The short history of young adults you provided is very enlightening. Thanks!

Thank you, also, for allowing the voices to be heard on this issue, and for interjecting thoughtfully and sensitively. You’re an inspiration.

I’ve been away from my computer for a couple days, so I’m getting caught up on the postings, and I did want to add a few thoughts.

I’ve been researching the history of YA literature and what I found was very interesting. YA lit originally started out as a genre that was largely imposed by adults onto kids. Stories were girl oriented, usually featured young women who were preparing to be housewives, or possibly a nurse, and the teens in the stories were squeaky clean. Basically, it was Leave it to Beaver in book form. But in the meantime, the kids realities were very different from this literature. We all have a tendency to want to glamorize the past and say “see how far down things have spiraled?” but, in fact, the past held it’s own set of problems and the perspective of whether or not things have improved is often based on whether you’re white or a minority, whether you’re a woman or a man.

So anyway, when YA lit started in the 1940’s this was the time of the war and the V Girls were sneaking out to hook up with young soldiers, and sexually transmitted disease was becoming a problem, and young women were frustrated at their lack of options. Minorities were treated abysmally. Fractures were still happening within families, but they were never discussed openly, and frankly, kids were frustrated with the literature presented to them. That’s why during the 50s and 60s we began to see more and more teens pushing the boundaries (in all fields) and these same teens grew up to write books that reflected the world as they saw it — a flawed and fractured world — rather than the portrait that adults had wanted to paint for them. That’s the milieu where the wild success of SE Hinton’s The Outsiders came from. A “real” book written by a “real” teen that didn’t attempt to lie about the world.

This eventually gave rise to the stigma YA books still carry today of being “problem novels”. So many writers wanted to write about the hardships of life that had previously been hushed up. Those same teens who felt denied started saying, “what about me? My parents got a divorce.” “What about me? I’m gay.” “What about me? I am a minority and I’ve had to overcome great adversity.”

Now in the 2000s, I don’t think we could go back to the way teen novels once were, painting a world that too many teens know doesn’t exist for more than a small few.

I understand the question that NMC raises, even if he/she hasn’t stated it exactly this way, but I think that question is largely whether books for teens reflect reality or create reality. I believe NMC would say that they create reality while those of us whose opinions fall on the opposite side of the debate would say that they reflect reality.

In actuality, it depends on which kids are reading them. That’s why I fully support choices for teens when it comes to reading. I think the school board’s decision was fair. Don’t deny the book to all children because for some, this book is going to reflect their reality, but offer warnings to teens and parents so that if it doesn’t reflect a teen’s reality, or if it’s not a reality that a given teen wants to explore, they have other options.

I would also note that in my research I’ve done a lot of reading about the definition of “teens”. The category of “teenager” is actually a marketing term that came about in the 1940’s. Before that, childhood ended very early and by the time kids reached the early teen years they often held adult jobs and were starting to raise their own families. Basically, there were children and adults. High school was only for the wealthy, white elite. It was only after the depression when so many young people were homeless and jobless that the government stepped in to make high school available to the masses, thus creating a block of people who were between children and adults.

This block became known as teenagers, and in our country we tend to view this time as an extension of childhood. In other times, people in their teens have been pharoas and monarchs, led armies, wrote novels, raised families, won sports championships, entertained thousands… in fact, teens today still do many of these things. My point is that teens are between childhood and adulthood and there’s a reason that it’s appropriate to include material in a teen novel that wouldn’t be included in a novel for younger children, and that’s because teens have reached an age of discernment. And if by the time a child has reached their teens they haven’t developed the ability to discern between right and wrong, your world and their world, and they haven’t developed the ability to make choices and judgements, then that teen probably needs some extra help to catch up to their peers.

Do I think teens should be treated the same as adults? No. But do I think teens should be treated the same as children? No. I think teens will be as capable, intelligent, and compassionate as we raise them to be. Do I expect both intelligent thought and compassion from my teen readers of Fat Kid Rules the World? Absolutely. But I have faith that they are capable of it. And if they’re not capable of it, or if they just don’t want to read my book, then that’s perfectly fine, and I trust they will choose another book on their reading list.

Public standards of decency change all the time, therefore they are not absolute nor do they always reflect what is moral or just. In our own country, it was once indecent for women to show their ankles or vote in elections. Elvis was indecent. The label of “indecent” gets slapped on anything that threatens the status quo, anything that makes people uncomfortable. But challenging societal norms isn’t always indecent. In some countries, women are banned from showing an inch of flesh in public. They are not allowed to go to school or vote. Would it be indecent for women to challenge that at some point? Should we revert back to a time when it was indecent (and against the law) for black people to eat in a restaurant with white people? From time to time, it is necessary to change our definition of indecent.

You say allowing children to read profanity in books is indecent. I say that it is critical that children read. All children need to read literature where they can see themselves reflected in the story, because, ultimately, we read to know that we are not alone. Some students can read Island of the Blue Dolphins and love it. Others will refuse to read it because they don’t see themselves in that story. If I don’t give them a book that they can relate to, they won’t read, and that is harmful — evidence to substantiate that claim abounds. So, it is necessary and responsible to allow certain kids an opportunity to read books where they see themselves, even if that means they will come across profanity or sexual situations. FKRTW has been called pornography even though none of the kids in the book have sex. I call a book that portrays adolescent boys thinking about sex reality not pornography. A child who has been taught not to swear is not going to do so simply because he or she reads it in a book. If you doubt that claim, think about this: does your child in junior high and high school swear at you? Because they hear the words all day — in the halls, the lunchroom, on the bus, anywhere there are teenagers without adult supervision. Has your child begun to swear as a result of exposure to this language? Probably not, because kids are capable of being around those who do not share their values while still holding on to their own if they have strong bonds with adults. And you can bet that the same kids at school who swear also talk about sex, and again, that doesn’t mean that the children who hear them talking about it begin to experiment with sex as a result.

What holds our society together is not a ban on swearing, it is the fact that we live in a pluralistic society where people are able to make choices. We have laws to punish those people who choose to act in ways that harm others. But again, and I’m sure you will ignore this point for yet another time, there isn’t any proof that exposure to profanity harms children. Parents can decide that they don’t want their children to use such language, of course, but parents also have to teach children that not everybody in society will hold that same value. In fact, what is more important than teaching your children not to swear is teaching your children that living in ways that reflect your values is hard. It is hard to hold on to beliefs that others might not share — that is the challenge of being an adult. You cannot control what others do, but you can hold fast to the values that are important to you no matter what.

It seems the public’s right to decency makes foul language unacceptable and shows this is not my opinion or my morality . When, where and how did profanity become only personal. You forget there has always been a public standard of decency in speech, dress, etc. It is called the community standard and I dare say without this public decency in word and deed, we can throw away these laws governing our society.

The commnunity standard of decency holds in check every person and stems from the common good. –If there is no standard in speech and action then anyone can say, do, read , write anything in any place without consequences.

This simply is not the case and while today many are trying to destroy our community decency,the fact remains that decency is a universal standard and indecent words and action still offends the community, neighborhood, school or any other public place. To think otherwise is ludicrous. That’s why Fat Boy is offensive for it violates every child’s sense of decency unless that decency has already been exploited, abused and damaged by our crude, crass way of living.

comparing a novel to poisonous paint is really quite pointless.

But these debates seem to spiral out of control because of lack of understanding between the “sides.” I’d love to understand your perspective. but it’s impossible in the face of your defensiveness.

it’s not merely an issue of whether or not a book should be on a reading list. it’s an issue of “right” versus “wrong,” or your interpretation of morality vs. other interpretations.

you just continue to be on the attack and your reasons don’t hold up.. so i ask questions because i’m honestly trying to understand your thinking. that’s what discussion is for. otherwise it’s useless, which unfortunately, this has become.

When I was in high school (a Catholic high school mandating that students take classes on morality) there sat at a table in the lunchroom a girl with horrible skin and a significant weight problem — she was at least 300 pounds. She sat by herself at lunch, every single day for four years. I sat at a table with my friends very near her. We never looked at her or invited her to sit with us. I thought about asking her to join us several times, and I’m sure that my friends and others in the lunchroom did as well, but none of us was brave enough to actually do it. We were all too scared that sitting with someone who was a social leper would have far reaching consequences for our own social standing. So we acted selfishly and cowardly and we let another human being be humiliated every day of her high school career. If we had read a book like FKRTW, maybe we would have understood how painful it is to be alone and judged as unworthy simply because of your appearance. Maybe we would have been kinder. I don’t know what happened to that girl. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if she thought about killing herself. The swear words and sexual situations in FKRTW in no way lessen the importance of the message of that book: be kind to your fellow human beings. Every teenager needs to learn that message. And for those students who are the social lepers, they need to know that they cannot give up — high school will end. You focus on language and miss the beauty of the book. But teenagers hear that book’s message loud and clear, because it doesn’t preach, but rather, it presents its message through a realistic character whom you grow to care for a great deal as you read the novel.