New Adult: No Sex Required

Photo credit: Muffet on Flickr

As New Adult novels have become more popular and successful over time, I’ve seen a lot of talk, both interesting and infuriating about the emerging category. 

The stereotype, which I’m sure most of you have seen, is that New Adult novels are Young Adult novels with explicit sex. 

It’s not hard to see where the misconception comes from. The most popular New Adult novels, the ones that really brought attention to the category, are largely Contemporary Romance novels in which their characters partake in steamy scenes. Sex, explicit or not, happens in New Adult and is completely acceptable. 

The issue that people seem to be getting confused on, however, is that sex is somehow a requirement for a novel to be categorized as New Adult. This, to me, is mindblowingly erroneous. New Adult novels are about a lot of things: independence, new responsibilities, being away from home for the first time, serious relationships, starting a family, grappling with the question of what it truly means to be an adult and so much more. Yes, some of them have sexy scenes. But New Adult is so much more than the sex. 

The point of New Adult novels was and never will be the sex. There's a genre for that already, and it doesn't encompass the entire category of New Adult. 

To infer that sex is somehow a requirement of New Adult novels is like saying that an Adult thriller that doesn’t have sex isn’t actually intended for the Adult audience at all, or like saying that a Young Adult novel without dark themes isn’t Young Adult. 

But don’t take my word for it. 

Last week, literary agent Suzie Townsend from New Leaf Literary & Media, Inc. (who, as an agency, collectively represent awesome books like Divergent, False Memory, Losing It and Shadow & Bone) interviewed several agents and editors about their opinions of New Adult and what New Adult meant to them. Here are some answers I found particularly telling: 

“‘OMG. I'm an adult. Now what?’ in any genre. Like YA, it concerns a lot of first-time issues and struggles, but they're what most people face in/after college rather than in high school. It's a different focus and a different mindset. Repeat after me: NA is not sexed-up YA.”—Gordon Warnock, Foreword Literary

“I'm seeing way too many NA submissions that are simply YA with sex. That's not NA and that's not what I'm looking to add to my list. I want to see more novels about the experience of being NA. Unsure what this is? See my definition in GIFs here.” —
Kathleen Ortiz, New Leaf Literary 

For those who want to learn more about how the industry views New Adult, I definitely recommend reading through the whole post. 

The way I see it, New Adult novels, like Adult novels, can have sex in all it’s varying literary degrees—from explicit to “fade-to-black” scenes. But sex doesn’t determine whether or not a book fits into the category any more than it determines whether or not a book may be sold as an Adult novel. 

So that’s my opinion, but what do you think? Is sex a requirement for New Adult novels? Why or why not?

Twitter-sized bites: 

Is sex required for a book to be considered NA? Here's why one writer says no. (Click to tweet) 

Do you think sex is a requirement for New Adult novels? Join the discussion at @Ava_Jae's blog. (Click to tweet)

Weird Writing Trends: Sexy Stalkers?

Photo credit: rithban on Flickr

I’ve noticed a rather strange trend in writing and YA novels. It isn’t really new, per say, and I suspect
that a certain best-selling series-turned blockbuster movies may have helped to kick it off, but every once in a while I see books employ sexy stalkers and I don’t really understand it. 

Before I go any further, let me explain what I mean about “sexy stalker.” 

A sexy stalker is a very attractive guy (or girl, hypothetically, though I haven’t seen this yet) who follows around/creeps on/knows way too much about/appears in bedrooms (or other private places)/aka STALKS the protagonist of the novel. Usually the protagonist is female and usually she doesn’t mind the stalking. Usually she falls in love with her stalker and so it’s all ok. Usually they end up in some kind of relationship and all of that strange behavior is chalked up to love and protectiveness. 

It’s weird.

The thing I don’t understand, is that stalkers are a real thing. There are actually people out there who obsessively and inappropriately follow around and “research” an unfortunate victim of their so-called affection. There are actually cases of women and girls (and probably boys and men, too) who are afraid to go places or even be at home alone because of said harassment. There are restraining orders and police and courts involved and it’s not a pretty thing. 

It’s also definitely not sexy. 

Stalkers are scary. They make people actually fear for their lives. They make people too scared to go to school, or work, or whatever the case may be. 

They don’t make people fall in love, and a relationship with a stalker isn't normal. 

When I’ve seen it in books, I’ll admit that for the most part, I’ve ignored it. I’ve quirked my eyebrow at the weirdness and the protagonist’s blanket acceptance of stalkerish tendencies and moved on with the story. 

But it still got me thinking. It still made me wonder why it’s ok for boys to be stalkers in books—no, why it’s sexy for boys to be stalkers in books. I’m wondering why our female protagonists are falling in love with boys who have borderline control issues and overprotective/obsessive tendencies. 

I’m wondering what we’re telling kids when our protagonists have boyfriends who sneak into their bedrooms to watch them sleep at night, and follow them around when they’re out with their friends to presumably save them when they’re attacked.

Maybe it’s just me, but that kind of relationship just doesn’t seem healthy. Or sexy. Or in any way desirable. 

But maybe it’s just me. Or maybe it’s not. 

I want to hear from you: have you seen the sexy stalkers trend? Am I the only one who finds it strange?

Self-Publishing: It’s Not a Backup Plan

Photo credit: luipermom on Flickr

I’ve noticed a trend on the web as of late, or at least, I’ve noticed it in the comments here at Writability, and it’s something I think is worth discussing. You see, oftentimes when talking about the very real possibility of not getting published (whether it’s a WIP or at all), invariably, people will say something to the effect of well, there’s always self-publishing and I die a little inside every time I see it.

Now don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I don’t think self-publishing is a valid option—quite the opposite, in fact. The problem is that a lot of writers view self-publishing as a backup plan should their attempts to traditionally publish fail, and truthfully, I don’t think that’s the right way to look at it.

Self-publishing isn’t meant to be a Plan B just as the e-book marketplace isn’t meant to be a last-ditch effort to sell failed manuscripts. Because it’s technically possible to go indie completely on your own, people sometimes take self-publishing lightly, but the decision to self-publish should never be based solely on the fact that you couldn’t sell your novel traditionally.

The hard truth is this: if you find that you can’t sell your manuscript through traditional means, there’s likely to be a reason for it. Now, sometimes it’s because you didn’t try long enough, or the market isn’t right for your manuscript, or you still haven’t developed strong query letter writing skills. Many times, however, it’s simply because you’re just not ready.

I know, no one wants to hear that. No one wants to be told that they aren’t ready for publication, because in the moment, you feel like you’re ready (otherwise you wouldn’t be trying to get published in the first place). No one wants to hear that they need more time to hone their writing skills, or that they’re going to have to spend even more time revising their already revised-to-death manuscript, but guys, sometimes that’s just the truth. It’s not pretty. It’s not fun. But if you can accept that you need more time to become a better writer or write a better manuscript before attempting to publish again, you may very well save yourself a major heartache.

Because the truth is, if your manuscript isn’t ready to be traditionally published, then it’s not ready to be self-published, either.

Deciding to go indie is a big decision. Self-publishing is a lot of hard work: it takes a monetary investment to do it right (editors and cover artists aren’t free), and the hardest work has only just begun when you finally do hit “upload.” It’s an enormous investment and when done correctly with a well-polished manuscript, you can certainly reap some significant rewards. Done incorrectly, however, and you’re only hurting yourself in the long run.

I know it’s not easy to wait, especially when the power to publish is literally just a few mouse clicks away. I know it’s not simple to say I’m not ready to be published yet, and I know it’s far from painless to put a manuscript that you truly loved and had dreams for in the drawer. I know that.

But I also know that dealing with the repercussions of self-publishing before you’re ready isn’t easy, either. And that’s a heartache that you can save yourself from if you give yourself more time to improve and reach the level you’ll need to be at to finally publish.

No, it’s not easy, but no one ever said this writing thing would be. But then again, you didn’t choose this path because it was a simple one, you chose it because you’re a writer, and that’s what you do.

What do you think? Have you ever considered self-publishing a backup plan?

On Writing and Publishing Trends

Photo credit: Horia Varlan on Flickr

When thinking about publishing, it's hard not to mention the market and the various trends that inevitably appear in the reading/ writing world. With Harry Potter came various books about witches and wizards, with the rise of Twilight came the explosion of paranormal novels, especially those involving vampires and creatures of the like, and now more recently with the success of The Hunger Games , dystopian novels have become very popular.

So when slaving away at their WIPs and rummaging through bookstores, writers often wonder how much they should be paying attention to the market while they write their books.

While I think it's important for writers to be aware of what publishing trends are rising in the book market (and, conversely, what is becoming more difficult to sell), and while I think it's especially important for writers to be well versed in their genre, I truly believe that it's far more important for writers to write the stories they want to write regardless of what's going on in the market.

Hear me out. The state of the publishing market is something that is completely out of the writer's control. What's more, it's a well-known fact that what is popular today probably won't be the hot in-thing in five years. That's not to say it won't be selling then, but publishing trends only last so long.

Writing a book, meanwhile, takes an excruciatingly long time. Even if you're a ridiculously prolific writer who can pound out a first draft in a month and revise in three and you either a) self-publish four months after writing the first draft with a fantastically revised novel  done in record speed or b) manage to find an agent and land a publishing contract immediately (which usually takes time), in the case of the self-published writer it takes time to build buzz for your book, and in the case of the traditionally published writer it can take up to two years (or more, even) just to get that story on the shelves. By the time that novel is released (or really builds up buzz), who knows what the market will look like?

Then of course, there's the opposite problem of writers who write to a trend that already passed because they love the genre and spend time worrying about whether or not it'll be able to sell. Again, the state of the publishing market is something out of our control. The energy spent worrying about the trends could be spent bettering your book, instead.

Look, I'm not an agent or a publishing expert, nor will I pretend to be. But from what I understand, (and I could be wrong here) if you're looking to publish traditionally, very few agents are going to turn down an excellent story that they absolutely love just because you "missed the boat" so-to-speak, as far as trends go. And by the same token, very few agents (or publishing companies) are going to pick up a mediocre story that was written quickly just to fit the current market.

And I suspect it's not all that different for self-published writers: a good book is going to sell regardless of publishing trends and a mediocre book that fits the market, well, not so much.

In short, I think it's important for writers to be aware of the market, but it's far more important for writers to focus on writing a fantastic book. If you can manage that, your book will find a place in the market regardless of what the trends look like.

Now it's your turn: Do you think writers should write to the market? How important is it for writers to be aware of the publishing trends?