1. Here is a review of Matt de la Pena’s latest novel The Living, from Entertainment Weekly this week. Take a moment with it.
I’ve criticized reviews before which show incredible bias toward what quality is in YA and toward what many believe to be a revival in YA that comes at the hands of an individual by the name of John Green.
Perhaps you’ve heard of him. 
Let there be no question: Green has earned his accolades and awards. He’s worked tirelessly to gain a following and fan base. But the fact that we as a reading and book culture — hell I’d even go further to say those who are casual readers — continue to uphold him as some Savior of YA and the success toward which to aspire is amazingly problematic. Because it follows in the same problematic gender norms that have plagued us since forever. The cis-gendered white male is the standard for best.
The review above irks me on many levels. But the reason we need to be talking about it and need to be angry about it is this — we spend a lot of time discussing about our need for diversity in YA. We want to give books featuring diverse characters and stories to YA readers, teens and non-teens, so that they may see themselves and see those who look like the people they interact with on a daily basis who may not be exactly like them.
We have a non-white author doing this kind of work, writing these kinds of stories, and yet — and yet— those characters must be worthy of the characters in a white, cis-gendered male novel. Worthy. 
De la Pena did a rare thing in creating an interesting YA with characters who, even though they aren’t white (that’s noted in the review) are worthy of the white ones in the white male author’s novel. 
At what point are we going to say we’ve had enough? And at what point will reviewers and/or editors actually sit down, reread these reviews, and think to themselves that maybe they’re further reinforcing a single norm as the “right” one? 
Do they even care? 

    Here is a review of Matt de la Pena’s latest novel The Living, from Entertainment Weekly this week. Take a moment with it.

    I’ve criticized reviews before which show incredible bias toward what quality is in YA and toward what many believe to be a revival in YA that comes at the hands of an individual by the name of John Green.

    Perhaps you’ve heard of him. 

    Let there be no question: Green has earned his accolades and awards. He’s worked tirelessly to gain a following and fan base. But the fact that we as a reading and book culture — hell I’d even go further to say those who are casual readers — continue to uphold him as some Savior of YA and the success toward which to aspire is amazingly problematic. Because it follows in the same problematic gender norms that have plagued us since forever. The cis-gendered white male is the standard for best.

    The review above irks me on many levels. But the reason we need to be talking about it and need to be angry about it is this — we spend a lot of time discussing about our need for diversity in YA. We want to give books featuring diverse characters and stories to YA readers, teens and non-teens, so that they may see themselves and see those who look like the people they interact with on a daily basis who may not be exactly like them.

    We have a non-white author doing this kind of work, writing these kinds of stories, and yet — and yet— those characters must be worthy of the characters in a white, cis-gendered male novel. Worthy

    De la Pena did a rare thing in creating an interesting YA with characters who, even though they aren’t white (that’s noted in the review) are worthy of the white ones in the white male author’s novel. 

    At what point are we going to say we’ve had enough? And at what point will reviewers and/or editors actually sit down, reread these reviews, and think to themselves that maybe they’re further reinforcing a single norm as the “right” one? 

    Do they even care? 

    1. inditesinink reblogged this from catagator
    2. wellsomething reblogged this from 70s-postmiserablisms
    3. 70s-postmiserablisms reblogged this from catagator
    4. somaperies reblogged this from catagator
    5. tipt0e-tulips reblogged this from inbedwithbooks
    6. inbedwithbooks reblogged this from yaflash
    7. kitkuzma reblogged this from diversityinya
    8. butstilli reblogged this from gwendabond
    9. fortheunicornchild reblogged this from diversityinya
    10. tubooks reblogged this from gwendabond and added:
      Reblogging again for Anne Ursu’s thoughtful addition to the discussion.
    11. kitrambles reblogged this from malindalo
    12. gwendabond reblogged this from anneursu and added:
      Reblogging to signal boost this fascinating (and important) conversation. Well said on all three counts. (Also, I can’t...
    13. cakeliterary reblogged this from tubooks
    14. thelittlesnicketlass reblogged this from tubooks
    15. pawnshopbelle reblogged this from yaflash
    16. frenchbobbyfrench reblogged this from diversityinya
    17. justwantedtotellyou reblogged this from malindalo
    18. andtara reblogged this from jessicaloveya
    19. alwaysaspencer reblogged this from diversityinya

the brains behind the machine

Paper theme built by Thomas

Recent Post

Read more