Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Confidential to the Argus Loun... | The Big Rock Candy Wiki »

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Ramona Quimby Wears Prada

posted by on February 20 at 14:32 PM

Yesterday, the New York Times did a story about product placement in Young Adult novels. Product placement’s been done in a couple of instances in adult fiction—the big one was Fay Weldon’s The Bulgari Connection. I have to say, though, that one was doomed from the start: Poor Fay hasn’t been taken seriously for decades, although I always did love The Life and Loves of a She-Devil. The surprising thing is that this isn’t drawing the same kind of vitriol that Weldon and others inspired; are people just used to marketers selling to kids, now? Or is the important factor the seven years between the former and the latter? Either way: Ewww.

RSS icon Comments

1

Are you There, God?

It's me, Jimmy Choo!

Posted by NapoleonXIV | February 20, 2008 2:42 PM
2

The solution is to prevent young adults from reading crap Young Adult novels. Give 'em real books to read.

Posted by Fnarf | February 20, 2008 2:47 PM
3

@1 -- You ought to be ashamed of yourself, NapoleonXIV.

Posted by six shooter | February 20, 2008 2:55 PM
4

Frankly, I agree with Fnarf. I hate that so many adults are reading young adult novels and that so many authors are writing them.

Posted by Paul Constant | February 20, 2008 3:00 PM
5

I was really horrified by some of the books that were in the middle school classroom where I was volunteering this fall. There are so, so many amazing and wonderful young adult books out there, and this room was stocked with crap. Not quite as bad as what this article talks about, but just insubstantial fluff. Ugh.

Posted by exelizabeth | February 20, 2008 3:04 PM
6

American Psycho did this YEARS ago...and it sucked then, too.

She-Devil IS a good book and the original British mini-series was great...sadly, the shitacular Roseanne movie has put off people from ever reading the book or seeing the tv show...thanks, Roseanne!

Posted by michael strangeways | February 20, 2008 3:04 PM
7

Where have you been?

Everyone grew up with brands - it's normal now.

Besides, the best books nowadays are dime store crime novels, written with a cynical flair.

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 20, 2008 3:21 PM
8

@6 and 7: American Psycho wasn't paid product placement. I have nothing against mentioning brands in books, but I don't think that books should have paid product placement in them. Maybe, if there was a free internet serial with paid product placement, you could make a case for that, but I'm totally against people sticking ads into books that people are paying, you know, fifteen to twenty bucks for. Call me old-fashioned.

Posted by Paul Constant | February 20, 2008 3:41 PM
9

well, maybe not officially but you just know that Bret Easton Ellis was calling up all the major designers featured in his (awful) book and looking for freebies...the guy is a scuzzball.

Posted by michael strangeways | February 20, 2008 3:47 PM
10

I cannot argue with you there. That is unimpeachable.

Posted by Paul Constant | February 20, 2008 4:05 PM
11

First, 90% of "young adult" books are shit, and not worth reading at all.

Second, I had no idea this loathsome practice had migrated over from movies. If I ever notice it while reading, I will forever ban that author from my bookshelves. As an adult, I can make that choice. But a lot of "young adult" books are aimed at school libraries and classrooms. As such, the practice should be outlawed for any books printed with an educational purpose. Or at the very least, school districts should refuse to purchase product-placement books for their classrooms, and refuse to place them in their libraries.

Publishers and authors of these kinds of books are loathsome scum, and should be publicly ridiculed whenever possible. Thanks Slog!

Posted by Reverse Polarity | February 20, 2008 4:16 PM
12

"Ramona Quimby Wears Prada"

no she wouldn't!

agreed, that's bad practice. there are so much better books out there--ie, classsics--that i was never introduced to in school, especially middle school, but instead, the MS library seemed to be filled with crap (which, yeah, i did read a little of--well God help me, i was 11-14!). i also recall that was about the time i pretty much stopped reading for fun, and up until then i was a fairly avid reader. all the titles and covers sounded and looked stupid (i know, i know, don't judge a book by its cover). this is when i started reading Time and Seventeen.

Posted by from east of miss | February 20, 2008 4:37 PM
13

I say if they are reading, it is all good. It doesn't matter if they are reading crap. And WHO defines crap anyway? I'm sure a LOT of self-appointed religious right "experts" would be more than willing to ban all sorts of books that they deem inappropriate aka crap. The beauty of reading is that you get to decide for your goddamn self what you want to read and if you like it or not! If someone wants to force me to read the "Iliad" because they think it is better than "Flowers In The Attic" then...well, screw them. I hate literature snobs! I am all for good literature, but not for other people deciding for me what I want to read and what is good for me to read.

Posted by Kristin | February 21, 2008 11:20 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).