"Girls Get Curves" - combining math and body positivism

Danica McKellar  charmed teenage boys in the '80s as Winnie Cooper on The Wonder Years has grown up to be something of a nerd heartthrob.

Having attained her math degree from UCLA, and coauthoring the paper Percolation and Gibbs State Multiplicity for Ferromagnetic Ashkin-Teller Models in Two Dimensions, she went on to author a series of books encouraging young girls to be confident and pursue mathematics: Math Doesn't Suck, Kiss My Math, and Hot X: Algebra Exposed.

Recently, Ms. McKellar published her fourth, Girls Get Curves. This one appears to take on body image issues with her play on words.

It's a weird combination on the cover, though, flaunting her now-mature sexuality and offering advice on attracting "guys" more prominently than she actually pushes math.

Meanwhile, she told BuzzFeed:

People tell us our value lies in our appearance, and that's what we need to focus on instead of realizing hair and makeup and fashion — that's all fun but it's really decoration. It's not where our value lies, and it's not where our self-esteem should come from, because that's extremely damaging. Girls forget that the things that are going to make them feel happy and fulfilled are the things you do from the inside — like succeeding in math. If you look at a really hard math problem, and you persevere and you do solve it, then you build internal fortitude, and you see that you're stronger and smarter.

Ms. McKellar also comments on media and advertising:

In the book I talk about how we can’t compare ourselves to the images in magazines — they’re not real. If you want to aspire to look like somebody, aspire to look like somebody you have in your real life. 

I also have a section about how advertisements are designed to make us feel bad about ourselves, because if we’re not happy about how we look we don’t need their products. So it’s in the advertisers’ best interest to make us look less than. It’s really damaging — it’s damaging to girls and it’s not going to stop. So I’m hoping to give them a different perspective.

I agree. But I would have asked her about how this applies to the spread she did in Maxim.

Might these two sides of the actress/mathematician give girls a mixed message about where their real value lies? I'd love to hear your opinion.

Read the whole interview here.

The least appetizing cookbook title ever #FdAdFriday

The BBC explains:

"Cooking With Poo is written by Bangkok chef Saiyuud Diwong whose nickname is Poo - which is Thai for 'crab. 

She runs a cookery school for locals and tourists in the city's largest slum, alongside the charitable organisation that published the book."

Well, that's a relief.

Saiyuud Diwong's book won this year's Diagram Prize for oddest book title of the year.

Good Books - Bad Ripoff?

Thompson by Steadman. Via Printed Editions.

Marc shared this hallucinogenic animation for Goodbooks International, featuring "a loving homage to the High Priest of Gonzo, and one of the most original talents to ever put ink to a page, Hunter S. Thompson" on Osocio:


Good Books "Metamorphosis" from Antfood on Vimeo.



I should love this. Dr. Thompson was one of my favourite American writers, despite (or perhaps because of) all of his personal flaws.

But it's a ripoff, plain and simple. Some writer at String Theory has stolen the dead writer's voice, and some animator has stolen Ralph Steadman's style, to promote a bookshop. (One that donates all profits to charity, but still...)

Dr. Thompson isn't with us anymore, so he can't comment on the homage. But during his lifetime, he was notoriously hateful towards those who would co-opt his image. He couldn't stand the fact that Garry Trudeau turned him into a Doonesbury character, once stating "I might set the little bastard on fire." (He reportedly gave the character a grudging acceptance by the end of his life.)

Many English writers want to emulate Hunter S. Thompson, especially if they discover his classic books and articles during their formative years. I speak from experience here. But there comes a time when you have to find your own voice, not indulge in mimicry.

By calling this video an "homage" the writer and animator have given themselves permission to indulge in faux-Gonzo. But, as often happens with Dr. Thompson portrayals, it focusses only on his extravagant recreational drug use and tries to approximate his obsession with making the written English language keep up with his resulting visions and thoughts through obscure and excessive description. That was the character he played, sure, but he was a deeper thinker than that. He was, in life, a passionate believer in American libertarian issues, and 60s-style social justice. When you try to recreate Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, but skip the bleeding-heartedness of the chapter "Genius 'Round the World Stands Hand in Hand, and One Shock of Recognition Runs the Whole Circle 'Round" you are simply engaging in parody. And not very smart parody, either.

Sound designer Antfood writes on their Vimeo post, "DISCLAIMER: What you will see is an entirely fictional and completely unendorsed representation. [Though we humbly suggest Hunter S. Thompson might have liked it.] We are devoted fans paying homage. No disrespect is intended." I'll take their intention at face value. But I still don't like what the video stands for.

If you want to honour the writer, read his books for yourself and let him rest. Or watch the movie version of Fear and Loathing, which was made with his participation and is fairly loyal to the spirit of the print. (I'm not sure about Dr. Thompson's late-life BFF Johnny Depp's continued efforts to put the legacy on film, but I haven't seen The Rum Diary yet.)

And don't muck up a great American voice with shallow "homage", no matter how cool it looks.

These book ads tell the wrong story

The artwork on these ads from Brazil's Paz Comunicação Estratégica is beautiful. But what is it saying?

This is supposed to be a campaign to convince people to donate old books to a charity, rather than throwing them out. But the homeless fairytale characters seem to be telling another story altogether.

Is the creative team equating the homeless with discarded objects? If so, wouldn't this idea better serve that cause instead?

I know I'm like a broken record on this issue, but as a social marketer I am constantly annoyed by agencies that use their client's cause brand as an excuse for showcasing irrelevant creative executions. It's a waste of any money the client may have ponied up for production, and is harmful to their brand and their cause because it makes them seem like they don't "get it".

Eye candy, like any candy, is lots of fun. But that doesn't mean it's good for you.

Via Ads of the World

Are books more interesting than women? #FdAdFriday

BoingBoing posted this piece of over-the-top vintage sexism.

Given the nature of the "literature," I wonder why they didn't address the additional point that the book will "stick together" with you after you're finished.

Selling books with internet cruelty

These screen caps claim to be actual Google searches.

Cruel? Maybe. But also funny because if you try them yourself you will get very similar (although not identical) results:

These are the main visuals of ads for South Africa's Exclus1ve Books, created by Ogilvy Johannesburg.

The copy is simple:

See the full ads and credist at Ads of The World.