I can keep quiet no longer. Despite the fact that some of my favourite authors have been nominated for the Queen of Teen award (“It’s glitzy, it’s glam, it’s the ultimate award for teen fiction!”), I have just looked at the website for the first time now. And while I passionately believe that anything that promotes books and reading to kids is great, I’ve had to spend half an hour in a darkened room to calm down.
If I lived in America, I could reach under my bed for my .50 calibre M2 machine gun and express my sorrow at the state of feminism from the roof of the local MacDonald’s. As I have chosen to reside in a nation that outlaws weapons of mass destruction for personal use, I have to make do with this blog.
Here’s what the QofT folk say about themselves: ”It’s the sparkliest, most glamorous and certainly the pinkest award in the world of fiction…the Queen of Teen award was founded in 2008 to celebrate the feistiest, frothiest and most fantastic writers for the tween and teen market!!!”
OK, The Orange Prize, it ain’t. But just in case you thought there was a serious intelligence behind all this frothy fun, here are some of the probing questions asked of last year’s winner, Louise Rennison:
3 Describe your favourite outfit.
4 What’s your favourite girlie movie?
5 What’s your favourite saying?
6 How long does it take you to get ready in the morning?
Bags or shoes?? Why, people, WHY? Why is so much marketing to girls swaddled in sparkly pink and demeaning language? (Please don’t tell me girls are biologically pre-programmed to like pink, words like ‘fabbie’, and hundreds of exclamation marks, because I grew up in the 60s and I know better.)
I haven’t read Louise Rennison’s books, but I’m prepared to admire them, and I certainly do admire (2008) shortlisted authors Jacqueline Wilson
and Cathy Cassidy, both of whom have dedicated their careers to writing subtle, non-stereotypical novels about all sorts of tough subjects. Couldn’t we nominate them for a prize that wasn’t quite so aggressively…pink?
You’d look lovely in cerise. Or not.
They promised me they’d do one for boys, but I have seen no signs of that.
“What’s your star sign?” shouldn’t even be a question! If people are subscribing to such things, it’s not like it’s something you get to choose or that’s going to be different for you than someone else born on the same day as you were…
Y’know, it’s not the pink that bothers me, it’s the glitzy/glam thing… total commercial nonsense, like there’s some innate biological need for girls and women to spend all their available money on things like shoes. Or make-up. Or whatever.
I couldn’t agree more, Claire. Here’s a comment from the Bookwitch’s blog questioning pink covers for girls, that I think sums it up nicely.
“Who cares if women graduate from reading Katie Price’s pink pony club books to reading pink chick lit? Good for them if they enjoy it.
Being trained to be pink and feminine has a far wider impact than the books you read. The pink concept is synonymous with the idea that if you are born female your purpose is to provide viewing pleasure for other people. It eats away at women’s ambition to claim positions of power by placing so much importance on looks and ‘correct’ feminine behaviour.
Businesses know that if they start early and sell the idea of pink to girls, they will go on to consume vast amounts from the beauty, fashion and slimming industries.
Witness Playboy – targeting young girls with a social networking site. Selling pink pencil cases in the Back To School section of WHS.
Girls+pink=profit.
The sad trade off is that as long as women are captivated by this incessant need to get rid of hair, add hair (extensions), add false nails, get botox etc etc, they will be distracted and dissuaded from achieving elsewhere.”
I totally agree. That’s one of the reasons I loved What I Was so much: it inverted the boring stereotype and had Fin doing all the independent ‘boys’ things like gutting crabs and being stronger than Hilary.
Personally, I think I should have been nominated every year, considering the number of face lifts I’ve had since the ’50′s I think I’m looking really good. And pink is my favorite color. I’ll try writing when I retire. I definitely have a book in me. Maybe you should write it?
Oh Barbie, Barbie! I love this idea. Barbie’s autobiography. I’m going to start working on it now. And let me tell you now, it ain’t gonna have a happy ending!
I waded into teeny chick lit in a Guardian blog last year. One hates to quite oneself, but … ‘The leathery-skinned hacks who churn out the Pink books present a vision of young people as self-obsessed, shallow, blind automata, swilling about in a moronic inferno. Reading these books will leave your soul as shrivelled as one of those pistachios you sometimes find, blackened, in the bottom of the bag. Teenage girls, read the Brontës, read Elizabeth Gaskell, read George Eliot, read anything else – even Jane Austen – but keep the pink off your shelves.’
Might seem odd to drag Jane Austen in to this row, but it is all her fault: just substitute snogging for marriage, and you have Louise Rennison. OK, also take away the subtle and complex language, the wit, the brilliant structure, etc etc, but thematically, it’s all there. Sorta. I think it’s interesting that popular fiction for boys – from Muchamore to Horowitz is more feminist, albeit in the slightly crap way that the female characters tend to be just as skilled at kung fu etc as the boys.
As a “leathery-skinned hack” who writes these pink-packaged of evil, I would like to point out in their (and my) defence a) the covers may be pink (yes it works from a marketing point of view) but the content is often anything but and b) it is possible to remove hair etc and achieve elsewhere.
It’s a sham – the questions above really don’t reflect the depth of subject matter that is often between the pink covers…Fiona Dunbar’s books for example. And I’ve read and howled with laughter at Rennison – Ok, they may be Austen for the modern girl but there’s nothing essentially wrong in that – at least they carry a degree of honesty. And as for Wilson, sod the pink covers, she never shies away from awkward subject matter or sells out with an overly happy ending. I think a little more subversion happens under those pink covers than QofT seems to want to acknowledge…..excellent book of nature v nuture for those interested…. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Theres-Good-Girl-Gender-Stereotyping/dp/0704340909
Well, that’s the mad irony, Kathryn. The Q of T books are mainly (I think) good and interesting books. And kids are nominating them. So why does the contest have to be wrapped up in so much patronising glitz? Back to Girls+Pink=Profit?
It’s the marketing that’s at fault here (marketing urged on by power-wielding chain bookstores?), not the so-called “leathery-skinned hacks” to re-re-quote Anthony McGowan there, who has a smartly put argument which is, I think, largely without foundation, as plenty of the pink or glittery titles I’ve read have contained feisty characters, hard-hitting storylines, or downright hilarious one-liners that need to be celebrated for the joy they bring to our reading lives. I speak as the author of a pink-covered book. Like my characters I have little interest in shoes and star-signs. I do think it’s a shame that the Queen of Teen prize is dumbed down with all the pink and glittery language, but I’m really glad there IS a prize for these books, which are so often overlooked, it seems to me, when it comes to other prizes.
Such a good point, Emily. And you’re right — there’s nothing at all wrong with the books or the prize, it’s the mentality that surrounds them. No one calls Nick Hornby the King of dicklit, or whatever the male equivalent would be!
Dear Meg
Here at Queen of Teen HQ we found your blog post about our award really interesting, and although I’m sure we have lots in common – such as wanting to encourage teenagers to read more and get involved in discussions about fiction – obviously there are certain points we disagree on. Yes, our award is fun and frothy, but it has a serious side too. Here is a brief response to your article:
The Queen of Teen award was set up to celebrate popular teenage fiction – the kind of books that are adored by readers but often overlooked by existing prizes. It aims to promote reading for pleasure, to celebrate the leading authors in the genre, to promote less well-known writers and to draw attention to the positive influence books about real-life issues can have on young readers. There seemed little point in being ambiguous about the fact that we were encouraging girls to nominate their favourite female authors, and the pink and glitzy look of our website is a useful shortcut that instantly engages the teenage and tween-age girls who support these writers. This doesn’t mean that we believe the books to be soft-centred, frivolous or silly (although please let teenage girls have room for silliness and frivolousness in their reading lives – reading is supposed to be enjoyable!) but if readers can be encouraged to read the witty Grace Dent, the brilliant Jacqueline Wilson or the sublimely funny Louise Rennison when they are in the mood for something light and “pink” then we think that has to be a good thing.
This response is probably already a little long, but to finish we’d just like to mention the support the award has had from authors, school librarians, teenage fiction websites and parents looking for quality, accessible fiction for their daughters. Oh, and the 10,000+ votes received for the first award and the hundreds of heartfelt nominations flooding in for this year’s award. Lots of these girls are also reading – or will go on to read – books by Elizabeth Gaskell, Charlotte Bronte and yes, Meg Rosoff, as long as they are encouraged to see reading as an enjoyable activity. We think that this is what we are doing. We’ll certainly take your comments and those of your respondents on board, especially regarding the questions we ask our shortlisted authors, which we agree have perhaps overly frivolous in the past, but in the meantime we’ll get on with celebrating teenage fiction with maximum fun, glamour and pink cupcakes at the Queen of Teen award ceremony later this year!
Thanks for that, Q of T contact. I’d give you even more credit than you give yourself, as most of the authors you’ve shortlisted deal with all sorts of serious subjects — some humorously, some in a “light” way, all in enjoyable ways for readers. Of course reading HAS to be fun, otherwise, why would anyone do it? As a writer and a reader (and mother of a 13-year-old), however, my preference is always to talk to tweens and teens the way I’d like to be talked to myself: with intelligence and wit and respect. Does this outlaw fun, frivolity and pink cupcakes? Not a bit. But when you start talking to girls as if THEY THEMSELVES are fluffy and frivolous, I start to feel very nervous. (Would you ever address boys the way girls are addressed on your website? And if not, why not?) It’s worth asking these questions (virtually every teen author’s had exactly these discussions with their publisher over cover design as well) — it’s impossible not to, really, as it’s what those of us writing for teens do every day of our lives.
Queen of Teen – as someone who was there last time, I know how well received it was by the girls, and it was an outstanding event for those lucky enough to meet so many authors in such a private way.
But I have to agree with Meg about the silly questions, but I gather you do too, now. And it might be possible to go for a variation in colour scheme each time, perhaps? Pink really does make people see red.
Thanks so much for starting this conversation, Meg. Like Emily Gale, I’m the author of a pink book (which happens to have an underlying strand about displaced war victims, as well as several empowered female characters …). I agonise over the pinkness, but I’m thrilled about the Queen of Teen competition and whenever I ask my core readers what they think of my book’s (positively sparkly) cover, they love it. Right now, I’m wondering whether black covers are doing girls any significant favours, although I know they adore those too …
Sadly, pink is now ingrained in the mass consciousness as being representative of girls. Look at all the girls’ baby clothes that are pink – we’ve struggled so hard not to dress our daughter in pink, and the outcome of it is that she always gets mistaken for a boy. (Alright, she’s still a bit chubby, but that flashy smile of hers could never be confused as male.)
So if you’re putting out a book that’s directed at a certain girl demographic, publishers are never going to play risky and cover it in blue. You just can’t risk it in children’s books, when to risk being different is to lose sales.
(I don’t know if you saw the QI episode recently when they talked about the fact that pink used to be associated with boys and their clothes? Not sure how it’s done such a fundamental flip!)
I know pink isn’t really your issue here, Meg (and I agree that the questions are fatuous and would never be asked of a male author), but I just wanted to say that there are plenty of books aimed at teen girls with blue covers. Tamsyn Murray’s My So-Called Afterlife, Joanna Nadin, Sue Limb, Jaclyn Moriarty books. The new Megan Cole (which the publishers are touting as the first in a new “snogbuster” genre) has an almost entirely blue cover.
The risk of being different is pretty frightening for most publishers (and most people). I think it leads to lots of marketing mistakes, and I’ve been in those rooms with everyone saying “It may look wrong to you, but this will really sell.” I worked in advertising long enough to know that no one really knows what will sell — and publishing has a long and wonderful history of astonishing surprises — Dava Sobel’s Longitude was a jaw-droppingly unexpected international best-seller in non-fiction, ditto Hilary Mantel’s Wolf Hall (650 pages of difficult historical novel), and of course nobody predicted Harry Potter. That element of not knowing is one of the truly great things about publishing, but a lot of the time it results in books being shunted uncomfortably into categories they don’t belong in. Chicklit is a comfy category for publishers because they know it sells like chocolate, but if you put a ham sandwich in a chocolate wrapper, you do everyone a disservice.
Sounds more like they’re trying to appeal to sexually ambiguous males to me …
What a great debate..I’ve just blogged about it http://wheniwasjoe.blogspot.com/2010/05/problem-with-pink.html
Well, at least it’s a change from the red, black and white vampire covers everywhere… how is this website ever going to appeal to the emos among us? But really, I agree with you, this kind of pink is way too tied up with Barbie and plasticised cheap beauty, we need a new colour in publishing.
Really, truly, it’s not actually the colour that bothers me. It’s the way they’re talking to GIRLS. The Richard and Judy book club (which has a very similar variety of books and authors, perhaps “popular” rather than strictly “literary”) might be a better model. They’ve managed to be popular without being condescending.
[...] Meg Rossoff – the bastion of sanity, excellent books and I reckon could sing some excellent Streisand – has an interesting post on the light and fluffy nature of pink-lit and the Queen of Teen. Please don’t tell me girls are biologically pre-programmed to like pink, words like ‘fabbie’, and hundreds of exclamation marks, because I grew up in the 60s and I know better. [...]
There is a problem for writers of teen fiction. For many teenagers reading fiction is not a default setting. They don’t have their pile of books by the side of their bed to read. We as writers have to fight for new readers every day. The other problem is that we have a transient readership. Every four years or so they disappear and we are faced with a new battalion of eleven year olds that we have to win over. So the cover debate is huge and hugely important. When I look at a cover proposed for one of my books I try and imagine myself as a teen picking it up and wondering whether or not to read it. I speak as a person who only discovered Anita Shreve (who I think is underated) because of the ‘romantic’ New England type cover brand that her publishers used to promote her. So covers need to win new readers and need to not be scary (in the sense of ‘heavy’). The question for me always is, Will this cover get me new readers? I looked at my books and discovered four shades of pink ranging from mauve to rose. That surprised me. But I have to be honest, if a pink cover will get a reader into my books then I’m willing to support it. (by the by I have a black, red and white book that is doing OK.) I like to think that the ‘fluffiness’ of this award is a kind of comfort zone for some teens. Then maybe once they’ve accepted that reading is pleasureable then they might try more demanding stuff?? Brilliant post Meg.
Thanks for that Anne, (and Keris). Agree totally with your point. But the issue I’m concerned about isn’t pink or pink covers. It’s HOW YOU TALK TO TEENAGE GIRLS.
Hi Meg,
Interesting thread. Thanks to David Maybury in Dublin for the heads up. Like Sophia, I write books with ‘pink’ covers. Very pink covers in fact, shiny pink covers with hearts and butterflies on them.
Before writing full time I was a children’s bookseller for 15 years, pressing great books of all kinds into children and teenagers’ hands and I know how important the look of a book is if you want readers, and hopefully lots of them, to pick it up in the first place. Once it’s in their hands, bingo! They open the cover and discover – hey, inside it’s not quite so ‘pink’ after all. Moody grey, darkest black, sunny yellow, pounding red . . .
But I agree – shoes or bags – does it matter? What I want to be asked is Seuss or Heaney? Blume or Wilson? Jacob or Edward (I’m kidding!). How I became a writer. Why I write. Who I love to read. Why I read . . .
I think the Queen of Teen award is a fantastic way of highlighting books that get sometimes get overlooked – go Threads I say!
Nice background on the blog by the way, Meg – really draws people in. Now would you call it, ahem, pink by any chance?
And great blog. I’ll stay tuned.
Yours in writing,
Sarah Webb (Ask Amy Green series, Walker Books)
I think it’s funny how the debate dissolved into a discussion of the colour pink rather than Meg R’s core point which seems to be the tone of the QoT’s site and author questions.
Personally, most of the teen girls I’ve met or know would run a mile from any books associated with such a tone ( which would be a shame because I’m certain the packaging belies the depth) but then the teens that come to my readings would be mostly into fantasy lit such as Suzanne Collins, Meg Roscoff, and Malorie Blackman so it’s probably a niche market sample of female teen opinion.
Yeah, my issue would be this bit, rather than the colour itself (which as everyone else has pointed out, is a bit tangential):
“the pink and glitzy look of our website is a useful shortcut that instantly engages the teenage and tween-age girls who support these writers. ”
Really?
Despite the vast amount of YA fiction I inhaled, I must have skipped straight over being a teenage girl, then, since pink and glitzy would have put me off (no snobbery – just never my cup of tea, and that was the same for quite a few of my peers).
How about being properly by being interesting about reading? You’re probably already doing that underneath the pink n glitz, so it should be pretty easy to continue! Girls coming to these sites are ALREADY reading, and don’t need to be told what you think they must like because they’re girls. They certainly don’t need to be assailed with random nonsense about bags or shoes – at least, not without balancing it out with some actually book-related thoughts. Aren’t the best author interviews the ones that mix a bit of personal stuff with a bit about reading and writing?
Of course you can’t please everyone whatever theme you choose, but if there’s one thing I do remember from being a teenager it’s that you’ll get a lot further by not patronising them.
*properly “engaging” is where I was going with that second to last paragraph…
@Anthony McGowan: Re. Jane Austen, AM said “just substitute snogging for marriage, and you have Louise Rennison..” Sorry to be pedantic, but shouldn’t that be t’other way around
Nice pink page background, Meg
Your pink and green reminds me of ACHUKA’s early incarnation…
What a healthy dialogue.
Actually, no, AM has it right… it’s all in the difference between substitute ‘with’ and subsititue ‘for’ and he wrote ‘for’ so it means what he meant, and not what I read…
I’m an author of a pink book too.
I think there’s a few steps in between talking about shoes and becoming entirely imprisoned by the male gaze. I like shoes. I like to look pretty. I’m not ashamed of that. I don’t let it dictate how I live my life, or how much I eat, or inform any of my life decisions.
The point is, by covering books in pink and sparkles (and websites), we’re making them what David Fickling calls Readermakers. A teenage girl who isn’t a very confident reader might pick one up, because it doesn’t look intense or threatening. But once she opens the covers, she will almost certainly find characters who are flawed, human, thoughtful, funny, who make mistakes and learn from them, who are curious about the world. And if a pink sparkly cover (or website) with shoes and bags gets them to open that book, then bring on the glitter. It’s what’s inside that counts.
And frankly I’d much rather teenage girls were reading pink books about girls who like shoes and make mistakes and learn and become stronger, than read black and red books about girls who are only interested in their abusive, distant, passive agressive vampire boyfriends.