conuly: (big damn hero)
conuly ([personal profile] conuly) wrote2011-03-06 09:27 pm
Entry tags:

So, over at Unshelved they believe reading should be, well, reading.

http://www.unshelved.com/2011-3-4/

On a semi-related topic, I recently (and randomly) found myself at Amazon's page for the BSC graphic novel.

There are two negative reviews, which are just lol-tastic:

"While graphic novels certainly have their value and place, I feel it cheapens this series--turning a classic series into little more than a comic book. Don't underestimate your child's intelligence--get her the originals."

"Don't get me wrong, I am sure this "book" is cute, but it is NOT the Babysitter's Club. It is a cartoon, and I am highly disgusted that after this many years they are publishing it as a "graphic novel" instead of giving us a reissue!"

To both these comments I have to say... are we talking about the same Baby-Sitters Club I grew up with? I don't see how you can "cheapen" a series churned out one-a-month by a set of ghostwriters, written on a permanent 4th grade level despite the fact that the characters were supposed to be in the 8th grade. Underestimating their intelligence? Dude. It's the Baby-Sitters Club. I read them as voraciously as the next girl, but let's not pretend they ever estimated our intelligence in the first place!

[personal profile] dragonwolf 2011-03-07 03:15 pm (UTC)(link)
As you said, let's not pretend they estimated our intelligence.

I read a couple of them, but mostly skipped over them entirely, preferring things like The Wizard of Oz and stuff from the Great Illustrated Classics company. That said, I think both comments seriously underestimate graphic novels and comic books as storytelling mediums.