Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Expletive-laced kids book parody is unlikely hit
Yahoo News ^ | Tue Jun 14, 9:11 am ET | Mark Egan

Posted on 06/14/2011 10:22:10 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Adam Mansbach has had three novels and a book of poems published but it was a brief Facebook update wishing his two-year-old daughter would "Go the F--- to Sleep" which helped him hit publishing gold.

Now a year later, the resulting parody of a children's book may be the unlikeliest hit book of the summer.

Ahead of U.S. publication on Tuesday, the expletive-laced book of rhyming verse has advance sales of over 100,000 copies and is in its fifth printing, which takes copies in print to over 400,000.

The movie rights have been bought by Fox 2000.

"After a particularly difficult time putting my two-year-old daughter Vivien to bed, I posted on Facebook ... 'Be on the lookout for my forthcoming children's book, Go the F--- to Sleep,'" Mansbach recalls of the unlikely night which changed his professional life. "It was a joke. It was not a book I had any intention of writing at the time."

Mansbach got a good response and in the coming weeks retold his joke again and again, winning positive reactions from fellow bleary-eyed parents who urged him to write the book.

Eventually he did, aiming to voice the love a parent has for a child while capturing the inner frustration of a parent who, however loving, also hears a darker inner narrative as the task of bedtime drags on and on.

Among the verses are:

"The eagles who soar though the sky are at rest

And the creatures who crawl, run, and creep.

I know you're not thirsty. That's bullsh--. Stop lying.

Lie the f--- down, my darling, and sleep."

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Books/Literature; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: expletive
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
All My Friends Are Dead
21 posted on 06/14/2011 10:58:05 AM PDT by Heartlander (You are either the doer, or the dude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE

You don’t think using vulgar language regarding your babies is abusive?

Or maybe you don’t think there is anything wrong with jacking off to porn photo’s with your daughter’s face ‘shoppped’ on them?

Those photo’s weren’t for kids either, so WHO exactly needs “HELP” here??


22 posted on 06/14/2011 10:58:17 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
speaking of "Johnny Dangerously"...a movie for kids..with not a swear word in it.

"Roman Moroni: I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel: You lousy cork-soakers. You have violated my farging rights. Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves. "
23 posted on 06/14/2011 11:00:41 AM PDT by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gena Bukin; discostu

OK. I get it. No child is harmed by adults reading this vulgar book.

And... by your reasoning - the 13 year old daughter also was not harmed by her father photo-shopping her face on porn photo’s.

No laws were broken. No one was harmed.

Got it. Y’all made yourselves very clear on this matters.


24 posted on 06/14/2011 11:03:23 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I see absolutely ZERO connection between the two. The thought of linking the two never even occurred to me, while it came somewhat immediately to you. Hmmm. If you see some type of connection, correlation or even a remote similarity, you’re head is FUBAR’d.

You seem to have some guy’s incestual, pederastic insanity rattling around in your head. You’re right in that it was disgusting as hell. But it’s not even in the same universe as a baudy “children’s book”. I hope you can scrub those images from your mind.


25 posted on 06/14/2011 11:08:31 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Technically the 13 year old wasn’t harmed by her father’s F’d up acts, at least not the one that got him dragged to court. But he’s got deep issues that are going to mess her up.

But there’s no comparison between him and this book. This book is just expression the frustration that every single parent has felt at some point. Show me a parent who got through all of their child’s infancy without once thinking “go the $%^& to sleep” I’ll show you a parent that hired a nanny from day one and was never in the same wing as their kid.


26 posted on 06/14/2011 11:09:10 AM PDT by discostu (Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: discostu

It’s one thing to think about such things. But for this guy to actually go through with expressing this idea as he’s done is too much.

Abusive language is abusive. And this opens an already open door to using and abusing our children with hate-speech.


27 posted on 06/14/2011 11:14:11 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

It’s not abusive language, he’s not saying it TO his kid. It’s in a book, that the kid won’t read. This doesn’t open any doors, and “hate-speech” is a liberal construct used to destroy white men.

So far you’re 0-fer, wrong on all counts.


28 posted on 06/14/2011 11:16:20 AM PDT by discostu (Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE

There ya go. Someone takes a moral high-minded view of things, and you get insulting.

Here ya go. This is the site you should be on....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/


29 posted on 06/14/2011 11:17:48 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

“hate-speech”

Aaaaaaaaand there we go.


30 posted on 06/14/2011 11:21:17 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I got insulting?
Who was it that brought pedophilia and “jacking off” into this and tried to link those, a pervert, and people who find a book to be funny?


31 posted on 06/14/2011 11:23:57 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: discostu

It’s not abusive language, he’s not saying it TO his kid...

____________________________________

Hoo boy. Ok, sport. I’ll tell ya what. YOU post the phrase “Go the f— to sleep” as you think it should be written.

Go ahead. There are no children here. Except for those childish moderators who will delete your post as abusive.

“It’s not abusive language”.

Really? And if someone tells you to eff off or to eff yourself or whatever... THAT’s not abusive?


32 posted on 06/14/2011 11:25:53 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE

Oh. I see. Because you got your feelings hurt by a reply that was not directed at you... You felt the need to get insulting directly to me.

OK. If that makes you feel better....


33 posted on 06/14/2011 11:29:15 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

There’s a separate no profanity rule here. While much abusive language includes profanity most profanity is not abusive.

What you’re failing to understand is the difference between undirected talk and directed. Saying in a book “go the $$%% to sleep” is undirected, it’s not aimed at anyone, which is why it’s not abusive. If I said to you “only an ignorant #$%^ weasel wouldn’t be able to understand that” (which I’m not) that would be directed and therefore abusive. In fact I could ditch the expletive entirely and it would still be abusive because it’s aimed. But, if after I post this I say to myself “I don’t know what kind of putz can’t figure this #$%% out” that again is undirected, non-abusive.

See it’s all about aim. Stuff with no target can’t be abusive because abuse needs a target.


34 posted on 06/14/2011 11:33:33 AM PDT by discostu (Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

35 posted on 06/14/2011 11:35:59 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Hurt? No.
Confused and concerned for your well-being? Yes.

I understand that you’re disturbed as hell by the actions of that “father”. Really, I understand. When I heard it, I was disgusted as well. But I didn’t internalize the level of anger you seem to be feeling. I just think you’re fixated on that when you try to link something that’s funny and HARMLESS and completely unrelated.


36 posted on 06/14/2011 11:39:25 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: discostu

Directed and undirected.

Got it.

Now tell me. Was the 13 year old daughter/porn photo’s directed or undirected?

Based on your logic and reasoning - it was undirected. There is no evidence the perv meant for his daughter to find out. It was not meant to harm her.

But guess what? It did harm her. It eventually destroyed him and his daughter.

Now. Is thinking vulgar thoughts “Go the f— to sleep” directly harming that baby now? No. It’s not. But keep that up, and guess what.....


37 posted on 06/14/2011 11:40:52 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE
Have you managed to figure out that this isn’t a book for kids, but a book for their parents? No?

I imagine that MILLIONS of parents, like myself, are reading the quoted prose and laughing their asses off, knowingly.


Oh, for sure. Well, as certain as you can count on kids making up every ridiculous excuse not to go to bed (or to do or not do almost anything else) you can count on someone on one of these threads not bothering to read carefully enough and going off on a righteous bloviation.
38 posted on 06/14/2011 11:41:57 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

FANTASTIC episode.
Puts “Catcher in the Rye” into a more critical perspective.


39 posted on 06/14/2011 11:43:04 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

The 13 year old is a completely different 100% unrelated situation and only a serious freak with deep emotional issues would continue to draw parallels between the two.


40 posted on 06/14/2011 11:43:16 AM PDT by discostu (Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson