Active Users:463 Time:26/10/2025 08:57:25 AM
Agreed. *NM* Camilla Send a noteboard - 09/09/2010 11:07:09 AM
I may not have been entirely representative as a child, but really, many of my peers did the same thing: reading books for 8+ when aged 6, and for 12+ when aged 8-10. As a result, I'm rather sceptical about the upper part of the professed range for YA books. At 16 or more, one is plenty old enough to read normal adult literature, surely, and also old enough to feel that "YA" books are more for younger children (though they can still be fun, of course). Though if one counts The Catcher in the Rye or To Kill a Mockingbird as YA, which I personally wouldn't but one of the Wikipedia articles seems to, then yes, those are very much suitable for 16-year olds.
*MySmiley*
structured procrastinator
Reply to message
What does "young-adult literature" mean? - 08/09/2010 05:08:54 PM 1058 Views
Re: What does "young-adult literature" mean? - 08/09/2010 06:29:33 PM 657 Views
Hm - 09/09/2010 12:56:32 PM 753 Views
Re: Hm - 09/09/2010 08:45:28 PM 800 Views
books marketed to teenagers - 08/09/2010 06:56:21 PM 691 Views
I agree with this pretty much. - 08/09/2010 10:12:23 PM 639 Views
Harry Potter and Twilight - 09/09/2010 03:55:52 AM 778 Views
I've always thought the age labels on children's books were silly, and these are no exception. - 09/09/2010 10:19:02 AM 621 Views
Agreed. *NM* - 09/09/2010 11:07:09 AM 267 Views
I think it could be how we use the term young adult in the US - 09/09/2010 02:27:38 PM 595 Views

Reply to Message