How to use this Page

Great post. Interestingly enough, since so many people I know think that just about anyone can write a book, they've seldom asked me how I came up with the books I've written. Some might venture, "How long did it take you to write it?" But that's as far as the conversatin goes.

You're right--there are those who think anyone can write a book. I have encountered some of those, too.

I feel like, in a sense, yes, it's true that many people are in fact capable of penning a book-length manuscript. Not everyone is capable, however, of revising that manuscript, again and again, or viewing it with a critical eye in order to make it the best it can be. Of course, that's another aspect of the mythos: so many people want to "be writers" and "have written" stuff, but not so much with the actual work of writing. :)

I hear you. I'm always in awe when a writer pumps out three books in a year. How is this even remotely possible? It slays me.

That said- I think authors are vague to keep up the mystic. Fans don't want to hear how their favorite writers ignored everyone in their lives and didn't sleep, shower, or change their clothes for weeks to compose their "masterpiece."

Great post, Sarah! It's nice to hear someone else uses self-bribery to completes tasks -- I'd actually forgotten about that -- note to self--use a movie as a bribe. :)
-Kristin

What? Your characters aren't, like, speaking to you??? How can you be so prosaic!?

Yeah. For me, it's involved with sometimes looking at Google Images - if I'm not careful, for, like hours. And, asking Teh Internets how fast someone's collarbone might heal - I'm sure I'm on the same Watch List; I ask a lot of violent questions, and Google keeps track - and looking at old photo sites, and occasionally the OED - and yes, asking people random questions.

Occasionally, I study recipes...

Yeah, "mystical elements" is sounding better and better.

I don't have a single method. It depends on what I have to do and what the project is like.

I generally try to fix the big stuff first and then move on to the little stuff. But I had to reverse that during one revision of my last project.

To me, the value of all the tools and advice is that there isn't one single thing that works for everyone every time. So the different tools give us things to try when we're stuck.

"as Blogger is wont to do...it reverted my post to draft status."

That's to protect us from "drunk blogging." ;-D

And the combination of the Sally Field quote with the internet quotation-bounded "like" is fabulous!

I was hoping somebody would catch the Sally Field quote. :D It kind of dates me a little, but oh well...

I look forward to Toon Thursday all week long!

I just posted a wee bit today about teaching for a community college on an army base. I learned A LOT about ethnic groups and misconceptions and preconceived ideas and everything else you write about here. One of the many things that has stayed with me is the experiences of a SGT, a very big man (his job was to carry a huge gun and he had the muscles to do it). One three occasions at different military bases while he was out jogging he was stopped by MPs (military police) (always Caucasian guys) and asked for ID. This was on base, he was in army sweats, and he was stopped. Each time he was asked why he was out running.

Think about that. Don't a lot of guys exercise on military bases?

He was both angry and resigned and when we (as a class) asked the MPs in the room why this would happen all they could tell us what that it does. They have to make random stops, he must look to some cops as the right guy to stop.

What was so interesting was how the black students weren't surprised and the white students were shocked. This was a SGT - someone they all respected who was a quiet force of power in my classroom (he could shut down a mouthy 19 year old soldier with a look) and yet he was being disrespected by MPs he outranked.

You mention seeing a group of brown-skinned young men; ever since my class when I see such a group I think of that SGT and I do my best to treat them with the respect not nearly enough people were giving him.

Lesson learned.

This came into my head especially because my brother was stopped by the police last Friday.

He was walking to the bus stop, doing a dry run for his junior college courses which will begin this August. He was stopped simply because ... because.

Why are you outside this time of day?
Why are you walking?
Where are you going?
Where do you live?
What classes are you taking?

My brother is quite possibly our Lord's wee brother, and is patient and sweet and goodhearted at all times. He didn't mind answering questions and chatting with the police officer. *I* minded. A LOT.

But, it will keep happening...

I've learned something here, too. I'm just not entirely sure what.

Great post! We're going to talk about this very topic at school. When I was in Suzchou (near Shanghai) once, I had a hard time convincing a crowd of people that I was not Oprah Winfrey. I didn't know enough Mandarin to be convincing.

I've seen many manuscripts where authors try to include people of varying ethnicities, but sadly fall into stereotypes, i.e., the African American who constantly says "Yo what's up?" and acts like the class clown or says "Girlfriend" all the time and acts sassy. It's always sad to see people so narrowly defined.

Oh, aargh. Yes. The "sassy diva" thing has got to stop. I hate seeing the phrase "you go girl" in books, and not only because it's grammatically ridiculous.

I am imagining the whole Mandarin conversation, and having a tiny (okay, well, actually kind of loud) chuckle. "No! I am NOT Oprah Winfrey...!" Hee! Convince me!!

Thanks for stopping by.

You can only go so far with ni hao (hello or hi) and duo shao (how much). Neither phrase is remotely helpful when a crowd is shouting "Oprah" in a park. Needless to say, I took a lot of pictures with strangers convinced that they had seen Oprah.

What's my experience? I am flooded by a whole host of memories of being defined not just by the way I look by also by the little bit of background people know about me. Eg when I was in secondary school, I was complimented many, many times by people who couldn't believe I was Chinese educated. Why? because the Chinese-educated person was supposed to be unworldly, nerdy, bad in English, good at cramming information but not learning etc. Even when the best students in my year were mostly from Chinese schools, acing subjects that required more than just cramming, people, especially teachers, still persisted in believing in their stereotypes and judging students accordingly.

WOW...I truly enjoyed this blog. You're spot-on about our stereotyping people - even those of us who don't think we do.

The experience that really shook up my assumptions was my first time in London. I was walking along the Thames, & there were two black guys walking in front of me. When I heard them speaking in Ebonics, with a British accent, I was floored. Somehow, I'd come to believe that those two were so disparate, that it never occurred to me I might hear them used in conjunction. I was ashamed to admit that I'd always thought Ebonics was something used by under-educated people, & that the British accent was a sign of "better-educated" people. It was a great lesson in assumptions.

Thank you for an insightful post!

Lin: Someday that story should make it into an essay or a novel: The Week I Was Oprah, by Lin Wash...

Ugh, Yat Yee -- that's not a stereotype with which I'm familiar but I definitely find the "you're Asian, wow, you're smart," to be so common as to be really disturbing. I think Asian prejudices and stereotypes within Asian culture are even harder hitting.

Morgan: There is a hip-hop shop here in Glasgow that took me from walking past to standing stock still. I stared. I gawped. I thought, "are they trying to be American, or...?" But, hip-hop and identity isn't tied to American-ness, but something more, I think, maybe more a common association to the themes of isolation and marginalization in the music.

Also what's still funny to me is seeing Asian and brown-skinned South Asian and African-British people speaking with a Scottish brogue. I always smile a tiny smile, because appearance does not equal voice - it's a lesson I'd do well to remember too!

Thanks for stopping by.

Oh, oops - I meant ALYX Morgan! Sorry!

LOL That's okay...I get that all the time. :o) "alyxmorgan" was already taken when I signed on for my email years ago, so I've just kept it backward with nearly everything else.

Thank you. This makes sense. I think it's telling (to me) that my favorite characters in George R.R. Martin's overwrought A Song of Ice and Fire series are the preteen Arya and teen Daernys.

I haven't read those. I have to admit, your describing them as overwrought doesn't make them sound appealing...but it is quite easy for fantasy to become overwrought, isn't it?

I'm sort of horrified that we haven't even done taxes yet; we're not even to dragging the kitchen chair to the computer yet...!!!

Bravo! But you forgot the "candy wrappers, Kleenex, dead pens, and scrap papers with cryptic notes" littering the desk. ;-)

My future book will be "Running from Friends," a Facebook story.

Loved the SNL reference. Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

I am pleased beyond belief that you noticed that. :)

Chasing the hookup.

I'd say that's not too far from the truth, either.

ha!

I think if you take two of the first and one of the second, you get the name of a good picture book. Think about it.

Ten Jumping Frogs! You're totally right. :D

Offer Void Where Prohibited.
May Cause Drowsiness. Do not operate heavy machinery after using the Title-O-Matic. See your editor if symptoms persist...

I think My Week as a Fruit Bat is probably a bestseller. Somewhere.

If my future novels:

Four Wombats
The Archer's Sorrow
Civil-War Sisters

become bestsellers, I promise to credit the Title-o-Matic!

I want to read Four Wombats RIGHT NOW.

"It's about working between, across, at, and through the edges and borders of literary genres. It falls between the cracks of other movements, terms, and definitions."

Definitely a gallimaufry of the best sort. My kind of reading.

This crossing of borders is one of the things that I've always loved about YA literature (and children's literature, too, though the borders are a bit different). In YA, it's ok to mix genres. In the adult markets, I think that people have more narrowly defined expectations (or the market has dictated that ... I don't know ... but I often find it dull).

It's amazing how much goes on in the world of books and book blogging isn't it? It's impossible to be able to do everything you want to do in the span of the year. Really the only way would be to win the lottery and what are the chances of that!

Hopefully you'll be able to go to one of the events, they really are a great time to learn and network with your fellow bloggers.

Thanks for stopping by and commenting! Yep, I went to the KidlitCon in Portland in '08 and had a fantastic time. Just couldn't afford to go to DC this past summer. :(

Yes, Katherine P. is an inspiration, and I hope for what you hope for, too.

Katherine Patterson is right. In our district they have paid lots of bucks to have a curriculum created for elementary through high school core subjects. They tell the teacher what to teach and the time frame for each unit and the books they are to have the kids read together (Language Arts) and as of this last month here in Bradenton, Florida our elective teachers have been told they must take Wednesdays each week and have the students read. I would not have seen a problem with this except our Art teacher was reading aloud the book "100 Cupboards" and the students were creating a cupboard and it had a whole readign and writing component to it and they told her she couldn't read it aloud on Wednesdays she had to do that some other time. Sad that just a few make the rules for those of us in the trenches who truly know what the children need.

That is REALLY sad. There's nothing I find more inspiring than lessons that really make curriculum something active and creative for students.

I keep starting to type things, and deleting them. I feel as if I've said the same things many times before-- you know, hopes for the rise of the small publishers, a real positive revolution of the American public school systems, etc. I would like to see the slush piles abate so that there's a better chance of good writing to get through. As ever, I am rooting for you, a.fortis.

I love random-notes posts - they are such fun to read! I must admit, I find I can do the self-blathering thing quite well, too, which is rather disconcerting because I'm really quite an introvert. But if I start talking something I'm doing that excites me, I can go on and on, AND I wave my hands all over the place, too! I'm sure the interview went well, though.

I have the Annotated Anne of Green Gables and love it.

Sorry - left the wrong url! (This is what happens when one juggles multiple blogs).

I've only had to do one or two live interviews, and taught a handful of college classes that were an hour and fifteen minutes long. WHOA, those were so hard. I took extensive notes and tried to talk slowly. The faster I speak, the greater likelihood the babble is escaping.

I for one am always glad to know more about you, a.fortis.

Thanks, Farida!! And, guys, you have no idea how reassuring it is to find out I'm not the only introvert who has moments of uncontrollable blather.

Word.
I totally want to do this to you now. Big long-distance call... from your writing...

I totally agree with you - as writers, we should never put aside our writings. These are the fruit of our love for the written words. When I had this admissions essay in college, I made sure that I had expressed who I really am through the words since I know these words are powerful. I always appreciate my writing may it be small or long because this is me; my writing reflects who I really am.

Oh my goodness. WHy didn't I see this? I have the same questions myself, often, and now I'll be teaching an academic literary course in the fall.

Thank you so much for the tip (and your thoughts).

b

Go, A.F., go!

Thanks for cruising by and commenting! I thought this was such an intriguing article--so many interesting points brought up about the way we think about the teaching of creative writing, and how it's changed over the decades. Just like the teaching of fine art! Back in the '50s and '60s it was apparently not uncommon for fistfights to break out during critiques...or at least that's the mythology. :)

It's gorgeous! Love the textured background and the way the images pop on it. It feels warm and welcoming.

Happy dance!

Congratulations, Tanita. The website is beautiful! How exciting. I look forward to visiting often.

Ditto! Great work, LW and Tech Boy. I just subscribed via Google Reader.

So cool to see that you have an author site and blog! Time to update my links :)

Wonderful! I love it!

Now, you've been thinking about doing this for a while, right? You've mentioned it a few times at Original Content? I think you're going to be very happy you did it. And, yes, it does look terrific.

It's beautemous! Great job, LW!

Thanks, all! C.K., I have you on my links page!

Gail, yes, I'd been mulling over this, and after reading your comments (and Colleen's and MotherReader's) about authors HAVE TO do more than just have a blog, I bit the bullet. Thank you very much for the encouragement (although unknowing.)

I must just weight in: being called "Tech Boy" is all Allie's fault. There. Said it.

If you want to know more about all sorts of nonsense, feel free to visit my blog.

It's fabulous! Looking forward to following you there too.

Just beautiful! I don't know how you authors have any time to write.

These both look very nice. A nice change when the winter is so dreary!

In my AK flying writing (both in the memoir and the novel) there is profanity because that is how we talked on the job - all the time, everyday, everybody. I can't remember a single person who did not cuss at the Company; it was just pretty much standard to our language. We cursed the weather, the planes, the bosses, the post office, the competition and even the gods who had placed us at such a piece of shit company where no one gave a flying f**k what happened to us as long as we got the mail delivered on time.

I mean really - it would be the ultimate act of dishonesty not to use profanity in those stories!

TadMack asked me to contribute to this post, but I hate to disturb what's already there...so I'll put my two cents in here! :)

For YA novels, I tend to agree with what you wrote, Tanita, in your antepenultimate paragraph (woo! I finally get to use that word!). There are situations where it would sound weird or clunky NOT to use profanity, or, by the same token, characters for whom it's an essential part of their voice. In a YA novel--generally because of what I've been told about what Those On High look for in a manuscript--I tend to avoid most profanity except for the occasional interjection that seems natural. Not that I'd be swearing left and right otherwise, though.

I think that my opinion is this: go with what seems natural 1) for the character/situation, and 2) for the WRITER. If the writer isn't comfortable writing profanity, it's possible that it will read more awkwardly than it would if they'd simply left it out or written it in a way that they were comfortable with.

For non-YA writing, I generally feel the same way, but I do feel there's more room for profanity insofar as it, again, is a necessary part of the voice. I am not a huge fan of ginormous amounts of profanity, in most cases, but I'll bring up the movie The Big Lebowski as an example here. (We recently watched it again after several years.) There is an incredible and almost disturbing amount of profanity in that movie, but it works. It's how those characters are, and although it makes me a little squirmy, the characters wouldn't be the same without it.

As for profanity as a reflection of social class or ethnicity, etc.--that's a tough one. I think that it's important to be aware that readers might use it as a cue...but it's always very difficult to get into readers' minds. And are we talking about all readers? Some readers?

I tend to think, if the writer IS using it as a shortcut, it WILL come across as such. If it's thoughtfully and appropriately used, there's still a chance the reader may interpret it that way, but...not to sound simplistic about it, but I feel like that's the reader's problem at that point, not the writer's.

I have a big potty mouth so as a reader I don't mind profanity Sometimes a cuss word says it all. As long as the writer doesn't become dependent of profanity I am okay with it. I love mysteries (stay with me) however I am quickly turned off when a writer finds its necessary to describe every cut and slash making it as gory as possible. To me that says the author doesn't have another way to keep the readers interest. I enjoy gore but everything has its limits including profinty. So if I feel an author is leaning too much on bad langauge I am quickly turned off.

I'm struggling with this same thing in the YA novel I'm working on. I don't use profanity, but this one minor character I'm writing definitely would -- in fact know exactly what she would say IF I could bring myself to write it. But I can't -- it just bothers my conscience too much, and I'm not convinced that trying to make the book "realistic" makes it okay. So I'm trying to work around it and still make this character's dialogue sound natural, but it's really hard at times!

So I have no solution, just sympathies. :)

I don't think the universe always needs to be disturbed. Sometimes we need comfort, reassurance, hope, a laugh, beauty. All in good measure. If it means anything I think you are doing a bang-up job of being yourself Tadmack.

Thanks for your post! You've hit on one of my issues with celebrity endorsements, the influencing in a way that is not related to the actual issues at hand. It is more of an "cool, smart, pretty people vote for x" statement than anything else, which means "if you want to be cool/smart/funny, you'll vote for x" as well as "if you're not voting for x, you're not cool/smart/pretty."

I've only skimmed the YA For Obama ning, and will return when there is a bit more content later this week, with it having a chance to have an official launch. So far, I cannot imagine a teen who is supporting McCain feeling welcomed at the site. As would be expected from a for Obama site, the Republican forum is mainly anti McCain. So I'm not sure how that pro McCain teen would participate.

YES. It's all about the in-group, the cool group, the "fun" people -- "We're are doing x." It feels very ...disingenuous, because it's a high school tactic used by adults... to include young people. ...? I was very influenced by what my favorite writers, movie stars, people at school -- did, ate, thought, wore, said. It just seems a poor idea. And yes -- I'll be looking to see how it further unfolds.

What a great post! Thanks for talking about this issue, which I think is one that deserves attention. As you said in response to Liz B, it's a group of adults using the same tactics as high schoolers. Recently I've started to become disturbed by the "Cool Kids" YA author clique, and this just further reinforces my misgivings.

I will include the caveat that I haven't visited the YA for Obama site yet, and I'm sure the site was started with lofty goals. Yet if the point is to encourage young people to think, to decide for themselves, and to vote once they're legally eligible, wouldn't a nonpartisan site be more effective? Instead of encouraging clique behavior and groupthink?

I did visit the site and found it very much a club atmosphere but a little light on information...in other words, where were the policy comparisons on stuff that teens would be interested in? Where were articles on the differences between McCain and Obama on energy or jobs or health care or college loans? Where were interviews with teens who had very real reasons for wanting Obama to be elected (everything from social issues to maybe foreign policy or immigration or whatever)?

What I'm thinking about would be a huge huge deal and require more time than you average person who is not a paid political consultant would have to donate. But if you're going to do this then I think you need to do it in as a complete fashion as possible.

In other words - there is a reason why there is no talk of Obama or McCain going on at Guys Lit Wire. I'm thrilled to have books on political topics but not one candidate over the other - it has to be balanced and let kids make up their minds.

I understand that these folks support Obama (hell - I very clearly support Obama at my own site) but this all reminds me an awful lot of my stepfather telling me who I had to vote for at my first election. The insinuation was that I couldn't make the right choice on my own and he was smarter and thus should make the choice for me.

This site reads as more for adult Obama fans who are writers of teen fiction then it does for teens themselves. I wonder if they realize that?

I'm with Colleen. More information -- policy comparisons, as she put it -- are necessary. It's insulting to teens to not provide that information.

Excellent points, TadMack (and other commenters). It sounds to me that a site like this gives the impression that there's only one right way for teens to feel about this election (especially if they are part of the cool in crowd). That's simply not true, and it's ultimately divisive, because it dismisses other viewpoints. I haven't actually checked out the site yet, either, though. I will.

But thanks for what I think is a brave post.

I haven't looked at the site yet, either, but this is a fascinating discussion. I can't help wondering how this would be different if the site had been, say, created by YAs themselves and then had YA authors as spokespersons?

With a political site started by adults, I think that those adults have a responsibility to tread very carefully, whether or not the site takes sides.

(Thanks, Jen. I still expect people to come out, screaming.)

Liz has a good idea -- go and look at the blog when it's not the first day of the launch. Maybe it'll balance out, and be more nonpartisan and informative.

I heard about YA for Obama last week and visited the site then before it had officially launched. I just checked in again now, too. I have a lot of the same reservations you have.

I think a site to encourage political involvement among young adults is a great idea, but I wish they hadn't tied it to a specific candidate. As Liz B said, McCain supporters probably won't feel comfortable/welcome there, so it's not as if they're going to win over a lot of new 18- to 21-year-old voters for their candidate, anyway.

Unless, of course, they win over young people who wouldn't have become politically active without a push from authors they like. But, again, I wish they'd encouraged them to become politically active, period--to vote in municipal elections, school board elections, etc., and not just go out and vote for one person and then go home.

i have a ton to say here but i will try to restrain myself and keep it to a few main points:

Trying to convince others of your viewpoint is not coercion. Public engagement and debate is the whole point of democracy. In times as dire as these-- my home will be slipping into the sea shortly, thanks!-- it is any artist's responsibility to speak up. if artists aren't allowed to do this then we might as well not have any artists.

When artists banded together in the eighties to make a stink about AIDS it changed history. Were they also self-appointed "cool kids" engaging in bratty highschool hijinx? I think they were just doing their jobs.

One might argue that the fact that our audience is made up of teenagers puts a greater burden on us to tread lightly with our opinons. I don't agree. I think most YA writers are YA writers partially because they assume teenagers are capable of thinking for themselves. (And, to be practical here, anyone who is going to be pulling a lever in November will be a legal adult anyway.)

To respond to Colleen's point that there isn't enough policy talk on the site: first of all, it's the first day with regular blog posts. I don't have any inside information, but I assume there will be all kinds of posts about all kinds of things, including, surely, The Issues.

And Colleen, you know I love you but I think it's disingenuous to suggest that ALL political discussion should focus on "Policy." The personal is the political! And anyway, a president's job, as much as anything, is to be a leader. That's not to say that this election should be fought on issues like Sarah Palin's hair and "who I'd like to have a beer with," but I think it's completely legitimate to take into consideration a candidate's ability to restore our morale as a country. That may not be policy in the strictest sense, but it's important.

I'm mostly concerned at the tone of this post, which seems to suggest that writers should shut up and sit down. That's exactly the opposite of an artist's role in a democracy. But here's the other nice thing about our (admittedly crumbling) free society: you don't have to listen to anyone!

To take in order the points bennett raised:

1) Trying to convince others of your viewpoint is not coercion.

No, it is not coercion, which would involve the direct application of force. Using your position to influence people can constitute undue influence, however, in particular when there's an aspect of power involved in the relationship. Celebrities influence all of the time without that influence falling into the "undue" realm ... but when the people we are influencing are minors, there is a definite problem, as they are not necessarily able to separate their hero worship from what they are being told to do.

2) It is any artist's responsibility to speak up.

Not really. If the aim of an artist is to change the world through achieving a bit of fame so that they can have political leverage, there is a definite evilness to whatever it is that you consider "art." Art should not be "instrumental" to some other gain. Doing art so that you had a platform to speak from is analogous to telling someone that you love them so that they'll sleep with you: it is simply not the right reason to do art, nor to "love" someone.

3) If artists aren't allowed to do this then we might as well not have any artists.

So ... artists' sole purpose is political ends? I really don't like the picture of art being painted here.

4) Again, with the "artists changed history" and "this is artists' job."

While it may be true that artists can affect change, and that change can be good, the situations are not exactly parallel. The AIDS effort was not aimed at children, nor was it aimed at something which which was debatably good. Rather, the AIDS effort was aimed at combatting a known evil.

(Are you now coming right out there to say that one of our political candidates is evil? If so, then you are part of the problem our nation is experiencing, in that we all must coexist, no matter who wins.)

5) We don't have to tread lightly with our opinions.

No, you certainly don't. However, people read your books, absorbing whatever it is that you have incorporated into the work, and are able to consider and discard it. It must feel real, to some degree, and must "work." That is your craft, your art. This other thing is merely expressing your opinions.

Tell me this: Why should teenagers listen to your opinion on the political situation? What have you done to convince them that you are capable of making a good judgment in this matter? Does the fact that you can tell a "real" or "true" story have anything to do with your ability to judge politics?

6) Teenagers are capable of thinking for themselves. Teenagers won't be voting.

This is really beside the point, and is particularly disengenuous. If the group is aimed at teenagers, then you hope to accomplish something with that effort. While you may not be attempting to get them to vote NOW in a particular way, you are attempting to indoctrinate them (in a particularly coarse manner) so that they vote as you would like 4 YEARS from now.

7) The issues upon which we focus shouldn't solely be those of policy, but should include an aspect of popularity, as leadership is something which is at issue as well as the ability to restore our morale as a nation.

I cannot agree with this statement at all, and you have provided no compelling argument for it. The idea that moral should play a part in our decision is to ignore the source of our poor morale. We may be depressed, as a nation, by any number of things which have gone wrong (the wars, an administration which advocates torture and kidnapping, two elections which may or may not have been won fairly, etc.). These issues, though, will not be resolved by a change in figurehead, but will only be resolved by a change in the policies themselves. If we were to have an absolutely uncharismatic leader (Dukakis, perhaps) who managed to affect a positive change in policy, I believe that our nation's morale would improve. How is it that a popular "leader" would do better?

Further, this statement sounds shockingly as if you are advocating the same type of administration which is in power: one which appeals to the lowest common denominator, yet does whatever it pleases, because the lowest common denominator does not consider policy to be important.

8) You are concerned with the tone of this post. You believe it to be saying that writers should "shut up and sit down."

I did not read that as being the intent at all. Rather, it seemed that the intent was to inject a bit of ethical behavior into the situation, rather than the Machiavellian machinations present upon the site under discussion.

Bennett - I love you right back!! ha!

I'm fine with authors talking but what bothers me a bit about this is the purpose is to get teens talking about democracy/voting/the process, etc etc and yet....mostly it is just a big cheerleading site. Large-Hearted Boy has been running guest posts for months from folks on why they want to vote for Obama and I think that is very cool - he's not claiming to be anything else. But this site seems to have goals for one thing and yet be doing another. And the forums...go read the forums. The forum on Palin is full of a ton of falsehoods and I don't see any moderator stepping in there and setting everyone straight. People are writing about how they hate her - HATE HER.

And go see what happens when someone sticks up their head and claims to be pro-life. It's not pretty.

I guess my disappointment is I don't see anyone learning anything at this site and do see the spreading of a lot of bad information and, to be frank, a lot of junior high level dialog. The idea is good - but the execution is leaving me cold.

I guess I would have preferred a bunch of teen authors to take their popularity and use it in a broader way and personally yeah - I LOVE Obama. It just seems that you could talk him up without talking McCain/Palin (mostly Palin) down. (That's where I get into policy discussions.)

Maybe it will change and I certainly hope it does.

Hey, Bennett, and everybody,
Thanks for stopping by.

I'm not sure I accused anyone of coercion, and I don't think I meant that everyone who's an author - or artist - should shut up and sit down. I know I'm a cautious person, but I'm not so cautious that I think writers should vanish or something. People also call it "fence sitting," when a person doesn't necessarily want to air their opinions publicly: I'm definitely not on any fence with regards to this election! I just want to put that out there, for the record.

I'm more remembering myself in high school. Some people -- probably the cool people like yourself ;) -- are really good at being self-determined and original. And then there's the rest of us, who are a little more (or a lot more) unformed, trying to figure out who or what we really think or believe.

What I was struggling to articulate was the fact that for some people, this sort of "bandwagon" approach really has the potential to be a negative experience. It all sounds really friendly and fun and "come join the fun people, the cool people, the right people," and there's no doubt that there are fun, cool, and right people and ideas involved here. But while it promises a shiny, inclusive experience, politics isn't a club, and the people asking you to join their team aren't really your friends. It all ends up kind of being a means to an end.

When I was teaching school, though I had political ideas, it would never have crossed my mind to share them with my students because in that sort of relationship, that just wouldn't be appropriate. I think maybe this comes down to how we view ourselves as YA writers. And, I'm willing to admit that maybe I'm taking myself too seriously, I've been known to do that. But, I'm not convinced...

I'm open to the idea that I might be misjudging this site, and as I've previously stated, I look forward to seeing how it all unfolds.

Again, thanks everyone for the discussion.

dear logical thinker!

okay, so i probably shouldn't respond to this because it's going to take all afternoon and we're talking about some tricky ideas. but i will give it a try.

one thing I'd like to say first is that other than signing up for it, I've barely participated in YA for Obama so far and definitely don't represent anyone's opinions except my own.

let me also preface this by saying that my books and stories are not remotely political on the surface. i mean, you would have to dig pretty damn deep. so i am not coming at you from a Joan Baez kind of place.

With that being the case, I certainly don't think that an artist's sole purpose is political. If that were true, I myself would be SOL. But I do think that art and politics are on some level inextricable. Everything's political! Including YA chick lit mysteries with waterproof "beach read" covers!

Furthermore i really, really, one thousand percent don't think that "... the aim of an artist is to change the world through achieving a bit of fame so that they can have political leverage." That's a real misinterpretation. I'm by no means suggesting that writing is some kind of wedge to gain a platform for political speech. Instead, I'm saying that, to some extent, art and political speech are the same thing.

I think that the aim of an artist is just to speak. Art is saying what you mean. The goal is not fame or influence; the goal is just to say whatever you have to say. Whether or not anyone "should" listen or care about what I say is not really the point. People "should" do whatever the hell they want! The point, for me, is to say it. That's what an artist does. An artist says stuff. People can choose to listen or not listen.

As for the comparison to the role of art during the AIDS crisis: I'm not going to play around with the word "evil" because that is not taking the discussion anywhere productive. But do I believe this election is a matter of life or death? Sure. Among other things, there's a war going on out there. I don't want to get into a real political debate about the pros and cons of each candidate-- that can be done elsewhere-- so I'll just leave it at that.

It of course seems evident now that AIDS was an obvious menace in the '80s, but the truth is that there were many people who considered it to be literally a gift from God. So I don't think it was nearly as much of a clear case of right/wrong as you're remembering it. If it had been, there would have been no need for protest in the first place. The NIH would have been throwing money toward research. Everyone would have known it was something evil to be defeated. That's not how it went down. Instead, the problem was ignored until artists started screaming.

AIDS-era art was deeply political and deeply "partisan." (Hate that word, but whatever.) Reagan was held responsible by many for the crisis. In other words, artists weren't just protesting a disembodied "evil" disease. They were explicitly protesting Reagan and his policies. Does that mean Ronald Reagan is "evil?" Again I don't think that word is useful. (But I don't know that I would ask Larry Kramer that question.)

The point is that I think the parallel IS there. You see the world going down the tubes; you do what you can. A writer writes.

As for the (smaller) argument of strict policy discussion versus bringing more ineffable factors into the mix, I stand by my opinion that it matters. It's not a huge part of the equation, but it matters. The ability to unite people matters; the ability to rally people behind you matters. Is it the ONLY thing that matters? Clearly not (Ronald Reagan, hello again!) But at the same time: being a statesperson is pretty much undisputably in the PRESIDENT job description.

I feel like I've gone pretty far afield here going blow for blow, so I'll try to bring it back home:

Is voicing an opinion exerting undue influence only because our readers are teenagers? Well, if teenagers are such hothouse flowers-- so malleable and easily swayed that it's considered "Machiavellian" to express an opinion for fear that they might actually listen!-- then I'm in the wrong business to start with.

What about books that are themselves explicitly political? Is Grapes of Wrath, which everyone reads Sophomore year, going to turn everyone all commie? (Well, I suppose maybe it worked on me...) What about Wrinkle in Time, which was read in my school sixth grade? L'Engle deals with some pretty explosive ideas in that book.

If you're saying that those cases are different because they rise to the level of art, I can see your point to some extent. And I think Colleen raises some good points about the shortcomings that the YA for Obama site might have. (And anywya, I'm in enough "social networks" already, thanks!)

But I think creating some kind of distinction between storytelling and other kinds of writing is silly. Just because a person has published fiction doesn't mean that he or she can't or shouldn't write anything else.

TadMack is right this all does eventually circle back to what the role of a YA author is... that's something I've gotten into arguments with other YA writers about, and is therefore a topic for another day.

But to argue that by writing to our audience we are somehow engaging in sinister manipulation tactics is absurd. It's called speaking up.

(i hope this makes some kind of sense. it's been a long day.)

Thanks for posting this, TadMack! I don't have anything new to add, but I do have misgivings over putting my name to anything these days that is a potential vehicle of misinformation. I've received emails from people whom I respect and love, about matters I agree with-- but the paragraphs used to support the matters aren't factually correct. I know how hard it is to get things right, but so much seems fueled by emotions first and fact-checking later. That's why I've been holding back on joining groups.

I've made a conscious choice not to blog about politics (at least, not the partisan politics of the election cycle; you could argue that other issues I do discuss, such as censorship, are political!). That's because I want to keep my blog's focus on the craft of writing.

But I don't have a problem with other writers expressing political views. I agree with Bennett that artists speak, and it's up to their audience to decide whether the speech is worth heeding. I don't think that just because a person (even a young person) has read an artist's book or bought his music that the artist's speech constitutes undue influence.

However, I do believe that responsible political speech focuses on transmitting facts and expressing opinions, not spreading misinformation.

And I want to clarify here that I haven't seen the YA for Obama site, and therefore I can't opine either way on that specific site; I just wanted to comment on the issue in general.

Yay!
I woke up this morning hoping I wouldn't have to close comments on this, and I don't.

You guys rock the mature -- intelligent -- discussion/dispute model but very, very well. Thank you, mille grazie, danke, merci.

This is really mind opening. Appreciate it.

I think this post is great, and I think the site seems pretty great too! I'm all for questioning everything...

I want to offer that celebs promote agendas all the time this way. As religious mission, to "rock the vote", as sex ed (or opposition to). I'm not certain I understand why its really any different when the support is for a single candidate.

I do think there's a responsibility, when you're famous, to be careful, to not spread gossip, to check your sources. You need to stand accountable when you're wrong, and answer for your position. But I don't think that celebrity takes away your right to promote an agenda.

I'm not famous, but if I were I'd still be a Jewish female democrat, a mother, wife, and American. I couldn't help wanting to speak as all of those people, and to use my influence to make the world a better place.

We can pick the site apart, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the idea of it. I blog about politics, and if my books should start to sell well, I wouldn't stop.

The argument that an artist exerts "undue influence" over the public when he or she voices political opinions is as simplistic and inherently misguided as Neal Pollack's "shut the [redacted] up about the war, nobody gives a [redacted] what you think" argument, which infuriated me both times he made it.

An artist is as entitled as any other person to express political opinions. The fact that those opinions may be given greater deference by the public than someone else's is not the artist's problem and should not prevent him or her from voicing them. Besides, it doesn't always work that way. The artist who speaks out about convictions that don't jibe with those of his or her fan base actually runs the risk of career derailment. Consider, for example, the Dixie Chicks, who denounced the war only to find their songs banned by mainstream country stations, and a large sector of their core audience angry and alienated. (This may have been temporary; I haven't followed their trajectory since.)

Sure, neutral policy discussion and interviews with teenagers are good, and might be useful here, but impassioned and informed opinions about the candidates are important, too. And if the arguments on this site truly are, as someone suggested, reminiscent of hectoring lectures from parents, presumably teens will tune them out just the way they do would a father up on his soapbox.

I agree with Mr. Madison: Adolescents are not hothouse flowers. They are people with developing minds who in general prefer and deserve to be challenged rather than condescended to or coddled. Authors who feel compelled to speak their minds about the candidates should do so. Free speech is still, at least theoretically, one of the most basic promises of our democracy.

Maud, I completely agree: if what were being said were that an artist shouldn't voice an opinion, then there would be a problem. I think that you and bennett are missing the point, though, which is to consider what is going on at another site, and whether that other site is behaving in an ethical manner. It is not. The discussion begun here was in the hopes of exploring just why there is an ethical problem with that site. Those in favor of the site simply do not seem to be able to conceive of their behavior as wrong, probably because they are too invested in the political process, to the detriment of their readers.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, true, and to express that opinion.

Here's a parallel.

Consider a policeman coming to your house (in or out of uniform does not matter, because you know him to be a policeman). He knocks on your door, and says, in some very strong terms, that you need to trim your hedges into a different shape.

This should make you a bit uncomfortable. Why? Simply because he is in some position of authority, and he is expressing his opinion about something you need to do. Right there is the difference between simply expressing his opinion and exerting undue influence.

All of those who use their position in this way are abusing a trust.

Hello, Again Everyone!
Thanks again for dropping by and making the random thoughts of one person into an interesting discussion.

I'm going to be annoying and close comments now, because ...well, because I can. Maureen Johnson posted a really interesting piece the other day further explaining her intentions with regard to YA for Obama, and you might enjoy reading it. I did. The essays posted by various authors are really thought-provoking, and there are tons of discussions to get involved with over there.

I'm not into arguing, and I actually kind of hate politics, and probably some of you think I'm a wuss and a fence-sitter, and I've heard other comments directed to those people who don't choose to make a huge stand about whatever. That's cool. One of the serious benefits of democracy is that everyone has the right to do it their way. So, this is mine: to listen, to observe, to think, and then to keep my own counsel.

Again, thanks, all. This has been really good.

Your writing experience may suck at this moment, but you do not.

Art may be how the world heals. Healing can be painful. And crooked. And frustrating.

But I can't tell you how many times my whole self has been saved by one moment of beauty. One string of words. One image. One thing created by another human being that says: you are not alone. I stand with you.

"But Tony is my friend." Exactly, Mr. Sendak.

Just...wow. And all I can think is, if only I could just get to the place where I'm deemed worthy to entertain the anonymous masses; then, when people are actually reading it (or not), I suppose I'll truly worry if my work has relevance.

Strange to think that these fears don't go away upon publication or upon career success; they just mutate into new and exciting forms. Evidently a career in the arts is where the wild things are...

Perhaps it's a good thing if we don't ever get past feeling that we're just making faces to entertain. It's what makes us continue to strife.

Oops. It makes us continue to strive. My use of strife may indicate some deep rooted, simmering problem.

Well, Gail, we also have to continue to, er, strife. We wrestle and wrangle with life. Really. Strife works perfectly...

Creepy is right! And it just gets more creepy in the final installment (and can I just say yay, now that I'm done? Now I get to read the Smart B post, spoiler-worry-free!).

Things can get really tense when money is concerned. It's sad, and it makes my gut clench up when it happens. I wonder if it's one way of dealing with the outrage of losing someone to death, even when that death is after a long, long life.

I think in this case what makes me even sadder is that there's no family left -- so it's down to caretakers and longtime fans who are all grieving, trying to make sense of what she wanted...

I LOVE THAT TOON! lol!

Click for cheezburger.

LOL, LW! That is a good one. Have you seen the Lolowls?

THAT would go well on a mug.

I wonder if you could get that done as a t-shirt over at Threadless.com.

Oh, literally laughing out loud. Fabulous!

I have to say that I've read through a bit of The Artist's Way... and ...I'm... not a big fan. I say this with the proviso that I didn't actually DO it, but I just skimmed through the first few chapter and it was a bit Stuart Smalley for me.

I believe that writing can be both mental and spiritual, but I have trouble with the sort of amorphous belief that exercises and affirmations lead to enhanced creativity and spirituality... it's too The Secret for me -- as if all you have to do is fiddle with the universe and find The One True Thing, and suddenly you will be published and all your dreams will come true.

ALL OF US want that kind of power and all of us want that level of success, but I'm leery of things that are so subjective that they come back on the user. As in, if you don't have success from this, YOU DIDN'T DO IT RIGHT.

My scanty pesos on the matter.

I like the idea of notebooks with toons on the cover---those would be fun to use.

TadMack, I hear you on the Artist's Way. I think the difference for me is that she prescribes action: writing morning pages and doing artist's dates, among other things. You don't just sit there and wish for success. (Which is pretty much what I was doing and it wasn't working!)

And so much of what she asks you to do is simply look at what you already believe, write it out and really SEE it, so you don't keep bumping up against unacknowledged, submerged obstacles.

Interesting comments, guys. Sara, I can see how that would be useful--becoming aware of your own biases and the ways in which we tend to sabotage ourselves, especially.

I think what's keeping me from doing it is the time-investment-to-perceived-benefit ratio...I'm just not sure exactly how tangible the outcome would be. Also, I'm not always very good at sticking to self-imposed schedules. (Now THERE'S an important bit of self-knowledge...)

I think the 7 stages of rejection have an audience.

I would also love to have the ferrets on a T-shirt, but that might be just me. (Oftentimes in life, it's just me.)

Haven't done the Artist's Way. Two friends have, and they really loved it. Like any tool, it's right for some and not for others.

This is a beautiful post, Tadmack, and something I wonder about a LOT. Is what we're doing (each of us) enough? Is it good or important or necessary or helpful? Is it service, or self serving?

But deep down I think that if you're the kind of person who's asking those questions and following them to their logical ends, you are serving. And helping. Really.

Part of what you're doing as a writer, I think, (besides providing an education and a escape through story) is raising consciousness.

Who's to say that ten people aren't going to act TODAY after reading your post? We all play different roles in the world, multiple ones, many of us. And the one you are playing today is lighting a fire under other ones of us who, together, can and should get this world fed.

Both literally, and through story...

I appreciate this post, TadMack. I really wish I could remember the person Madeleine L'Engle quoted when she said that the writer's/storyteller's job was not to tell the troops that they were going to die, but to entertain them and give them stories the night before they were going to die. It was in one of her books, so I should just go back and reread them all.:) She said it much more succinctly than that, of course! But I've carried that thought with me for many a year. Books definitely helped me emotionally survive the rough years. Whenever someone said, "Oh, you've just got your head in a book," I wanted to respond, "Yeah? What have you got to offer that's better?!" (I was in 4th grade, and not that snappy, though.)

I wonder about this issue a lot, too...I often wonder whether there's some way I can use my ability to write, or draw, to do more than simply draw others' attention to important happenings.

Let's make a pact to tell each other if we come up with any bright ideas! :)

I do love what Liz and Akelda had to say about this, too.

Tadmack (and Liz, and Alkelda, and Sarah): I struggle with this issue every day. I wonder if what I do on a daily basis makes any difference, especially when the world is such a cruel, cruel place. (Especially now.)

It's nice to know others struggle too.

I think that art gives us the "why" we live--despite grim headlines and personal struggles, to find/create meaning and sense is a powerful thing.

And ahem.....when are we going to see the review???

I feel the same way - and so I donate money to causes I believe in and people I hope to get into power so they can change the world. And I write to my senators and congressman (actually not so much writing to the congressman as he is facing a investigation by the Dep of Justice - oy) and let them know how I feel about things.

And I buy what I can to support local business and I don't use pesticides on the lawn and I hope to God that Al Gore gets a seat in the next governmnet so he has a chance to save the damn world.

And I write because I truly believe that we get the goverment we deserve and what is happening now is proof of just what terrible shape our education system is in. The politics of fear brought us to this place, because there were not enough educated, forward thinking people to out vote those who did not know better.

Write books Tanita, so that young people will read them, and when they are done, they will keep reading more. And they will not be so easily fooled; they will know enought to question outrageous things are said.


PS. Madeleine L'Engle also wrote "fight to the death for truth and the Lord God fights by your side". In a good world we would not need to entertain the troops with stories; we would not need to send them away.

Thanks for writing this, TadMack. "Why write" is a question I am constantly asking myself and trying to answer. Most days, I do believe writing/books are so very valuable... but I also believe I could be doing more to give. Maybe we always could.

Thanks for this post, Tanita. It's what good writing does: ask the questions. Amen to: 1) still writing and 2) thinking what else to do.