The Question of Queer in YA

Most people are aware of the problems queer Young Adult literature faces in the publishing industry, and indeed the media in general. As a bookseller, I am often saddened by the lack of queer protagonists, with some notable exceptions (Will Grayson, Will Grayson, Ash, The Bermudez Triangle). Anyone who has any contact at all in the book industry will tell you that this is a problem.

It is a problem because kids who are queer, and even those that aren't, need to see queer themes more often. While I've never had someone ask directly for a title in that section with those themes, I well remember how much I longed for something like that when I was a teenager. I would never have asked, but it would have meant the world to me, to see myself represented in that fashion. I was always looking for the subtext, always looking for themes of tolerence and acceptance but through the lense of genetics or aliens... I don't really have the words for how happy I would have been, to find a story that actually put it out there. I never found such a title, but I am glad they exist now, but there still aren't enough. Kids that don't have the support network I did need it, and they need more than a couple titles on the shelves.

Growing increasingly problematic are the responses to this issue that have begun to crop up recently.

When I read this article on the Publishers Weekly blog, it was not shocking, that they had been rejected based on a character's sexual orientation. Sad, but not shocking, as evidenced by how few titles are on the shelves that deal with this issue. Again, subtext is great in it's way, but it doesn't really count as a morale booster for kids who are queer. Then there are those who are actively working against queer acceptance in YA literature, which actively hurts those who are young enough to be impressionable. As in the post I made previously, it seems that people who fit the hetero-normative profile won't read things about people that don't, even though the reverse is true. I liked this article when I first read it, as it talked about concepts I agreed with and was trying to generate support for those wronged and held hope that the system could be changed.

Then this article was released, which basically claims that the authors at the very least misunderstood the criticisms they were given, at the worst that they were exploiting the issue. Now, I won't pretend that I actually know one way or another what exactly is going on in this situation. In any case, the agency in question claims that it wasn't about the sexuality of the characters, but the overall writing choices to which they objected. The rebuttal to the rebuttal can be found here, if you are interested in the back and forth of the situation.

I feel the situation is in danger of becoming one fueled by drama. It's a topic that pushes a lot of buttons, and generates a lot of emotion. It makes me sad that what could have been a lovely opener on this issue has, warranted or not, lost some of its validity due to the circumstances surrounding it. This is all the more disheartening because there are those that would argue that there is no need for representation of minority characters. These detractors would say that if there are authors who say that they have good stories about that they can't sell, they are making it up. I'm not saying that this is what has happened here, but I wonder at the motivation behind calling out someone who may only be trying to begin the conversation. However, given that the issue appears to be devolving into a he-said-she-said affair, will people outside the industry still be willing to listen? I hope so, but they might not be, and the missed opportunity saddens me most of all.

Even more distressing, The Mary Sue released this article about the subject, which was written by Aja Romano, an author I have read before and very much admire. The article itself is well written and raises good points, yet I find I must disagree with the solution that she proposes. She suggests that rather than wade through the mire of the publishing industry, that authors should just self-publish on the internet, or release their work for free.

One problem with this argument is the issue of editing. While one could argue that an determined (and finanically independent) author could do the same marketing job as agents and publishing houses, they do serve a very vital function: they edit and critique. Now, it is possible that an author knows someone who is very good at doing these things and is willing to do it on a freelance basis. Again, the issue here is money, and an author could sink quite a bit on an editor for a work that may not ever be bringing in profit. A lot of authors do not have this resource, and so must rely on friends or family members to help where they can. A friend is good for overall impression of your work, but they most likely have not been trained to be an editor, and would not give you the same feedback. Anyone that is your friend first and your editor second is also going to have a hard time being objective about your work, which is critical to the process. This leads a lot of self-published works to reflect the low quality of the editing, even though the story itself may be good. The reality is that often consumers don't bother with buying self-published titles on Amazon and the like, because there is such a plethora of un-edited, terrible works or just plain plagiarized titles that it gets to be too much to wade through.

Most authors talk about their editors the same way some athletes talk about their coaches: while they are behind the scenes and never get much credit they are completely vital. Could one still self-publish a book and have it be good and profitable? Of course. I have no doubt that many people can and do, but to not mention the downsides to doing it without an editor or an agent would be a little disingenuous. Although agents don't do as much in the editing side of things, they still perform a vital function in terms of representing your work, negotiating the legal side of things, and just in general being the person who is completely on your side. Rejecting the idustry in its entirety also ignores the agents and publishing houses who do publish queer or minority centered books, and rather than reward them for their courage, denies them the chance to continue publishing such works.

The second problem with this solution is, as you might have guessed given my current profession, is that works self-published online will never go through a brick-and-mortar store and thus contributes to the dwindling state of bookstores. I acknowledge my bias in this case, but I don't think that it invalidates the point.

While the internet allows your work to be seen by many thousands of people who would not otherwise have seen it, you are also limiting who sees it. People who don't use e-books, and there are still those out there who do not, will not get a chance to read your work. This is particularly important when we talk about the YA genre, since the main point here is that queer teens would benefit so much from seeing themselves represented and teens use e-readers much less than adults. While e-readership has grown among teens recently, what about the teens who cannot afford e-readers? Many kids still only read what is required reading in schools, and most teachers still teach print only books. College is moving away from print text books and the like, but the younger a student gets the more teachers rely on paper to teach. These younger students are the ones it is most important to reach, and the ones most likely to be left out.

Taking the bookstore out also takes the bookseller out of the equation. When people ask me why it is important to have brick-and-mortar stores to sell books, I usually say that a mathematical algorithm doesn't really understand why you like certain books, and couldn't help you find something that would suit your taste but is outside of what you normally look at. There is something about a bookstore itself that allows a sense of discovery, that pushes at your boundaries a little, that invites you to try something new. As this piece points out, there is a reason that people say that a bookstore closing is a sad thing. Part of the power of books lies in the ability they have to force the reader to see things from another point of view. Kids who aren't looking for it won't get those titles put in their "suggested" list, and so miss out. The same is true for adults who might also benefit from having their horizons broadened.

Parents also rely on booksellers to recommend titles that are good and appropriate for their kids. YA is a broad age range, and what is appropriate for a 17 year-old is not always appropriate for a 13 year-old. Parents utilize booksellers as a way to know the difference, so that they can be sure they are buying books that won't suddenly throw a sex scene at a kid who is perhaps not ready to handle it. Or, if they are okay with their kids reading such material, they want to know it is in there so that they can be prepared to talk about it with them. I worry that more parents will react like this to the young adult genre without the aid of booksellers to navigate the section. I don't want parents to get to the point where they start restricting what their kids read blindly because they can't find anyone whose opinions they trust.

I do believe that the internet is an awesome place to put free, queer friendly things for teens. As a teenager, I found solace in fan-fiction that expressed what real books did not, so I completely understand where that sentiment is coming from. However, I still always had the sense of missing out on something, because I had to stare at a computer screen instead of reading one of my beloved books to get the stories I wanted. If you wish to release your work for free on the internet, please do so, but don't do it just because it is easier than fighting for what is right.

Self-publishing online is indeed a viable option, but I feel it is only one that should be used if you have exhausted all other options. As this agent says, it takes time to sell a book, and sometimes all that is required is patience. It hurts the book-selling industry, especially those who rely on good works being printed in order to keep their jobs, when talented people give up before they even try. I would argue that it also hurts rather than helps the many teens that are starved for stories of themselves, and does nothing at all to change the minds of people who would dismiss the topic out of hand. This is a problem, one that needs to be addressed, but the solutions are not to give up, or cause unnecessary drama about it.

So let's all take a deep breath, and get back to the business of writing, promoting, buying and reading these works that are so desperately needed.

Moment of Squee - Thermal Ink

Okay, so this has not been a weekly thing, but I am going to try to post "Moment of Squee" more often.

Today's squee comes from an article at Brain Pickings about Jordan Crane's new kids book - Keep Our Secrets. In a blend of science and whimsy that is full of awesome, it uses thermal ink to hide messages and images in the book, which are revealed at the touch of your hand. Check it out!

As a bookseller these kinds of things are really exciting, especially because I think that creative projects like these are what will help keep the brick-and-mortar bookstores in business. After all, you can't do that on a Kindle.