|
|
Post by aln1982 on Mar 12, 2006 16:52:45 GMT -5
Someone's post on the topic of Kristy's Portrait reminded me that I wanted to post this but kept forgetting. I really like the character of Watson and think he's a great stepfather (father too). He seems so good to Kristy and all of Elizabeth's kids. I thought he handled the situation of Patrick and Kristy's secret meeting very well in Kristy's Portrait and felt bad for the way Kristy treated him in Kristy at Bat.
On another subject about the Thomas/Brewer clan... for some reason, I don't really care for Nannie. I am not sure why. Maybe it seems like she spoils or favors Emily a bit. Actually, it almost seems like they all favor Emily Michelle. I realize that she was "chosen" but if I were David Michael, especially, I might be a little resentful. Is this addressed in any of the books? It just seems like Watson, Elizabeth and Nannie are always scolding the other kids for doing "this or that" to upset/wake up/frighten Emily. I know she is only 2 but sometimes it seems like she gets away with a lot. Maybe just my perception.
|
|
ktag
Junior Sitter
Posts: 694
|
Post by ktag on Mar 12, 2006 18:13:39 GMT -5
I haven't read too many books that focus very much on Emily Michelle, but I guess it's because she's the baby of the family and still adjusting. I do think David Michael gets the short end of the stick, though. Other than the early Louie stories, has he ever been given any good stories? It's always Karen this, Karen that. Karen found a secret playhouse, and David Michael can't play in it so he has to build his own crappy one. Karen wants to play Let's All Come In, so David Michael can't play with his Lego blocks. Karen's not there, so we won't even bother with babysitting at Kristy's house in this book. Even Andrew gets more attention than DM, because he's the cute, shy one who gets bossed around by big sis. Sorry for the rant, I just feel for the kid.
I haven't made up my mind about Watson yet.
|
|
macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on Mar 12, 2006 18:24:28 GMT -5
Emily always seemed like an outsider. She never really seemed like the Thomas/Brewer's "sister" to me, which was wrong, I know. But it was almost like she was Nannie's daughter.
Normally I think Watson's great and he really made the effort to be a "father" to Elizabeth's kids, never saw them as a burden or inconvenience like a lot of stepfathers out there.
Only time I didn't like him was in one of the earlier books - Kristy's Big Day, I think - when he blamed Kristy for the fact that Karen and co had washed Watson's old car with steel wool scourers. Kristy had a legitimate reason for having to go inside and take her eyes off the kids for a minute, it wasn't like she was ignoring them chatting on the phone or something.
|
|
Amalia
Sitting For The Braddocks
Her Original Point of View
Posts: 3,664
|
Post by Amalia on Mar 12, 2006 20:56:25 GMT -5
I think part of why Emily is babied a little bit more than she should have been because, I read in one of the books, that she is supposed to have a learning disability. That's why Claudia had to tutor her.
Anyways, about the Watson's old car, didn't he say he wanted to repaint the thing anyways?
|
|
|
|
Post by sparklymouse on Mar 13, 2006 17:37:32 GMT -5
Watson seemed determined to make his new family a success. I think he really did consider Elizabeth's kids his own. To me Karen and Andrew got screwed over in the dad department. I've read a lot of Little Sister books and Karen is often jealous of Watson and David Michael's relationship. Sometimes Watson was inappropriate with forcing Karen and Andrew to celebrate big events with Elizabeth rather than their own mother.
As far as Nannie was concerned, she always seemed like she had to prove her worth. She was almost like a housekeeper or an actual nanny rather than a grandmother.
|
|
Amalia
Sitting For The Braddocks
Her Original Point of View
Posts: 3,664
|
Post by Amalia on Mar 14, 2006 1:18:53 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't remember them inviting her over for extend visits earlier in the series. As for Andrew, I think that Watson should have paid more attention to the boy. He seems like he needs it.
|
|
|
|
Post by buffykay70 on Mar 14, 2006 5:48:24 GMT -5
watson seemed like a good dad to kristy in her portrait book, but in every other one he is in, he doesnt seem to spend much time with his kids at all, esp. karen, andrew and emily. maybe thats why karen is such a brat and attention seeker, she wants her dad to notice her.
and as for emily michelle, why in the hell did watson and elizabeth even adopt her if they were planning to never take care of her and dump her with nanny, 24/7? do they ever play with her? look after her? they always use the BSC and that time when emily had learning difficulties, claudia was the one who had to teach her, her colours and shapes...
in all, i dont like watson (or elizabeths) parenting. sure they work, and work hard but try spending a little more quality time with ur children instead of hiring a baby sitter or kristy every weekend
|
|
macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on Mar 14, 2006 16:46:22 GMT -5
It was quite strange, really. In Stoneybrook, extended family either live in the household or remain virtually not existant. The BSC clients always relied on a bunch of 13 yr old girls to watch their children and other grandparents - for instance, Dawn's Granny and Pop-Pop - really just seemed like the kind of relatives you only see on special occasions.
Nannie did not seem particularly close to her grandchildren before moving in (and even then, she only really focused on Emily) and - as someone else pointed out - where was she when Patrick first deserted her daughter and four kids, including one newborn? Presumably out there living her oh-so-active senior citizen social life and being relied on to watch 4 kids on a regular basis (even when it was absolutely necessary) would cramp her style.
However, once Emily came along - adopted by her daughter and her millionaire husband - she was only too readily available full time, five days a week?! Unrealistic
|
|
|
|
Post by aln1982 on Mar 14, 2006 17:45:56 GMT -5
[/quote]Nannie did not seem particularly close to her grandchildren before moving in (and even then, she only really focused on Emily) and - as someone else pointed out - where was she when Patrick first deserted her daughter and four kids, including one newborn? Presumably out there living her oh-so-active senior citizen social life and being relied on to watch 4 kids on a regular basis (even when it was absolutely necessary) would cramp her style.
However, once Emily came along - adopted by her daughter and her millionaire husband - she was only too readily available full time, five days a week?! Unrealistic[/quote]
I guess this is what bugs me so much about Nannie. I have been thinking about it all day and have decided that I'm "transferring" some of my issues with my own grandma favoring my little cousins. Nannie seems so much more interested in raising Emily than she ever was with Kristy or David Michael. She even seems to give Karen and Andrew more attention.
As for Emily being "spoiled" I guess what I mean is that Elizabeth and Watson don't want to be "bothered" by her. They are always yelling at the other kids for upsetting her, etc. I notice this especially in the Little Sister books. They also seem to always tell Karen in those to play with Emily, help Emily, etc. Again, transfer of personal issues for me as I was always being told to look out for, play with, help, etc. my little cousin (who is 10 years younger and came along after I was an only child and grandchild). Funny how our personal experiences can impact our views on characters, even in BSC books.
|
|
ktag
Junior Sitter
Posts: 694
|
Post by ktag on Mar 14, 2006 19:16:41 GMT -5
LOL, I also have little cousins that are over a decade younger than me. Everyone loves and spoils them, but I also adore them so it doesn't really bother me. Since I'm on the other side of the country, I guess it's not suprising that we were never as close to our grandparents. And also probably why we haven't gotten sick of our cousins, we only see them maybe once a year. But I agree about personal experiences affecting how we view the books. The oldest girl is almost 11 and I'm sure no one, including her, will all of a sudden decide she is old enough to babysit her younger sisters. Or run around on vacations by herself. So not taking her to Sea City.  I think Elizabeth was a better mom when she was single than with a millionaire husband and live in mother, so...maybe not a bad thing. |
|
macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on Mar 14, 2006 19:34:21 GMT -5
Word on the younger cousin thing. I have twin cousins almost two decades younger than me and they receive FAR more attention and spoiling from my grandparents than my sisters and I ever did. Doesn't really bother me, but it does cause a fair bit of eye-rolling between my parents and I behind closed doors.
Also, I agree that Elizabeth was a far better mum before she married Watson. Once Watson came along, she was like "ugh, did hard time as the struggling single mother, it's me time now" conveniently forgetting that her four kids hadn't disappeared, she still had a SEVEN yr old, FFS - not to mention an adopted daughter (that her mother was raising, but that's beside the point).
|
|
|
|
Post by sugarmonkey on Mar 15, 2006 9:03:00 GMT -5
I always tell my self that extended relatives did visit in the early books, but it just wasn't mentioned. I'm always doing stuff like that to justify inconsistencies.
I think we were suppose to assume that Watson was a kindly generous father but he could put his foot down when the plot needed some drama. Unfortunately he came across as a jerk who never spent time with his kids. Karen and Andrew were there ever other weekend at first and Waston worked the Saturday mornings his kids were there. After he got married Elizabeth was off doing something and wouldn't watch his kids either. I also read in one book that Watson worked out of the house! Aren't Karen and Andrew old enough that they could entertain themselves for a few hours by themselves, but within hearing distance of Watson? Then he and Elizabeth went out to dinner that night or something. The books just didn't show this blended family blending. We were just told they did, like the "closeness" in every other relationship in the series.
|
|
Amalia
Sitting For The Braddocks
Her Original Point of View
Posts: 3,664
|
Post by Amalia on Mar 15, 2006 15:26:25 GMT -5
I think Elizabeth was a better mom when she was single than with a millionaire husband and live in mother, so...maybe not a bad thing. I think Elizabeth was a better mom before the BSC came along. She knows that Kristy loves sitting for her siblings (and that the BSC was created partially for parents who don't want to deal with their kids sometimes  ) so it seems that she uses that for her advantage. I mean, does she really have to work? Can't Watson be the breadwinner for the both of them or will Elizabeth feel guilty that she is making Watson take care of a whole other family besides his own. I read somewhere that Charlie was the one who helped out Elizabeth the most after Patrick left. If that's true then it seems as if he is now gettting a break. I guess the same with Elizabeth as mentioned elsewhere on this thread. Same with Patrick. It is just that he took his break a lot sooner than his family would have liked and in a way that was not acceptable. |
|
macca
Sitting For The Newtons
Posts: 2,084
|
Post by macca on Mar 15, 2006 17:15:11 GMT -5
That could be an issue, although since they adopted Emily together it seems strange that Watson wouldn't support his wife staying home and raising her (as opposed to a live-in mother in law, every man's worst nightmare ;D ) ... no, I think Elizabeth working is another example of Ann being the hardcore feminist.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparklymouse on Mar 16, 2006 23:13:22 GMT -5
Elizabeth was cool in the beginning. I liked how Charlie, Sam, and Kristy all had their one day to watch David Michael and she arranged for a sitter the extra two days so that everyone could do their own thing. She'd also stop by each kid's room at night and talk to them about their day.
Nannie was around for the wedding, but then disappeared until Emily showed up. I know a lot of you haven't read the Karen books, but some of them are seriously disturbing. Sometimes it's just a little comment that Karen makes like "the whole family was in the backyard, except for Emily who was napping. That's ok, cause Nannie had the baby moniter strapped to her waistband in case Emily woke up." There was once a whole plotline about the family going to NYC for a long weekend and they got 3 hotel rooms. Charlie, Sam, DM, and Andrew got one. Nannie, Kristy, Karen, and Emily got one. Watson and Elizabeth got their own. How messed up is that?
|
|
) so it seems that she uses that for her advantage. I mean, does she really have to work? Can't Watson be the breadwinner for the both of them or will Elizabeth feel guilty that she is making Watson take care of a whole other family besides his own. I read somewhere that Charlie was the one who helped out Elizabeth the most after Patrick left. If that's true then it seems as if he is now gettting a break. I guess the same with Elizabeth as mentioned elsewhere on this thread. Same with Patrick. It is just that he took his break a lot sooner than his family would have liked and in a way that was not acceptable.