I double-dog-dare you to walk through your local book store's "Teen Literature" section. Please, drink in the stock character smoldering eye-air brushed-dark hair-often shirtless men (well...boys?) plastered to the covers of single word titled books. Read the back cover synopsis and awe over the amount of mythical creatures, super powers, and "ordinary, plain" girls who fall for the mysterious bad boy. I have recently done just this and was utterly repulsed by the literature given to our teens to read and synthesize. Not only is the quality of rhetoric and art severely lacking, but the messages and motifs given are unrealistic and detrimental to a teen's view of the world and self.

I am by no means anti "Twilight." The fact of the matter is that teen romance has encouraged young boys and girls alike to open the cover of a good old fashioned book. This phenomenon is beautiful in that a unique genre has sucked young readers in! The issue, however, proves to be the lack of expense that follows. In school and stores alike, a select few books have been deemed acceptable in theme, language, and content. This is a huge disservice to America's youth as it narrows the scope of literature readily accessible to young readers; thus, perpetuating the teen romance niche.

"The Great Gatsby," "Of Mice and Men," "The Scarlet Letter" and "Hamlet" are all incredible literary masterpieces. The problem is that educators have created a crater between "school reading" and "pleasure reading." Regardless on your stance of Common Core, the program encourages this gap to be bridged through including non-fiction text that creates social relevance. Why not challenge students with works such as "Lolita and Death" and "The Maiden" (if you haven't read these works, do it!). Sure, the topicality of the material is more intense and borderline controversial, but themes and motifs present force critical and global thinking. By choosing "p.c." books to be the focus of high school curriculum, we are subliminally telling students that they are not quite ready to read "big kid" books. This not only dissuades love of literature in general, but forces teens back to the Stephanie Meyers of the world.

Literature is made to create controversy. Authors write because they have something to say. Whether a story that paints the simplicity and breath of life or the pain of war, stories are written to be read. The teen section in Barnes and Noble is not cutting it. What would happen if educators and parents alike encouraged the reading of radical literature that challenges traditional thought? Not only would teens create a more well-rounded worldview, but also expand basic vocabulary and improve basic writing skills.

Plot twist, vampires are not real. Not matter how well read you are on the subject it will never change the fact that blood sucking babes do not exist. War, poverty, racism, and rape do exist. Remaining ignorant to the stories of those affected, fictional or not, is to remain ignorant to the world. Jacob is great, but Jacobean drama is better, Edward should only be fawned over when reading "Sense and Sensibility," and the debate between man and monster is found in "The Count of Monte Cristo," not "New Dawn."