Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.
The Book Party

Sara Nelson Blog | 11/03/2008 4:15 pm

Book Abuse, by Sara Nelson

By Sara Nelson

Editor’s Note: Sara Nelson is the editor in chief of Publisher’s Weekly, the industry’s leading news source, covering every aspect of creating, producing, marketing and selling the written word in book, audio, video and electronic formats. 

Last week, amid disturbing news of layoffs and contractions at all kinds of media businesses – Reader’s Digest, the Los Angeles Times and our own beloved Doubleday, among many, many others — the story that struck me was the one about the little book from tiny Tricycle Press that has become exhibit A in an ad campaign supporting Proposition 8 in California, which aims to overturn legalized gay marriage in the state.

King & King, a children’s picture book by Linda de Haan and Stern Nijland, which was originally published in the Netherlands, is cited by a New England mother and father who were horrified that their son was exposed to the book — a kind of fairy tale in which a prince falls in love with a prince — at school. As PW’s Wendy Werris reported, this was hardly the intention of Nicole Geiger, the Tricycle Press editor who published the book in 2002. She told us she’s “devastated” that the picture book, which is meant to promote tolerance of diverse lifestyles, is being used, in her view, to promote the opposite. “I’m saddened by any association [with] politically motivated attacks on civil rights,” she said.

Naively perhaps, I thought we were past co-opting pieces of art for political purposes. I remember when Bruce Springsteen threw a fit over Ronald Reagan’s attempt to appropriate his "Born in the USA" as a campaign theme song; more recently, there were squabbles over McCain commandeering songs by Bon Jovi, Tom Petty and others. But a children’s book? I can’t think of the first or last time a political campaign tried to use one (OK, Michael Moore made hay with Bush’s reading of My Pet Goat, but the book was incidental).

Ordinarily, I might try to find some way to see this as a good thing, kind of the way I decided that Sarah Palin’s alleged book banning proved that, at the very least, books still matter. But I can’t seem to locate any optimism here. What’s more, this time I can’t even invoke the all-controversy-is-good-for-business theory: According to Nielsen BookScan, the book has sold only 100 or so copies each week over the last fortnight. There’s simply no way around the bad news: A book made of socially liberal intentions is being used to defeat those intentions — against the wishes of its publisher and, perhaps, its creators, who are Dutch and, so far, silent on the matter. That’s kind of creepy, and I feel for the publisher as she watches this story unfold.

Of course, the couple featured in a pro-Prop-8 television ad, clearly uncomfortable with homosexuality, is even more so leafing through the pages of boy-meets-boy. I feel for them, too. Yet to see a book (ab)used in this manner is appalling — an innocent prop employed to hammer home a politically contentious, well, Prop. Everybody’s entitled to his own opinion, of course, and nobody says you have to like King & King, or any other book for that matter. (NB: Neither PW nor its sister SLJ was more than lukewarm about it as a literary offering.) I just wish those with political agendas could articulate them without maligning an earnest book written, and clearly published, in the spirit of tolerance.

29 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

HA BIBI
excuse me….Did anyone in their right mind “not” think that this is a conterversial topic, DUH! And, it tells me that those using the book as a prop, with the intentions of nailing their point home, had it instead, backfire. Maybe the couple who looked obviously uncomfortable….Were. And if so, should perhaps earn their pay in the doing of commercials for more believable product endorsement.
By HA BIBI on 11/03/2008 4:45 pm
gulliver fourmyle
en guarde—-as 10% of mammals seem ‘queer’ (sorry, not me—-i don’t even get it, “Brokeback Mt. or not, but love Emmylou’s song), Life and sex are truly weird—-plant or animal—-how-to-hell may my fave fish, Snook; Completely go from female-to-male and vice-versa in 4 days? these are Big fish—20 50+ lbs, and i’m a Snook-Master—-strange? the change seems to ‘drain-energy’, ive caught several huge critters that just seemed ‘pooped’, usually, they’ll ‘spool-ya’ if ya don’t run down their gulf beach, reeling in line they really ‘rip-off’—-but a couple month’s ago a Tampa Bay fish site told me of this odd ‘trans-gender’ switch; and how they needed lots of food, but were weak for days after—-ah, mystery solved—- look at marsupials, at possums—-no ovaries, pap possum has a weenie like ‘Joe-the plumber’s’ roto-rooter—-and mama possum gestates from her lower intestine—-makes ya wonder why Life made ‘fudgepackers’? (I may be wrong)—-is this our future, as our past was clearly All female? could the future bring all males? apparently—-i would, from here & now not be happy—-But, i am not Life—-one odd deal—-i would mourn the loss of women—-but if ‘born-again’, would i even know?????in such???
By gulliver fourmyle on 11/06/2008 7:33 pm
HA BIBI
Gully,your last statement is very poigniant, “Could the future bring all males”? Well the Bible tells us that there will be no giving or taking of marriage nor the birthing of children as we will all be in our spiritual bodies which ironicaly, are genderless as we know gender to be here on earth. And, all angles are depicted as of the male gender. So you see…..You may be on to something! :)
By HA BIBI on 11/06/2008 8:08 pm
gulliver fourmyle
i don’t think so , may i call you ‘MEG”? all our xlations come from men—-i stick to only the words, hopefully accurate of Christ—-who really knows, but his mention that ‘no one in Heaven marries’, implies both sexes—-and i heavily rely on Dante’s ‘IL Paradiso’ as truth from the Muse—-and his love Beatrice is there, guiding him—-Christ’s statement that no one in Heaven is married—-that makes sense, as forever is one long time—-one mate could get tiresome—-so while Sos may remain, rather sure that would become an extended deal, no problems, as here—- a Heaven w/o you ladies? i’d pass, move on to next infinite set-point—-ya don’t have to spend decades being trained, eating peyote, sniffing weird crushed beetles, herbs, etc.—-i needed that, many do not—-my ‘body’ was ‘dumb’—-‘power-plants-substances’ were required—-to make me a true ‘warrior’—-oddly it’s much easier for women—-some born advantage—- but a none 2-sex Heaven? i don’t, never have worked for that—-if Life cheats me? look-out—-
By gulliver fourmyle on 11/06/2008 10:34 pm
HA BIBI
Christ’s statement that no one in Heaven is married—-that makes sense, as forever is one long time—-one mate could get tiresome By gulliver fourmyle on 11/06/2008 11:34 pm Nope Gully, That’s not the reason. The reason is simply the fact that we are in spritual bodies, i.e. not flesh. So therefore no reason to operate any longer as we do in this earth age. :)
By HA BIBI on 11/07/2008 8:58 am
gulliver fourmyle
the error of your reasoning is simple, well, not really—-an ultimate ‘mind-twister’—-but spiritual ‘set-points’ are infinite, as ‘corporeal’, were you in a spiritual ‘set’, well, ya wouldn’t say ‘ouch’, when hammer hit thumb—-the entire idea of space/time IS to be corporeal, even a corporeal Heaven—-to be ‘material’, and enjoy such. Read ‘Tales of Power’ for the most ancient thinking on this conundrum—-pay very close attention to the concept of ‘Islands of the Tonal’—-as that is,as here, where yo ‘do-be’. yes, you, Elaine, have an eternal ‘true-self’—-Native Americans term that your ‘Nagual’—-‘that for which there are no words’, why? because you may, as here, exist in many infinite ‘sets’—-as You—-yet each are so different, from, as in the case of humans, so totally different, that No words, ‘body, soul, god’—-where anything applies. How so, you have a Second self, Your Tonal—-intended to be a ‘guardian’, it often becomes a ‘guard’—-big difference—-this set seems All—-not so, simply another ‘Island of Your Tonal’. once entering any of its infinite sets, the Tonal quickly ‘takes charge’, and you ‘learn’ ‘the view’ of your world, as if there is no other—-not so—- your Tonal, often becomes as a guard—-takes ‘the baton’, and swiftly conceals your ‘totality’—- which is usually only revealed upon death—-lest you may really stretch that mind—-as ‘string-theory, no easy thing, bizzare, but ‘testable’ yeah, it’s ‘Dualism’, but look around, it has basis, ‘body’-Soul, good-evil, past-present’—-you may grasp the problem, in a set of space/time, where there’s a word for everything—-and may see this set for what it is—-corporeal, to the end—-whole idea—-and what it is not—-i look forward to a Heavenly meeting, not as ‘spirit’—-as the 1st argument of Paul—now, faith must become substance—-
By gulliver fourmyle on 11/07/2008 8:38 pm
HA BIBI
Well Gully, I believe that man/woman is made up of both the flesh body in this earth age as well as a spiritual body that exists inside this flesh body and that spiritual man/woman has existed from the time it was created by our heavenly Father. Man/woman all have a soul and the spirit of that soul is the intellect of that soul, that part of the soul that determines what our values/beliefs are and of whether we operate with that of good/evil. I don’t belive that we are of various substances, if you will, nor contain the ability to transfer of our own accord at will. :)
By HA BIBI on 11/13/2008 12:16 pm
gulliver fourmyle
advise better to read ‘The Presence of the Past’—-
By gulliver fourmyle on 11/13/2008 3:24 pm
gulliver fourmyle
hmmmm—-now that’s cryptic—-try and imagine you in other ‘sets’ so different, no common words exist—-yet, being there, all seems familiar—-it’s a gift of words trying to explain ‘that-for-which-there-are-no-words’—-brain twister—-i feel you may see the deal—-what if you had been a 2-dimensional flat-lander, and popped in for a peek—-ya’d never ‘get-it’. when you see this, Buddha smiles—-no thought to your personal choices—-just glad—-and No easy thing—-
By gulliver fourmyle on 11/13/2008 10:17 pm
Tinka Parker
I agree. Whatever the merit of the book, the publishers clearly knew it would be controversial, even notorious, and therefore sell lots of books. From what I read here, looks like it backfired (though, personally, I’d like to read it).
By Tinka Parker on 11/13/2008 11:28 am
gulliver fourmyle
as with Elaine, best go for ‘The Presence of the Past’—-a bit academic—-what ‘backfired’ on Castaneda? cults of ‘con’ folk sprang up—-and after his 1st 3 books? he ‘sold-out’, those Malibu Mansions are pricey—-so he kept cranking-out BS, people kept buying—-welcome to America? as for ‘The Presence of the Past’? yep, 1st considered a hoot—-nobody’s laughing now—-the author is also the only man/woman ever to receive an apology from ‘The Great Randy’—-the Great ‘de-bunker’—-
By gulliver fourmyle on 11/13/2008 3:45 pm
gulliver fourmyle
well, hell of a read—-M. Korda met him, prior to being publisher—-not to be missed—-a pure Muse-Written-Treasure—-why do i respect his data on the oldest ‘belief-system’? It Works—-
By gulliver fourmyle on 11/13/2008 10:37 pm
Susan Gabriel
I’m with you, Sara. I think this is the abuse of a book with the good intention of promoting tolerance. I am curious why the author(s) have not spoken up yet. Although I’m glad the editor at Tricycle Press has. I keep wondering about the symbolism here. Perhaps it points to the power of children’s books, or the mindset of the people who want to overthrow legalized gay marriage. Thanks for telling us about this.
By Susan Gabriel on 11/03/2008 5:29 pm
Ms. Dee
Wow. I’m with you, Sara. King & King. What a cute idea to help kids understand. how different we all are. I subscribe to that type of child-rearing. You have to discover your little one. You don’t want to mold everything they are right out of them. I’m not a lesbian. Never kissed a girl. Never really wanted to, except when they were really good in a play, or I’d had a really good time at their house and I was giving them a good-bye hug. But I had no problem talking with my children about family friends who were “married” for all intents and purposes. Some people just feel that way about the kind of family they want when they grow up. I’m sure King & King didn’t have any sexually explicit illustrations. Criminy! Grown up nudity, period, can freak a kid out. And I guess, if you’re gonna survive a concentration camp, y’gotta get used to it. But a picture book about two princes who fall in love and live happily ever after. Whose the publisher? Tricycle Press? Let’s flood them with orders. Donate them to every child-care center in the country. Come on, wowOwow. Sara’s right. This book has been abused long enough. It’s not this particular book that’s the issue. But buying this book can help teach a valuable lesson to a lot of people. Who’s with me? What’s the retail on this book? Do I have to go to Amazon? Come on!
By Ms. Dee on 11/03/2008 5:32 pm
starry Nite
Prop 8 is so unecessary and should not even be on the ballot. The issue has already been voted on by the people . The right wing evangelicals are using children the their ugly ads. I hope everyone will vote no on Prop. 8.
By starry Nite on 11/03/2008 7:12 pm