Teenage Kicks

How have all the readings developed your understanding of children’s literature and the issues surrounding it?

“in actual fact, the numbers of people who seriously think that young people 14 and up can’t handle this sort of material are actually an odd minority holding an extreme opinion that is hardly shared by the rest of society.” (Melvin Burgess on “Junk”)

According to Burgess I am a minority with an extreme view but I do not believe that most people think that Junk is a text suitable for all teenagers.

The main justification for exposing children to Junk seems to be that children are already in contact with drugs in some way. According to the NHS Information centre website:
“In 2003, 17 per cent of secondary school children thought it was acceptable to try cannabis, 10 per cent thought it acceptable to try sniffing glue and 4 per cent believed it OK to try cocaine;” (http://www.ic.nhs.uk/statistics-and-data-collections/health-and-lifestyles/drug-misuse/statistics-on-young-people-and-drug-misuse:-england-2006)
The largest percentage of teenagers willing to experiment with drugs is still only 17% who say they would try cannabis. Without entering into the debate about cannabis I think that it is generally considered to be less harmful by the younger generation after all the confusing decriminalisation debates. Only 4% of teenagers are willing to try cocaine and the statistic for those teenagers that have been offered heroin, “junk,” is 6%. This would be about 30 children in a school of 500 who have come into contact with the drug, not that many. Who is to say that a book about heroin use is not going to peak the interest of vulnerable children in contact with drugs. There are other important issues that could be introduced to children that I think could be beneficial for all teenagers to read about. For example 14,000 people were hospitalised for stab wounds last year according to an article in The Independent by Jonathan Owen 06/10/08. Teenagers affected like Stephen Lawrence could raises important issues for discussion like racism.

“Adolescents talk about their involvement with stories almost entirely in terms of identification with the characters and situations they are in.” (Appleyard “Becoming a reader” P. 106)
94% of children have not come into contact with heroin and so fail the Appleyard criteria of “Realism” being able to identify with drug use and squats which is the subject matter in Junk. Readers therefore are unable to assess and make value judgements about the book based on their experiences because they do not have any. Leaving a teenager to make a moral judgement about Junk is risky, who is to say that a teenager will read the book past the initial elation of heroin that Gemma describes in Chapter fifteen “I’m flying” (Junk P. 192).Teenagers who read Junk are supposedly presented with the facts: Heroin does make you feel wonderful but it becomes an addiction and ruins lives. It is for adults to trust them to make the right moral judgement based on these facts. I think that it is important to have high expectations of what children can achieve (In fact it’s a QTS standard!) but isn’t it asking a lot of teenagers to have the skills that we as adults possess reading Junk as teenagers do not have the life experience.
“When we reject it we know ourselves and our feelings and convictions more clearly for doing so.” (Appleyard “Becoming a reader” P. 120) I think that it is unfair of us to ask teenagers to know what their convictions are and to use them to reject influences at such an early stage.

“All the events in the second half of the book are real. They didn’t always happen to those particular characters in that particular way, but they did happen. I had nothing to invent.” (Melvin Burgess on “Junk”)
A justification by Burgess for Junk is that it is a true story about real events. I do not understand why this makes it subject matter suitable for children but I think Burgess is saying that because it is a story about teenagers it makes it suitable subject matter for them. Horrible things do happen to children, sadly, but this does not mean that they should happen and are suitable for children to read about, for example the tragic Soham murders by Ian Huntley. Burgess describes how if Junk were to be made into a film he was told by a production company that it would be an eighteen certificate. Burgess says in defence that children of fourteen can get into eighteen certificate films or that they can get them on DVD. This does not mean that we should encourage this behaviour and deem that the Texas Chainsaw Massacre is as suitable for children as Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire. The eighteen certificate would be on Junk the movie for a reason and parents would know that the film is deemed by protective legislation not to be suitable for young teenagers because it shows drugs, violence and sexual violence. Books are at least equally powerful to films and if a film of Junk is considered suitable for teenagers aged eighteen and up it is an indication of the audience suitable for the novel.

The issues surrounding teenage literature are complicated. There is tension between childhood and adulthood and I suppose I have been arguing in favour of prolonging childhood innocence and not hastening teenagers toward harrowing life experience that includes heroin and prostitution. The description in Appleyard about the duality and the struggle between the development of the inner secretive self and the outer self that fulfils a role in society is a helpful model of why teenagers are so at odds with themselves and why Junk might be a good read for them. Junk could develop the harmony between the objective responsible teenager that has been instructed that drugs are bad and the subjective inner teenager who can realise for themselves that they do not want to take heroin. When I was reading Junk I thought about the cartoon of Pinocchio who ran off to the fair drinking alcohol and having lots of fun with his new friends until he suddenly realises that they have all been turned into donkeys to work down the mines. Perhaps modern children need modern morality tales and Rob and Lily are the modern child’s donkeys. Through Junk I suppose that children can learn early on not to get themselves in tricky situations but in my opinion children should be allowed to be children for as long as possible and although Burgess said that my view is the view of the minority, I am not the only one.

The Observer 01/02/09 Article “Children should be allowed to be sad; we expect the young to be happy while subjecting them to our concerns. No wonder they are so anxious” Lisa Miller and Margaret Rustin.

“Also relevant is how exposed today’s children are to the grimmer realities of the world. Television and the internet provide little protection from images of disaster and distress. The visual nature of our culture bombards children with levels of violence and human vulnerability that have complex effects on their picture of the world.”