|
Post by booboobrewer on Jun 11, 2008 22:58:31 GMT -5
I think they just should've kept Mrs. Barrett single and not dating Franklin imo. I would have liked that. Their combined family was just too much for me, and I liked reading about the Barretts by themselves. I never skipped subplots that involved them. And maybe Franklin liked to be called Franklin, but really, Frank is so much better.
|
|
sarish
Sitting For The Papadakis's
Posts: 1,618
|
Post by sarish on Jun 12, 2008 17:36:54 GMT -5
I actually agree sweetvalleygirl, now that you mentioned it. I think they should have shown that a woman didn't need to get married so soon after a divorce (I know they did that with Kristy's mom, but she did get married in the 2nd Kristy book!).
|
|
courtky10
Sitting For The Johanssens
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by courtky10 on Jun 12, 2008 17:42:20 GMT -5
^Is Stacey's mom the only one that got a divorce and didn't remarry?
|
|
|
Post by sweetvalleygirl99 on Jun 12, 2008 19:59:14 GMT -5
I actually agree sweetvalleygirl, now that you mentioned it. I think they should have shown that a woman didn't need to get married so soon after a divorce. Yes, I think they should have shown that too . To me the Barrett/DeWitt families combining into one was way too forced, like AMM and the ghostwriters just threw in this Franklin guy and just for kicks his bratty reckless kids to boost more baby-sitting drama in the books. In every subplot I've read about the Barrett/DeWitt's, they're always at each other's throats and fighting with each other. In turn, they made the calm Barrett kids out of control. It got to the point where I just stopped reading about them; the whole combined family thing was way too much for me.
|
|
lyricalangel
Sitting For The Newtons
Logan's love-bunny
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by lyricalangel on Jun 12, 2008 20:37:04 GMT -5
We already had the Pikes and the Thomas/Brewers for the big families. The Barretts should have stayed the way they were.
|
|
nothingtolose18
Sitting For The Johanssens
Mal / Sam / Price / Ben
Posts: 1,059
|
Post by nothingtolose18 on Jun 12, 2008 20:43:28 GMT -5
Agreed. It's kind of weird that AMM insist that every single mother get remarried, when you think about it. She's all for women's rights (which I have no problem with, of course, but she was for it to the point of annoyance, like saying 'it's gingerbread people, not men.') You would think that she would be all for allowing women to stay single and raise a family. By making them all get remarried, she is sort of implying that all women should get married and be dependant on a man. I'm sure that's not the message she was trying to convey, and I never thought much about it before honestly, but analyzing it now makes me get that vibe from it. I guess you could argue that the men also did the same, but we didn't know many single fathers - Watson, Richard, Franklin, Mr. Brooks? Then again, we all know that the first three got remarried and the latter didn't. So, maybe I just disproved my own theory, I don't know I think Stacey's mom (haha, I think of the song, lol. I'm so mature!) was, in fact, the only mom to stay single. I like that she stayed single.
|
|
courtky10
Sitting For The Johanssens
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by courtky10 on Jun 12, 2008 20:59:26 GMT -5
I think AMM just liked the idea of every having a perfect family -one way or another.
|
|
|
Post by lionessblack on Jun 12, 2008 21:31:10 GMT -5
I like the divorce and blended families and those things were portrayed as normal. I think it gave a positive image to kids who were raised by single parents or were going through a divorce, that it was okay, and kids live with this and can be normal, and it's not the end of the world. But the idea that everyone remarried was kind of ridiculous.
I think if the DeWitt's had been introduced as a separate family, it would have been different. They would have been able to develop as their own family. As it was, they were just an annoying extension of the Barrett's and the kids weren't given a chance to really become their own characters. I don't even know if I can name all of them, they just sort of blend together for me.
|
|
courtky10
Sitting For The Johanssens
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by courtky10 on Jun 13, 2008 0:18:35 GMT -5
The only DeWitts I can think of are Lindsey, Madeline, Taylor, and Ryan. Is that all of them?
|
|
lyricalangel
Sitting For The Newtons
Logan's love-bunny
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by lyricalangel on Jun 13, 2008 2:29:15 GMT -5
^I think that's all.
|
|
courtky10
Sitting For The Johanssens
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by courtky10 on Jun 13, 2008 9:32:05 GMT -5
That's what I thought too, but I couldn't remember if there were four or five DeWitts.
|
|
|
Post by sweetvalleygirl99 on Jun 13, 2008 14:13:31 GMT -5
We already had the Pikes and the Thomas/Brewers for the big families. The Barretts should have stayed the way they were. I couldn't have said it better myself .
|
|
|
Post by sweetvalleygirl99 on Jun 26, 2008 14:45:09 GMT -5
I can't believe they had to give Pow away . What book did that happen in?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2008 20:49:18 GMT -5
for me it depends on who the charges are. I like the Pikes because something crazy always happens, and I like the Delaneys and Jenny P. mostly because they aren't easy charges and make the BSC work for their $2.50/hr. I would skip over Jamie Newton jobs (he just annoys me), Charlotte chapters (boring and kind of whiny) and jobs at the Perkins' house.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2008 21:37:29 GMT -5
I think if the DeWitt's had been introduced as a separate family, it would have been different. They would have been able to develop as their own family. As it was, they were just an annoying extension of the Barrett's and the kids weren't given a chance to really become their own characters. I don't even know if I can name all of them, they just sort of blend together for me. Exactly. Come to think of it... I couldn't even tell you if Taylor DeWitt is a boy or a girl without looking it up... or if it even matters, since I seem to have survived this long without knowing.
|
|