Dammit Ronnie’s stolen the second paragraph of my Jerusalem review
Maybe I should have couched that as being more in a commercial sense. It’s also likely that a lot of what you read as a young adult is now split between children’s literature or genre literature.
The YA market was left in kind of an ambiguous state. No one in that age group wants to be shopping in the kids department and the rest of the store is possibly a bit too much for some of them at this point.
My understanding was that Twilight had far more to do with that than Harry Potter.
I was around for Twilight too. The push to make Twilight a success was trying to recapture the sales giant that was Harry Potter and keep the audience that book had grown with it.
Harry Potter set everything up. Twilight was the attempt to keep the party going. There were diminishing returns with other book series that were similarly positioned. What came out of that was an entire subgenre and bookstore section that drew (maybe still draws) some of the best writers in adult fiction like Gaiman and Patterson due to the growth in that section.
As soon as the specter of sex enters a story, it is pretty much ruined for the YA audience. Harry Potter was wish-fulfillment with a worthy opponent, Twilight was the vacillation of adolescent angst that was written and filmed really, really badly. Boiled down, it was the hormonal wails of the adolescent female writ large. IOW, crap. It missed having that overarcing story of good versus evil amidst a rather Horatio Alger set-up. Classic. Twilight, nothing but neurotic musings without true movement.
There are rules and parameters to successful YA literature. Potter met them. Twilight broke them, choosing to be thinly-disguised romance novels.
Those may be the rules to what you like. Romance novels can do very well and The Twilight books (I have never read them or seen any of the films) sold a shitload.
Also a lot of YA novels tended to have a healthy dose of romance in them. Twilight certainly didn’t have any more romance in it than Vampire Diaries, which was published over a decade earlier.
Loved VALIS, especially how it’s just as much a story about mental illness as it is about all of PKD’s wild ideas about religion, philosophy, time, and human development. It’s now my favorite of his novels, edging out Androids and High Castle.
Now I’m reading Child of God by Cormac McCarthy and Lynch on Lynch, a series of interviews with David Lynch, covering his life and art (not just the movies, but his paintings and multimedia projects as well) up until Mulholland Drive.
I don’t know what you guys are talking about. Clearly young adults have never been interested in romance; how many teenage love songs have you ever heard of?
It’s the only one of the nominees I’ve read, but it’s very good.
That’s really cool. I haven’t got around to reading it yet, but I bought it for 99p in a Kindle deal a couple of months ago. Must give it a shot.
On a separate note, A Brief History of Seven Killings is still sitting on the bookshelf by my bedside, unread.
As to what I’m reading at the moment, I am currently in the middle of Moonglow by Michael Chabon. I have liked a lot of other Chabon books a great deal more. This one is a lot more grounded than say, Kavalier and Clay or The Yiddish Policeman’s Union. It isn’t the most cheerful of stories.
I also read A Legacy of Spies by John LeCarré, Norse Mythology by Neil Gaiman and The Lovers by John Connolly, all of which I thoroughly enjoyed.
I have the Star Trek Discovery tie in novel and he by John Connolly awaiting a read.
How are you finding it? I bought it for someone as a present recently and they’re quite enjoying it, but I haven’t read it yet. I might borrow it to read once they’re done with it (without making it look too much like I bought them a book just so I can borrow it).
It’s a fantastic book for commuting with. It is broken into little stories which don’t take too long to get through.
In many ways it is quite Gaimanesque, but he is trying to do straight version of the stories. And I enjoyed them. I wasn’t familiar at all with the mythology above and beyond what I’ve read in the comics. So I loved it and was sorry when it was done. But it didn’t outstay it’s welcome. In answer to your question, it was well worth the read.
Jerusalem never even made the long list. It’s a travesty!
Ya. I found it very straight forward. It only seemed Gaiman in the sense that Gaiman’s work always feels very mythological. I quite enjoyed it too.
I thought it was pretty straightforward. I wasn’t surprised like I was when I read the Norse gods in Sandman, but then, there were far fewer errant dreams happening, too…
As someone who reads mythology now and then, it seemed fairly standard. He stuck pretty closely to the material. If you expect differently, then…
By his own admission, that was what he was trying to do.
I bought this a while back and just got round to starting it.
I saw the documentary of the same name. It was very interesting.
Yeah that’s what made me pick up the book. Only read thirty pages but I think I’m going to pick up some more of his work to try.