How to use this Page

THIS IS HILARIOUS.

I, of the curly-haired persuasion, just realized my protags always have nice, straight, manageable hair and their sidekicks generally have unruly curls. Dare to dream.

Man, I would have made an awesome ’80s chick!

So true! I somehow never noticed it in books, which is odd because somehow I wind up in conversations about hair care more often that I ought to. But yeah, I also have long curly hair, and the number one rule is don’t brush it. Especially don’t brush it when its dry. You will definitely wind up with an enormous frizzy bushy mess. And chances are the brush will get stuck in there also.

YES! Man, the word really needs to get out about this. If you and Hadas hadn’t told me about the no-brushing/conditioner rule, I’d still be in a pixie cut. Or possibly bald.

YES! Thank you. That drives me completely bananas.

Aaand for some reason I was logged in as not me.

Anyway, amen, sister.

I still don’t subscribe to the no-conditioner rule (in fact, I can’t seem to live without conditioner), but you’re right about not brushing curly hair when dry….it ends up a disaster.

oh, I use only conditioner - no shampoo.

Author must admit to owning very straight locks–curly haired daughter, however, is big on brushing her hair to keep it controlled. Go figure!

My pet peeve: describing flecks of color in love-interest’s eyes while in dim lighting. (And, yeah, I’ve probably done it myself.)

Thanks for the post–made me smile : )

Sydney: I cannot for the life of me explain this divergence of experience (I thought curly hair + brush = big bushy mess was a fundamental law of physics), but thanks for coming by to comment on it!

Well, she’s only 9 so all that hair stuff is still pretty new to her. I do feel bad that I can’t help her manage her hair (will pass along tips learned here).

And, thanks, because I will no longer let curly characters comb so much : )

I completely agree. And whilst there is something I like about Shane West, I don’t think he ever really improved. I am more annoyed that Julia Whelan didn’t continue (or get hired for roles) as she was so real, so true and unbelievably talented.

I think Wilson Cruz, who played Rickie on MSCL, throws a bit of a wrench in this theory.

I wonder if it’s because there appear to be more potential dimensions for female characters. I mean, if they are trying to get a teenage boy audience, does it make sense to have male characters (and actors) able to portray sort of the “everyboy” (not like just anti-emotion and just wanting to hang with his buddies, play basketball, and do the video game thing, but someone that a young male audience can relate to).

This is really neat to think about … it never occurred me to contemplate it : ) I’m going to have to do some rewatching of VHS tapes of MSCL lol. Can’t believe I admitted to still having those … : ) Actually, I’m not–that was a great show!

Yeah, I think I agree, KLo. Jordan Catalano was never all that deep of a character. Claire Danes had a lot more to do, so I think that’s probably why–she had that opportunity that J-to did not.

Emily, I didn’t see your post…and I agree. Wilson Cruz was really good. Rickie was such an awesome character, too. I wish I had a Rickie, too!

I also was thinking of other TV shows geared towards teens. The Dawson Creek actors were a bit older, I think, when they started (around 18 or 19, mostly?) and I think Katie Holmes and Michelle Williams were considered to be better than the Beek. Though Joshua Jackson had his moments. Not that any of them are really all that good when compared to Claire Danes.

Did you guys ever see Freaks and Geeks? I often compare to MSCL just because they were both really good, authentic shows about growing up (as opposed to the super happy Dawson’s Creek, 90210 type shows) and both were canceled after a season but had/have huge cult followings.

I agree that Claire Danes was the best thing on MSCL, and females generally outshine male actors, especially at younger ages. Maybe the range that we want boys to express is more limited, at least if they’re going to be masculine, so Wilson Cruz is not really an exception. Fred Savage on The Wonder Years, but he had the advantage of having an adult voiceover (Daniel Singer) adding depth — you see the kid acting, but you hear the grown man looking back on it with greater understanding.

On thirtysomething, where hthere were no kids, Timothy Busfeld did well with a good role, but for my money Melanie Mayron was the real star — a grown-up version of Angela Chase in a way I can’t quite put my finger on .

H&Z started out writing for Family, whose teenager was Kristy McNichol — not so great

Good comments, y’all. I’m still not sure what to think of this.

I think it’s right that the range of emotions that the male characters are expected to portray is generally more limited; Rickie on MSCL is a total exception, and the character’s being gay is undoubtedly a reason for this. (Also, I think it’s a really good point, Jay, about the use of the older voice-overs in THE WONDER YEARS on this score.)

But how much of this is because of the writers’ sense of what boys are like, and how much is because of what the male teen actors can actually carry? Like, on ONCE AND AGAIN, Eli is totally not introspective and self-aware like Grace (and, later, Jessie); that’s part of the point. But he does have real problems on the show — in this first season, that he really struggles in school — and he’s supposed to express a lot of anger and grief about that. In a way, though, it’s not these big moments that he carries poorly (some of them are actually pretty good) as much as the more naturalistic scenes. He’s just noticeably more artificial.

Another thing I wonder is whether there are as many parents trying to break their young male kids into acting as there are for young girls. I have absolutely no knowledge here, just speculations out of my ass that this may not be the case, and might help explain why there are more good teenage actresses to choose among.

Sadako: a bit of a belated response, but yes, we both love Freaks and Geeks!

“Startlingly green eyes.”

I just realized that’s the usual cliche for love interests. I would bet that if I searched through my full YA bookshelf I’d find a dozen instances.

I thought there was a law or something that girls with red hair had to wear green clothes most of the time. And if clothes, why not eyes? “Startlingly green eyes” has feline connotations, at least in my mind.

Lists can be an endearing device — think of “High Fidelity,” (not a kids’ book, I know) which begins with the narrator’s top five memorable break-ups. But Facebook is making it get old fast.

And how could Emily have left “Wizard of Oz” off her list of good movies from kids’ books? As for Princess Bride, I don’t know but I suspect that Goldman was thinking movie when he wrote the novel, even though the film wasn’t made till more than a decade later. Goldman started out to be a novelist, but his stuff was second rate at best and never went anywhere. But he tried screen writing and turned out to be very good at it. So my guess is that at some point, he started thinking of novels in cinematic terms.

Hi. Someone let me know that you’d posted about this on your site, so I dropped by. Love your post! The MG/YA writer, Alan Gratz has been complaining about green eyes for forever too. I met him years ago, before my article, and he complained about it then. I’m not sure why it never ended up on the list, because I totally agree. I just did an article about cliche characters for SCBWI’s bulletin (last month, I think), which I’ll be posting soon on my site. Maybe my next piece will have to be about green eyes! Haha. Oh, wait. You just covered it.

As for lists, I love them too! They just show up a lot, so they kind of had to go on the list. I wasn’t really intending to tell people not to use ANY of those things, just pointing out that if you think they’re original ideas then you’re probably not reading enough!

Loved your post. I’ll stop by again.

Thanks, Joelle! Yeah, I have nothing against redheaded protagonists and green-eyed boyfriends, but you do notice it when it comes up over, and over, and over. (Well, I guess I don’t have to tell you that!)

I think you got the crux of it with “Guys with extraordinarily long eyelashes,” and me when I thought of how often it’s “startlingly green eyes.” Of course a lot of love interest characters will have long eyelashes; it’s an attractive trait. But when you see these same phrases over and over, it feels less like the author has imagined a specific person in their head that they’re trying to help you see too, and more like they’re pressing the buttons that are supposed to produce an effect of “Attractive!”

“Let’s see now, we’ve got the startlingly green eyes, which she notices but is too shy to say anything about, so she hides behind her red hair, smattering of freckles, and tendency to blush…”

It’s the problem with any cliche: it’s trying to produce an impression by bypassing the stage that involves actually imagining something. So, it’s weak writing.

Thanks for your list; it’s really great.

Jay: Good point about Goldman writing the book as setup for a movie. That seems highly plausible. It’s stylized in all the right ways to become a film. (Although, the device he uses where he pretends he’s drawing from a bizarre academic tome — the one I embarassingly fell for — would never have worked in movie form.)

THE PRINCESS BRIDE and THE WIZARD OF OZ both come from books that are clearly for children, but are movies that are not so clearly so. Is that just because they’re so campy… or is it not so much intrinsic to the movies, as that the campiness fits in perfectly with the strong tendency of my generation (and those about 10 years older than me) toward nostalgia?

Jay: Such a good call on THE WIZARD OF OZ - I don’t know how I forgot it.
Elizabeth: I actually disagree, I think of THE WIZARD OF OZ movie as squarely for kids, which is not to say adults don’t also love it, partly because of nostalgia, and partly because its just a damn good movie, but I do think of it as primarly a kids movie. Whereas I do think of THE PRINCESS BRIDE as being a bit more of an all-ages movie.

Actually, now that I’m thinking about it more I might concede this point. Maybe the difference is that the humor in THE PRINCESS BRIDE swings a bit more to the ironic side (I’m thinking, for example, of the ROUSes). THE WIZARD OF OZ is many things, but it is not subtle.

I have hazel eyes, green flecked with brown, but they appear golden brown unless you really look closely. I’ve always been fascinated by green eyes and startling green eyes are quite rare. It sets up how special the character is, and aren’t there a lot of special characters in literature? Violet eyes are pretty common in romance novels I hear.

Did you get my e-mail by the way? Emily can answer too of course!!

Ooh, I just did now! (Emily usually checks the Underage Reading account.) Thanks so much!

I haven’t really read the books you mentioned, but that IS odd. Hmmm.

In the case of the first book (Getting the Girl) it does seem like they’re trying to lure in guys with sex (like, ooh, look, tantalizing, a navel!). Like, it’s just a body, no head, so it’s obvious what they’re trying to do.

I’m not sure about the Sarah Dessen ones. I think as you said, they are still about white/blonde girls, so it’s not like just by taking off the head, someone will say, “Oh, that’s me!”

Very interesting post!

Also, since I have no visual sensibility: do the first and second Zusak covers (which, I believe, correspond to the US and British editions respectively) come from the same photo shoot? They couldn’t possibly have reshot just for the slightly different British cover, could they have?

Weird. I never noticed this before. Now half of my bookshelf is taken up by either floating, disembodied heads or headless people. Ew.

I can’t answer you, because I never loved this book, especially not nearly as much as I loved the title and the cover–I did THAT for years before I read it. I think my cover illustration was the one above, in a different edition, and I just loved the mystery of it and of the idea of a secret garden. I had the whole book worked out in my head–the plot, the characters, the atmosphere–but when I did read it, eventually, I wasn’t excited. I’m much more attached to MOVIE SHOES by Noel Streatfeild (in which, if you haven’t read it, a girl stars in a movie version of the book). I don’t think I’ve reread it as an adult, so maybe I shouldn’t judge too harshly, but I’ve never really cared to.

On the other hand, I loved and continue to love–have reread countless times–A LITTLE PRINCESS. Don’t ask me why. I mean, you can, but I wouldn’t have a coherent answer. Maybe if I reread THE SECRET GARDEN I would.

This was my book discussion title for my March homeschool book club meeting. The fifteen children were aged 9 to 12 and all but one loved it! Several parents commented on their love of the book as well (oddly, many of them were less enthusiastic about Coraline). Here are some of the things they enjoyed, including some of the aspects I loved as a child and still appreciate as an adult:

(1) Having a secret – a large, walled-in beautiful secret. It’s titillating.
(2) Dickon. He had this preternatural ability to interact with animals as if they understand him. I was in love him then and find him adorable now.
(3) Misselthwaite Manor – no significant supervision, a large house with many locked places, and a mysterious owner. Not to mention a boy’s cries echoing through the halls.
(4) The adults in this world as shamefully neglectful and selfish. The children, however, break the cycle. They are adventurous, playful and they believe in magic.

The mystery for sure! Its very spooky and gothic for a kid. And a girl fixes everything. That’s why I liked it.

Also, obviously you loved the musical adaptation that ran on Broadway in the early 90s, which oh so wisely shifted the focus to the adults. Obviously.

I felt the same way, Emily. I’ve reread it (not recently, but as an older person) and I’m definitely struck by a lot of things. For one thing, the racism (not surprisingly)–like when the maid (forget her name) is all, “I thought you’d be dark because you came here from India” and Mary flips out and is all, “YOU THOUGHT I WAS AN INDIAN?! HOW DARE YOU!”

It’s schmaltzy but hey, it is what it is. Gotta love it for what it is. I thought Little Princess was over the top even at the time. She was way too much of a martyr…Sarah or whatever.

I must confess that I have no recollection of reading The Little Princess, although I probably did. I know that I never read The Little Prince. Which I gather is not so much the same thing, though.

Anyway, Dog Ear’s list is very convincing to me. And I thought I didn’t remember anything about this book (even though I read it I don’t know how many times; I was even quoted in a NY Times article about its enduring popularity when a reporter interviewed me in a Barnes and Noble children’s section), as soon as you said the name Dickon, a wave of ill-defined nostalgia came back to me.

Yes, those are compelling reasons - I can see how the very secretness of the garden, and the mysterious, creepy Manor would have drawn me in as a kid, whereas somehow they didn’t grab me so much now. I also realized, as I took a detour through the Brooklyn Botanical Garden yesterday on my way to the library, that when I was younger I might have been much more enthralled with the whole gardening aspect. I used to love helping my mom pick out flowers and plant the little flower garden each spring, whereas now gardening is in no way a part of my life and hasn’t been for many years.
Excellent, sense of nostalgia restored, although I probably won’t put this one into the frequent re-reading rotation.

Well I still really like The Secret Garden, but Ive always hated A Little Princess.

I haven’t reread it as an adult, but I remember really loving the IDEA of a secret garden (throw in a huge, mysterious house and I’m set). Even before reading it, I remember finding odd keys and wishing they would let me into secret, hidden rooms and that kind of thing. I also liked that Mary wasn’t a goody-two-shoes like Sara.

I had the movie as a kid - the old movie with the prologue and epilogue, and loved it so much I probably wore out at least one VHS - but I never read the novel. I attempted to read the book in high school, and I was disappointed. I don’t think I finished it.