Gossip Girl and Peeps

In Gossip Girl, as Naomi Wolf posits, the teen characters try their hardest to fit into a materialistic adult lifestyle. The strange thing is that the lifestyle they are striving for isn't one that 99% of the world will ever come close to experiencing. Anyone who can spend over $100 on a purse without batting an eye is in socioeconomic minority. Does this mean that girls are giving themselves false aspirations, that they are hoping for experiences they likely won't ever experience? Or do they realize the absurdity of that kind of lifestyle and read it as a trashy diversion? I hope that it is the latter. Lets give them a little more credit. The fact that generations have survived materials their parents found disturbing, repulsive, and potentially adulterating makes me wonder if we aren't overreacting. In the 30s it was Jazz, in the 50s it was rock and roll, in the 60s it was flower power, and on and on. Most of the teenagers involved with those things didn't become drinking, drug-addicted sex fiends like their parents feared they would due to the influence of those 'evils.'

On the other hand, if we think of Gossip Girl as a symptom rather than as a cause of what teens are dealing with, that might be more productive. What I find most troubling in this novel is the role of sex in the girls' lives. I don't find it disturbing because it is a perverted or abnormal representation, but rather a typical one. What is the one of the most powerful insult to a woman? To call her a slut... and doesn't Blair use this weapon against Serena? According to the OED, the use of slut as a term for "A woman of a low or loose character; a bold or impudent girl; a hussy, jade" has been around since 1450. Is there a similar word for men? One that has held that nasty power for over 500 years in the English language? Not that I can think of. A woman's power and a woman's downfall has long been tied to her sexuality. We are forced to live in a duality wherein we must inhabit the world of the virgin and the whore simultaneously, and only because these personas appeal to men. In other words, a woman's sexuality is not her own. This is shown painfully in Serena's case as lies about her sexual practices are spread in order to damage her. Her value is determined by her desirability which are simultaneously increased and diminished by her slutty reputation.

I could go on and on about this, but if I keep going I'm going to keep thinking and going some more and soon I'll have a dissertation-length paper on my hands.

On to Peeps...

First let me say that, as the wife of an evolutionary biologist, I loved this book. The alternating chapters of non-fiction along with the description of the parasite in the fictional chapters was fabulous. So many people don't understand natural selection and this is a vivid and interesting way of explaining how it works. Bravo Scott Westerfeld. As far as my experience and how the alternating formats were affected by it-- I'd say my experience of the vampire story was greatly enhanced by the real science. It almost made the story seem more plausible because it followed the logic of true science. I also thought it was interesting that the parasite in the fictional story is also an STD because it showed how quickly a real STD could spread among people. And I love the idea of the anathema. If you think about it everything a kid once idolized becomes a sort of anathema once they are a teen-- their parents, their childhood blankee, etc. They become symbols of the childhood the teen is trying to separate him/herself from in order to become an adult. No I am not saying teens are diseased, I am saying that this is an interesting symbolic parallel. I am also saying this might be what makes it YA literature.