YA Literature Argument Essay

All over the world, teens aged 11-17 are reading shockingly gruesome “Young Adult Fiction Books” or YA books. These books cover a vast range of topics and ideas. Some examples include self-harm, sexual abuse, and homicide, but it doesn't stop there. The endless amount of gory topics could even merit an “R” rating for a movie. So, the question is, do we want to allow teens expose themselves to these YA books? This has been an ongoing debate throughout society for years. Critics and authors have been battling it out in articles and live banning debates in schools and libraries across the nation. YA literature should be limited, like in movies, by enforcing age restrictions for purchase or library checkouts, because of graphic content, loss of innocence within teens, and the negative influences it presents.

First of all, most YA literature is much too graphic for certain age groups. There is always going to be those younger kids who desire to do what the older kids can, so naturally they'll read the same books, even if they are too graphic. However, being so immature for example, pre-teens, these books should not be in their hands let alone their minds. “Reading about homicide isn't going to make a man a murderer; reading about cheating on exams won't make a kid break the honor code. It has to do with a child's happiness, moral development, and tenderness of heart. Entertainment does not merely gratify taste, after all, but creates it.” Clearly, a single story is not going to make a person who they are, but by reading gruesome YA books, one after another, teens and even younger kids will grow callous and maybe even become depressed. Obviously no one can work up a truly genuine smile after reading of something like a gory death or graphic rape, especially not younger adults. Even younger children may be trying to get their hands on these books, which, in the long run, are bad for their development, and can adversely affect how kind and selfless they could grow up to be. Another thing it affects is children's taste. People who read graphic content grow to have YA fiction as their only reading preference. For example, mystery murder stories, or tales solely about homicide and finding the killer. No worries for the grieving family, no mention of any funeral. If this grows into a “child's taste” in literature then what can we expect them to become as adults? This graphic material must be restricted because of these long term negative effects.

Secondly, YA books introduce teens to new concepts or ideas that cause a loss of innocence. After being exposed to gruesome topics, teens aren’t just going to forget them. The stories will linger in their minds and once read, they can't be untold. “(In) the latest novel by 'this generation's Judy Blume,' otherwise known as Lauren Myracle, a close friend of the victim, is herself yet to recover from a sexual assault in eighth grade; assorted locals, meanwhile, reveal themselves to be in the grip of homophobia, booze and crystal meths.” and “Acquaints us with the concept of 'bag fags,' heterosexuals who engage in gay sex for drugs”. After reading this, you can experience how twisted books have become. It is known that sexual abuse is a realistic problem in the world and that Myracle's book tackles recovering from it, but in the eighth grade? No one desires to read about a twelve or thirteen year old being raped. It's sickening, depraved, uncommon, and younger readers should not be subjected to read such material. Also the concept of “bag fags” is not only offensive to some but also opens up new ideas and a pathway for obtaining drugs. Selling yourself suggests new ways for teens to get what they want when that shouldn't even be an option. Obtaining drugs also shouldn't be viewed as a normal everyday thing to do, as portrayed in Myracle’s book. It also can’t be that hard for teens to hold off on reading  the really graphic stuff. “Adolescence is brief; it comes to each of us only once, so whether the debate has raged for eons doesn't, on a personal level, really signify”. This shows that in the short time teens are at that age of innocence, they don't need to be exposed for, only a few short years of their life to YA literature and that they can wait until they mature individually. As teens, most have not experienced the horrible things in life and still hold that certain awe of innocence. Some may argue that most teens are already aware of these topics. However, if they already know such pain and sorrow why should we allow them to be exposed to even further? Also if they aren't aware, why should we allow them to be like the others just to have that youthful innocence taken away from them? By practically handing them these books, their dark contents will haunt them and linger in their memories forever.

Some may say that YA books give teens solutions for their problems, however the solved problems portrayed in stories negatively influence them. For example, “The cover [of the novel, “Scars”] shows a horribly scarred forearm- might trigger a sufferer's relapse.” Now the “horribly scarred forearm” is just a picture, but if only a cover of a book has the potential to make a teen cut their own wrists or “self-mutilate” then you can only imagine what the contents of such a book might make them do. One glance of a picture and a week reading, which might influence them more? Obviously teens could face images just like this in the world, but why should we make that possibility even greater? These books should not be in open to teens because the consequences are likely greater than the lessons that might be learned. No one wants teens, or even children to be influenced to foolishly harm themselves over some fictional story with fictional characters, so the only solution is to limit those stories. Another example of negative influence is, “Books focusing on pathologies help normalize them and, in the case of self harm, may even spread their plausibility and likelihood to young people who might otherwise never have imagined such extreme measures.” If tens, because of YA books, regard things like cutting and drugs as casual or normal then that shows they see themselves doing the same even if they learned someone else's solution. We don't want them to take that first step into something that can harm them, therefore limitation, till a proper age, is necessary.

Overall, YA books for younger teens should hold an age limit because of its long-term consequences. Without their child-like innocence and being exposed to graphic content that gives off negative vibes, teens could become a stiff, unkind, scarred generation, whose childhood was taken away from them. Unforgettable images, and graphic words are powerful, sometimes too powerful for teens and children to take in properly. It is every one's job to protect them from that. We don't want our future generation running the world with misperceptions and bad ideas embedded in their mind. It is little things like harsh literature that can change the future of the world because the children are the future.

"Obsessive Genius" by Barbara Goldsmith

 In "Obsessive Genius: the inner world of Marie Curie" by Barbara Goldsmith, the author teaches not only of Mme. Curie's career and accomplishments but also of her hardships and personal experience in a time where she wasn't considered equal. Goldsmith helps the reader really understand who Marie Curie was as an individual and takes us on her journey from birth till even after her death with her hard research and great description of Curie's feelings or actions. One thing the author does is quote Marie's relatives on stories shared within the family. For example her granddaughter, Helene Langevin-Joliot tells how Curie was extremely depressed after she lost her husband, Pierre. She also describes where the Curie's performed experiments and the equipment they used in the process for the reader to better understand the process to discover polonium and radium.

In doing so, Goldsmith hopes to make the reader empathize for and get to know Curie. She also wants to persuade the reader that even through discrimination, you can succeed. One way Goldsmith does this is simply by using the facts. For example, when Pierre met Marie he didn't want to marry her because he thought, as a scientist, she would just get in the way of his work but Marie ended up being the complete opposite of a distraction. "All my mind was centered on my studies. I divided my time between courses, experimental work, and study in the library. In the evening I worked in my room, sometimes very late into the night...the world of science, I was at last permitted to know in all liberty." This quote was intended for readers to really understand how dedicated she was to learning and succeeding in science. Clearly she, unlike women were labeled, was hardworking and would only help advancements in technology and other forms of study. One way she makes readers see the other side of Mme. Curie, however, is by showing her struggles, making her job sound unbearable and making Curie extremely relevant in this time of age. "Marie found herself coping with heavy workload and child care. This major problem has been ignored or glossed over in many Curie biographies. At lunch time and in the evenings Marie would rush home to nurse Irene [Her daughter]. When she could not yield enough mile to satisfy her crying baby, though finances were strained, she was forced to hire a wet nurse, an act which gave her a feeling of failure." In writing this Goldsmith not only makes readers understand Curie’s struggle but really lets them empathize and connect to her, whether that's because of a sense of failure, pressure, or even motherhood. Another thing Goldsmith sneaks in is that her biography is different than most because of her honesty to portray Curie as just another person with problems of their own, not particularly special even if she did win a Nobel peace prize.

This well written complex book has made it so that I can clearly see that no matter any one's accomplishment, everyone has been through some tough times and is, at it's simplest, human. This makes me think that if I can relate to someone as iconic as Marie Curie, then essentially I can relate to almost anyone. Whether that's celebrities, people of third-world countries, or anyone one from a different socio-economic background.

"Has Young Adult Fiction Become to Dark?" By Mary Elizabeth Williams

 In, "Has Young Adult Fiction Become to Dark?" By Mary Elizabeth Williams, the author wants us to know that YA books, unlike Meghan Cox Gurdon suggests, hold an essential position in society and should not, in any way be banned or limited by schools or libraries. Williams states that YA books can't be compared with the past to prove a point, that although YA books have grim topics, misery is already presented in teens' lives and that they are named young adult books for a reason whether that's to experience complicated situations safely or to learn about the reality of society.  To prove her points, Williams quotes Gurdon and counters her opinions with Gurdon's mistakes. For example, she quotes Gordon saying that some YA fiction is suitable for teens and that no book can drastically change a person, then faults her for saying that all YA literature should be banned. Williams go so far as to say that Gordon's only valid point is that YA books don't contain desirable topics, Another thing she does is, unlike Gordon, include the perspectives of actual young adult. For example she quotes one of her daughters who explains that they are not called children books, but young adult books for a reason. Williams also quotes teen blogger, Emma, who explains that books are the only safe way for young adults to feel and experience otherwise dangerous situations. Williams' examples show that Gurdon's plea to ban YA books is invalidly supported and that these books have a useful and already limited-to-inappropriate-age-groups position in the world.
                     
 Williams strives to persuade readers that Gurdon's argument is invalid and that YA books present more good than bad, therefore have no colossal reason to be banned because of their ability to suggest solutions and bring comfort to already suffering teens. One way she achieves this is by using condescending language to show Gurdon as naïve or inexperienced, For example, " Do we really have to have this argument again? All right, fine. Here goes. Contemporary literature has too much sex violence, and our kids need to be protected from its depravity. So says critic Meghan Cox Gurdon, in a scorching Saturday editorial about Young Adult lit for the Wall Street Journal titled "Darkness Too Visible." Let's roll up our sleeves and get to it, shall we?" This opening is intended to show readers that the controversy of YA books is something the author is well versed in and that by Gurdon writing another negative article about the books just adds to the endless amount of articles. This suggests that Gurdon is beneath Williams and she is foolish to present an argument that is so easily refutted that responding just becomes busy work. She also persuades readers by selectively quoting teens to show the perspectives of who these books would effect. For example teen blogger, Emma, expresses reading YA lit as it ripping apart all the private parts of us and then stitching them all back together again before w even realize they aren't talking about us. This shows that the people being affected by these books are eloquent understanding teens who just want to feel and experience. This gives Williams an advantage because most everyone can relate or empathize for this teen's wants and feelings.

Mary Elizabeth Williams' article has made it so that I feel as if even some of the best critics leave mistakes in their work and anyone can argue with them. It also has made me feel that YA books actually have a slight positive effect on teens because the ones Williams quoted seem more realistic and well-spoken. One thing i'd like to see however is more pro-YA book adult perspectives so that I can get a feel for how past YA books affected other adults and what they think certain topics are useful for (i.e. a former cutting character can help a still suffering teen cutter). Overall Williams really disproves Gurdon and succeeds in persuading me that YA books have a useful purpose for teens.