Am I Alone?

I don't think that at all, it's just a genre thing. People (i.e. often girls) who are interested in clothes aren't dumber readers. A lot of pop-culture embedded stuff is very intelligent in its themes and message.

It dates them but I wouldn't say it lowers the intelligence of the writing.

Consider, too, how short a period your typical YA novel spends in bookstores. Sprinkling it with pop culture references which will not be out of date by the time the novel is on remainders tables may increase its appeal or help it 'click' with its readers.

Maryn, who finds such references handy, depending on the work

I'm with Rllgthunder...it dates the book, but product placement alone doesn't dumb it down.

And for some reason, I want to read "Are you there, God? It's me, Margaret" again, and see if there's any dated references in there. Oh, I remember, there is! Feminine products. And still a timeless book.

I agree with Maryn. I think it is a matter of what the goal of the book is. A lot of YA books these days are about immediacy (aren't many of them written by committee?), but will probably have a short shelf life. Judy Blume did write books set in the time they were written (with a few exceptions) and while a few things invariably date them, because they are not prevalent they are easier to look over I think.

When I read Judy Blume as a YA it was already out of date in this way, but Are You There God It's Me Margaret still resonated with me. So what if they had belts when they wore pads (I actually thought that was cool).

I used to read a lot of Stephen King, way back in the 1970s and 80s, and he was always having musical references in his books eg; The stand had 'Bad moon rising' in it, and the lyrics if I remember rightly? Those musical references were part of the fun of reading his books for me at the time; where I've always loved music, it made the book feel more intimate.


Elodie

It depends on the book and how it's done. If it's done well, it gives it that little extra "spirit of place." I'm working on something right now set in 1984 and I'm having a lot of fun with some of the references in the story. You just have to watch out and not overdo it.

I think I understand the problem. It's not so much that the writing is unintelligent as I think it can seem sloppy. The writer doesn't want to think of a way to really describe someone or something, so they throw in a pop culture reference. The thing is that a lot of these kinds of things drive me bonkers as well, especially when I'm not familiar with what's being referenced and there's nothing else to guide me. For instance, they say a person resembles a certain actor but I don't know that actor. They didn't give any other description of what the person looks like, expecting that the actor reference would do it all, so now I have no idea what the person does look like. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone is familiar with all aspects of pop culture. I think these things should be used sparingly, in places where the reference isn't integral to understanding the story, or backed up with other description/explanation.

Steve King still references all sorts of modern stuff. From cell phones to text messages to the Powerpuff Girls. And much more, in Cell, for example.

Dating a novel is not necessarily a bad thing, in that it doesn't necessarily become the factor that makes the novel unreadable thirty years later. For example, Douglas Adams is thoroughly dated now, yet he reads wonderfully. Isaac Asimov is dated, but still readable.

I think that, like swearing, some authors mistake product placement as a way to make the novel seem more real and true-to-life, when they are forgetting that it's good writing which will do that every time.

Pop-culture references don't irritate me. Clothing does. Ever try reading a romance novel from the eighties? Ever try imagining a really hot guy in a pastel blazer? (To say nothing of his paramour's shoulder pads and unplucked blonde brows.)

I agree with virtue_summer, the references can be confusing if used in place of description or expository writing. References are best when used on the sly, a little friendly poke in the ribs for those who understand, and a sad little bit of nothing for those who don't. They shouldn't scream YOU SUCK BECAUSE YOU DONT GET ME.

Hey, thanks guys. In my novel, I made reference to Sheryl Crow, my FC was singing along to an old song of hers on the radio, but I'll take it out now and just say she was singing along to an old song on the radio.

And PeeDee, I gave up reading Stephen King in around 1988, so wouldn't know what he uses in his books anymore I'm afraid.


Elodie

virtue_summer said:

I think I understand the problem. It's not so much that the writing is unintelligent as I think it can seem sloppy. The writer doesn't want to think of a way to really describe someone or something, so they throw in a pop culture reference. The thing is that a lot of these kinds of things drive me bonkers as well, especially when I'm not familiar with what's being referenced and there's nothing else to guide me. For instance, they say a person resembles a certain actor but I don't know that actor. They didn't give any other description of what the person looks like, expecting that the actor reference would do it all, so now I have no idea what the person does look like. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone is familiar with all aspects of pop culture. I think these things should be used sparingly, in places where the reference isn't integral to understanding the story, or backed up with other description/explanation.

Click to expand...

I very much agree with you. I personally rather actively avoid most pop culture, so these things go right over my head. When I look at the celebrity tabloid covers in the grocery store line-up, I don't even know who half of them are. If it's a soap opera tabloid, I don't know who ANY of them are. And it's just plain lazy description anyway, in my books.

I also very much agree with Éclairer. I strongly dislike detailed descriptions of clothing (does it show I'm not a fan of most romances?). When clothing must be described - and as far as I'm concerned that's only when it tells something about character or gives important information about social standing or something similar - I find a judicious adjective or two much more helpful. Elegant, sophisticated, garish, sloppy, whatever. Knowing that every hair is in place tells me a lot more about the character than the precise hairstyle. And it ages well. But I guess the authors of these books are not looking for a long shelf life.

On the other hand, a precise cultural reference can be a very telling detail in establishing a setting, but it's wise not to lean too heavily on it, so that readers who don't get the allusion don't miss out entirely.

Just my two cents'.

Pop culture references can date the book so quickly.

And it makes writers like James Patterson and Jackie Collins look sad for trying to appear trendy. (I only pick on those two because those are the ones who screamed "I'M TRENDY!" at me most recently).

pop culture refernces do date the book. Thats a fact.

I think its diffrent when you deal with YA novels becuease those things are designed to tap inot a diffrent readership. A readership that generally has no collective memory so you have to have something to ground them to the text.