Reluctant Readers ages 12-18

I don't know, Maurice, but I'm going to sit here and lurk because I think it's a fabulous idea. I know for so many kids--especially boys--it just tkaes that one interesting series to get them hooked on reading in general.

My brother used to hate to read and when he was 12 or 13 he got hooked on Hardy Boys. He had gobbled up anything in print ever since and he's 22 now.

Maprilynne

Who publishes Captain Underpants? I would think that would be a RR series aimed at boys.

I'd say the 'butt' books, too, but that author is from Austrailia; I think that's where the books were first published.

There doesn't seem to be a universal definition of a 'reluctant reader' book. Overall word length should not be the only thing that defines a RR - I think that vocabulary and sentence structure should also be carefully monitored. However, I write for http://www.barringtonstoke.co.uk/ (their 'gr8reads!' strand) and Barrington Stoke publishes ONLY RR stories, so they have categories galore, eg aged 12-16, reading age 8+, aged 12-16, reading age under 8 etc.

Quite a lot of books could be considered an easy read because of the writing style - basically anything you can whip through very quickly is probably using simplified sentence structure and vocab. But RR books as a category of their own are usually quite limiting for the authors.

I have two RR books for Barrington Stoke - Perfect and Babyfather. The editing process was a delight - if anyone's interested I'll expand!

mauricesempine said:

What I didn't find were any in the US. If anyone knows of a US publisher that is looking for young adult reluctant reader material, I'd sure like to know about them.

Click to expand...

I did a Google search for "books for reluctant readers" and found dozens listed. I would look at the publishers of those books, particularly if a publisher shows up more than once on the list of books.

Hi Mac

Yes, I think Barrington Stoke likes all sorts of stories - I mean, if you check out their site you'll see the range they produce, from crime to fantasy to romance.

The editing process was wonderful. They take the draft manuscipt out to a school and sit with a group of reluctant reader kids, who read it aloud around the group. The editor marks down any words they stumble over and also encourages discussion and feedback - so, for example, if one character describes another as 'fit' there may well be a discussion on whether that's popular slang right now or whether the kids would themselves use another word.

Then the editor collates all the feedback and rings me up. We spend about two and a half hours on the phone, painstakingly going through every single sentence of the manuscript, changing vocab and rewriting sentences. Mostly I adopt their suggestions but occasionally I think I can rewrite it better or I want a particular word to remain for a particular reason. In that case we usually compromise. By the end of the phone call, we both have scribbled over mss and have agreed everything.

Then the next I hear is when they send me the proof with rough illustrations (some have illustrations, but they're different styles for the different age groups). I am encouraged to comment on the illustrations (although in quite a general way) and we also discuss the title of the book and the front cover. I did veto several suggestions for my book 'Babyfather' which was originally called 'Up the Duff' but they wanted a one word title. They suggested all sorts of things I didn't like but we eventually agreed - and they then produced a really good front cover.

Then I simply wait until the final copies arrive, about a week before publication.

The process is very different from working with a conventional editor, and the kids who did the reading of the manuscript all get thanked at the back of the book too. I like the process immensely - it feels really collaborative.

I should add, however, that the advance is tiny, but then it doesn't really take that long to write 2500 words anyway! (at least, it doesn't take me long) There are further royalties too, so if the book does well with schools and libraries, there will be more money to come.

I'm not sure if there's technically a difference or a difference in market, but to me, there needs to be a difference between reluctant readers and struggling readers. Reluctant readers are often just kids who don't like to read. And I really have no idea how this relates to your particular question, I just wanted to get it out there. Sorry.

True, Lauren. But 'struggling readers' are somehow easier to market to. Conventional 'kids who don't like reading' are harder to target, I think.

You're right, though - a reluctant reader can be reluctant for many reasons. Barrington Stoke just targets one of those reasons.