/lit/ - Literature

>>9626658
I'm not sure why it's hated but surely you don't find it compelling?

Because fuck you

because of the age range of 4chan. people here in general are young adults, and feel a need to prove that they aren't children anymore. the irony being if they were actually mature it wouldn't matter to them.

that printout is some serious bitch shit though I'd walk out of a store for them being passive aggressive at me like that.

>>9626658
Same reason I flinched at the Twin Peaks thread, I don't trust popular things, because popular things are enjoyed by popular people, and popular people are the reason I'm so insecure, so to not collapse I need to invalidate anything that reminds me of myself.

Is Mistborn for kids?
I'm liking it so far.

>>9626670
Does that work for you, or are you still insecure?
I shit on YA because I don't like it and I have yet to see a good apology for it.

>>9626658

For me personally, I have no reason to read any YA fiction. There are much better fiction books I could read, and aside from that there are so many great writers / pieces of literature to read through out human history that I'd rather spend my time reading things more within my interests.

>>9626675
It does not, which why I'm trying to be indifferent. Seems like a healthier state of mind.

all genre fiction is stigmatized on this board

this is LITERATURE nigga do you not know what that word means yet?

What is the most /lit/ example of YA, aside from Infinite Jest of course.

I don't care if others want to read YA but I find that as a genre YA is extremely shallow and therefore not worth my personal attention

>>9626658
If I owned a bookstore I would use that sign, if only for marketing though.

>>9626658
I used to shit on YA (purely out of ignorance of course) but I was at a bookstore and this piece of paper said it was okay and I gave it a chance at it is equally good if not better than the so-called "classics" mentioned here.

i don't have anything against it, it's just the kind of thing that generally doesn't appeal to me. however i've been meaning to read more ursula le guin, and allegedly much of her work is YA, so i wouldn't say i'm opposed to reading the stuff either.

>>9626806
Most disgusting post I've seen on /lit/ in a while you savage you.

>>9626658

It's for women

>>9626661
>but surely you don't find it compelling
>>9626675
>I shit on YA because I don't like it and I have yet to see a good apology for it.

there are some that are actually pretty good. Then again, I usually only re-read the ones I read as a kid. Still, I did read A Squire's Tale, Artemis Fowl and Howl's Moving Castle (which I fucking loved).

I guess it's like throwing a frozen pizza in the oven, instead of cooking yourself a nice meal. Enjoyable, but only for occasions in-between when you're feeling a bit lazy and you want something easy and quick.

>>9626658

My distaste for it doesn't lie as much in the genre itself as it does in the crowd it attracts. YA is/has been popularized by the intellectually immature and the mentally underdeveloped. Not even memeing. It would be one thing if it was a matter limited to children broadening their literary horizons to the realm of fantasy, but holy shit, I'm a recent college graduate and l know people who still worship J.K. Rowling like she's the leader of some cult.

People are trying to make quidditch an actual intercollegiate sport now for fuck sake.

>>9626658
Pretty much every YA is exactly the same.

>some young, bland, almost characterless young person is special in some super way
>gets inducted into a secret society of also super specials
>but the character is the most super special for basically no reason
>some dumb bad guy with a black and white motivation threatens EVERYTHING, even the normies
>so super special has to stop them somehow
>something something hot guy/girl
>something something side kick
>repeat until every sequel gets worse and worse because the introduction to the main character and the world is pretty much all you get with these stories

They very rarely break this kind of formula and even when they do (The Ill-Made Mute) its still not the overall most compelling read. Even Artemis Fowl which a decent protagonist doesn't have anything interesting to do, and he gets old real quick. Harry Potter is probably the only exception to the sequel rule as the world and characters continue to evolve. That is until they get to part 5 and it really starts to shit its pants.

The only exception to the above is Wizard of Earthsea which was concise, entertaining, great world and the character was not only great but wasn't some super special fish out of water snowflake. His arc started and ended with just a hint of tragedy, all his own fault, and required him to grow up and fix his own mess. But then again, the sequel was a slog so it seems like its pretty easy to fuck everything up even with a talented writer.

Ultimately I don't find them super entertaining and I feel my time is better spent reading something more challenging or what I am more uninterested in. At the very least even if I don't like a classic I can see what the fuss is about.

>>9626785
Nice try

>>9626670
Food is pretty popular.

>>9627478
I literally also have an eating disorder lmayo

>>9626658

late capitalist schlock that substitutes narcissistic investment in a fetishized notion of childhood imagination for anything resembling artistic substance. exhibit a in the case for the culture of an empire in decline: bread and circuses and infantilism rolled into one. the dystopian figures it can't seem to avoid don't help much either.

>>9627101
I don't think any John Green novels follow that formula

>>9626658
This sign is broadly true, but only because the standard of adult fiction has fallen through the roof. We are a society of children

>>9627521
>plucky young nerd who is special for absolutely no other reason has a side kick and a hot girl to stop a villain

Even if it doesn't strictly follow the formula its not super compelling.

>>9626658
It's pretty much differently named genre fiction.

>>9627540
and they can't say fuck

>>9627542
>implying they can't say fuck

>>9626844
Bingo.

>>9627544
do they say fuck in ya?

>>9627549
johnny green does

>>9626658
Because this site's user base is college age. What does one read in college? The great works of literature, of course. Historical plays, epic poems, challenging novels. Reading for self-improvement (to become EDUCATED), not reading for fun. Even if you got course credit for reading Twilight, there's no bragging rights associated with it. It's not an exclusive accomplishment.

>>9627556
I don't know, I think anyone with the stomach to slog through the entirety of Twilight without killing themselves deserves some credit

>>9627552
is he really ya, or ist that just what people insulting him say?

I think we're very aware of how people read exclusively YA and nothing else. It just doesn't do to be reading only that, or at least if you have a professed love for literature to do so. /lit/ likes to masturbate over older writers and traditional techniques because these seem to rapidly disappear and become less influential with time - yet they are still the foundation.

It's similar to how your high school teacher would deride you for not wanting to learn about Shakespeare when you're just trying to feel some girl's titty for the first time. People are motivates by simple things, and the focus is ever changing. Here there's a little sense of eternity, and we can speak on more eternal things.

>>9627556
>What does one read in college?

Minority authors and gender theory textbooks.

>Open a YA book
>Map on the first page
>Look at place names
>The Dark Forest

>>9626658
Because it's a completely pointless demographic designed entirely for marketing purposes and written by milquetoast plebs who have absolutely no artistic vision. If you want to read vapid garbage for mindless entertainment it's already readily available in every other section.

Bad prose.

>>9627556
It's not even fun though. What's so fun about reading the same teen fantasy or teen drama repackaged over and over?

Because it's essentially pulp but dressed up in hardcovers

>>9627620
This made me laugh harder than you know

>>9626658
Because it's all prolefeed. 'Young adult' is code for 'unintelligent adolescent', and widespread perpetual adolescence works in the favor of those who wish to impose 1984 on us, whatever name you want to give them.

>>9626667
This

>>9627697
This is the only correct answer. YA is means of manipulation, just like moronic commercial music and movies. I really wonder wonder what will happen once the 20 year old manchildren of today turn 40 and become the backbone of our society. We are headed towards an imminent collapse, aren't we?

>>9626667
/thread

all the kids on summer break getting btfo lol

>>9626667

>because of the age range of 4chan. people here in general are young adults, and feel a need to prove that they aren't children anymore. the irony being if they were actually mature it wouldn't matter to them.

This is true.

Only teens and young 20something try hards who think they're the shit take shots at YA readers here. Older anon simply don't give a shit about it as much.

>>9627810
Most people here don't care about it at all but when it's brought up shitting on it is the appropriate response if one is to respond at all.

Because it's just objectively lower quality work

Although people who think anime or fucking video games have literary merit have absolutely no right to join in the hate.

>>9627579
Most people who read his books are firmly in the YA range, and the quality of Looking for Alaska (can't speak for any others) felt pretty YA to me

>>9626658

Because it's entertainment for children and most people here have a more serious interest in literature as an art form.

>>9626658
Catcher in the Rye is YA

>>9627521
He does, except in his case super special means having cancer.

>>9626658

YA is the equivalent of Capeshit. It's made solely to be disposable and forgotten, zero depth, zero edge, the sole purpose of it is to sell. It's not even good as low tier wannabe Dickens material.

>>9627856
Just because a book appeals to young people doesnt mean it's YA.

>>9627838

Yeah fair enough.

But when people shit on it with any emotion you know it's a younger guy.

>>9626658
>Why are bad books stigmatised on the literature board
Seriously?

>>9626658
Because I'm not a young adult. I don't see why I should read books explicitly written for a younger demographic.

>>9626887
>there are some that are actually pretty good.
This isn't a good apology, are you fucking stupid? Why did you reply to my post?

>>9628486
did you read the rest of my post, you fucking autist?

>>9627726
fuck off back to /r/books with that

>>9628491
I did, it still isn't a good apology. It's a bad analogy. Kill yourself, cretin.

>>9626658
Obligatory

>>9628511
come and shoot me yourself you fucking coward

>>9626887
When i want something easy and quick i just go to your mom's kek

>Why is YA so stigmatized on this board?
Reading is supposed to be the reasonably smart person hobby. Fiction requires little intelligence to enjoy regularly, young adult fiction even less so. So, a lot of people that read shit that requires any sort of brain power get offended when they get grouped in with people who read oversized children's books.

>>9628551
I don't want to kill you, I just hope that you kill yourself.
>coward
>Non-murderers are cowards
lol

>>9626658
The implication is that well-read people who have a good understanding of the art simply don't enjoy genre fiction. There are plenty of good reasons to think this is true, and so when people talk about how much they loved X or Y YA book, it's interpreted as them admitting that they don't really get literature and they just read for the plot.

Maybe it's a false distinction, but you'll find that a large number of posters believe in it, or at least there's a vocal minority.

>>9626658
Don't even know what the term really comprises desu. I know it's meant in a negative manner on this board, but what about stuff like The Hobbit or Watership Down? Are those YA?

>>9626844
grow up

>>9626672

>>9628537

>>9628537
delete this right now you lil fucker
i've read shakespeare first when i was 10, there are no excuses to fed yourself with shitty modern clichés

>>9627516
Underrated post

>>9626667
>people here in general are young adults, and feel a need to prove that they aren't children anymore
This. Plus the edgelord compulsion to shit on anything that's popular.

I'm in my thirties, and here's a few kid/YA books I will always remember fondly and some I occasionally revisit:

The Wind in the Willows
Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH
Trumpet of the Swan
Sign of the Beaver
Redwall
Duncton Wood
My Side of the Mountain
The Henry Huggins books
The Hardy Boys series
Hatchet
Harry Potter
The Chronicles of Narnia
Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass
Captains Courageous
The Once and Future King
The Jungle Books
The Giver
Rabbit Hill
The Swiss Family Robinson
The Voyages of Dr. Dolittle
Tom Sawyer
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
A Wizard of Earthsea
A Princess of Mars
The Hobbit
Where the Red Fern Grows
Black Beauty
the James Herriot books
Uncle Remus' Tales
Robinson Crusoe
A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
The Complete Sherlock Holmes
Smokey the Cow Horse
The Starbuck Twins books
The Fantastic Mr. Fox
The Dark is Rising series
The Chronicles of Prydain

That's just off the top of my head.

>>9626658
Because this a "literature" board, not a "books" board. It's the same as going on to /o/ and wanting to talk about your mountain bike. That's fine, but there are other places to do so, because /o/ is specifically automotive. Go to r/books or even /b/ or /soc/ or something, but /lit/ is supposed to be about "literature." Not all books are literature, OP. I'd say the same thing for someone looking for suggestions for a non fiction book about a specific time period, that's what /his/ is for.

>>9629496
Classical children's literature is entirely not the same thing as a brainless YA novel.

>>9629500
That's honestly the biggest problem with this board. More than half the threads at any given time are completely off-topic. It's like people forget that /his/ even exists and is meant for philosophy and historical discussion. I'm guessing that they just see the literature tag and assume they can talk about any book here.

>>9629500
>LITERATURE: writings in prose or verse; especially writings having excellence of form or expression and expressing ideas of permanent or universal interest

I would argue that there are SOME children's and YA books that qualify. Do you disagree?

>>9626658
You're supposed to outgrow it and instead people have equated it to literature because their reading comprehension stunts to around the level of a Facebook post.
The weight of ignorance is heavy but wieldy. The isolation of intelligence makes those who advance past descriptions of gas lamps in a trendy neighborhood lash out because they seek recognition from those who never do.

>>9630320
All readers are equal

>>9627844
You think it is impossible for a videogame to have literary merit? I don't know any that do (I have played very few videogames) but I don't see a fundamental reason why one wouldn't exist.

>>9627620
>>9627679
>there's always a badlands
>dark-/black-, the dark/black [geographical feature]
>[direction]land
>elves live in forests
>evil things in black/blighted/charred/dead/shadow lands
>the [hidden] vale

>childhood friends on a journey
>magic or supersecretpowers all of a sudden
>children or teens only
>adults are hiding the "real" real world
>there's always some bashful idiot village girl
>the strong mountain/foreign warrior
>the pet that's practically fucking useless 99.99999999999999999999999999% of the time, until it saves the day once and nobody shuts up about it
>some shite macguffin that turns out to be useless in the face of "the power of friendship"
>the bigbad always fucks it up for itself, but is described as if the heroes overcame all odds
>the journey used to take a single book, maybe 2-3, now 3-8 is standard and expected
>travel and npc's in books are never fleshed out
>characters rarely grow more than 3 pubes in the run of the series, if they grow a single fucking toenail

>>9626658
I don't hate YA, I just hate that shit quality actually sells because people are too boring to create something good.

Same with literature, genrefic, anime, video games... there comes a point when you've seen/processed "enough" and can just glance at a synopsis to know it's hack/low quality work.

How many "hyperintelligent-but-aloof specialist" shows are there on satellite tv? How many color-stylized-psychological-archetype-characters-in-a-super-fighter-guy-against-the-world-except-the-antiheroes anime are there? How many repeats of purposefully boring fucking conversations in a mundane setting do there have to be before authors, readers, and academics realize there's no hidden literary meaning besides the ones they project?

No, I have't had my cookie yet today.

>>9626658
This is an adult board. YA is for children. We don't want this board filled with Harry Potter, whatever is the next fad in children's literature threads.

>>9630641
>You think it is impossible for a videogame to have literary merit?

Yes

>>9629496
>Where the Red Fern Grows
My librarian read this to us when we were in fifth grade. My god.

>>9626658
Is YA any better or worse than shit written by Cornwell or Steel or Patterson? I think not. Most likely what that sign is referencing.

On this board, however, I'm led to believe that the majority feels literature is meant to be more than just a novel.

>>9626658

>>9631113
so if cervantes wrote a videogame with lots of dialogue and narration it would be bad dialogue and narration?

>>9630403

No they aren't. There are many different levels of reading, and YA facilitates only the most superficial kind.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Read_a_Book

>>9626658
There is nothing inherently wrong with YA literature, and it is often enjoyable, certainly. I would give examples from my own youth, such as Harry Potter (that's right), Guardian's of Ga'hoole, Warriors, His Dark Materials, Ink Heart Goosebumps, Animorphs, so on so forth...
But while these YA works can certainly be engaging and entertaining, even beyond one's youth, if you do not eventually evolve past them as a reader, as a thinker, you are doing something wrong.
It strikes me that the issue is not precisely with the literature itself, but rather with the reader. Literature, quality literature, when seriously pursued and engaged, is meant not only to entertain, but also, and equally, to edify. If your tastes in literature are not growing as you do, it is very likely you have not matured as a person. This is generally true of all forms of media. If you are entirely satisfied with the childish, youthful perspectives in YA media, you have not matured.
That, I believe, is the nature of the problem.
All that said, I maintain that there is no shame in enjoying YA literature, with moderation, especially when revisiting or sharing works which you enjoyed in your youth.

>>9626667
/thread

>>9626667
People just want to evangelize art. It's not that they're insecure or immature, they just want more people getting deeper into lit instead of getting stuck on YA.

>>9629496
Yeah I don't know what these insecure children are throwing shrieking fits about. I still proudly display YA on my shelf. I haven't picked up The Illiad or Finnegans Wake in a while but they're excellent books that c/lit/s have no business looking down on.

>>9627516
Is this a copypasta

>>9626675
I disregard stirnerposts out of hand, and I've never been wrong to do so a single time. You merely supply me with another piece of ammunition to use to humiliate those who quote that make-believe non-philosopher.

>>9627726
>>9627793
>>9627810
>>9629496
>>9631261
>defending YA

>>9626658
Because it's what we used to call "boy's books" pretending to be something else.

Whatever you want to achieve by reading or writing, it can be done better by not trying to write for a "young" audience. It's OK. The young people who will like your stuff will read it regardless, because age is not a very huge factor in what people read, unless you get into issues that are related to actual mental development. In which case you're talking about legit children's books.

"YA" is often completely impossible to tell apart from other, similar fiction intended purely for entertainment. The label itself is basically an admission that the writer didn't try to write literature, and that it isn't for people who are looking for literature.

This the literature board. Go figure.

>>9627844
"annie may" refers to the concept of animation as a whole and not just the moe moe otaku shit people seem to enjoy. It doesn't help when tards call something much deeper than The Sad Tale of the Raging Bitch '''''''avant-garde'''''''''.
>>9631241
Cervantes would be too confounded by the concept of a moving picture to begin creating a video game.

>>9631573
>Cervantes would be too confounded by the concept of a moving picture to begin creating a video game.

Not to mention that the dude only had one functional arm. Using normal controls would be pretty hard for him. Though I suppose he could make a pretty baller Renaissance combat game about killing Ottomans.

There is so much more to gain by reading actual literature that to continue to read YA books when you're capable of reading more is really a waste of your time.

I used to think Bloom was right about JK Rowling - reading Harry Potter in your youth was a preparation for reading Steven King in your adulthood. But it turns out he gave Rowling too much credit. All she is is preparation for reading even more infantile YA books.

>>9626658
Is it perhaps possible to view this increase in prominence of YA fiction in line with the greater infantilization of young adult people in the Western world?

>>9631984
There definitely is a correlation. Most people are adult children nowadays. Nostalgia is the new religion.

>>9626658
For me YA novels are usually in a weird place between children's novels, which are usually focused on quick pure adventure, and adult novels which will usually try to have some message through its morality plays, usually grey morals. YA on the other hand usually focuses on forced character drama that ends up reading like a soap opera. the focus on adventure/imagination present in kids books are gone, but also it doesn't really have anything "smart" or "real" to say either. then again I would say the same thing superhero movies or star wars, so whatever.

>>9631955
>preparation for reading Steven King
why the fuck would that be seen as a laudable goal, hell that may even be a regression.

>>9632147
King actually has moments of brilliance. Moments, mind you, when he's spent as much ink as he has. Hearts In Atlantis is a good book.

My thing is, it's fine if you want to read YA fiction, go ahead. I have no problem with people consuming entertainment for entertainment's sake but at the same time don't pretend reading YA puts you on the same level as someone reading actual literature or that your favorite YA book has any sort've actual artistic merit.

>>9632147
Uh... it's not? I'm not seeing how that is a positive statement. Rather, I read it as a slightly elite, exasperated statement. King isn't exactly known for writing high literature, after all.

Essentially, what he's saying is "reading stupid shit prepares you for reading more stupid shit". It's a rebuke of the argument that any reading, for young people, is good reading.

Stephen King himself has said he is the literary equivalent of a Big Mac and fries, and despite that, he has written some nice work before.

The Stand and Different Seasons come to mind

>>9632147
It's not a laudable goal. Read Bloom's review of Harry Potter to see more context if you're so inclined.

>>9633430
(Correction; read Bloom's "Dumbing down American readers" which was in response to King receiving the National Book Foundation's annual award)

>>9627768
Didn't you post this same response in /mu/ an hour ago?

>>9632691
>Stephen King himself has said he is the literary equivalent of a Big Mac and fries
Sanderspn took his place