How to use this Page

(This is one of those north-by-northwest thought processes where I arrive at a point eventually... so bear with me.)

This reminds me of ...school. Or, Sunday School. Little kids get to sing and dance and do crafts for years and years and years. Fun stories, movement, color, all in the service of learning your ABC's or your "begets."

And then, adulthood. Which means all the fun stuff is gone. And learning is this hard, harsh curve, and a drudgery. And we all accept that, as if that's what adulthood is about, as if that's to what level we strongly wished to climb when we were elven and deeply wished we were seventeen, and able to date, or twenty-one, and able to go out with dangerous boys.

I think adults retreating to YA lit are remembering that Once Upon A Time they wanted something better, and something more, and they're backtracking, perhaps, to see where they lost the trail of their lives, and maybe some of them are reaching back and recapturing a bit of their better selves.

The YA/kidlit blogosphere is amazingly ...young. No matter how old we are collectively and individually, I was just sort of gobsmacked at how attractive and flexible and bright the lot of us are. It was spooky.

It's the books. Reading them and writing them and thinking of them makes us... different.

My two pesos, anyway.

I heartily agree with you, Sarah. In fact, the few adult books that I've read and actually loved differ from the standard adult fare by telling actual stories. I include in that my favorite grown-up title in the past decade, The Guernsey Literary and Potato-Peel Pie Society, which is co-written by a kids' author (maybe that's why it's so good!) and which includes fascinating information about the Channel islands during WWII, and about rationing, and it's epistolary and generally wonderful.

I agree with Tanita's comments to the extent that they imply that most of us wanted far more (and far better) out of adulthood than what we got, but I find myself agreeing more with you that STORIES are what matter. (Which explains why Stephen King and Neil Gaiman sell craploads of copies - they actually tell stories!)

And to add to the list of things grown-up fiction is lacking, crisp editing is high on the list. The last few grown up fantasy books drove me absolutly crazy because there was tons of repetition in description and characterization that I don't thing any good YA editor would have tolerated for a second. This might actually be one reason for the verve lack you mention....

Viz taking innocent child-like pleasure in life-- I am enjoying my children's new Wii very much. Especially the ping pong.

I completely agree with you, Charlotte, about the editing thing--I've noticed that numerous times, and it really frustrates me.

And, enjoy the Wii! We've got one, although lately it get used primarily to stream Netflix movies. (I have a video game I'm partly finished with staring sadly at me from the shelf...alas, no time!)

Agreed -- EDITING is hugely significant between YA and adult writing. I struggle with adult novels because there's a loss of ...point, there's so little editing. YA writers deal with editors as gatekeepers, but adult writers dealing with their editors must have a much different relationship. Hm. Something to ponder.

The stories are definitely the key... and we had better stories when we were still eager for the journey and imagined what life would be like when we "got there."

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes! (I love this community; it's so wonderful to know I'm not alone in feeling this way!)

I especially liked this sentiment of yours:
"I like the fact that YA literature, by contrast, embraces the process, the journey, reminds me that I can still learn and grow regardless of age."

So, true. It's wonderful to read these kind of stories. And it's wonderful to know that some of the best people are writing for our kids.

Tanita, you put it much better than I did--that YA writers deal with editors as gatekeepers.

Melissa, glad you stopped by!

I keep coming back to the journey idea, and I can't help thinking that not only is it a good thing to recognize that life is an ongoing journey, but it's also rewarding to be able to recapture and revisit and continue to learn from earlier points in the process. Because, of course, we wouldn't be who we are NOW without who we were along the way.

I also realized some of my resentment about being made to feel that YA/children's lit is solely for children is the fact that I really resent being told what I ought to like or dislike, especially when the reasoning is so specious and flimsy. :)

Oh my gosh, what a fantastic post and chorus of respondents. You have made me think a lot about editing (and having written on both sides of this fence (while refusing to actually believe there is a fence)), and I believe that you are onto something.

I wanted to send you this link the first time I commented, but couldn't find it then--I found it both interesting and amusing!

http://evesalexandria.typepad.com/eves_alexandria/2010/07/are-you-reader-enough-for-difficult-fiction.html

WOW. I also enjoyed the discussion in the comments. It was very telling to me that the commenters who felt compelled to leap to the defense of the book being critiqued, were not only missing the point of the review but also making themselves sound just as pompous, dismissive and insufferable as the author of the book. Kudos to you for putting in a comment. I was way too chicken. :) Not to mention speechless.

A pissing match in a teapot, that article... that means everyone gets messy and it all stinks.

I could get on a soapbox about THAT and stay on for days.

"It's about working between, across, at, and through the edges and borders of literary genres. It falls between the cracks of other movements, terms, and definitions."

Definitely a gallimaufry of the best sort. My kind of reading.

This crossing of borders is one of the things that I've always loved about YA literature (and children's literature, too, though the borders are a bit different). In YA, it's ok to mix genres. In the adult markets, I think that people have more narrowly defined expectations (or the market has dictated that ... I don't know ... but I often find it dull).

You know, I commented somewhere yesterday, I think it was Original Content, that these discussions were going to start up another round of blog focus angst. So, this is none too surprising. I think that it's your blog, and you have a lot of other things in your life, and you should write detailed reviews if you want to, but not otherwise. I'll be interested to read your posts about reading and writing in general.

Happy Friday!

I agree wholeheartedly with you and with Jen. Blogs are a labor of love that shouldn't feel like a job or a chore. I love this blog, but will go with it no matter where it goes. Take care of yourself and your own priorities first and foremost, and thanks for a consistent great read here.

I like it when you all reocommend books, because I'm pretty sure I'll like them too, but I am happy to read whatever you feel like writting!

It means a lot to me to know that you're all reading, and to feel your support and good vibes coming my way! Thank you.

I like your in-depth reviews, but the roundups are fun, too. Part of the reason I read the blogs I read is because I like the writing style and the writer's voice. I think most of us are like that.

I totally understand where you're coming from. I experienced something similar last summer and changed the way I do things. No more "reviews" for me, particularly of novels. I'm leaving them for myself to read and enjoy and savor. I might mention that I liked a book or quote an excerpt if I'm really moved, but no more of what I used to: Read a book and turn right around and blog about it (most of 'em).

Now, I show lots of art, focus on picture books, and try to let the book creators speak for themselves (interviews, in-their-own-words types of features). I just don't have time to keep up with the way I used to blog.

I think Adrienne hit the nail on the head. People who love your OWN VOICE, your writing style will come back, no matter what you do. I believe that, too.

Hoping I'm making sense in my head-cold-from-hell haze.

(P.S. I can't even keep up with these discussions about blog reviews anymore. I just do my thing, and if I have one person reading, I'll keep doing it.)

I always feel weird in the blog review discussions (even when the blow up on my blog :) because what I do is not really blog-related. I think the last book I gave an indepth review to at chasingray was "Special Topics in Calamity Physics" and that was because I hated it so much I had to tell somebody! ha!

The one thing I have noticed though is that there are a lot of folks out there who are hard core serious about their blogging. We're talking a new review everyday, interviews every week, all kinds of events and carnivals, etc. They are very very busy on the blogs and I can't do that at mine. I like the "What a Girl Wants" feature I'm doing because really it's just sending the question out and then cutting and pasting the responses but it comes out really good and everyone seems to like it. Those are the kind of things I really enjoy doing - and I also like the round up posts the everyone does. They are a great way to hear about so many things I've missed!

All this is to say that yes, like everyone else I will read your posts regardless just because I like to see what's going on.

I think we all evolve with and toward our blogs. We discover what it is to be fully immersed in the blog world, and then we step back and rediscover ourselves off the blog. It's back and forth. As Jen says, you should do just what you wish to do on your blog. Short reviews are sometimes easier for blog readers—they tell us what we need to know, and give us room to make our own decisions.

This blog has definitely evolved--and because Tanita and I each have our own personal blogs, I think that the content sometimes overlaps and flows back and forth and sometimes it's completely separate...and, despite my best efforts to have this be "the writing blog" and aquafortis be "the personal blog"...well, it hasn't quite worked out that way. :)

I agree, though, with Jules and Colleen--sometimes it's just too hard to keep up. And there are times when my expectations of myself would be better placed elsewhere (like with my revision--argh!!).

Oh my goodness. WHy didn't I see this? I have the same questions myself, often, and now I'll be teaching an academic literary course in the fall.

Thank you so much for the tip (and your thoughts).

b

Go, A.F., go!

Thanks for cruising by and commenting! I thought this was such an intriguing article--so many interesting points brought up about the way we think about the teaching of creative writing, and how it's changed over the decades. Just like the teaching of fine art! Back in the '50s and '60s it was apparently not uncommon for fistfights to break out during critiques...or at least that's the mythology. :)

I thought the exact same thing. I don't want to hear about how the pictures weren't directly related to the text or whatever - this was THE illustrated book for kids that everyone has been talking about. It is head and shoulders above everything else published last year (and there were some lovely books put out there).

I think there needs to be a Printz NF award for teens. The Sibert award just doesn't seem to get nearly the attention that the big three get and NF for MG and YA readers is very important.

I'm still picking my jaw up off the floor. Kadir Nelson was robbed. But then again, maybe the Caldecott is like the Oscars, and they'll give it to him when he illustrates GHOST. I don't try to understand the whyfores of awards in books or movies. I'm grateful We Are The Ship was made, and now I'm going to buy multiple copies to show my support!

It's really too bad...which is why I'm glad we bloggers have all been singing his praises for ages!

Hah! GHOST.
*snicker*

You're absolutely correct -- the opportunity to simply buy up more copies of the book and give it away as gifts is really all that the shiny gold sticker means.

The workings of award committees are a thing of mystery and I can say that having been a Cybils judge.

I asked a friend who had served on the Texas Bluebonnet committee if there were guidelines outlining required genres that had to be on the list each year.

Every year there is one picture book poetry book, one bilingual book, one nonfiction picture book and one novel that pushes the upper age limit of the targeted age range.

She assured me that there were not any criteria that required any specific genres. But that year (and in all subsequent years) there was one picture book poetry book and one bilingual book and one nonfiction picture book and one novel that pushes the upper age limit of the targeted readers.

I love the TX Bluebonnet Program because they offer such a terrific list every year but there HAS to be a mindset at work for the genres to be so uniform, year after year.

Did you watch the live webcast? It was fun to hear how people reacted every time this book was mentioned; it's clearly much-beloved. That will be what endures in the long run.

Okay, I have to go out and buy this book, thanks.

Aaargh! Ferrets!!

Very topical indeed, a.f. The ones that get me are when they send the third book in a series, where I haven't read the first two. I know they can't be expected to keep track of what I've read, but perhaps asking first before sending books like that ... Just a thought.

It sounds like you have a pretty good plan for blog-life-balance, though.

I've contacted 3 pubs this week and already heard back from two - both taking me off the auto mailing lists and asking that I send review copy requests for whatever I want.

One of them was Harper Collins!

I could not believe it. (More on all this at my site tomorrow.)

Libri Eruptus answers: "But they're young adult ferrets! It's a perfect fit!"

We hear ya, Sarah! Sounds like you've figured it out.

And, Colleen, that's great news!

I like that plan. Congrats on finding a balance.

Thanks, guys! We'll see how well it works... Congrats, Colleen, on making progress with publishers!

Thanks for the Guys Lit Wire link! I read it and left a comment.

I enjoyed meeting TadMack yesterday evening and look forward to seeing you in a couple of weeks.

Yay, cool!! I look forward to meeting up, too.

A.F., she posted a VIDEO of me. I'm thinking I should have given in and taken NICE pictures with you. But alas...

Oh, and thanks for posting about this conversation. I... as a writer... take exception to that... I think I see the point he was TRYING to make...? Maybe?

That is WAY cool about your Sherman Alexie interview being in a book. It was awesome! Is it the U. of Mississippi press? They do really great author interview compilations.

Yeah. Ditto what you said.

Ooooh, I'm a tiny bit green over here. That is fabulous news about the Alexie interview. It WAS a good one, so it's deserved.

Congratulations on your interview being in a book. That IS way cool, and that's how I would have put it, too. An analogous thing for me (though not as impressive as being in an book) is that Rick Riordan has linked to my WBBT interview with him as part of his official biographical information on his website. I think that says something about the legitimacy of the whole WBBT effort, and the time that went into that particular interview.

Anyway, kudos to you both on the Sherman Alexie thing. That is excellent!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts :) It made me feel better.

Thanks, TadMack, for adding your words to this, too. And thanks, Becky, for cruising by--I've read your posts, Colleen's, and others on the subject and it really is quite a kerfluffle (incidentally, the spell-checker thinks I'm trying to type "truffles"...). I don't think anybody is deliberately setting out to exclude people, and I hope that doesn't happen in the future, either.

I've been meaning to tell you that I saw you over there at Gurney Journey! Woo-hoo! I'm not an artist, so I can't speak to technique, but I will say that yours made me laugh outright. Really. Visually, yours just works. Like a cartoon should. ;)

The cartoon?

Perfect.

Congrats on the compliments to your work! Pixar -- woot!

WOOOOT! AF, how cool! And your comic was recognizably yours, I really was deeply worried about the whole fruit basket thing after our earlier conversation about Wales, tuxedo cats and aliens... fortunately, none of the others had fruit baskets.

COOL. COOL! And you didn't even say anything!

Wow! Favorited by a Pixar Dude! That oughta last you through a couple of bouts of self-doubt! Huzzah!

The problem I had with his words and subsequent inability to admit he looked like a jerk and should maybe yank his kneecap out of his esophagus was his position in this community. Apparently this dude is a Big Name in the community and culture of books for adolescents. He made an inflammatory comment that derided his community as well as the work of people in it. It wasn't tongue in cheek, it wasn't ironic, it was just rude. I can think of a lot of adjectives that describe that behavior, and they start with "wanky" and end with more words that probably will get this comment deleted.

When you're in a genre that's treated like the poor cousin in the mainstream, as if the books in it are only worth something to readers that fall into their age bracket, it's like shooting yourself in the foot. It's undermining your bottom line. If we don't take our genre seriously and stand up for it, demand it get the same respect awarded books in another genres, then we really can't complain when reviewers compare "weak" adult books to YA lit or accuse publishers of "ghettoizing" books by labeling them YA. They can just point to our own people and go, "Well, look, HE'S important and he thinks YA is second-class."

I don't get how he thought this was a good way to start a "discussion". Encourage "discussion" by making people feel like crap? That's a new one; AWESOME JOB, MAN. Thumbs way up! If members go around vomiting out wanky comments that make our job validating YA/kidlit just as rewarding as "adult" literature harder, that says something and it points to B-A-D.

I have to say, I wonder -- was RS wanting comments so posted something just to get a response?

Was he being a Devils Advocate?

If someone is arguing or posting something they don't believe -- well, how ironic considering the recent fake memoirs, to now start believing that we have fake posts, if it's not what Roger believes but said more to get a response.

I'm not sure why he said it; but I do find it disturbing on a number of different levels.

Including the possibility it was done just to stir the pot;
and including the possibility that he sees himself as The Wise Old Man to us Foolish Children, and so must speak up to teach us.

Yeah... I'm feeling the Wise Old Man vibe. I feel it frequently, but usually think, "Ah, well, maybe I don't know anything. I can do Foolish Child."

But I'm beginning to find that role is very narrow. I guess if he's just stirring the pot, I can be grateful - it got me thinking - but it also makes me realize I have better things to do with my time than get upset that yet another person is deliberately misunderstanding young adult literature...

It actually makes me feel quite YAish! Time to uprise against the established authority, especially when there appears to be no good reason that the established authority is, well, an authority.

Who is "the man" to tell me what I can or cannot read, should or should not read, in order to get granted the title "grown up"?

"Mr. Horn Book, setting himself as a cat among pigeons, as a fox among ...hens?" I think you nailed it with that. I won't even go read what he said. It's just foolishness.

It's okay, anyone who uses the OED is emotionally mature, well-rounded and worthy of respect, especially if it's the unabridged.

I do understand the man's point to a point, since, after all, to pass life without reading a Dickens novel is mistake. But so is failing to read Pinkwater.

Thanks, tadmack; I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one out there (I knew I wasn't, but you gave me a place to voice those feelings)... I appreciate that. (This post has helped, in an odd way, with the feeling of community, too. We're all in this together: adults who love YA books. So what if we don't want to entirely grow up?)

What incredibly ignorant - and unsupportable - comments Roger makes.

1) "...children's books tend to be easier and thus potentially 'fun' for adults in a way they tend not to be for children."

Really? OK, so Roger's compared the reading level of adult books to that of YA books? Or maybe he's talking about easier subject matter, in which case I'm wondering how a genre which examines things such as making right moral decisions is somehow 'easier' than things like crime novels; I'd also wonder about comparing individual segments of the genres, and whether there's any validity to such a comparison whatsoever.

This is, of course, presuming that Roger has done any study of the matter, rather than simply spouting off without any support whatsoever.

2) "...adults whose taste in recreational reading ends with the YA novel need to grow up."

Hmm. OK. So, if you read YA novels, you're not grown up. A matter of taste is now a cause for accusing a group of people of some deficiency? So, if I were to say, "people who prefer beer over wine need to grow up," I would be making just the same quality of statement Roger makes, and with about the same force: i.e., none whatsoever.

This article is simply Roger's opinion, and it stinks of course, because he doesn't have any idea how to argue a point without resorting to childish tactics such as calling names. It also stinks because he has presented things as 'facts' which are nothing of the sort, and is essentially just spouting off empty rhetoric. A first-year logic student could at least cobble together a proper argument, but not our Roger: he's a book reviewer, an arbiter of style and taste, therefore he doesn't need to be able to think.

And we listen to him ... why?

I had to laugh at the whole "adult lit/ya lit" thing given my experience this year in the book club I joined so I would branch out and read more "grown up" books.

So far this year we have read:

Saint Maybe, Anne Tyler -- a teen's words, uttered in anger, follow him into adulthood as he repents for his action.

A Small Rain, Madeleine L’Engle -- beginning as a small child, a young pianist comes of age.

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, Mark Haddon -- Austistic teen deals with the world.

Balzac and the Little Seamstress, Dai Sijie -- the power of literature during the cultural revolution in china and its affect on two teens undergoing "re-education."

The Way of All Flesh, Samuel Butler
-- the childhood and coming of age of young Ernest Pontifex in his pseudo-religious Victorian family.

Seems to me, all the "grown up" books we've read so far this year have a YA novel lurking within them.

Ooh, Sam, my OED *IS* unabridged, and it has that way cool word-nerd magnifying glass with which I occasionally get sidetracked by using to see closeups of bugs and fabric weave... *ahem.* But to return to adult guise:

Does one become 'authority' (or an arbiter of taste) because one is the first to say so? I accord this gentleman no such power -- his community is not mine, his taste does not inform mine, he's just a guy with a blog who happens to work in NY where there are a lot of big houses, and he's in contact with them. He's not one of "our own," to me, so I guess I'm with Leila at Bookshelves O' Doom and can say that I'm used to people thinking that YA is nothing but Gossip Girl/SweetValley-After School-Just-Say-No Special of Fumbling Pre-Adolescent Sex That Ends in STDs and Pregnancy -- People are always trying to bring me "better books." I'm over it.

I do read my Dickens and my Austen, and my Hawthorne, but I'm not about to argue about who the audience was for those books -- young, impressionable adults. I count myself among them. (Just too cranky right now to be too impressionable.)

P.S. Camille -- I recall the Mark Haddon book was only published as ADULT in the U.S. -- originally in the UK it was YA...

I was impressed and moved by the responses to Roger's post, and the ones in here, too. The side-benefit of such a post is that I get to see in action the thoughtful, critical rebuttals I miss by not being an active part of my library profession.

You have reminded of the Gwendolyn Brooks poem "To Be Grown Up" (which probably should be saved for Poetry Friday, but here it is now):

To Be Grown Up

The whole chocolate cake can be yours.

To be grown up means
you don't get a report card.
You don't face a father, a mother.

The walls of the cage are gone.
The fortress is done and down.

To be grown up means
the Bill will be paid by you.

To be grown up means
you can get sick and stay sick.
Your legs will not love you. They'll fail.

No icy sidewalks for sliding.

No grandmother to fix you big biscuits.
No grandfather to sing you "Asleep in the Deep."






















If I were to write a response poem, I'm sure something would crop up like, "I can read children's books until 2 a.m and not have to hide under the covers with a flashlight."

Well, Roger's post actually resonated for me in a different way. I don't think of children's/YA lit as somehow "lesser" than adult--which may be the implication that is making people bristle. I'm not bristling because that's such a common misconception that it no longer gets a rise out of me. I can't take it seriously.

What I want to focus on is the idea of readers limiting themselves to a genre--any genre. For example, people who read only mysteries are missing out on many great books, I think. But who am I to say that if they really enjoy mysteries, they HAVE to read anything else? I would encourage them to try other books from time to time, just as I would encourage children's/YA writers to read outside our genre from time to time, but it's not mandatory. Who's keeping score, anyway? The kidlit arena is rich and diverse--we have children's/YA science fiction, chicklit, mystery, historical fiction, nonfiction, literary fiction, etc., etc.--that it's not exactly limiting to stay in this world. On the other hand, why not try a peek at the other bookshelves from time to time? It's all good.

Further to that, though, liquidambar, I resent the implication in his post that people who read widely in the world of YA have necessarily limited their reading to YA books only. (It also begs the question of what it means to "grow up" or be "grownup," but that's a whole other philosophical discussion...)

I'd like to go in the opposite direction, too, and point out that for those of us who are YA writers, it's of critical importance for us to be well read in our (for lack of a better term) genre. In my opinion, it's also important for writers to be well read, period.

Ultimately, though, my complaint is this: whose right is it to say that my reading habits and preferences are a reflection of my level of taste, intellect, or maturity? Who can even accurately make that judgment?

Alkelda,
I'm totally taking the whole chocolate cake thing? Literally...

Man, do I want a liquid chocolate cake right about now.

But I totally agreed with your take on Roger's comments, and with bottle-of-shine's comments about it being extra horrible coming from someone who is place as an advocate for children's literature.

Also? The writing is, in the main, better quality. I didn't get into it over at my blog because I didn't have the energy, but I almost feel as if he doesn't merit having the position he has now that he's gone and said something like that. Which is overly dramatic, but it's how I feel about it.

Your rant is SOOO awesome, Tadmack, that I decided not just say "what she said" in response. But I also tried my hand at a little product placement of my own. Can you place me?

http://kidslitinformation.blogspot.com/2008/02/place-me-and-what-she-said.html

Huzzah! Well-said, TadMack. I hope you remember to thank your mother for investing the time into acting on her principles - that's totally awesome.

*Standing ovation, lighter swaying, stomping on the floor*

and another round of that for your wise mom

Nice! I can't trackback to blogger, but I linked over.

"product-larded books" Love it.

Awesome post.

YOU ROCK.
Get on your soapbox anytime, please.

"Go 'head girl" she said as she snuck off to get the embroidery scissors out and snip the GAP letters off her toddler son's hoodie. "I am totally with this! I can't believe they think we are such suckers!"

Read William Gibson's Pattern Recognition, too: its heroine is so physically sensitive to brands she can't wear them--but so attuned to their power that companies pay big bucks for her approval.

Regarding Pattern Recognition: we're going there, and everybody keeps on shouting the warnings ... but is anybody listening? When the publishing companies can hire a marketing executive to 'write' some books to push products ... methinks that we're there already, and that there's a big problem.

You know those "stories" in magazines and newspapers that you think, at first, are genuine articles? And then as you read, you start thinking, "Hmm, this sounds sorta like a commercial," and you look up and see "Advertisement" in the header?
If a story's written for any reason other than to tell a story, the reader can tell.
Btw, love the little ranting smiley face with his arm akimbo.

TadMack, your mother was HARDCORE. I think I love her.

And speaking of love, how about your phrase "product-larded"? Mighty fine, Wordsmith.

Yes, I loved "product-larded." I had to go back and savor that one. Not that lard is something I normally savor, but you know what I mean.

I realize I haven't joined in the discussion yet here or in our writing group, but generally I tend to agree--the only exceptions that I can think of are brands that have become synonymous with what they represent (i.e., Kleenex, though "tissue" is perfectly serviceable; or Doritos, because is there really anything else like a Dorito on Earth?) or brands that really have stood the test of time and do reveal something about a character...But even then, is it really necessary to use a brand name? Probably not. I've been guilty of it from time to time, dropping in a brand name with just as little forethought or awareness as the readers who would potentially be reading it.

And even if young consumers these days are marketing-savvy, does that make it okay to pepper writing with brand names? Even if you're aware you're being marketed to, that doesn't change the fundamental psychological principle that we tend to remember things that we've been repeatedly exposed to...for many, the familiar = comfort...and if messages are camouflaged in a favorable setting, such as an enjoyable book, we tend to be more receptive to those messages.

In the end, I don't think it's flat-out wrong to use brand names in writing. There's a danger that it can weaken and/or date fiction writing, and sometimes takes the place of more vivid description and exciting writing. But I do feel it's VERY wrong and also icky to construct a purported creative product on the framework of a marketing endeavor.

AMEN. Thank you for writing thi!

Aagh. For writing this, is what I meant to type.

(Time for more coffee!)

Your post is amazing and SO needs to be said. I will share it with my kids, too.

"I'm unprepared to even discuss the economy as compared to the wellbeing of my sister or any child." Go go go go go!!!!!

I'm so disgusted by this HarperCollins idea that I don't know what to say. It sounds like the backbone of a dystopia novel.

I hope the series fails miserably.

I'm reminded of that short story in Anne of Green Gables (or was it a later one) where Diana submits Anne's story to a magazine and puts in the flour product placement right at the very end.

Ellen Emerson White said that she updated her previous Meg Power books to make Meg drink Coke instead of Tab. I still find all of the Cokes mentioned a bit distracting. However, whenever an author makes up a convincing product (Bernie Botts, anyone?), I am fine with it.

Thanks for the link.

Just say no to labels - at least, to those that encourage conformation and/or silence. The labels I gave to my Nerd Fighters were empowering instead. They said:

HELLO! My name is ______
and I am made of awesome.

I'm sure Tipper Gore can give them a report on just how well the "parental advisory: explicit lyrics" labeling went...to me, putting a sticker on the book saying it has "mature content" is just asking for kids everywhere to go "OOOOOOH gimme!"

It never ceases to amaze me how books are targeted - and removed / labeled / whatever - yet television & movies seem immune from this persecution. I've seen some of the most hideous things just passing by such shows as CSI ... things which I don't want inside my head, much less that of a child. Yet, it continues.

I think that they pick on books because books are an easier target, and because most people just don't care, because most people just don't read. Grrr.

Stickers! I love sticker! I put them on my calendar all the time to show when I've exercised. The only stickers I want to see on my books are award stickers, thank you.

I completely agree with you, D. That's all unfortunately true. And there IS some truly godawful stuff on crime shows, especially.

Yes, I heard this yesterday, and the sequel part is just weird. And I heard they've got Peter Jackson on board as executive producer, so why oh why don't they get him to direct it?? I'm scared of a new director.

Oh well.

Jules, 7-Imp

Because nothing is sacred, of course. Nothing.

I'm so flummoxed. *Two* movies? I mean, I guess I'd rather have two movies than one movie that crams every single detail into the space of 2 hours. And yet... is there really enough material for two? How will they make two distinct plot arcs of it? *continues to be flummoxed*

I can't see that flying in the public library systems. When you can't even sell Girl Scout Cookies on library premises, how on earth is it okay to insert ads in library books?