Everyone's talking about New Adult.

Fallen too farAs I was not at ALA earlier this month, I missed out on the New Adult Conversation Starter run by Sophie Brookover, Liz Burns, and Kelly Jensen:

New Adult Fiction (NA) has made waves in the New York Times, the Guardian, Publishers Weekly, and more. Depending on who you ask, NA either demands its own section of the library or is just a new name to describe books about twenty-somethings, which libraries have always carried. Maybe it’s “young adult books with sex.” Maybe it’s books about emerging adults trying to figure out the world before an uncertain future happens. Join a lively discussion on what NA may be, who’s reading it, where it’s shelved, how we catalog it, and how it fits into reader’s advisory.

So I'll be watching the comments section over there to see if the discussion continues!

In the meantime, there's Keren David's post at An Awfully Big Blog Adventure, which leans in the direction of NA = "YA books with sex":

Unfortunately New Adult has stopped being a useful label for my books and the books of the authors mentioned above, because New Adult has come to mean ‘books about teenagers having sex, generally originally self-published, and picked up by publishers who want a slice of the action.’

And so far, really, that describes most of the New Adult that's been pitched to me.

But I could see books like Justina Chen's Return to Me or Sarah Dessen's The Moon and More—neither of which I've written about, as I've been reading faster than writing lately, but both of which are about the summer after graduating high school—or the third and fourth Jessica Darling books being described as NA.

What do you all think?

Or have we done this topic to death?