Laura Marchesani, Dick and Jane and Vampires (Grosset & Dunlap, 2010)
See Dick. See Dick run. See Jane. See Jane play. See . . . Vampire? See reviewer take interest. See book fail on all counts. See reviewer cry.
Still with me? Okay, on with the review. Dick and Jane and Vampires is taken from the old Dick and Jane readers that were a mainstay of elementary school education during the middle of last century. But these readers became déclassé once phonics came onto the scene, and now they're usually only mentioned in passing or by some hipster that wants to be "ironic." (Though with the rampant use of the word ironic by GenX and Y hipsters, one can't but help wonder if they know what ironic means. Unfortunately Dick and Jane never covered irony.)
With so-called "mashups" of classic literature so popular right now, publishers are doing what Hollywood producers have done with hot movie genres: they're running a fad into the ground at warp speed. Jane Slayre, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter are a few books that do it well. Dick and Jane and Vampires? Wishes it could be half as good. Perhaps that's because the original subject isn't that great to begin with. Past a joke or two, Dick and Jane have definitely seen better days. The illustrations are too trite to be retro cool, and the choppy writing that's meant to teach very young ones how to read comes off bland and boring. Only adults will get the joke, and the joke isn't funny. Or entertaining.
Stop me if you've heard this one before; Dick and Jane walk into a backyard, and find a Vampire and . . . play with him. The end. No really, that's all there is to Dick and Jane's run-in with the undead. These stories don't really veer away from the basics they are based on. Vampire plays with Dick and Jane, and hangs out with Mother (Father mysteriously disappears early on, but there isn't so much as a peep or illustrative tease as to what, if anything, happened to him). Spoiler Alert: at the end of the book Dick and Jane find Vampire a ladyfriend, but all the two do is sit on a park bench. Tada! Big (non)bloody deal.
The problem with D&J&V isn't the satirizing of this very old children's work, it's that the "Vampire" is merely tacked on. In a few of the illustrations you can see where he's been photoshopped in. And any new drawings are so different in style from the originals that it feels as if this book was rushed to printing before a quick buck from the mashup fad passed 'em by. The lack of finesse in these doctored illustrations and stories are so obvious that it goes beyond ironic and into stupid without passing Go or collecting two hundred dollars.
The author, along with Grosset & Dunlap, passed up a chance to bring this series into the new millennium with this send-up. Which is a shame, because this could have been an adorable romp for the Pre-K through 3 set as well as a fun light read for grownups. It can be done; books like Everybody Poops and But Not The Hippopotamus are a whole lot of fun without losing the child in over-their-heads humor, and the 1995 film The Brady Bunch Movie took the beloved but overly straight-laced Brady family and brought them into today's world in a clever way. Instead, Dick and Jane and Vampires is a letdown that feels stodgy instead of retro, forced instead of fun. Too bad, as I was hoping to read this to my 3-year-old nieces and 5-year-old nephew. Luckily, for nights where I want a bit of fun with the kids, I still have a copy of Politically Correct Bedtime Stories to fall back on.
