February 6th, 2008
Woolworth’s ditch ‘Lolita’ bed
Woolworth’s have had to ditch a new bed range called Lolita, which is aimed at six-year old girls. Parents kicked up about it, unsurprisingly. Who’d want to tuck their little girl up in a bed named after a precocious pre-teen who is taken advantage of by an older man?
According to Reuters:
“In Lolita, a 1955 novel by Vladimir Nabokov, the narrator becomes sexually involved with his 12-year-old stepdaughter - but Woolworths staff had not heard of the classic novel or two subsequent films based on it.”
Seriously?
Bill Hicks is probably busting a gasket somewhere and cursing the marketing folk from a height.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Have you seen ‘Broken Flowers’ Sinead? It contains an amusing Lolita reference.
J.
February 6th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
John, is that the bit with Sharon Stone’s daughter? It’s funny. Unlike Woolworth’s take on bed-naming…
February 6th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
That’s the one. Yeah I don’t think a Lolita Bed is a good idea. I wonder what their range of Floozie Jacouzzi’s are like.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Somebody in a marketing department somewhere thought it would be a good idea to call a bed aimed at six-year-old girls Lolita? Disturbing. Another disturbing modern trend for me, not a million miles away, is the block-heeled boots for six-year-olds and bras for children for whom puberty is a long way off that are on offer in every department store and clothes shop with a kids’ section. The mind boggles.
Also, it sounds a little disingenuous for them to have said they simply hadn’t heard of Nabokov or Lolita. If that’s true, we’re in a worse state than I had thought.
February 6th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I read this story the other day - not ONE member of staff understood the connotations? And what of the person who actually thought up of the idea of putting that on a kid’s bed in the first place?
February 6th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
I read that heading way too quicly and thought it said Woolworth’s ditch Lolita BREAD.
I need a holiday.
February 6th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Could be one for this group. Although I never thought Horlicks sounded like a dirty word until I saw it in there.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/inappropriate/pool/
February 7th, 2008 at 2:43 am
Nice spot, Sinead.
But never mind the Lolita bed. It’s the Lolita pre-teen pole-dancing kit they were selling that disturbed me most.
And I’m not even making that up.
Their excuse? ‘We didn’t know about the book or what it was about.’
Nice. First they start selling paedo-themed wares at kids, then claim they knew nothing about it.
Let’s take that at face value and believe that no one among the £1 million or whatever of branding, marketing and advertising pondlife hired to create this had ever heard of the extremely famous book by one of the 20th century’s best-known novelists. Or the film classic by legendary director Stanley Kubrick. Or the remake of the film a few years back.
Unlikely, but I’m a generous man quick to offer the benefit of the doubt.
So, lads (and you just KNOW they were all lads, twenty to thirty something cokeheads with sharp suits), care to explain the pre-teen pole-dancing kit for us?
February 7th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
I presume since playboy has started branding children’s clothes and school stationary without significant fuss that the sexualisation of pre-teens will continue unabated.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Yep, the Hickmeister had it spot on back then - marketing people are the worst ….
February 9th, 2008 at 12:54 am
Joe, I support your worries that “the sexualisation of pre-teens will continue unabated.” Irish children have been abused by paedophiles; the full extent is only being uncovered. We don’t need to set children up as inviting targets for more pervert attentions. There’s something commonsensical about modesty in dress. Besides, the clothing industry is making a fortune and parents are under advertising pressures to pay out big sums on children’s clothing.
February 9th, 2008 at 8:43 am
oh dear…
i really didn’t think that was possible
February 9th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
This is astounding. Where the hell do Woolworths get them?
I wish I was seven. In twenty years’ time I’d sue Playboy for loss of innocence…
February 9th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
[…] 9, 2008 Sinead Gleeson’s running an interesting post at the […]
February 9th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
[…] 9, 2008 Sinead Gleeson’s running an interesting post at the […]