Lauren Myracle is a New York Times best-selling young-adult author. She’s also one of our country’s most frequently “challenged” writers, meaning, her books have appeared at the top of the American Library Association’s list of titles most often cited for removal—banning—from our public libraries’ shelves. In the past week, she hit another milestone: she is the first author to be nominated for the prestigious National Book Award before having that nomination revoked.

The novel in question, Shine(Abrams, 2011), concerns a violent hate crime against a small-town gay youth, the ensuing cover-up by local authorities, and a girl who takes it upon herself to find the truth. We called Myracle for her first interview since this occurred—highlights from our chat:

VF Daily: Walk me through what happened with the National Book Award nomination.

Lauren Myracle: On Monday of last week, I got a call from Harold Augenbraum, who told me that I was a finalist for the National Book Award. And I said, “You’re fucking kidding me!” He said, “That’s not usually the response we get.” But we went through the whole back and forth confirming that it was my book, and my name, and my publisher, and then he said, “Keep it to yourself until the official announcement on Wednesday.”

On Wednesday, they did a live-stream announcement from Oregon Public Radio, and I watched it online. There was this drama of pulling books out of black sleeves. And they got to Shine and my heart was so happy. Then, a couple hours later, I got this e-mail from an editor at the School Library Journal, who asked, “What’s this Shine/Chime business?” And I didn’t know. But she wrote back, “Do some Googling. I’m so sorry.” And I started Googling, and what was written from the National Book Foundation was that they’d added a sixth book to the list—Chime, by Franny Billingsly—that there was an error in communication, but they’d decided that there were going to be six nominees this year.

I felt like the rug had been pulled out from under my feet. So I called Harold, who was a darling, and he said, “I’m so sorry this happened. Yes, there was a miscommunication. But the judges unanimously would like to keep all the books on the list.”

Then the next day, I got the bad call, and it was Harold again. And he said, “Well, we’ve got a problem.” He was diplomatic, but he more or less said that the position was being changed and that people wanted Shineoff the list. And how did I feel about that? I felt gutted. I felt embarrassed, and ashamed that I had the gall to believe that this book was worthy. So over the weekend came the question of, Do I withdraw, or do I let them strip it from me? I first thought: They made the mistake; they can clean it up. Then I realized that I had a chance to either be classy or be seen as someone gripping with white knuckles to something they didn’t want me to have. And I was going to be taken off the list regardless.

So I decided to step down, and that’s when we thought it would be nice to ask the National Book Foundation to make a donation to the Matthew Shepard Foundation—I live in Fort Collins, Colorado, which is where Matthew was medevac-ed after his assault in Wyoming, and he came to the hospital where all my kids had been born, and is right around the corner, all of which was very much in my mind when I was writing Shine. [Shepard, a student at the University of Wyoming, died of injuries sustained in a notorious anti-gay hate crime in October 1998.] And they graciously agreed to donate $5,000 to the foundation. And that’s the one unsullied good thing that’s come out of this for me. And that’s more tangible good than a shiny gold sticker any day.

When people hear this story, they can’t help but wonder if Shine’s subject matter had something to do with the decision to pull the nomination. What do you think?

I don’t think so, at all. Controversy seems to follow me, and I could see how people could think that . . . there was this whole kerfuffle inThe Wall Street Journal recently, where Megan Cox Gurden talked about “dark Y.A.,” about how depraved and pathologically lurid the world of Y.A. is these days—and Shine was singled out. Her article was a battle cry to parents to reclaim “safe” Y.A. books. So Shine has been out there in a negative way, for some, because it deals with ugliness. But it’s ultimately a novel about love, and redemption, and tolerance—you gotta go through some mud to get there.

So yes, while the outside perception might be [that] it was the hate crime or the homosexuality, the judges would never have let them be a factor. Because they’re young-adult writers themselves—they’re amazing authors, very well read, and they know what they’re doing. I honestly think it was a clerical error, and from there, there was some mismanagement for sure that didn’t need to happen . . . but it did.

I’m sure being nominated was a true high. But what does it feel like to be un-nominated?

I guess I would have to say, just like any bad breakup or any awful thing you go through, if I could go back and have it not happen, I would have it not happen. But some really good things have come of it. . . . [T]he community of writers has been amazing. I felt ashamed and embarrassed, and they’ve taken my shame and embarrassment away from me. They’ve said, No, we love you, and this is an important book. And that’s made me feel so humbled.

__What are you working on next? Maybe something uncontroversial?__I’m working on the story of a satanic cannibal cult set amongst the Republican presidential candidates.

Just kidding! I’m actually working on a book about genetic engineering and big old questions about tolerance, love, and life, and who gets to create life and who gets to define what that is. I don’t shy from controversy. I’m telling stories, and I’ll tell whatever story seems like it wants to be told.