Argument Essay: Should YA Fiction Have Limitations?

         Did you know that books, including Captain Underpants, have been challenged in 2013? Decisions like this sparked an ongoing debate on whether or not young-adult fiction should have restrictions. But many articles have validated my point and have brought me to my clear position. This includes multiple perspectives on the profane content in blurbs, the questionably realistic circumstances within a YA novel, and the surprising changes between previous books and the ones we read today. The following evidence will clarify that it is not up to a ‘gatekeeper’ to try to challenge books and interfere with a person’s reading life by influencing their opinion on books.

         Admittedly, YA books seem extremely intense and gruesome, when they’re talked about or summarized by critiques in their articles. For example, Meghan Cox Gurdon’s “Darkness Too Visible” states that Shine involves, “the protagonist [16 years] once a close friend of the victim…recover[s] from…sexual assault…[Also,] assorted locals [are] in the grip of homophobia, booze, and crystal meth.” These ‘assorted locals’ aren’t important characters in the story and her relived ‘sexual assault’ was a small portion of the book (as she investigated suspects). As you can see, books may involve intense events and tend to normalize dangerous issues to set a certain setting, but these aren’t large components of a book. In other words, David Levithan is paraphrased in William Porter’s “Teen Fiction Plots Are Darker And Starker” saying, “a book’s… blurb often makes it appear grimmer than it is.” Therefore, YA books may often have summaries that look more profane without the context of the entire book, so they don’t deserve to have limitations.

          Secondly, YA literature shouldn’t have limitations because some teenagers may find them very helpful in terms of normalizing and coping with the real problems in their lives. This is actually a very popular opinion that hasn’t failed to come across in many articles for this debate. In Sherman Alexie’s “Why The Best Kids Books Are Written In Blood”  he bases this entire article mainly on this point, and how it reflects his hardships as a teenager. For example, he implies that teenagers, “read because they believe…that books-especially the dark and dangerous ones- will save them.” This was a little opinionated but at the same time led to some really informative and eye-opening points, that held some truth to them. Although YA fiction could somewhat disturb a reader, limitations would only, “protect the [seemingly] privileged children,” continues Sherman Alexie. In simpler words needing and not having a coping mechanism for something disturbing in your real life is far worse than simply being disturbed by a novel, which you can easily stop reading if you wish to. All in all, this isn’t a reason to put limitations on YA fiction.

  It’s certainly not a lie that teen fiction has gotten darker over the years. And many critiques haven’t failed to mention this in their articles. For example, Gurdon quotes, “40 years ago, no one had to contend with young-adult literature because there was no such thing.” This brings up how YA novels have gotten more graphic over the years but fails to address why. For example William Porter starts out his article by showing the similarities between “headline news…[and] plotlines from recent novels.” This proves that if our daily news is getting more intense everyday, it’s only fitting for YA literature to do the same. Therefore, books getting darker isn’t a valid reason for limitations on young-adult fiction.

  In conclusion, there are many valid reasons as to why young-adult literature shouldn’t have restraints of any kind. This includes the exaggerated graphics within blurbs, the necessity of normalizing gruesome events in a teen’s life, and the expected darkening of YA fiction over years. Considering young-adult fiction is, after all, intended for young adults, the only control people should have over kids reading YA books is parenting of your own child, not others. But that’s exactly what limiting books does, if you think about it. So instead of choosing what’s appropriate for someone’s child, don’t you think we should give the parents an opportunity to raise their children the way they intend to?