finish Johnny the Walrus review

diff --git a/content/drafts/book-review-johnny-the-walrus.md b/content/drafts/book-review-johnny-the-walrus.md
index 796e5c5..affc37c 100644 (file)
--- a/content/drafts/book-review-johnny-the-walrus.md
+++ b/content/drafts/book-review-johnny-the-walrus.md
@@ -10,4 +10,10 @@ With competent execution, this could be a great children's book! The premise is
 
 But Matt Walsh completely flubs the execution by making it a satire rather than an allegory! The result is cringey right-wing propaganda rather than a silly, memorable story that I could read to a child without feeling ashamed. (It's well-known that [the left can't meme](https://unherd.com/2021/08/why-the-left-cant-meme/), but that advantage doesn't secure the outcome of the culture war if the right can't write children's literature.)
 
-Rather than being a silly non-realistic children's-literature grown-up, Johnny's mother is portrayed as being duped by social media. ("But Johnny's mom's phone said it's not just pretend / 'Only a bigot would say that! How dare you offend!'", with angry emoji and inverted Facebook thumbs-up icons bubbling out of her phone into the scene.)
\ No newline at end of file
+Rather than being a silly non-realistic children's-literature grown-up, Johnny's mother is portrayed as being duped by social media and medical authorities. ("But Johnny's mom's phone said it's not just pretend / 'Only a bigot would say that! How dare you offend!'", with angry emoji and inverted Facebook thumbs-up icons bubbling out of her phone into the scene.) We get illustrations of protesters bearing signs saying "Human Walruses Are REAL Walruses", "Literally Walrusphobic", "He/Him/Walrux", _&c_. The worms come in an orange pill-type bottle labeled "Wormones." (Separately, walruses don't eat worms, but that's not the main problem here from a literary perspective.)
+
+All of these satirical real-world allusions completely _ruin the mood_, to the extent that I don't think this is really a book _for_ children. (Not even an ideological book for children, meant to socialize them into the correct beliefs.) It's a novelty "children's book" for the brief amusement of ideologically conservative grown-ups.
+
+This might partially explain the poor illustration quality. (The illustrations aren't _ugly_, just—very amateurish. The visible sketch-lines mark it as the probable product of Matt Walsh's friend who likes to draw sometimes, rather than a serious artist with a portfolio.) To compete in the regular children's book market—to try to be the kind of book someone would unironically give as a gift for their niece or nephew, you want the illustrations to be beautiful or endearing, something kids or their minders will _want_ to look at many times. _Johnny the Walrus_ just—doesn't have that ambition. The ideological gimmick is the point. The point having been made, there was evidently no need to spring for a more expensive artist than Matt Walsh's friend who likes to draw sometimes.
+
+I don't think this was inevitable. With care, it should be possible to pull off children's literature that maintains its integrity as children's literature while pushing back against the tide of gender identity ideology. (Which should _mostly_ just look like children's literature from the before-time when "gender" was a synonym for sex, with a few subtle modifications to defend itself in the current year.) But _Johnny the Walrus_ is not trying to have that kind of integrity. Not recommended.