while you write specially for children and you write quality for adults, YA doesn't have quite the same demands in place. There aren't exacting requirements as with children's lit, and there aren't quality demands as with adult lit (but see below for contradictions to the latter). What you ultimately have, therefore, is a genre that can be as 'stupid' as children's literature (lacking coherent plots, complex characters, and interesting ideas), but aimed at a demographic that is viewed as adults. It's dumbed-down adult lit.
5. I've been a writer all my life. When I was a teenager and still an amateur (well, more of an amateur), I wrote YA fiction. Now that I've matured as a writer and have written what I'm told is excellent adult fiction (I find it hard to believe, but okay), I look back on all the YA work I ever did and it rings extremely hollow.

I just backed that up.

<smallq> maybe you just haven't read good YA?

As I had just said, I had read the excellent Queen's Thief series. I went on to mention more great YA. I have yet to test Animorphs but think it stands a fair chance of being decent, given the nostalgia-goggles I'll be reading it through. So . . . I've read some good YA.

<!sniffn> there is nothing inherently bad about YA books, there are good and bad examples just as with any genre

I get sniffn mixed up with the other ops, and I might owe him an apology for that. From what I remember, he's basically a cool guy.

Anyway, I just somewhat disproved his first statement and agreed with his second statement. This is one of those times when I feel like people can't keep up with me.

<!sniffn> now you might not like a particular genre, but that's a different issue ;)

The subject of genres is another beautiful nest of snakes. Maybe I'll get into it one day, but for now, it is, indeed, a different issue.

<FekketCantenel> YA attracts authors who are either amateurs or want to take a break from writing seriously
<FekketCantenel> it's not like children's lit, which requires a certain skill
<FekketCantenel> it's just adult lit dumbed down and written poorly

Here I summed up the arguments I presented more fully above. I apparently should have gone into more detail, because my eventual sparring partner dropped this confused gem:

<smallq> I think you're trolling.

From what I understand, 'trolling' (which I have never heard of before and in which I certainly have never accused anyone of engaging) is the act of speaking radical opinions in an attempt to anger others for your own pleasure (just like [insert name of vocal public figure you don't like]).

This ebooks channel is, as far as I know, entirely made up of adults, with a good subset of whom don't pay attention to YA. I was surprised to find a single person who took my comments negatively. Therefore, I did a pretty terrible job of trolling. After all, choosing your medium is the most important step.

* !sniffn agrees with smallq

I'm convinced that the friendly op was being sardonic. "Oh, yeah, she's being a troll by discussing a pretty obvious and redundant topic in a channel where no one is really interested. WINK."

<FekketCantenel> I know what I'm talking about

If you didn't notice it, start reading from the beginning and you'll find the several sections where I proved it.

<FekketCantenel> of course there are exceptions
<FekketCantenel> but they're just that
<FekketCantenel> heck, Series of Unforunate Events is technically YA
<FekketCantenel> and it's great
<FekketCantenel> so there, two exceptions
<FekketCantenel> come to think of it, Megan Whalen Turner and Lemony Snicket are two skilled authors who just don't dumb things down for the YA

Here's some other great/bearable fiction that Wikipedia claims is YA:

• Brian Jacques' Redwall series
• Flowers in the Attic by VC Andrews (I disagree that this is YA, since it has SPOILER ALERT a brother and sister going at it. Also, the rest of the incestu-crazy series is terrible.)
• Eoin Colfer's Artemis Fowl series
• CS Lewis' Narnia series
• Hatchet by Gary Poulson
• JK Rowling's Harry Potter series (ignoring the last few books)
• almost anything by Scott Westerfield
• Laurie Halse Anderson's Speak (elements of which affected Anna Rikan's characterization years later)
• the works of Charles de Lint, though his cookie-cutter fantasy selections are on the garbage side of the axis

That might look like a long and impressive list, but see it as I do: As isolated volumes scattered across an expansive set of shelves. The space between them is filled with drivel.

<smallq> The Queen's Theif is technically fantasy, you know

I don't understand this part. I hadn't mentioned fantasy, and I'm not sure whether smallq (whom I assume is male by default) was defending or lashing out at my beloved Thief trilogy.

<FekketCantenel> do you mean The Thief
* FekketCantenel likes 'The Queen's Thief' better as a title, wondering where you heard it
<smallq> series is called The Queen's Thief
<FekketCantenel> huh, I always just heard it called the Thief trilogy/series
<FekketCantenel> (series now that the fourth is coming out in April, to my great joy)

I had only rarely met another person who had heard of this trilogy (soon to be a series! yay!), so I had rarely heard of it by this name. Nonetheless, unforgiveable brainfart on my part.

<smallq> and EoUE isn't even serious.

I assume smallq is referring to SoUE, which I had mentioned. I'm not sure what he means in this offhanded comment, other than that SoUE was written as a sort of parody and that it can't be considered typical YA fiction.

<!sniffn> authors in their own words: http://collectingchildrensbooks.blogspot.com/2010/01/brunch-for-post-award-weekend.html (scroll down to IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WRITING FOR ADULTS AND CHILDREN?)
<!sniffn> interesting range of opinions
<!sniffn> there's a lot of both in that list

Here, sniffn reinforces my assumption that he's not really taking sides.

<FekketCantenel> writing for children != writing for YA
<FekketCantenel> "born from a futile desire to convince people that writing for youth wasn’t something I did when my brain was on vacation." haha
<smallq> I wonder if you've read stuff like To Kill The Mockingbird or Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret
<FekketCantenel> the former, read it, was meh
<FekketCantenel> the latter, haven't read it

Note that he keeps going back to the exceptions. 'Well, these are good YA books, so you must be wrong'. There are still a hundred YA books stacked between those two you just named, so I think I'm still in the lead in this race of the minds. Are there pizza rolls at the en

<FekketCantenel> what I'm gathering is that the difference is attitude
<FekketCantenel> same as with writing adult lit
<FekketCantenel> if you want to tell people a good story, you'll try harder
<FekketCantenel> if you just want a paycheck or are filling time between better books, it'll most likely be junk
<FekketCantenel> the problem is, YA is like a break that professionals take, or a good break-in area for amateurs
<FekketCantenel> hence the ratio tilts

If you missed the part of this blog post where I iterated this idea in detail, start from the beginning.

<smallq> that's true for any genre.
<FekketCantenel> yes, but more true for YA

It is at this point that I am baffled again.

<smallq> there's no "buts" here.

This is baffling to me.

<FekketCantenel> yyyyyyyyyyyes there are

This is me being baffled.

<smallq> there's a rule: 80% of everything is junk.
<!sniffn> sturgeon's law
<FekketCantenel> that's not hard and fast
<FekketCantenel> it's a generalization

My argument here is that 95% (conspicuously more than 80%) of YA fiction is junk. Sturgeon's Law is a nice idea, but it's not exact. From what I understand, it's a philosophy dictating focus on the more lucrative or enjoyable of a given set. 'Read 20% of fiction for 80% of the enjoyment'; okay, that makes sense. But it doesn't mean that exactly one out of five books you pick up are going to be enjoyable.

<smallq> so maybe you just need to select your books more carefully
<FekketCantenel> oh heck do I select them carefully
<FekketCantenel> go look at my Shelfari
<FekketCantenel> nine books I read a few pages and dump them
<FekketCantenel> one book I finish
<FekketCantenel> every five of those books, I enjoy

Ever since I wrote the above-linked article, the subject has been heavy on my mind. I often wonder if my reading habits are too picky and if I look like a moron for them. Logic, evidence, and those around me say 'no', but I'm a tiny bit obsessive.

<smallq> that's not selection.
<smallq> I dump 1 book out of every 10 I start

There are two ways to interpret this: The way smallq meant you to and the way I immediately did.

The way smallq meant you to interpret this statement: "I carefully read through reviews (and am gullible enough to believe the majority) and therefore magically end up with mostly great books."

The way I interpreted it because I speak English natively: "I'm a moron who either can't recognize a bad book or refuse to admit it, and am therefore better than you."

* FekketCantenel is more demanding of books
<FekketCantenel> and I read across genres, though it occurs to me that I've been on a fantasy kick in the past month

I already wrote about the former subject. As for the latter, maybe I need to write an article about genres. After all, I did write the Genre Masher.

<smallq> or you just grab everything you see and start reading without reading the reviews first :)

This is, I assume, in response to '/me is more demanding of books'. Now, I know I'm expecting a lot from the kind of dunce who picks fights in IRC channels, but I don't think smallq's high-and-mighty attitude is justified.

I see a current movement toward ignoring movie critics (and layman reviewers) in favor of one's own taste. It's the only way I can explain Avatar becoming the highest grossing movie of all time (obligatory: OF ALL TIME!).

This is yet another case of me being ahead of the curve, because I've had the same attitude about book reviews, both professional and layman, for a long time.

<FekketCantenel> I never trust reviews
<FekketCantenel> reviews tell me that Vladimir Nabakov is a genius
<FekketCantenel> and that Book of Eli sucked
<FekketCantenel> both are wrong

I'm an individual who has specific, personal tastes. I dislike trusting strangers to tell me what I'll like. My friends often have similar tastes, and have pointed me to great books and movies; therefore, I'll trust them most of the time. But if smallq sees 'blindly believing a hundred idiots he's never met' as a sign of intelligence, I see him as an unintelligent person.

<FekketCantenel> as a matter of fact, most of the stuff I've been trying to read over the past few years is 'must-read' sort of things
<FekketCantenel> that I feel left-out for having not tried
<FekketCantenel> 9 out of 10 turn out to be garbage, or at least I dislike them
<FekketCantenel> so that's where 'reading the reviews' gets me

For a massive list of these garbage books, see my Shelfari profile. Only rarely am I personally recommended a book that I can't stand.

<!sniffn> maybe reading isn't for you ;)

This still baffles me a little. Sure, it could still be ill-targeted sarcasm, but it mostly strikes me as close-minded. Only liking one out of ten books and not paying attention to reviews makes me a bad reader? What are the requirements for being a 'good' reader, then? Obeying the herd again and again, even when it leads me to junk? Only discard every . . . seventh book? Fifth? Second? None?

<FekketCantenel> nah, it makes that 1 out of 10 all the sweeter
<FekketCantenel> for instance, Across the Nightingale Floor was a pleasant surprise
<FekketCantenel> although the middle half was sort of boring and trope-heavy
<FekketCantenel> the beginning and ending were tight

I covered this concept at the end of my article on putting books down, linked above.

<!sniffn> ever read hyperion? just curious
<FekketCantenel> is that the one with the spiky guy on the cover
<FekketCantenel> that's high on my list
<!sniffn> yeah

Here I decide that sniffn was being sarcastic after all, if he still deigns to wonder if I've read this or that.

However, it is also here that I realize that smallq took me up on my suggestion to hunt down my Shelfari profile.

<smallq> um... I don't think we would ever agree on books.
<smallq> you gave 3 stars to Dan Brown's Deception Point and 2 to Asimov's Foundation :)
<FekketCantenel> at least I sat through Deception Point, though it was the book that convinced me that Dan Brown sucks
<FekketCantenel> to be fair, it was back before I figured out that I can PUT DOWN BOOKS I DON'T LIKE :D
<FekketCantenel> whereas Foundation was after

So began a brief session of me needlessly defending my opinions (which, I believe, are in my reviews posted on the mentioned books).

<smallq> and you gave 5 stars to Memoirs of Geisha :)
<FekketCantenel> beautiful book
<+robshot> hahaha... for FC, anything japanese is beautiful :)
<FekketCantenel> I'm no weeaboo

I suddenly feel as if someone should be spanking me.

<smallq> jeez, 4 stars to Angels and Demons?!
<FekketCantenel> Angels and Demons was the first Dan Brown book I ever read, and when I was 14 or so
<FekketCantenel> so it was all bright and new
<FekketCantenel> hence I liked it

This exchange is especially hilarious to anyone who knows me at all and has therefore heard me rant about the biggest hack in the world.

<FekketCantenel> as for us never agreeing, I'm a writer and book editor professionally, which changes my opinions on certain things
<FekketCantenel> like showing/telling and usage of tropes
<FekketCantenel> heck, it's an effort to read for pleasure
<FekketCantenel> nitpicking _can_ be fun, though
<FekketCantenel> one important thing is that once you understand those flaws, you won't repeat them when you write your own book
<FekketCantenel> so you kind of have to weigh blissful ignorance versus skill
<FekketCantenel> sort of a Tropes Will Ruin Your Life versus Tropes Are Good situation

If you missed the part above where I explained this part and also all the times I told you to go back and read it, I've lost you and would post a picture of a hamster if I were Jhonen Vasquez.

<smallq> that doesn't add any validity to your opinions :)

Here's a novel concept: I don't need to validate my opinions for you, dipshit. (This is what I should have told him, but I'm too nice to point out to people in person that they fail at social skills.)

<FekketCantenel> small, for the one who called me a troll earlier, you sure are jabbing me personally quite a lot
<FekketCantenel> just saying

(Okay, I lied. A little. At least I held back on calling him a 'dipshit' in front of the ops.)

<smallq> I didn't call YOU a troll, I said you were trolling

Ah, semantics, baffling last shelter of the criminally stupid.

<FekketCantenel> ...

This is me being baffled.

<smallq> because I usually see bashing a big group of people based on personal opinions as a trolling
<FekketCantenel> I, in turn, wasn't bashing people, but the YA genre
<smallq> um, yes, you kinda said they write poorly...
<FekketCantenel> and you said I troll
<FekketCantenel> so we're even
<FekketCantenel> now please stop attacking me personally
<smallq> am I attacking you right now?
* FekketCantenel does /ignore smallq for peace of mind

In case you can't tell, bafflement has led to fatigue. /ignore is a great tool for dealing with people too stupid to realize that they're wasting your time.

This human headache only intruded into my mind one last time, in the form of a log fragment someone pasted to me. This was after someone had asked me about my professional editing.

<FekketCantenel> Dad is one, he gives me work sometimes
<FekketCantenel> enough that I bash my face against a brick wall regularly
<FekketCantenel> between that and the writing, I'm apparently an English major now, according to someone who heard me going on about tropes
<smallq> huh, that means I'm a professional editor too.

I'm not sure what exactly this poorly-thought-out remark means, except that it was emitted by a pair of hands attached to a butt.

I worry that I look stupid because of my reading habits. However, maybe those who disapprove are the stupid ones. I've found one, anyway.