Fag books
By woo
I am more disturbed by this the more I think about it.
This entry was posted on June 18, 2009 at 4:25 pm and is filed under oh I don't know, just stuff. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
June 19, 2009 at 12:32 am |
Being in the States, I thought this post was going to be about some bigot who went on a rant about books concerning homosexuality, which is usually a disturbing spectacle. We have this creepy preacher Fred Phelps who takes his merry band around the country with “God Hates Fags” signs and it would have been just his style.
Hemingway, Conrad, Kipling and Stevenson all speak to a certain shrill hypermaleness, when you think of it, but Tolstoy kills the straight (if mixing a poker metaphor doesn’t scramble the discourse utterly).
June 19, 2009 at 2:33 am |
I’m a Beatles fan, and occasionally annoyed when someone demeans them, perhaps by mocking Beatlemania, without seeing the difference.
I feel the same way about this.
We ought not let someone comes along snarky and detract from the original. This is like juvenile delinquents late at night peeing on a cathedral wall, believing they make a statement. (Had the authors wanted the statement made, they’d have done it themselves.)
The rain of a new day washes it away.
June 19, 2009 at 3:15 am |
This is just such a strange concept … although I have to say, one of my thoughts was: “Packaged in crinkly cellophane! The kitties would love that!”
June 19, 2009 at 5:30 am |
I’m speechless. Who thinks this would sell books? To whom?
June 19, 2009 at 11:59 am |
sledpress – as an Englishwoman, that interpretation of ‘fags’ hadn’t occurred to me until I showed the photo to a canadian colleague who was extremely confused by my referring to them as ‘fag books’. “But… Hemmingway wasn’t gay, was he?…” I was fascinated that Hemmingway was the only one he had trouble believing had been homosexual. Not that it matters.
Ombudsben – “Had the authors wanted the statement made, they’d have done it themselves.” Absolutely. Hunter S Thompson probably would have, but not these guys.
David – I have a kitty staying with me for a week (Sylvester, now a little more grown up from his first visit in March) and he, too, would love the crinkly cellophane. At about 3 am. *yawn*
healingmagichands – yes, that’s what concerned me. Do the marketing people think the packaging is cool, somehow? Are they aiming these books at younger people? I just don’t get it.
June 20, 2009 at 12:14 am |
I’m still confused, but it’s early morning and I need coffee..
June 22, 2009 at 11:25 am |
I might be tempted by the fact that they are small an pocket size, but the cigarette packaging does not thrill me. Perhaps they are suggesting that books are a a better addiction?
June 22, 2009 at 11:53 am |
Pan – me, too.
waxingstrange – that’s an interesting way to look at it. Books *are* my addiction, so I guess I’m the target audience.
June 22, 2009 at 12:55 pm |
wtf?
I mean, seriously, wtf?
*scratches her head and mutters to herself*
June 23, 2009 at 1:48 am |
What Mary said.
June 23, 2009 at 12:07 pm |
Mary – yep, you said it. Mystifying…
Mr Random – speechless? You?