I remember when my younger sister was all about the Sweet Valley books and buying into the "perfect size 6" ideal. Years later she still won't wear shorts because her legs are "too fat." And she is a size 6!
I was horrified by that expectation at the time; to call a size 4 "perfect" is reprehensible. Teenage girls are already highly susceptible to suggestion and insecure in their body image.
Ugh!

They should absolutely not be updated in my opinion. Sure, there are some things in older books that might not fit in with the modern times, but they're reflective of the time in which they're written. I still love the old Nancy Drew books and I wouldn't change a thing about them.

And it's neat to go back and read them because they're something that my mother read and therefore, a link to her as well.

I really dislike the idea of updating them.

I remember when this was a TV show... *sigh*

And anniekim makes a great point too - I was never going to be the Wakefield twins before and now I'm certainly not going to be if they just pander to what society may think is perfect.

ALSW--I completely agree with you and the Nancy Drew books are an excellent example.

what a shame!! even when i was reading "margaret" and "sweet valley" in the early 90s some of the aspects were a little out of date (NOT referring to the clothing size however - size 6 is and always will be fabulous!) but i enjoyed learning about how things might have been back when my mom was in high school or even just a few years before. how can we expect people to learn about society and culture in other times if we're updating things to their comfort zone.

as for the size 6 --> size 4 that shocks me. i am really disappointed to hear about this!!!!

anniekim - Thanks! My mother collects Nancy Drews, so I grew up reading them, her Titian hair and convertible and all. And I absolutely loved them and still do. I can't wait until I have a daughter to share them with and pass them along to.

Books should stay how they are. If they want an updated version, start a spin-off series (like the numerous Nancy Drew series that are much more modern than the beloved originals - I still wish they would make some Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys Supermysteries for adults because they could really do something with that sexual tension between Nancy and Frank).
OK, back on topic, they should not change the SVH books, especially chaning the girls' size - that is horrible! Most girls who read SVH books are a little younger than the characters and are still developing, which leads to shakey self-imagine. A size six is fine!

I think updates can be a good thing --- but it depends on WHAT they're updating and WHY. I'm disappointed the SVH girls are being dropped to a size four; they were always portrayed as healthy and totally unconcerned about their waistlines --- they were too busy living the dramatic plotline of each book! If they wanted to update their music or hairstyles or something that screams OUTDATED, that would be fine.

Ugh. What a disappointment.

Updating a book just for the sake of updating it is absolutely absurd. Plus, let's get our young ladies reading something a little more stimulating than the sweet valley high series (I read a few when I was little, but I don't think any girls today would really feel LEFT OUT if they didn't have an updated series.)

syako - I didn't even know that people read these anymore. I have a few Babysitters Club books for reminescing and because I loved those when I was younger, but I was never that into SVH.

I have to say that the English major in me just hates the idea of updating books. I mean, why not go back and rewrite the classics? (I realize that's a leap from SVH to the classics, but I'm sure someone out there is thinking about it.)

I voted other, because I can see reasons to update, but I hope they never get rid of the original versions completely. OTOH, the perfect size 4 thing is horrendous.

NO!

No way! I can see why publishers or authors may want to do this (especially with popular series like SVH and Babysitters Club type books) since they make tons of money but I think they should keep the originals the way they were (same for the cartoons IMHO). They should just do spin offs of the books using siblings of the characters or even their own kids, now that would make for a good read

I think updating books is ridiculous. If you want a modern book, write a modern book. I think books and stories develop character with age- they're products of their time, and should stay that way. Not everything should be up-to-the-minute.

And the dropping the girls to a size four is absolutely ridiculous and terribly irresponsible. Way to send the wrong message, people.

To be fair, I never cared much for Sweet Valley High and only read them because I had nothing else to read. They always seemed a lot like talking Barbies to me. I was a Nancy Drew kind of gal.

What the F? Seriously? Updating books so the kids reading today can understand the references? To me that is just basically saying that children would be to dumb to look things up for themselves! I read Mark Twain and Shakespeare and Arthur C. Clarke and whatever words I didn’t grasp; I went to the good old encyclopedia Britannica and looked them up! Or asked my parents! It’s like lying to the reader to change things, because now you are rewriting history for the sake of what? That now size 4 is the norm and not a size 6? You update school texts, not classic books……..next they will make Sherlock Holmes chew gum instead of smoking a pipe, or turn Pippi Longstockings into Pippi Leggings.

It's ridiculous and I agree w/ the other posters I was always reading Nancy Drew or the Babysitters Club

"Pippi Longstockings into Pippi Leggings"

Caterpillar - That is hilarious! Great point.

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one totally irritated by this!

Adjusting the content of older books to reflect current cultural references and ideals lacks integrity.

I don't understand why any writer would agree to it, apart from (very obviously) focusing on potential profit. Beyond the marketability factor, there is no need for the re-writes.

(And when did it become a *bad thing* to taste the flavor of older cultural references as consumed through book reading? Isn't that part of the whole experience -- exploring otherness; measuring similarities and differences between our lives and those of the characters? This allows us to discern between more eternal principles of life and universal aspects of humanity as compared against the ephemeral little details of everyday life determined in a large degree by time and location.)

~ This subtly encourages mental laziness and pervasive superficiality in our younger generation of readers, does it not? ~

I enjoy reading books that were modern at the time they were written but give a sort of historical perspective on life when you read them now...and enjoyed that even as a teen.

If they wanted to sell Sweet Valley High books to a new generation, they should have written completely new books with the updated theme (not that I agree with the reducing the clothing size premise!). To stick with the Nancy Drew example--they haven't updated those books, but they have written new books that are more modern.

This whole idea makes me angry, sad, dismayed. You all have made excellent points with which I agree.

That's annoying... I could understand spin-off series, but rewriting the originals?
The size thing is ridiculous. As much as I loved SVH, I never liked the way they described the girls in every single book. Is it really necessary to know their exact size, height, weight?

I loved those books as a kid, thanks for negating my childhood.

megan921 - i totally agree with you. how are we supposed to learn about the past and about different cultures if books are modernized to fit the current standards? i think that young readers learn more if they are exposed to ideas that they don't already know.

It's a book! Would you update Jane Austen or Shakespeare?????

The size 4 thing is ridiculous. The man that bragged about THAT "update" is a freakin' idiot.
Also, I loved loved reading the books my mom read as a girl, "Cherry Ames", "Bobbsey Twins" and "Nancy Drew" and liked that taste of life in the 50's. I would hate to think that my daughters won't share that experience. I think I'll just make sure to save my copies of "Sweet Valley" "Ramona" and Judy Blume books for my kids. (I don't have any yet.) And by the time I do have some, size 6 will probably be considered *plus size*.

Keep them as they are!

wow - i think that remaking the book for a 'modern' feel is so wrong. those books were important for teens at that time becuase it was something that we could read and enjoy when there weren't outlets like there are today - and i feel like there are so many other series today that have a teen relevance that they should leave well enough alone.

the jeep, the clothes size - everything - that's just too much!

perhaps SVH is realizing it doesn't have the staying-power of something like Nancy Drew. But "updating" assumes readers are too stupid to grasp references from earlier days. seems most of the posters on this thread grew up reading old books, and it didn't hamper their enjoyment of them.

and I don't even want to comment on the size change... I'd start fuming like a steam engine.

This update is idiotic and unnecessary. If you want to publish something modern, write a new book. And why do they need to change their size? To be honest, I didn't even remember that there was even mention of their size and it wouldn't have occurred to me that I need to be the same size as whatever they're described as being. Well I was a skinny kid anyway, but weight wasn't something I spent time thinking about. I was more occupied with school, reading (since it was a favourite childhood activity), and playing with my barbies, other toys and outdoors. Oh and watching old movies. They better leave other books alone. I'm glad I have old copies of some of my childhood books.

Everyone has made excellent points here with which I completely agree with- updating books is ludicrous. How do we expect our kids to learn about what it was like to be a teen in another decade or generation if we're constantly modernizing their reading material? Oh and heaven forbid they start to ask us questions! That would be a nightmare! I can't imagine having to explain what it was like growing up in the 80's and 90's- it's just so ancient!

Phase, My 10 year old niece just doesnt believe that we didnt have cable, remotes, computers, ipods, lap tops, Playstations.....she cant wrap her head around that!

When i say that i used to have to GET UP to change the channel on our tv, she laughs at me.

Um, wow. First of all, the change from size six to four is horrifying, but not nearly as horrifying as the overall concept. Shall we also update Madame Bovary so that she can communicate by email? And, like, millions and millions of other books that were not written in the modern era? I'm shocked. shocked.

Keep them as they were.. I used to LOVE those books when I was younger!! I had forgotten about 'Sweet Valley High'!!

As several of you have pointed out, changing minute details in teen pop series from - gasp! - only 20 years ago sets a really terrifying precedent of easing history. I've always said that the literature (and other art) a culture produces leaves a better record of our history than a straight historical record might. If we're going to change slightly outdated references in teen books, why not just go ahead and destroy an entire cannon of literature about slavery in America. After all, its not like that exists in American anymore -- just like belted sanitary napkins.

This is so ludicrous. If they want to make the updates, a spin-off series is the way to go, rather than changing the original and setting a preposterous precedent.

my mom never let me read sweet valley high, and thankfully for a good reason.

This is crazy!

rickimc - what about Ned? Or are they over like Barbie and Ken? I can't keep up.

I don't really think that books should be updated, but the size four thing doesn't really bother me. It's not like they said a perfect size 00. My mom always told me in the past what's now a size 6 would have been a called a size eight, even though they are the same size. The size of clothing is growing, but the number on the label stays the same. While that's probably not what the publisher had in mind, it is possible right?

size 6 to a size 4? ughhh.

btw is that Leven Rambin on the cover?

Is Levin Rambin the girl on 'All My Children'?

I still want my little sister to be reading the original series as I did, not revamped.

I hate this crazy body image thing our society creates. It's so sick. Makes me sad that Francine would let them do that to her work. Not that a perfect 6 is much better...