I loved Jacqueline Wilson's books as a kid. The first one I ever read was The Mum Minder, followed by The Suitcase Kid, and I was hooked.

I wish the Stevie Day books were still in print, they were great. I read How to Survive Summer Camp before she partnered with Nick Sharratt.

As an aside, when I was a kid, I loved Sharratt's illustrations and imitated his style as best I could for many years, but I'm so tired of his one-trick-pony style. I know I'm not the target demographic, and the fact that I found his style so appealing as a kid shows he got it right, but man, it gets tiring very quickly. Especially how for instance Tracy Beaker and Ellie Allard are supposed to be the ones illustrating their own stories, but they have the exact same art style and handwriting. I'm sure there was even a book where two characters had the same handwriting in the one book.

Speaking of which, why do all her characters speak the same? The phrases "ever so" and "not half" aren't as ubiquitous as Wilson thinks. I've heard "not half" now and then, but "ever so" is one I don't think I've ever actually heard in person. And I've lived in London all my life and worked with people from all over the country.

I know it's a thing, but it bugs me so much that literally every character in the books I've read so far use this phrase regularly. Including all the characters from London. It's not really a London phrase. How about a bit of variation in speech patterns, WILSON?

I'm just saying, for a writer of her calibre, different speech patterns shouldn't be hard. Also for a writer of her calibre, maintaining a consistent tense shouldn't be hard.

She randomly switches from past to present and back to past again in one scene.

Back on track, it's well-known that Wilson's books deal with heavy issues, like addiction, domestic abuse, neglect and mental health disorders. A lot of traumatic stuff. I never read any of those ones as a child, but as a teen, there was one Wilson book that just left me feeling gross for ages after. Actually, I still feel icked out remembering it now. That one was Amber (another out of print). Yeah that was the traumatic one for me.

I'm reading through the Girls series, and why has no one seemed to point out what a creeper Ellie's dad is? A grown man talking about a 13 year old girl like this is call-the-cops behaviour!

I didn't think of writing a full-blown snark for this series until I was already halfway through it.

Is Wilson Sponsored by McDonald's?

It's like literally no other fast food joint exists in Wilson World. She has that everlasting fictional Flowerfield's Centre that features in almost every book, but instead of coming up with her own eatery, she extols the wonders of Maccy D's all the freakin' time.

You think I'm exaggerating? This is all from ONE book:

It's Not the 80s Anymore

Go eff yourself. You went to the trouble of getting this book back in print and getting it re-illustrated by the one-trick-pony, and you couldn't take a few moments to look at this line and think, "Am I telling kids that they can't be from this country if they don't have white skin?" Naff right off with that crap, Wilson.

You Referenced Your Own Book

A ha ha, you're so clever.

Interwebz is a Thing

I had to look this up, because I swear Art Attack was always only ever Neil Buchanan. Zoe Ball was on SMart! SHE HAS NEVER BEEN ON ART ATTACK, YOU DUMB BINT!

I really need to get back to snarking the Babysitters Cult again, clearly I need an outlet for my anger.

But no, seriously, this was such an easy thing to check. Anyone who grew up with Art Attack knew it was a Neil Buchanan show. According to Wikipedia, there was a new presenter for a reboot in 2011, but the last of the Girls books was published in 2002. Oh, now I see why Ann M. Martin sticks with The Love Boat and I Love Lucy. It stops her making stupid mistakes like this.

No, It's Not

I guess this myth hadn't been debunked yet in 1999. For the record guys, it's not true.

I Can't Even With This Book

Okay, look, I know teenagers are dumb, but what the hell? Even little kids know not to get in a car with strangers. Predictably, the creepy guys take them away to some grotty flat on a council estate, lock them in and ply them with drink and drugs. They manage to get away, but I love how Wilson just plays it off as "phew, disaster averted," when in real life, these girls would have been r*ped the moment the door was closed.

Why is Wilson so casual about guys in their twenties hitting on thirteen year old girls in this series? This was why Amber traumatised me so much. I seem to remember her mum's boyfriend sleeping with her and she thought she was pregnant by him. Ugggghhhhh I wanna take a shower, I'm still so grossed out by that book.

Anyway, in this series, Nadine had a relationship with a college student when she was 13, who drugged her in an attempt to sleep with her, and was later revealed to have a penchant for girls 13 and under, one of whom he even got pregnant; Ellie's dad pervs on Magda; and you've got these three grown men taking thirteen year olds back to their flat to r*pe them. And I mean, it's presented as bad (although not as bad as it should be for Ellie's creeper dad), but not really that big a deal. Like, they know Nadine's ex is raping girls (age of consent is 16 here), but no one thinks this guy should be reported as a sex criminal? Not even the family of the girl he got pregnant?

I know I've lived a very sheltered life, but this book really seems to normalise sexual assault. You know what, I'm really hoping there's a Jacqueline Wilson snark community out there.

Also, I want to know, is it really that easy for someone to cure themselves of anorexia with no medical intervention, like Ellie did in Girls Under Pressure? Serious question, because she was already at the body dysmorphia stage.

It's just as well no one really reads this blog, because I remember the Lauren Chlid fangirls coming after me on my old blog when I gave a lukewarm opinion on a Ruby Redfort book. If Wilson's fans read this, they'll probably burn my house down.