Feminist Pub IX. Newbies and regulars welcome - pop your cognitive dissonance down outside and have a gin.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Right, thought I'd better start a new pub. I warn you, my knowledge of Roman numerals conks out shortly after this one, so either buffy will have to start the next thread, or we'll have to go Arabic.

Everyone is welcome in - if you want to chat, or just jump in with a question/link/gin, please do. Especially if it's too small for a thread or you don't feel up to thread-starting.

The old thread has, at my count, about 9 posts to go, and it was here: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2126791-Feminist-Pub-VIII-not-as-prolific-as-the-Swaggerers-but-there-are-cushions-and-consciousness?

We were just chatting about feministy light reading, and will doubtless meander onto other topics shortly.

That's a very odd choice of image for Charlie and the chocolate factory. I can't see how it might possibly represent the story in the slightest.

At first I thought that it was so irrelevant that it didn't matter, then I read the comment about it showing the dark and light side of the book. So a sexualized young girl, with a hand creeping towards her knee, is part of what Dahl wrote about? Did Penguin know something about his private life they're trying to tell us?

That looks like a female adult hand resting on female adult knees, sat next to a child. The girl has her own hands on her own lap. How is that suggesting anything creepy? Can adults not sit next to children now? How sad.

It's a subset of this image

www.creativereview.co.uk/images/uploads/2014/08/numero97_0.jpg

And here's the rest of that fashion spread:

noirfacade.livejournal.com/217055.html

Curwen to me it suggests creepy because the child is made up like a doll, rather than a child.

In our culture, women and children being "dolled up" IE made to look not like themselves, but like dolls, has sexual connotations, were you not aware of that?

That's where the creepiness angle comes in.

In addition, the idea that the only way you can represent "light" and"dark" in a children's story, is by having a picture which has echoes of inappropriate sexualisation, is in itself creepy.

HTH

Ok then Curwen.

You tell us how exactly that picture has anything to do with the children's book, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and we'll stop being so jolly silly about it.

LOL that fashion spread's demented. No wonder clown phobia is a thing

I didn't say it wasn't odd. I cannot see what it has to do with the book itself. I was responding to Kick's point about a sexualised child and a hand creeping towards her knee. I don't see that at all.

Isn't possible to discuss these things rationally without all the snippy 'HTH' bull?

Curwen

• The image is creepy
• The image is "beauty pageantry" which sexualises children
• IMO, The hand isn't creeping in for an assault, though it's weird that it's a bit disembodied (if Penguin were really trying to make something of the dysfunctional parent/child relationships with the cover, they should have left the mother figure in the picture)

Well what was I thinking, with you being so friendly and all?

Newbies and regulars welcome

Bland - isn't the imagery based upon Mommie Dearest - 1940's Hollywood and Joan Crawford? Beauty pageant to me would suggest swimming costumes, exposed flesh etc. I don't 'get' fashion though.

it just... makes no sense in hte context of the story, aside from being inappropriate obviously

is it supposed to show a "spoilt" child? apparently not, because it's not depicting either verruca salt or violet beauregard (the latter wore a tracksuit anyway iirc). and if it were, then why pick verruca, who has equal billing with the other spoilt (in different ways) children, both boys and girls? because you can show an "edgy" fashion shoot with a sexualised young girl that doesn't fit in so well with the other children?

roald dahl did write some weird stuff for adults, but nothing like this that i can remember, and what has that got to do with CATCF??

i work in a related field, i know people who work on this stuff, and i just can't envisage the meetings and thought processes behind the decision

I've not seen that film, but don't you think the girl looks beauty pageanty?

Oh, a new thread! I hadn't noticed.

My brain is too tired and too full to deal with the shit of the world atm, so I am studiously ignoring it all.

But that cover is beyond stupid.

it's supposed to be the cover for adults, so let's just pick a controversial "edgy" image that has nothing to do with the themes of the book

note they didn't pick an overweight boy, a boy addicted to computer games etc. oh no, not "edgy" or "creepy" enough

Btw, I'm not saying that the image was out of place in the French magazine (although can't say I liked it) but as the cover of this book?

at that cover. What's it got to do with the book? Or even light and dark side of the story?

I've always found the pub to be really friendly - in fact, it is one of my favourite places on MN.

The only other place I regularly hang out is the exercise threads. The lovely people there have been helping me stay motivated - I've been managing to fit in 30 min exercise 5 times per week even though I do the DC picking up/drop in off (DH commutes further than I do). My pelvic floor is holding up fairly well

Anyway - happy Friday everyone - can I have gin now?

As much gin as you can handle Oubliette.

And the pub is friendly... to people who are friendly to it

I hate gin. Can I have vodka? Lots of ice. The Dd's have been hideous today ( then great for dh when I popped out ).

Oh, gosh, I think it's beyond creepy.

I'm afraid I did just think of the bit in Lolita about her sitting on his lap. That doesn't make me a nasty suspicious person who doesn't think children can sit next to adults. That makes me someone who's reasonably literate.

There are many, many images of children and adults that wouldn't creep me out. But with this one, all you see is the adult's hand and knee - which is the point Humbert makes, that Lolita sits on him as if he's just a thing, not a person. The child looks as if she's wrapped in a feather boa, which I'd usually associate with a particular kind of adult female sexuality (and with strip-tease). She's also wearing a totally frozen expression, which, again, to me suggests Lolita, who has a 'dreamy and eerie expression' and a 'blank' look in her eyes.

Sorry, I really don't think I'm reading into it.