New Adult Fiction

New adult fiction.

I came across this term a couple of hours ago, when I was reading the latest issue of Publishers Weekly (PW) on my flight from New York to Hong Kong. There was a short piece in it that introduces the term - the genre - and explains it as fiction for books that are, basically, older than YA (young adult) and younger than adult/contemporary/mainstream/literary fiction. The contents of NA (somehow I don't see the abbreviation NA catching on, like the abbreviation YA, because of the other kind of NA, N/A. I don't fancy any author wanting his or her work to be mistaken for being N/A when it is NA.) are usually centered around characters who are older teens and younger twenties who are navigating what it means to be a (new) adult. It's coming-of-age, another genre that instantly makes me think of Catcher in the Rye and the movie Stand By Me, for an older set. Coming-of-age, typically, as far as I've always known it to be, was about the preteen referred to as 'tween' in the current century) through adolescent years and center around how the protagonist navigates the mental, emotional and social changes that adolescence brings.

The term 'new adult fiction' came about in the early 2000s when a contest was held within the walls of a publisher on how to describe a particular book it's staff was working on. It hasn't really come into vogue (yet) but with its unveiling in this week's PW I'm sure it's only a matter of time before it stakes its claim in literary lexicon. NA fiction is also geared towards those YA readers who are getting and have gotten older. With this approach, I suspect some authors may expand on the types of stories they tell to keep their audience. I don't know if this necessarily good or particularly bad but it could lead to stories just being produced no maintain a fan base and not written because the author HAS to tell the story.

Personally, I like this new genre. Well, the genre, as far as the kind of books that would fall into it, isn't new. NA books have been written for decades. The identification though for books being referred to as such is new. Really, readers will like stories that entertain and move them so it doesn't really matter what you call them. I love Legend by Marie Lu, The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint Exupery, and the Narnia books by C. S. Lewis, to name a few, and these are regarded as YA/children's books. I loved them today, at 43, as I did when I originally read them when I was a tween. (Legend, of course, I only read as a 43 year old because it only came out last year but I love it, all the same.)

I like the term, though, from a marketing and publicity viewpoint. When asked about my book, Back Kicks And Broken, I describe it as 'older YA;' something that's appropriate for 17+. I feel it's NA because of the intimate scenes and not because of the martial arts action or the adult material that pertains to issues surrounding the protagonist and his parents. The martial arts scenes are action but they're not violent and, from personal experience, I know of eleven year olds and younger who have been faced to deal with - and handle very maturely - their parents' divorce, extended families with parents' new boyfriends/girlfriends/spouses. Good or bad, it's the world we live in in 2012.

Another reason I like about the term 'new adult fiction' is that those are the kinds of stories I'm writing. I've described my work-in-progress, Sage of Heaven, as YA but when I finished the first draft I felt that what I'd written is 'older YA' yet again. I can, and might, change it to more conventional YA yet but the story naturally lends itself to older YA, aka new adult fiction. This new genre gives writers like me a firmer place to belong as I slowly make my way into the world of writing and publishing. And that, in and of itself, makes me hopeful that I might actually make it. Good writing and storytelling will always win readers regardless of what category a book falls under and who the writer is but it never hurts having to place to call home.

No Pulitzer Ficton Winner Good For Indie Books

The Pulitzer people announced their 2012 winners this week and, for the first time in thirty-five years, they didn’t award a winner for fiction. As someone who, three or four years ago, made it a goal to read each year’s winner I was a little disappointed that there wasn’t one. I’ve come to rely on the Pulitzer people to make one choice for me each year. Like many readers and lovers of books, who don’t have bottomless pockets filled with cash to spend on books, I’m careful when I choose what books to buy and read and The Pulitzer is arguably one of the most respected, albeit subjective, gauges of literature in this country. (Yes, I know I can enjoy reading books for free by getting a library card but, based on my reading habits, it’s probably cheaper to buy the books I read.)

Of the three finalists - Karen Russell’s Swamplandia!, David Foster Wallace’s The Pale King and Denis Johnson’s Train Dreams - Russell’s debut novel is the one I’m most familiar with. I have read Denis Johnson’s Tree of Smoke, however, and I almost picked up a copy of Wallace’s Brief Interviews with Hideous Men a while back.

The fact, though, that a winner wasn’t chosen because neither finalist garnered enough votes to push it passed the other two is another clear indicator - in addition to book sales, for instance - that what makes for a good book is subjective to the reader. There are some who put down genre fiction but, clearly, with the popularity that YA vampire/monster stories like The Twilight series have garnered and the growth of YA dystopia (The Hunger Games and Legend) there is a place for all kinds of books. This reinforcement that ‘good’ books are subjective is a good sign for indie authors.

With the economy what it is and with many traditional publishing houses not gambling on new writers, many writers, right off the bat or after getting rejected by agents, have turned to various forms of independent publishing (e-book formatting, print-on-demand, small runs at a small printer, etc). Yes, there are many indie books that are pretty bad. (Yes, my last sentence does sound subjective but I think there are some universal truths on writing; things like consistency of voice and POV, the ability to have a story thread throughout the novel, unique dialogue, etc.) Based on the positive responses my book received from agents and other writers before I published, I like to think it isn’t one of the baddies. I do know, however, that some people will love Back Kicks And Broken Promises while others will loathe it and others will find it ‘comme ci, comme ca,’ if not hate it altogether. There are also some traditionally published books that are not well received. Just read any review supplement in any Sunday edition of a national newspaper and you’ll read critics saying a variety of different things on some of the same books. Take a look at Entertainment Weekly magazine’s Books section. The magazine’s reviewers give the books actual letter grades. I’ve agreed with some, disagreed with others and I’ll admit that I’ve been influenced by the grade a book got when deciding whether and/or when to buy it.

The reason that no Pulitzer winner for fiction is good for indies is simply because it reinforces what I’ve tried to point out - that readers will find different books likable, lovable, loathe-worthy. Readers’ tastes are subjective and their responses to a particular book could be different from one day to the next. I read Tinkers, the 2010 Pulitzer fiction winner by Paul Harding about how a father and son, through tragedy, come to terms with the world and each other. It’s well written, a quick read and quite touching but I still felt frustrated when I was done with it. So, the fact that traditionally published books, by some well known and respected authors, that were aided by an agent’s efforts and resulted in some kind of monetary advance did not win, gives us - indie authors - hope. Perhaps an indie book will never appear on the list of accepted entries or finalists for a Pulitzer but, if the Pulitzer people can’t find a book to praise from the traditionally published, it (and the readers who follow the organization), may have to look elsewhere. And, the only alternative to traditionally published, whether e-book or print book, is indie published.

There are many book awards for indie authors. There are the Indie Reader Discovery Awards and Writer’s DigestSelf-Published Book Awards. These are good opportunities for indie books to get recognized and praised. They’re great marketing tools and give the authors a sense of validation if their books do well. Ideally, though, at least from my opinion, is for all books to be regarded together. Fiction is fiction regardless of who wrote it and who published it. If it does, for you, what you think and feel good fiction should do then it’s good fiction.

We read for lots of different reasons. For readers of fiction, I’m sure one of those reasons is old-fashioned enjoyment. Just make sure you’re actually enjoying what you read.