Okay, how did I miss this?
Holy freaking cow. I’ve been avoiding my RSS feeds for awhile now — they get overwhelming sometimes — and this is what I miss???
What makes you “a person suitable to work with or be associated with children”? And this is not to offend those at RH, which has published quite a lot of books I adore, and which I hope will continue to do so. But … how does the publisher decide what is morally objectionable? Like, does smoking cigarettes make you unsuitable to be around kids, ’cause cigarettes are bad and they cause cancer and if you smoke in front of kids then the kids might think it’s cool and go try to get cancer themselves? Or what about something really controversial? What if you’re (a) not Christian or (b) gay or (c) a recovering alcoholic? Would one of these things disqualify you from writing YA?
I don’t think so. I mean, I think that’s one of those things that gives us stories to tell. When we ourselves struggle with addiction, or religion, or sexual identity — just to name a few of many, many possible struggle-y things … well, that’s when we pony up, right? That’s what gives us perspective. And in part, that’s what makes a writer.
I don’t know. I’ve only read these two articles about it, that I linked to. If you’ve got more info or other blog links, send ‘em on over. I’m keen to hear what has been going on around all this. And I, likewise, will update you if I hear anything, and I’ll probably weigh in later with a few good examples of books RH has published that at least grapple with these sorts of issues.
UPDATE: According to one of our awesome commenters, this RH problem exists only in Europe. Thank God. We Americans are much too depraved to be able to live up to a morality clause. Or maybe we just have much stricter ideas of morality. Like, in the US you can be immoral for almost anything, depending on who you ask. Whereas in Europe, I’m pretty sure they’re more interested in the hard-core stuff, like Big Bad Drugs and crimes that would get you locked up for several years.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:25 am
That clause appears only to apply to the UK only, and there seems to be some doubt as to how often it is being applied.
Galleycat did a good recap of the issue here: http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/trends/another_look_at_that_ya_morality_clause_92522.asp
September 8th, 2008 at 8:52 am
Thanks, S. That is a huge relief.
September 8th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Yeah, I’d be out of luck. Cigars. Booze. Failure to shave daily.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Ah, well. If you are willing to write teen books that feature a teenager’s struggle with cigars and booze, maybe you could get away with it. Besides which, you can just write under another name, and no one will ever know about the cigars and booze unless you admit to them.
Me? I’m living out of wedlock with a man (of my dreams, though), and I have been known to purchase cigarettes that cost nine dollars. NINE. (Kids, this is why you should never, ever start smoking, okay? Because these cancer sticks are expensive, and I have been told repeatedly that it’s easier to go off heroin than it is to quit smoking. Not that I haven’t tried. Repeatedly. Maybe this RH hullabaloo will even get me to try again.)