Wild Things: YA Grown-Up discussion

I doubt that Fiona wants yet another folder, so I will squeeze this subject into the mystery folder...

So all you horror readers out there, what kinds of YA horror did you read as a kid? Which books were your favorite?

I remember reading and loving the Goosebumps series by R.L. Stine, and Christopher Pike, and the Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark trilogy.

There really doesn't seem to be a heck of a lot of scary books for kids, at least that I know of, but please chime in with your favorites!

Some cheap cousin I had growing up gave me a couple Goosebumps books for Christmas and whlie I did read them, I never got into them beyond that...not my thing I guess.

I was a huge fan of the Fear Street books by R.L.Stine. I read Goosebumps but didn't enjoy them as much. The Fear Street books were for an older reader so they seemed more appealing. :) And I loved Christopher Pike, too.

I love the Fear Street Saga! I completely forgot about those!

Yeah I lived for those when I was younger! :)

Me too... I have the first book of the Saga at home, but I'm missing the last two. And then they changed into Fear Street Sagas, which is semi-related but not as good.

I should get those again, but I am afraid that they will not live up to my loving memory of them!

You know it's funny, my daughter went to Catholic school thru 5th grade. Each classroom drew names and exchanged a book at Christmas and the Goosebumps books were outlawed.

I've never read one, but they can't be that bad, right? And the teachers discouraged the kids from dressing up as anything scary at Halloween too. I thought that was kinda funny.

I don't really understand that. I mean really, what exactly are they afraid of? Imagination?

The Goosebumps books are not really scary at all. They are children's books! The closest thing that I can think of to what they are like is Scooby-doo. You think something scary is happening, until you find out that it's really just the greedy banker dressing up as the Loch Ness Monster to try to scare the townsfolk into selling all their property super-cheap! LOL

I really think that preventing kids from exploring different types of things is what leads them to rebel. I know that if I was told that a certain book (or series *cough*Harry Potter*cough*) was taboo, I wouldn't stop until I had read it, even if I had to beg, borrow or steal it to do so.

Yes, Becky! It's Catholic school for crying out loud. Of course that's what they're afraid of.

In my opinion!

And I can say that, since I'm the youngest of 9 and was raised Catholic & married to a practicing Catholic.

I do think there were lots of things they just didn't want the kids exploring for fear of what it might lead to *gasp* but I completely agree with you Becky.

It's terrible always being right. *dramatic sigh* ;)

I don't seem to have that problem; hence, the Fist of Doom is getting a workout.

Yes, well, you put it to good use. ;)

Seriously though, I don't get the point of banning books. I can only think of one book I would ever ban, and only that because it is a home-made incendiary device instruction manual. O_o

Yeah, I pretty much went out of my way to do almost everything people told me not to do - I think that's why I've always kept such a close eye on my dau., I was afraid she'd be more like me.

No, it really doesn't Laura!

The church I attend is NOT Catholic, but non-denominational. They preach against Harry Potter each time a new book or movie comes out. I get so angry, I always skip church those days. I have friends just brainwashed into believing that tripe and I can't have a real discussion about it without, eventually, throwing up my hands in disgust.

Well, I do feel that one particular point is ridiculous, but there are about 1000 other things I love about my church. My children are VERY involved, they just don't talk about HP to the kids that aren't allowed to watch. Seriously, tons of the kids are, so... It's stupid and shallow minded, but you have to go somewhere.

That is one of the things that I detest about organized religion... It seems like everything NOT officially recognized by the religion is demonized...

I'm all for personal religion. I think people should believe whatever they want. It's when a religion is a political and global force that I think it's a bad thing.

Kandice wrote: "It's stupid and shallow minded, but you have to go somewhere. "

Why? I don't understand why you "have" to go somewhere to believe. Isn't enough that you do believe?

As a teacher, I hate to hear of students being denied access to certain books because some church officials don't like/agree with them. A few months ago, I heard of a school that was prohibiting teachers to send out the monthly Scholastic book orders and canceled the book fair because they said Scholastic was promoting "anti-God" literature. (ie, Harry Potter)

Of course it is, but I really do enjoy church. I like being with people who believe what I do, I LOVE the singing, I used to be super involved with the Drama Team, my kids are always in the plays and choir. They all go to AWANAS, which is a little like boy/girl scouts, but at church and tons of other church organized activities.

I had been attending this church (after leaving my husband's Catholic church that he refused to attend) for almost a year before the whole HP brouhaha. I just choose to ignore it unless in a small group and then I voice my opinion. I didn't want to lose all the we enjoyed and looked forward to each week because of that one difference.

I can understand that, K... if you ENJOY going, then by all means go! I just don't understand when people feel obligated to go when they dislike it. :)

Bird, that kind of thing really concerns me, and seriously makes me want to homeschool my kids... when I have some.

I grew up before the age of Goosebumps, sadly. I would've devoured them! I did read several when my son was younger, and they are great! I loved Lois Duncan as a child. Some of her books are really frightening, especially Down A Dark Hall. Good stuff!

Never heard of those... I will have to check them out. :)

Becky wrote: "Bird, that kind of thing really concerns me, and seriously makes me want to homeschool my kids... when I have some."

If you send your kids to a reasonable school that understands what "separation of church and state" means that shouldn't be a problem. Granted, I was always enrolled in specialized programs in NYC public schools, so I realize my school experiences were kind of different. (The exception was 9th grade, when I went to an all-girls Catholic school. It made me seriously consider dropping out of high school. The only thing that got me through was knowing it was only for one year.)

I think everyone here already knows by now that I loved L.J. Smith's books while growing up. I think they were considered horror at that time, but I wouldn't classify them that way compared to something like R.L. Stine's Fear Street. The Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark books terrified me as a kid. The illustrations cemented themselves in my head to replay as I was trying to fall asleep, listening to all the creaks of my old house.

I was such a scaredy-cat when I was young. I read one or two Goosebumps books and I think I started Scary Stories to tell in the dark, but they both scared the pants off me. Now I'll read pretty much anything. I wonder what changed for me?

I don't know, JG. I'm just the opposite, I NEVER got scared when I was a kid, and now I find movies that I have seen a dozen times (The Exorcist) scaring me more than usual.

Books generally don't scare me as much as watching something does though. The Exorcist has always been one of those movies that terrified me but fascinated me at the same time. But when I was younger, I'd watch it alone in the middle of the night with no problem. Now I'm not quite so brave, it seems, when it comes to the movie, but the book didn't scare me at all, oddly enough!

The movies always have and probably always will scare me! My cousins would watch all the Jason and Freddy movies and then tell me about them. That alone was enough to have me hiding under the covers for a week at a time. :-) I haven't improved much. But at least I can read the books now.

I think it's the visual aspect of them. Which makes no sense at all! You'd think that imagining something would make it all the more scary, but for me it's not like that. I think I "tone down" scariness in my imagination!

That's exactly what I do! I don't want to think about it? I don't. But there's no avoiding the gore splashing across the scene in a movie. By the time I know to close my eyes, I've already seen too much. I'm such a weenie.

Hi...I have read a few Stephen King books including "The Pet Sematary" , "Carrie" and "The Dream Catcher". I may have read children's horror, if so I don't remember. I don't think I particularly enjoy them except for maybe one or two occasions when it gets really dull. Horror movies are so much like a reality game, it is horrifying when you get caught in the story...I shudder for days and swear I'll never watch ...well,,,,until the next time I get really bored. lol

I used to love the horror stories for kids. The Scary Stories to Tell In The Dark series, Goosebumps, R.L. Stine, Christopher Pike, etc. I loved it all.

They were after my time. I was very envious of my son. I would've devoured them if I were a kid......I did read through many with him, though! Good stuff!

I read Stephen King at the same time as I was reading Pike and Stine and the like.

By "any of that stuff" do you mean Koontz and King too? I'm shocked!

I don't really read horror anymore, either, even though it's all I read as a kid. I have had an urge lately, though, to go back and reread Christopher Pike, because I remember how in awe of his writing I was as a kid. I'm not saying it would be the same now, but even when I was 10 or 11, I remember liking RL Stine, but thinking that he didn't come close to Pike as a writer.

No, RL Stine was definitely more simplistic and childish.

Christopher Pike has written for adults too if you are looking to get back in to his writing. The Season of Passage is a favorite of mine, but different than his normal stuff.

Well that's different Heather. I can understand that. I just thought that you meant that you don't read King or Koontz because they don't write "literature". LOL

Becky wrote: "Well that's different Heather. I can understand that. I just thought that you meant that you don't read King or Koontz because they don't write "literature". LOL
"

That was how I interpreted it, too. But that's probably just because I know too many of *those* people...

Me too Misty. LOL

There are too many people in this world that turn their nose up at Stephen King because he's "only" horror. I've been in groups like that, that I untimately left because of the snobbery (is that a word?).

When I was a kid, we didn't have Pike or Stine. I know I'm aging myself. So I read Lois Duncan and then moved on to Stephen King and John Saul. Thankfully, there is much more of an assortment in this genre today.

I would much, MUCH rather read something by Stephen King or John Saul or Dean Koontz etc than read snooty "Literature" that is impossible to understand. Pfft. That kind of stuff doesn't impress me. If I have to read a sentence 14 times to get the allusion or whatever, it's a waste of paper to me, and I may be blasted for saying so, but it's true.

If 99% of your reading audience can't understand your book, that doesn't make you a genius, that makes you out of touch. I think a lot of people WANT to understand, but most do not and assign "greatness" to the book out of a desire to feel as if they did get it.

It's like people who throw books like War and Peace and Ulysses and Crime and Punishment on their display shelves so that others will see them, but have never actually read them, and would hate them if they did. It's all just fake.

I love classics, and I love literature, but I have no problem saying I disliked a book, or that I hated a book, or that I didn't GET a book, if any of those things are true...

Yep. I agree with all that Heather. :)

The whole point for me, no matter what it is that's being read and whether or not I'm going to get a chance to discus it, is to enjoy it (or not) for what it is and as it deserves. I rate things based on what they are, so a 5 star classic isn't going to be the same as a 5 star humorous essay, which isn't going to be the same as a 5 star cheesy fun love story -- but they can all get 5 stars. They just have to be good at being what they're supposed to be; I am just as capable of enjoying myself frivolously as I am debating seriously.
And I think both sides of the coin could learn something from the other and be a lot happier, besides.

I agree with that too, Misty.

I just stumbled on this article, entitled "When Books Could Change Your Life: Why What We Pore Over at 12 May be the Most Important Reading We Ever Do.

http://citypaper.com/special/story.as...

I thought it was interesting...

Agreed. It's hard to compare completely different genres. Sometimes even within genres it's difficult.

I'm jumping in here and I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me... but I recently realized that most of my studies of YA lit has to do with horror. I hadn't put that label on it until I found that section in my library and realized those were all the books I was interested in. I have done studies on vampires and witchcraft in teen lit, and I'd like to start on werewolves. I really want to read Shiver, though I haven't got around to it quite yet. Right now I'm in the middle of Melissa de la Cruz's Blue Bloods series, which actually has a very rich story, something that originally surprised me.