In Maggie Stiefvater’s article of Pure Escapism For Young Adult Readers she explains her opinions on why the dystopian trend is so popular among teenagers and why it will continue to grow within the next several years. She explains that she doesn’t believe teenagers are reading dystopian novels because “the darkness of the subject matter” reflects their lives, but instead they find it interesting. She states that teenagers wouldn’t want to read dystopian novels if it actually reflected their lives because, “Would we be so enamored with dystopian fiction if we lived in a culture where violent death was a major concern?” Instead they read and follow the dystopian trend because it’s simply satisfying to them. Young adults like reading novels about what’s right and wrong, but while reading the novels they have to find where the good is.

I agree with the author that teenagers aren’t reading the dystopian trend because it reflects them but because they find it interesting. The whole purpose of reading is to have your imagination run free and to create an outlet of another world for yourself. I think young adults are able to relate to the characters in dystopian societies because, like the characters, the teenagers want to fight for what’s right; they want to take a stand, speak out, and change their community (or world) for the better. The connection I made with The Giver by Lois Lowry is the “black and white choices” Stiefvater mentions. Jonas was always perceived as different and that was made clear when he was named the Receiver. Jonas thought his society was “polite” and “acceptable” until the Giver gave him memories. He then learns that his community lives without passionate emotions, individuality, and creativity. His world fell on either side of the black and white spectrum but never in-between. We see that Lowry creates a story where finding the good or evil in a character is hard because he/she doesn’t know right versus wrong or good versus evil.

Westerfeld argues that teenagers are fondly prone to attract to stories or novels that depicts systems breaking down under its own contradictions. Teenagers are in a stage where they must cope with adult responsibilities including school, work, yet they are not fully granted with such adult powers to gain respect. With the two extremes he describes, dystopia and apocalypse, signifies the “Uglies”. This meaning constitute how a society based on surveillance and control would have “zero tolerance. I agree with Westerfield’s argument. I believe that in today’s society, teenagers experiences luck in waking up every morning with a place to stay, eating approximately three meals a day and getting an education to better their future. As a result, teenagers would break away from a structured life filled with many rules, regulations and restrictions. In The Giver, we see the moment when Jonas breaks away from the norm of his community due to becoming the Receiver of Memory. He possesses more wisdom than anyone in his community but his youth makes it possible for him to receive the memories and learn from them. Reading these types of books gives teenagers a different aspect on life, one that they are not accustomed to, but arouses their suspicions and curiosity in such a way.

Jay Parini, who wrote a blog post on teenage interest in YA lit in 2011, suggests that young adult readers turn to dystopian novels as a way to escape the stifling world of standardized testing and the watchful eye of the system as a whole. To teenagers, this “system” works to turn them into adults and to “separate the sheep from the goats.” While I do agree that current dystopian novels work so well because they take aspects of reality–such as an ever-present surveillance system–and makes the audience think about the real world, I do believe that the popularity of such books stems from interest with the genre itself without feeling “trapped” by the system that they are in. Even with the example of The Hunger Games, its massive popularity stemmed from various reasons (strong female protagonist, romantic plot that surfaces in the midst of the novel’s chaos, and the Battle Royale-style of picking a group of young adults to fight to the death); finding that as any “escape” from the world of standardized tests, Facebook status updates, and demanding adult figures could only work to explain a handful of novels in the genre.

Clements argues, primarily from his own experience as a young reader, that fiction that explores the evils of the world is necessary for children as their understanding expands. He recalls growing bored with books in which conflict was minimal, relegated to small disputes that typically culminated in a Happy Ending, as he began to discover that the world can be really dark. He also states that today’s dystopian stories are most likely so dark due to the increased visibility of violence and evil via the internet and other media that did not exist during his childhood or Poe’s time. I completely agree with Clements, echoing that Sendakian notion that children are complex people who are not blind to evil, even if we wish they were. I had a similar experience to Clements as well–one minute I was reading pretty bland middle school fare, and the next I was devouring 1984, followed soon by A Clockwork Orange, armed with my trusty printed-off-Sparknotes Nadsat dictionary.

The commentary definitely relates to The Giver, especially in terms of Jonas’s growth. I like to think of the book as, on one level, about growing up and learning that the world that has been constructed for you by trusting adults is largely a farce. This hits home for me in a very specific and vital way: Everyone has to learn not only that people suffer and die, that Santa doesn’t exist, that falling in love is hard and painful, but also that most if not all of what we learn about history as children is romanticized. We don’t find out about the horrors our forefathers have committed (genocide, de facto racism, and reproductive violence en masse to name a few) unless we seek out these truths for ourselves.

Faustino contends that the “dark” themes of YA dystopian novels are no different from the themes found in classic YA novels known for their “gritty realism,” such as The Chocolate War, by Robert Cormier or The Outsiders, by S.E. Hinton. She further explains that the only difference lies within the fantastical elements of dystopian novels like the setting of The Hunger Games. She contends that the main goal of these novels is to understand how to hold onto our individuality, humanity, and connections to others while facing an uncertain future.

I agree with Faustino’s point. I think that, while YA novels that she mentions like Feed or Harry Potter have obviously impossible circumstances (zombies and wizards), the themes explored can be found in YA books with real settings and no fantasy elements. For example, in the Chocolate War, the protagonist struggles with questions of ethics and morals of the leaders in charge of his boarding school. In Harry Potter, the same questions are explored…just with wizards.

I think Faustino’s view relates to The Giver in that the “darkness” of the novel comes less from the Dystopian elements, and more from the human element that raises questions about our future as a group and as individuals. This is the aim and the benefit of all YA novels.