Reflecting on Allowing Discussion of the CW ND Television Series

In 2019, I stood my ground on allowing discussion of the CW ND television series, despite strong opposition that came from quite a few collectors.  On May 31 of this year, I posted the following to the Collecting Vintage Series Books group on Facebook.

We welcome discussion of all media based on our legacy vintage series.  This means that modern adaptations of legacy vintage series are fine to discuss, regardless of format or whether the adaptation is faithful to the source material.

I remind you of this because the fourth and final season of Nancy Drew premieres tonight on The CW.  I am following through on a promise that I made to myself in late 2019: I will not allow bullies to prevent me from allowing discussion of an adaptation of a legacy vintage series just because they don't approve of it.

I was treated rather badly in late 2019 when Nancy Drew premiered.  I received some pretty hateful private messages.  I was compared to Joseph Stalin.  That was when I promised myself that I would not back down.  It is reasonable that a group devoted to Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys should be able to allow discussion of modern adaptations of Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys.

The series finale aired on August 23.  I posted the following right after I made my final episode post.

And it's a wrap!  I have fulfilled my promise to myself that I made in late 2019.  I was bullied about allowing and facilitating discussion of this series in this group.  I promised myself that I would post about every single episode in the series until it was over.  And so I have.

I am very proud of myself for following through, and I have felt slightly uncomfortable the entire time.  Every single time I posted about the latest ND episode, I felt discomfort.  Yes, all 62 times.  I knew what some people were thinking.  But I didn't let it stop me.  I felt strongly that a group devoted to Nancy Drew and similar series books ought to be able to discuss a Nancy Drew television show.  I remained firm.

I've been reflecting about this, and I went through my private messages on Facebook from 2019.  I share some of my remarks here with you.  All content in this post was written by me.  You don't get to see the comments that were made to me, but my responses will give you the gist. 

I refer to different people by the letters A, B, C, and so on, to maintain their privacy and to distinguish them from each other.

A few notes...

Since my comments are from private messages, I do make some pretty strong statements and am a bit unfiltered.  I may offend those of you who didn't like the show.  To be clear, my frustration was with the people who were attempting to beat me into submission, who were also attempting to keep anyone from discussing the show online.  I never cared that some people didn't like the show; I was annoyed with how aggressive and mean a subset of those people were.  It was wrong of them to act like they did. 

I refer to Person Q as "nuts."  This person was unhinged.  She cussed all over the place and made extreme statements that were rather shocking.  The behavior by that person was particularly awful.  What happened in late 2019 was the worst behavior from series book fans since the flame wars of the Nancy Drew newsgroup from the late 1990s.  

I mention being pleased about certain people flouncing out of the group.  It's a funny thing when people threaten to leave a group.  They act like they will be hurting the moderator.  Instead, difficult people brighten a moderator's day when they flounce out of the group, since they will then no longer be a problem.

The story begins with the script being passed around between collectors in early 2019.  Some of us read the pilot episode script long before the first episode was even filmed.

February 21, 2019, to Person F

The sex scene will freak everyone out!  They will die.  They can't deal with Sophia Lillis' hair or clothing, so they will absolutely have conniption fits.  It might be the end of ND fandom. 

February 22, 2019, to Person F

The story is good, especially at the end when Nancy realizes that all is not as she thought.  Making Nancy a few years older would make the mature scenes easier to accept.  At the same time, keeping her a teen is important to the story, since she still lives with her father and feels betrayed by him.  But regardless, I hope this is filmed and that we actually get to see it.  

The story reminds me of the recent comic book series, which I have not gotten back to finishing.  It's like they got some ideas from it, especially the Bayport part.

July 19, 2019, to Person A

I agree!  This is going to be really good!  I SO hope that the show is successful.  It's important that the show appeal to people other than us, and this show has everything needed to do that.

August 9, 2019, to Person E

I have read [the script of the pilot episode].  The reaction is going to be bad, and some people are going to flip out completely.  They are already upset, and they do not know what is actually in the show.

I have been following the discussions in the ND Book Fans group, and I am getting increasingly concerned.  I notice another argument transpired today with someone leaving the group.  Someone else left the group a few days ago.  I don't understand why people leave groups instead of just blocking the people who annoy them.

The show premiered on October 9, 2019.

October 9, 2019, to Person F

I haven't checked the group yet since I was watching the show.  The show was exactly what I expected.  I had read the script and seen previews, so no surprises. 

(later)

I'm beginning to read the comments.  I don't get why they are so rigid in their thinking and why things like George being bossy are so annoying to them.  I thought George was bossy at times in the books...

(later)

[Person B] is surprised that I support the show.  He has no clue about me and what I think.  He wrote on another post "0% Nancy Drew."  He has no idea.

October 10, 2019, to Person F

The fan reaction has definitely reached full-blown meltdown status in the ND group.  Ooh, I need to check the game fans group again.  I haven't been there since last night.

(later)

And some of the language!  One person posted about ND having a "f*** buddy" and someone else said she's a "b****."  They aren't taking this well.  

And their comments about the morality of the sex is out of line.  A few people declared that they wouldn't watch the show again.  

And I'm sick of people putting down young people, saying that they don't read books, etc.  I did respond on one comment thread stating that a number of my students bring paper books to class to read.  So annoying to read judgmental statements.

(later)

Several people say it isn't like ANY of the books.  I disagree.  Aside from the sex, I think the show isn't that different from the Files, which admittedly I haven't read in years.

(later)

The game fans seem to be a lot more sane about this.  There are complaints, but they aren't coming across as raving maniacs like the people in the book group.

(later)

Yes, the behavior in the book group is embarrassing.  If people from the show are there, they will think we are all insane.

(later)

[Person Q] is nuts!  I was thinking of Taylor Swift's "You Need to Calm Down" and someone posted the gif!

October 11, 2019, to Person F

Some of these people are way over-dramatic.  A few claim that the show has ruined Nancy Drew for them.  

I made note of a couple comments I saw earlier today.  One person:  "But I just clutched my blue tweed very first Nancy Drew as I watched."  Wow.

October 13, 2019, to Person F

I haven't seen a discussion of the sex go well anywhere that I've seen.  People are incapable of having a rational discussion about that aspect of the show, just like with politics.

I came up with the idea to ban the sex discussion part of the show way back in June but didn't tell anyone.  I was originally going to warn people before the first show aired, but then I decided just to see what would happen.  Now I know and am not surprised.  They can't handle it.

October 13, 2019, to Collecting Group moderators

[Person G]'s post on the ND show bears watching.  We already have a statement about the immorality of premarital sex and another one disagreeing, and that strays into religion and politics.  Not good.  I have made two comments in an attempt to prevent the comments from getting worse.

If the post deteriorates into a flame war in the next few hours, please close comments.  It's skating on the edge right now.  A little trolling is going on by [Person H], who is not a regular.  Some other comments are also problematic.  

(later)

Right, I don't think ND Book Fans is banning such posts.  People just shouldn't be hateful to each other and shouldn't be cussing like they were.

I'm concerned about the comments regarding the morality of premarital sex, since that borders on religion and politics, which we do not allow.  So far, the comments are going overall okay, but this will continue to bear watching.

This may sound heavy-handed, but this is what I'd like to do as we will be dealing with this for months if the show doesn't get canceled (and I hope it doesn't).  

I would like to make a rule that states that fans can discuss any aspect of the show except for the sex.  What do you think?  Does that sound reasonable or insane?  

I don't want to read comments for and against premarital sex every single week as this show airs.  We already know that [Person I] will not drop it, nor will others who are strongly on the other side of the issue.  That discussion needs to occur somewhere else and not under our watch.  

I don't like the inclusion of sex in the show, but this is just fiction.  It's just a show.  She isn't real.  It's not productive for us to debate whether she should or shouldn't every single week.

And [Person J] just called [Person G] "twisted."  We won't be able to leave the post open much longer.

(later)

As others have stated in our group and elsewhere, it's the sex that seems to enrage people more than anything else.  Ever since I read the script early this year, I have been worried about it.  I originally wanted to ban discussion of sex in this show before the first show aired, but I never followed through with it.  So that's how I feel about discussing that aspect of the show.  I don't want to touch it at all.

(later)

So how about the post gets closed, and I write a post stating that no discussion of Nancy Drew having sex is allowed.  This is a ridiculous rule, but ridiculous times require ridiculous measures.

(later)

I think that we are going to run into problems again when the second show airs.  This is my current plan.  Let me know if you have any other ideas.

Each Wednesday before the show airs, I can start a discussion thread for the new episode.  Discussion will be limited to that post.  The post will include a warning about not discussing any sex scenes that might appear in the show.  The warning will also state that all comments about the sex will be deleted.

And then we will have to see if that idea will work.  If not, discussing the show can be banned, but I'd like to allow it if we can keep the controversy out of the group.  This is just so silly that some people can't be reasonable.

There are actually some comments in the ND Book Fans group where people state that last week's episode ruined all of their memories of ND.  That's crazy!

October 14, 2019, to Collecting Group moderators

You might have noticed that I did not remove [Person J]'s comment calling [Person G] "twisted."  I think it is good for people to see exactly what was starting to happen so that they know why I banned discussion of sex in the group. 

I noticed that three people left the group after I banned discussion of sex: [Person I] (he has been a problem in several ways, so good riddance), [Person K], and [Person L].

All three complained about the sex, so they must be annoyed that they cannot complain more.  Why can't they just ignore the show?  Why is that so hard?

I assume that the next show will have sex in it.  If anyone complains about or mentions the sex, then their comment or post should be deleted.  We must take a hard line on this.  

October 16, 2019, to Person E

I appreciate your comments.  I'm now planning two posts for tonight, one for fans and one for people who are not fans.  This might not work, but it's worth a try.

(later)

I'm back to just one post and no restriction other than no discussion of sexual content.  We'll see what happens.  I also just had to kick out someone who mocked me.  Such fun times.  Your thoughtful comments are always appreciated.

October 16, 2019, to Collecting Group moderators

The show is about Nancy Drew, and I have always stated that all versions of Nancy Drew are within our guidelines, just like all versions have always been covered by publications like Yellowback Library.

(later)

It's just that we have always accepted other versions like Pamela Sue Martin.  If we are not going to allow this one, then all filmed versions should be tossed out.

The Nancy Drew Book Fans group is pretty much on its own due to the Sleuth convention [currently in progress].  [The moderators] aren't available to moderate it.  I want to give people just one place to discuss the show in peace.

(later)

I just kicked [Person M] out and banned him.  This is the first time I've ever been mocked with "baaah!"  

(later)

I just placed the group on moderation so that we don't get a bunch of threads about the show.  Also, we're all going to have to sleep.  That won't stop bad comments on existing posts, but new posts will have to be approved.

[Person N] also just suggested we stick to books only.  I'm not responding, but if we did that, then we shouldn't discuss Bonita Granville or any other version, should we?  

If there is one thread and one thread only, I continue not to understand why they can't just ignore it.  

(later)

I also don't want to cave in for anything in the world at this point.  I don't want to give them the satisfaction of beating me down.  We should be able to discuss a Nancy Drew series.  

(later)

The complainers are now jumping in, and they aren't referring to the new show, since it hasn't aired.  It's interesting how we are expected to put up with them, and how dare we ask them to hold back.

October 17, 2019, to Collecting Group moderators

I agree.  I read [Person B]'s comment slowly last night, twice, to see if he went too far.  He was using veiled language to get away with it.  He knew that my guidelines forbid terms like "adult situations," so he made it more vague.

I think he will end up leaving the group or being kicked out before too much longer.  I expect he won't be able to resist being blatant, and I will offend him, causing him to leave, or I will kick him out.  The clock is ticking...

October 17, 2019, to Person A

I'm getting a lot of flak over allowing discussion of the show, and I will not back down.  I think it has gone okay so far.  Some people say that the group should only be about BOOKS, so the show doesn't fit.  But those same people don't mind Pamela Sue Martin and Bonita Granville.  They just don't want a version discussed if they don't like it.  People are so unreasonable.  We've lost at least five members this week plus the one I kicked out yesterday.

(later response)

I appreciate your support.  I really do.  I feel like the discussion has gone really well.  We had one minor skirmish last night, and the person who started that comment thread then deleted it when it didn't need to come down.  But at least that person is trying to avoid causing trouble.

[Person B] just can't keep from saying something.  I know what he meant and he veiled it to fit the rule, and I read it twice to make certain that he wasn't going too far.  At least he didn't use "adult behavior" like he did days ago.  He's one of those who said the group is about BOOKS only.

Even though the naysayers claim that the sex is the reason they don't like the show, they wouldn't like it anyway.  The only ND that would be good enough is if Nancy could jump off of the cover of 1930 Old Clock and into a movie.  She would then have to act exactly like in the book and say the same lines.

October 17, 2019, to Person X

I'm digging in, standing my ground, even though some people cannot stand seeing the show discussed in the Collecting group.  They are now saying that the group is only about the BOOKS and that the show should not be allowed.

If so, then Bonita Granville and Pamela Sue Martin's versions should be banned, right?  I'm not picking and choosing which versions to allow.  It's either ALL or NONE.  I'm going with ALL.

We are losing members.  Two more people left last night since seeing the episode discussion.  I don't care, and I actually hope more complainers leave.

I also got mocked yesterday in the group over politics, so I banned that person.  Fun times.

I think the discussion in the Collecting group is going well, and that's why I want one each week.

October 27, 2019, to Person A

I was surprised to see a really positive comment about the ND Diaries series recently in the ND Book Fans group from some random fan.  No matter what the version, some people like it.  I personally don't like the scared, self-doubting Nancy in the Diaries series, but I'm glad that there are people who really enjoy those books.  It's good for the brand.

November 1, 2019, to Person F

[Person D] does have a point about the supernatural events, especially since a few people have now commented that they are losing interest because of that aspect.  However, I maintain that most of these people would have lost interest anyway, supernatural or not.  I will just go with whatever craziness happens in the show.  I'm making a weekly event out of watching it, and I hate television.

November 2, 2019, to Person F

The supernatural events don't bother me, although having them is unusual for ND.  Whatever they do, I'm fine.  The characterization of Nancy meets the one requirement that is most important to me:  she is strong and fearless.  The Diaries series bothers me because Nancy calls herself a "wuss" and is scared, nervous, or self-doubting much of the time.  This show doesn't make Nancy weak, so I have no complaints.

November 6, 2019, to Person F

It's been quite a day.  First, [Person R] posted about the sex in the first episode, which he just watched.  He didn't like it.  That post went bad fast.

[Person B] complained about how ND has its own group, blah blah blah.

[Person S] tagged me.  My favorite part was [Person T]'s response of "Mommmm!" and my reply of "Mom has arrived."

I closed comments.  Some hours pass and [Person R] deletes his post.

Then [Person U] posts about the post that was deleted.  That one is still there and you can read it.  I closed comments to it since it was going bad.

Sometime after that, [Person B] had it and flounced out of the group.  

November 21, 2019, to Person F

I am enjoying the show.  I just go with whatever they do.  It doesn't bother me.  The spirits thing was jarring at first, but now I fully embrace that Nancy is surrounded by spirits with weird stuff happening.  I find it fun.

And also, people said that the CW show wouldn't bring in new ND book fans.  The post from today in the ND Book Fans group proves that wrong.

(later)

It's funny that the show has almost no sex right now - implied, yes - but Nancy hasn't gotten any action in a while.  Instead, the show has gone full-on supernatural.  That is bothering some people who are still watching.  If most people hadn't ditched after the first show, they'd be ranting about the spirits.

A few months ago, I spent a fairly significant amount of time flipping through the NDGD books until I located where Nancy is arrested for breaking into a business.  It was that important to me to prove that Nancy has been arrested in the books.  This was because of the comments on the Hidden Staircase movie about how Nancy has never picked locks, broken into places, or been arrested.

November 22, 2019, to Person F

I don't like horror films that feature blood, gore, or anything like that.  I have no interest in shows like CSI because I don't want to watch autopsies and yucky stuff.  So far, this show hasn't taken that aspect too far.  The morgue scene was icky, but we didn't see much.  As long as they don't take it further than that, I will be fine.  Even if they do, I'm still going to watch.  I want to see how this plays out.

I find it interesting how many people are bailing because of the supernatural stuff.  And at the start, the problem was the sex.  It turns out that the sex wasn't the real problem after all.

November 25, 2019, to Person A

[Person C] gets on my nerves big time, and he's been doing it for 17 years, at least.  I still haven't forgotten his comments in the Sleuths group in 2002 about the Maggie Lawson pilot.  I responded with my view, and he proceeded to twist my words to support his view. 

I've decided to just skim what he and [Person D] say about the show.  It's unnecessary to repeat the same statements over and over and over...

[Person D] didn't want the show discussed in the group, and I doubt that [Person C] does.  They might be trying to wear me down via the negativity.  I'm not backing down for anything in the world.  I will create a post for every new episode, even if I just discuss the show with myself.

November 25, 2019, to Collecting Group moderators

I'm actually overall okay right now, all things considered.   The group isn't really bothering me.  The [Person O] thing was a problem, but it was just a temporary problem.  

I keep thinking about the CW show and how I KNEW that we could discuss it in the group.  Several people thought I was nuts, [Person D] included.  He kept discouraging me.  I was right!  We CAN discuss the show in a calm fashion.  See?  I knew it!  I'm pretty happy that we can discuss the show, and people can express their varying opinions.  Not everyone likes it, but that's okay!

December 3, 2019, to Person F

This show is not going to ruin ND.  It doesn't even have that good of ratings.  Goodness.  I doubt most people know that the show exists.  I was just told in my blog that I am the [only] reason that they know about the show. 

December 5, 2019, to Person F

In the Collecting group, [Person C] made a comment on the new episode post about being sad that some of us actually like the show.  I made a statement similar to ones that [Person P] has made in the ND group.  

I feel like some people are spoiling for a fight with those of us who enjoy the show.  At the least, they want to convince us not to like it.  It's not going to work.

December 13, 2019, to Person W

I also think [Person C] is hoping to make the discussion posts go away by trying to pick a fight each week.  I told someone else recently that I'm going to keep posting the discussion threads for each new episode regardless of how many people are against me.  I feel like a martyr.  I took a lot of heat for allowing the show to be discussed while not allowing certain people to preach at us about premarital sex.  I'm not backing down for anything in the world.  People can be so immature.

December 13, 2019, to Person P

It is really hard to be fair and not favor some people over others...  I want to allow people to say that they don't like the show, but it is really hard to know when they are going too far.  And I really can't tell people not to be negative, unfortunately.   

And I don't think either you or [Person W] was picking a fight.  I meant that [Person C] seems to be trying to pick one.  My stance is to ignore him. 

December 13, 2019, to Collecting Group moderators

Just letting you know that I'm dealing with the minor fuss in the television show discussion thread.  I'm fine with going it alone on anything with the CW show since I have vowed to do weekly discussions no matter what.  I feel like a martyr. 

December 27, 2019, to Person F

They mostly are behaving.  In the Collecting group, a couple of people have taken offense at the cover of an old Sugar Creek Gang book (Christian themed) with a raccoon cornered in a tree by hunters.  We were informed by [Person V] and someone else that hunting raccoons is against Christianity.  Then someone else pointed out the hunting references in the Bible.  I deleted the comments, which angered [Person V].  How can she think that getting on her soapbox in the group is appropriate?

January 24, 2020, to Person F

And then in the ND Book Fans group earlier today, someone threw out the "real ND" statement, since of course none of the new versions are the real ND.  That's actually a bit offensive.  I loved the most recent ND Diaries book and really enjoy the modern versions, at least when they are written by good writers who know not to have ND scared all the time.  

.......................................

What I've shared covers the bulk of the early fights about the series.  This shows my thinking and how I doubled down, making the CW ND show discussion the hill that I would die on.

It saddens me that many fans won't allow us to have some happiness in discussing an interesting current project.  Series book fandom won't last for many more years.  I believe that we are currently at the beginning of the end.  It will take some 20 years for it to be over, but that day is coming.  

Why must anything new be trashed into oblivion, even when there is nothing much wrong with it?  Even the 2019 movie with Sophia Lillis was trashed, and that movie was completely wholesome.  Our fandom weakens itself and sucks the joy out of everything.

Even though I initiated discussion of all 62 episodes, little discussion occurred.  I'm confident that most of the people who were watching the show were fearful of commenting in the group.  That is sad.

The Transformation of Nancy Drew into CW Nancy Drew

The Stratemeyer Syndicate switched from Grosset and Dunlap to Simon and Schuster for publication of new Nancy Drew books beginning in 1979.  The Stratemeyer Syndicate still fully controlled the series at that time.

The Stratemeyer Syndicate was sold to Simon and Schuster in 1984.  This is where Nancy Drew began to evolve into a character very different from what she was under the Stratemeyer Syndicate.  1984 was 35 years ago.  It has been so many years since the evolution began that it is astonishing how shocked people are about Nancy Drew's portrayal in CW Nancy Drew.

People who were exposed only to the original Grosset and Dunlap books must be, for the most part, near 50 years of age or older.  I was exposed to some of the Wanderer books when young, and I am 47.  I expected for fans younger than me to be more aware of how Nancy Drew has changed since the Grosset and Dunlap books, but it seems that many of them were just as shocked about the series.

The people who say that the new show is nothing like the books have not followed the evolution of Nancy Drew since 1984.  They cannot have followed it, or they would not be so surprised by how Nancy Drew is depicted in the show.  The character has been changing for 35 years and is now but a tiny piece of a corporate conglomerate.

Nancy Drew is owned by Simon and Schuster, but Simon and Schuster is owned by CBS Corporation.  CBS Corporation and Warner Brothers own The CW.  This means that, for all practical purposes, the current rights holder to Nancy Drew is responsible for the current television series on The CW.  Wrap your mind around what that means.  CBS Corporation can do anything it wants with Nancy Drew.  And so here we are.

Even though CW Nancy Drew uses the names of the classic Grosset and Dunlap books as Easter eggs sprinkled generously through each episode, the show is not at all based on the Grosset and Dunlap books.  The show is only based on versions of Nancy Drew that have been created since 1984.

Let's go over how Nancy Drew has evolved since 1984.  The versions pertinent to this discussion will be the only ones mentioned.  All media are considered.  Some fans feel that only the original books count, but that is not true.  The modern books are just as important, and so are all forms of media.  The importance of the Nancy Drew games fandom cannot be overstated.  Those fans are Nancy Drew fans, whether they have read the books or not.  Fans of other media, such as the comic books, movies, and television series, are also Nancy Drew fans.

In particular, note when Nancy has committed breaking and entering and when she has been arrested.  Many fans, particularly of the Grosset and Dunlap editions, have the mistaken belief that Nancy has never broken the law or been arrested in any of the books.

Simon and Schuster 1984 - present

The Nancy Drew Digest series ran from 1979 to 2003.  Simon and Schuster controlled the content of the series beginning in 1984.  Burt and Dave were dropped from the series.  It was a bit silly for Nancy Drew to have five friends (Bess, George, Ned, Burt, and Dave) who could travel around the world with her to solve mysteries.  By getting rid of the extra baggage, Bess and George could bring in mysteries involving various temporary boyfriends.  Ned sticks around.

Nancy does break into offices, hotel rooms, and other places in this series.  She uses either a lock pick or a credit card to open doors.  In one book, Nancy steals a master key to open a hotel room.

Simon and Schuster launched the Nancy Drew Files series in 1986.  This series ran until 1997.  In the Files, Nancy Drew investigates murder, which she never does in the original series.  Nancy and Ned do not get along, and Ned whines about Nancy's mysteries.  Nancy is arrested several times, and she quite often picks locks to break into various places.

The Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys Super Mystery series ran from 1988 to 1998.  Nancy also picks locks and commits breaking and entering.  Both Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys often break the law in this series.

The Nancy Drew On Campus series ran from 1995 to 1998.  This series was the first version to feature a gay character, and having a gay character in Nancy Drew adaptions becomes common by 2015.  George Fayne has sex and faces pregnancy fears.  The series deals with issues concerning drugs, date rape, and other modern teen issues.

The Nancy Drew Digest series ended in 2003, and the Nancy Drew Girl Detective series was launched.  Girl Detective ran from 2004 until 2012.  In Girl Detective, Nancy is thoroughly modernized.  She is imperfect, forgetful, and impulsive.  In #20 Getting Burned, Nancy breaks into a business to look for clues and is arrested.

CW Nancy Drew is sourced from all of these modern book series.

1995 Nancy Drew Television Series with Tracy Ryan

This version is based on the Nancy Drew Files series.  Ned is whiny and doesn't like Nancy's fixation on solving mysteries.

Nancy picks a lock to break into an office.  She also picks a lock to break into a house and then disables the alarm.  These are additional examples of breaking and entering.

Her Interactive 1997-present 

Nancy maintains her fearless personality quite well in the Nancy Drew games.  Furthermore, since the player is Nancy Drew, no one complains that she doesn't look right.  Nancy has quite a habit of breaking into buildings and taking things that don't belong to her.  The games wouldn't be much fun if Nancy were to avoid burglary and theft.  Nancy's behavior in the second episode of CW Nancy Drew is strongly inspired by her behavior in the Nancy Drew games.

A bulletin board featured in CW Nancy Drew in the police station is designed exactly like the bulletin boards seen in the Nancy Drew games.  One show features a scene in a pantry where there is a wine rack in front of a hidden safe.  The wine bottles are placed in the wine rack in a fashion that strongly resembles similar displays from the Nancy Drew games.

CW Nancy Drew has gone full-on supernatural, which is a distinct departure from the books.  However, the Her Interactive games have often had supernatural content.  In one game, Nancy goes around capturing ghosts.  The spirit seen in CW Nancy Drew looks very similar to the spirit seen in one of the Nancy Drew games.

A gay primary character is featured in Her Interactive's 2015 game, Sea of Darkness.

CW Nancy Drew is without doubt strongly based on the Nancy Drew games.  And interestingly, Her Interactive recently redesigned its Nancy Drew silhouette to match the silhouette seen in the title credits of CW Nancy Drew.

2002 Nancy Drew Pilot with Maggie Lawson

I remember the fan uproar over this version.  The movie opens with Nancy driving a car with her hands not on the wheel.  She also dodges in and out of traffic in a reckless fashion.  Nancy breaks into the athletic director's office and is arrested.

Nancy's behavior is much like the Nancy Drew of Nancy Drew Girl Detective, yet this movie came first.  Perhaps this movie inspired Nancy's characterization in the Girl Detective series.  In any case, the Nancy of this movie seems just like Nancy Drew Girl Detective.

Dynamite Comic Books 2017-2018

The Dynamite comic books relocate Nancy Drew to Bayport, where the Hardy Boys live.  The original draft of the pilot script for CW Nancy Drew also places Nancy Drew in Bayport.  By the time the show was filmed, the producers changed the location to Horseshoe Bay in Maine.  They likely did not wish to use River Heights because that name could be confused with Riverdale.

The Dynamite comic books feature George as Asian and lesbian.  George is Asian in CW Nancy Drew.  This development is logical, since George easily passes as an Asian girl, Chi Che Soong, in the 1961 book, The Mystery of the Fire Dragon.  Why not make George be Asian?

George is not lesbian in the television show, but another primary character is.

Since CW Nancy Drew uses several aspects of the comic books, it is definitely sourced from them.

Nancy Drew and the Hidden Staircase 2019

Nancy also breaks and enters in this movie and is arrested for it.

Some fans don't like Nancy's portrayal in this movie, but she's not that different than Nancy Drew Girl Detective.  She's just younger.

George is African American in the 2019 movie.
_______________________________________

George may no longer be Caucasian in future filmed versions.  Filmed versions will likely feature gay characters from this point on.

Simon and Schuster has so far avoided having any of the primary characters be gay or racially diverse in the Nancy Drew book series.  At some point in the future, that could change.

As the years pass and different people become involved with a franchise, the franchise takes on additional qualities that it never had before.  Some qualities may not stay with the franchise, but others will.

Are you exactly the same person you were earlier in life with no changes?  Nobody remains exactly the same.  Like all of us, Nancy Drew has changed over her lifespan, which in a few months will reach 90 years.  Nancy Drew will continue to change, regardless of what we think.  While new versions may not be based on the original 56 Nancy Drew books, those books will always be there for us.

What I Think of CW Nancy Drew

In "Figuring Out My Nancy Drew," I wrote about how I respond to filmed versions of Nancy Drew.

The inherent problem with filmed versions of books is that a filmed version cannot replicate what we see in our minds when we read the books.  Filmed versions will always fall short of expectation for that reason.

I am rather open-minded about various filmed versions of Nancy Drew, since I know that they cannot replicate my reading experience.  I do not like some versions very much or do not care about them, but they do not upset me.  I also keep quiet and don't tell other people when I don't particularly care for a certain version.  I don't want to spoil someone's joy or put negativity out there.  It just doesn't matter to me.

Books and filmed media are not at all the same, so there's no point in comparing one to the other.

After exploring my feelings about the different versions of Nancy Drew, I drew the following conclusion.

Regarding the different filmed versions of Nancy Drew, most of them are not my Nancy Drew.  In particular, Bonita Granville is not my Nancy Drew.  She's too silly.  The filmed versions that I like the very best are the 1995 television series starring Tracy Ryan and the 2002 television movie starring Maggie Lawson.  I tend to prefer the modern filmed versions over the vintage filmed versions.

Okay, so I figured it out.  I am a modern Nancy Drew girl.  I prefer the modern filmed versions, and I am quite fond of most of Simon and Schuster's Nancy Drew output from the 1980s to the present day, with the exception of the Nancy Drew Files and Nancy Drew Diaries series.  My Nancy Drew is a more modern version, which is why I am open-minded about new versions.  I just don't see a problem with Nancy Drew changing to fit modern society.

It was a foregone conclusion that I would like CW Nancy Drew.  There was never a question.  Now, let's go over details.

The opening sex scene of the first episode is disgusting.  I made two observations about the scene which skeeved me out tremendously.  One observation will remain unstated.  The other is that Nancy leaves Nick, walks immediately into the diner, and then begins serving tables.  She doesn't wash her hands.  Eww.

So, I hate that scene as much as anyone else, but I can overlook it.  The first episode is the pilot, and pilots are usually off.

Nancy did get some action a second time in the pilot episode and then again in the next episode.  That may be it so far.  It's not like I'm keeping track of Nancy's conquests.  The sex has not been the focus; rather, the show has gone full-on supernatural.

At first, some people thought that there would be a logical explanation for the spirits.  Um, no.  Vapors going into and coming out of objects made it apparent to me that the spirits would be real.  At this point, nobody is still saying that there might be a logical explanation.  The spirits are real, real, and real.

We are seven shows in, and George has been possessed.  Two séances have been conducted, the second one with unmistakable spirit contact.  A toy is currently possessed.  Nancy is being haunted by the ghost of Lucy Sable.  Black shadow figures are after Nancy and her friends.

It turns out that the sex at the beginning of the series was less of a problem than the supernatural aspect.  Some fans bailed at the beginning because of the sex.  Others are now losing interest because of the supernatural.

As for me, I was disconcerted by the spirit vapors and glimpses of spirits during the first few episodes.  It was just so weird for Nancy Drew.  By the end of the third episode, I accepted it.  Fine, Nancy Drew sees and talks to spirits.  Whatever.  It's cool.

I read young adult dystopian novels with really crazy stuff that makes no sense.  If I can suspend disbelief for those books, then I can watch a Nancy Drew show with spirits in it.  No problem.

This show with spirits everywhere is no different for me than any other filmed version of Nancy Drew.  No filmed version replicates what I experience when reading, so I have always seen filmed versions as alternate versions.  Supernatural Nancy Drew is no less real than Emma Robert's goody-goody Nancy Drew or Bonita Granville's silly Nancy Drew.  I have never expected any filmed version to be much like the books, so this one is no less valid than any of the others.

I actually like CW Nancy Drew quite a lot.  The whole supernatural thing is a lark and great fun.  Why not?

The show is like a soap opera.  The story continues from one episode to the next, and each episode features a different mixture of characters, just like in a soap opera.  The story moves slowly for that reason, but the journey is a lot of fun.

I have not heard a single negative comment about Kennedy McMann as Nancy Drew.  Even people who are put off by the sex or the supernatural aspect of the show seem to like Kennedy.  She is outstanding.  Based on her appearance, personality, and delivery of lines, Kennedy is the best Nancy Drew of all time.  She nails it in every way.  I am in awe of her.  I predict that Kennedy McMann will have a very successful career.

Carson Drew is problematic.  I think of him as a weasel.  I didn't dislike him at first like many people did, but I currently do not like him.  I expect my opinion will change for the better once he stops being so shady.  He's hiding something from Nancy, so he comes across as a... weasel.

George is awesome.  She gets all the best one-liners.  Nancy tries to help George carry an ice chest, and George snaps, "Get your hands off my chest!"

George's mother is hilarious.  She can communicate with spirits, and she gets drunk a lot.

I like Bess.  While the Bess from this series has a different background than Bess of the books, this Bess does have a similar personality.

I also like Ace.  I hope he is okay.  The ending of episode #7 has left us wondering about Ace's fate.

I go back and forth on Nancy's boyfriend, Nick.  I liked him at first and not as much currently.  Most likely, my opinion will keep fluctuating.

Ryan Hudson is supposed to be the bad guy.  I didn't like him at first, but I currently do.  The information revealed in episode #6 changed my opinion.

Chief McGinnis is beginning to grow on me.

I am neutral on Laura Tandy and the other supporting characters.

I typically do not watch television.  I used to be devoted to Survivor, but due to my autoimmunity and often feeling bad after a day's work, I lost patience for watching it around five to eight years ago.  Big Brother is the one show that I have continued to watch over the years.  However, I barely watched it this last summer due to my intense dislike of most of the cast, especially Jack and Jackson/Michie.  Ugh.

I watch very little television.

But I am watching this show.  I am making an occasion of it.  I sit in front of the television for the entire hour, doing nothing else.  That's astonishing that I'm actually sitting down and paying attention.

I really like this show.

Finding a Middle Ground to Discuss CW's Nancy Drew

A few days ago, I wrote about last week's Nancy Drew Fan Meltdown.  I explained how I decided not to allow discussion of Nancy Drew's sex life in the Facebook group that I moderate.  I had already created a scheduled post for discussion of the second episode.

On Wednesday, I second-guessed myself on how to handle the situation.  This happened because of another post someone created on that day that then resulted in some argumentative and unfortunate comments made by group members.  I was very worried about how my scheduled discussion post was going to be perceived and was very worried about how negative some members might be.

I suggested that members refrain from being negative in the post, and that caused members to threaten to leave the group.  People don't realize that threatening to leave a group does not have any effect on the moderators.  If those people leave, then they take their unhappiness with them.  That's actually not a problem.

Aside from that, I was just trying to create an environment where members can calmly discuss the show.  I didn't wish to censor the opinions of others, but people do need to remain calm and rational.  And regardless, they cannot discuss the sex since that leads to a debate about morality which then leads to religion.  People of varying backgrounds simply cannot rationally discuss morality and religion.

After I realized that censoring negative comments would create a bad environment in the group, I next decided to create two posts, one for the show and one against the show.  Fortunately, I came to my senses before it was too late.  I didn't need to create two posts and double the impact on the group.  I decided to stick with the original plan of one post and hoped that the people who hate the show would let others discuss it calmly.

In the meantime, I was told more than once that the group is about books, so the television show is outside of the focus.  I was also told that the Nancy Drew television show discussion should be in the Nancy Drew group instead.  Let's consider both points.

The group is about books, so the television show is outside of the focus.

If the group is only about books, then all filmed versions of Nancy Drew are outside of the group's focus.  And what about the Nancy Drew lunchbox and the collectibles based on the Pamela Sue Martin television series?  If we start banning filmed versions of Nancy Drew, do we also ban the collectibles based on those versions?

We will either allow all filmed versions of Nancy Drew, or we will ban all of them.  We will ban all or none.  What these people really want is for me to disallow the 2019 CW show from being discussed while allowing all previous versions.

Did you know that I strongly dislike the Bonita Granville Nancy Drew movies?  That is, I strongly dislike the only one that I have seen.  I dislike it so much that I have never watched the other three.  Whenever those movies are discussed, I barely glance at the comments.  I am uninterested.  I don't think people would want me to ban discussion of that version simply because I don't like it.  However, they want me to ban discussion of the 2019 show because they don't like it.

A few of them might also argue, "But the 2019 CW Nancy Drew show is too much of a departure from the books."  Actually, it isn't.  The show is a combination of the Nancy Drew Files and Nancy Drew On Campus series.  In the On Campus series, George Fayne has sex.

The Nancy Drew television show discussion should be in the Nancy Drew group.

If we use this argument, then Nancy Drew books should not be discussed in the group, either.  After all, we have a separate forum for Nancy Drew.  We might as well kick out Judy Bolton, Trixie Belden, the Hardy Boys, and a few others while we are at it.  They all have separate groups.

Neither suggestion is viable since both use flawed logic.  The suggestions were made just to try to get the 2019 show out of the group.

We are not going to selectively ban discussion of any version of Nancy Drew.  People are trying to wear me down, but I am not giving in.  This is a Nancy Drew show.  We will allow discussion, like it or not.

So, I went with my one discussion post and hoped for the best.  A few complaints popped up immediately, but this has—to this point—worked out far better than I expected.  It could become a disaster at any time, but we are managing to get along so far.  The people who hate the show can't say why since they can't mention the sex.  This seems to be keeping them to a low level of complaints, since the sex seems to be the main issue.

The people who don't like the show because of the sex are very unhappy that they cannot discuss their grievances.  One of them referred to not being able to say why and that it "hardly seems fair."  In a moderated forum, rules have to be followed for the general good.  We learned last week that allowing the sexual content of the show to be discussed without limit caused arguments about morality and religion.  Some members openly announced how much the comments offended them.  We simply cannot maintain a calm environment with that in the groups; therefore, we cannot allow discussion of the sex.

The original guidelines on my discussion post were these.

1. You are not allowed to discuss Nancy Drew's sex life or that of any other characters in the show. Any comments mentioning sex or using a euphemism to refer to sex will be deleted.

2. You may discuss any aspect of the show other than the sex scenes.

3. You may not resort to insults or attempt to bully someone else into changing their opinion.

I found last night that the rule against mentioning the sex had an unintended consequence, so I had to add another guideline to the discussion.

4. Avoid being combative. Play nice. Don't criticize someone's opinion.

What happened was that a couple of people said that they didn't like the show.  One person called it "rubbish."  No reason was given.  Someone got combative and said that the other person should say why they didn't like the show.  It turned out that the person who called the show "rubbish" was following the first guideline and couldn't say why.  The second person was out of line for trying to force the first person to say why, when that would have caused a rule to be broken.

On the surface, we seem to be getting along okay.  However, we have lost some members.  Three members left because of what happened on Sunday, detailed in my previous post.  At least two members have left since Wednesday's discussion post appeared in the group.  I had to remove one member after he defied me and bleated at me like a sheep, "Baaaah!"  At least six people are now gone from the group.

By the way, I do understand that for some people, sex in the show is intolerable, and they cannot watch the show for that reason.  Each person has to make a decision on what is best for their own general well being.  I can ignore that aspect of the show, and I want to see how the story plays out.  I also strongly desire to read the opinions of like-minded fans, hence my desire to have a calm place to discuss the show.  Those who do not like having a discussion post about the show in the group should ignore it just as I ignore the discussions about the Bonita Granville movies.

The Big Nancy Drew Fan Meltdown of 2019

On September 9, I wrote, "We are one month away from what could be the big Nancy Drew fan meltdown of 2019."  The original draft title of that post was "The Big Nancy Drew Fan Meltdown of 2019."  I changed it to "Figuring Out My Nancy Drew" after I decided on the approach I wanted to take.  That worked out well, since the title remained available for the actual meltdown.

The Nancy Drew fan meltdown played out exactly as I expected.  Fans could not deal with Nancy Drew having sex, so they went into complete hysteria over the show.  It was quite bad and rather embarrassing.  And it's not over.  I assume that Nancy will continue to have sex each week, and if so, the meltdown will continue for months.  How splendid.

Those of us who have been active in the online forums since the late 1990s and have been subscribers to series book magazines such as Yellowback Library did not have a meltdown.  Several expressed the opinion that they would have preferred for the sex not to have been in the show but stated that they enjoyed the show.  That is my opinion as well.  At least one of these fans is very against the sex but did not have a meltdown over it.  These fans are almost always very reasonable and grounded in their views about Nancy Drew and modern projects.  We want Nancy Drew to remain viable and understand that she will be modernized for current and future generations whether we like it or not.

Other fans were extremely angry, so much so that I question why they have so much anger over a fictional character being depicted as having sex in a fictional show.  We are talking about extreme anger.  They act like their lives have been ruined by the pilot episode of the Nancy Drew television series.

In fact, a few people actually stated that the show has ruined Nancy Drew for them, that it has ruined all of the books or ruined all of their memories of Nancy Drew.  This is a bit extreme.

Some people said that those of us who enjoyed the show are not "true Nancy Drew fans."  Honestly, that statement could be turned around to say that people who didn't enjoy the show are not "true Nancy Drew fans."  However, that would be mean.  There is nothing wrong with liking or not liking the show.  The problem is that people cannot seem to accept differing opinions.

Several people were cussing, calling Nancy Drew and other fans obscene names.

Some fans have the opinion that the television show is not like any Nancy Drew book.  I assume those people have only read the original 56 books.  The television show is like a combination of the Nancy Drew Files and the Nancy Drew On Campus series.

If you are thinking, but wait!  Nancy Drew didn't have sex in the books.  I don't believe that Nancy Drew ever did in the Nancy Drew On Campus series, but George Fayne certainly did!  Having sexual content in a filmed version of Nancy Drew is not a complete departure from the books.  At least, the Nancy Drew On Campus series did include sex.

Many people are also offended simply because Nancy Drew is not like their idea of Nancy Drew, as in "not my Nancy Drew."  One person announced that she was starting a campaign called #notmynancy.  That person also cussed a lot.

Normally, we can escape into our series book discussions and ignore the craziness in the world.  Finally, that craziness has invaded our safe place.  I never thought I would have to create this Facebook group rule:  You are no longer allowed to discuss Nancy Drew's sex life in this group.

That rule isn't something I just thought up because of what happened this weekend in a group I moderate.  Not at all.

Back in February, a digital copy of the script of the show's pilot episode was shared with me.  I knew that the sexual content was going to be quite problematic, but I didn't have an answer for how to handle it at that time.

It was during the summer that the average fan began to learn about the sexual content of the show via some online articles.  The reaction was quite negative but not a full meltdown.  It was then that I decided that I would ban all discussion of the show's sexual content in the group that I moderate.  I did not tell anyone about that decision, but I had a firm resolve that I would not allow fans to fight about the sexual content.

I originally was going to warn fans of my decision in the one to two weeks before the first episode aired.  I ended up not doing that.  Ultimately, I decided to keep quiet about my unannounced new rule until the negativity began invading the group.  I wanted to let the members see for themselves why the new rule was necessary.

Oddly, it took a little more than three days for the inappropriate comments to begin in that group.  The meltdown had been in full swing in another group for those three days.  Once the comments in the group I moderate began to deteriorate, I pulled the plug, stating that members cannot discuss Nancy Drew's sex life.

That decision was mine and mine alone.  I don't care if some members hate the rule.  I am so firm in my resolve that the rule is the right decision that I do not care in the slightest who disagrees or how angry they are.  I made the decision months ago, and I stand behind it.  Those of us who do not want to read complaints about sex outside of marriage ad nauseam needed for a rule to be in place.  If people want to complain about Nancy Drew having sex, then there are a number of places online where that can be done.  I suggest complaining directly to The CW.  I don't want to hear about it.

And yes, there are at least three people who are so against the new rule that they left the group.  Two of those people were regular, active participants in the group.  It's odd to give up access and all future participation in a group about vintage children's books simply because one wants to preach about the immorality of sex outside of marriage.  I don't get it.

While I would prefer that the sex not be in the show, I can ignore it.  That is what I did last week, and I will continue to do so.  The show has an intriguing mystery, and I look forward to seeing how it plays out.

Figuring Out My Nancy Drew

We are one month away from what could be the big Nancy Drew fan meltdown of 2019.  A new Nancy Drew television series starring Kennedy McMann will premiere on the CW network on October 9.  The series has already caused controversy and arguments between fans, and fans have not even seen it yet.  If the episode is faithful to the script that has been circulating online, then some fans will get quite upset because of the sex scenes.

The CW’s Nancy Drew Won’t Directly Adapt Any Books, But It Will Be Horny

Personally, I don't care whether Nancy Drew is horny or not.  In a perfect world, a Nancy Drew television series would be based upon the Grosset and Dunlap books, which means that she would not be horny.  Of course, I would prefer that.  However, we do not live in a perfect world, so there you go.

I want Nancy Drew to be strong and independent and motivated to solve mysteries.  You know, not like Nancy is portrayed in Nancy Drew Diaries #16 The Haunting on Heliotrope Lane.  Yes, I will keep linking to that one review.  If Nancy Drew has to be horny in order to be strong, independent, and motivated, then I can deal with it.

That aside, fans have already begun fighting among themselves due to varying opinions about this television series and how Nancy Drew will be portrayed.  The biggest problems arise when some fans make very strong statements including the phrase "not my Nancy Drew" or "not Nancy Drew."  Other fans have pointed out that the latter phrase is outright wrong, since a television series titled "Nancy Drew" is Nancy Drew by default, so the statement "not Nancy Drew" is inaccurate.  Using "not my Nancy Drew" also offends others, since one person's Nancy Drew may not be another person's Nancy Drew.

I find all of this to be rather interesting and have reflected upon it at length in recent months.

The inherent problem with filmed versions of books is that a filmed version cannot replicate what we see in our minds when we read the books.  Filmed versions will always fall short of expectation for that reason.

I am rather open-minded about various filmed versions of Nancy Drew, since I know that they cannot replicate my reading experience.  I do not like some versions very much or do not care about them, but they do not upset me.  I also keep quiet and don't tell other people when I don't particularly care for a certain version.  I don't want to spoil someone's joy or put negativity out there.  It just doesn't matter to me.

This got me to thinking:  Exactly which Nancy Drew books are my Nancy Drew?  To do this right, I must analyze both the cover art and the stories.  I will also use "not my Nancy Drew" repeatedly, so bear with me.  It's not a phrase that I like or have ever used, but it is appropriate in this discussion.  My use of "not my Nancy Drew" will offend some of you, which will make my point.  You've been warned.

Nancy Drew #1-34, original text with 25 chapters

Stories:  I did not read any of these books when young.  I like them, but I view them as a quaint older version.  Nancy doesn't act like Nancy should.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Cover Art:  I love the cover art, but again, this is older cover art.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Nancy Drew #1-34 revised text and #35-56

Stories:  I did read these books when young.  This should be my Nancy Drew.  Guess what?  It's not.  Many of the stories have not held up well, and I do not like them as much as I did when young.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Cover Art:  That stupid flip hairstyle.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Nancy Drew #57-78

Stories:  I don't like these books.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Cover art:  The cover art is good but looks a bit dated.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Nancy Drew #79-175

Stories:  Many of the stories are sabotage, but ignoring that aspect, these stories are quite good.  You know what?  This is my Nancy Drew.

Cover art:  I like the cover art for pretty much all titles.  Yes, this is my Nancy Drew.

Nancy Drew Files

Stories:  This Nancy Drew annoys me because of her relationship with Ned.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Cover art:  The cover art is fine, but this is not my Nancy Drew.

Nancy Drew Girl Detective

Stories:  I actually like this chick.  Aside from when Nancy is portrayed as too forgetful, I like this version.  This is my Nancy Drew.

Cover art:  Just take a look at the banner on my Facebook page.  I love the logo.  This is my Nancy Drew.

Nancy Drew Diaries

Stories:  Don't get me started.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Cover art:  The cover art is pretty, but Nancy is too young.  Not my Nancy Drew.

Regarding the different filmed versions of Nancy Drew, most of them are not my Nancy Drew.  In particular, Bonita Granville is not my Nancy Drew.  She's too silly.  The filmed versions that I like the very best are the 1995 television series starring Tracy Ryan and the 2002 television movie starring Maggie Lawson.  I tend to prefer the modern filmed versions over the vintage filmed versions.

Okay, so I figured it out.  I am a modern Nancy Drew girl.  I prefer the modern filmed versions, and I am quite fond of most of Simon and Schuster's Nancy Drew output from the 1980s to the present day, with the exception of the Nancy Drew Files and Nancy Drew Diaries series.  My Nancy Drew is a more modern version, which is why I am open-minded about new versions.  I just don't see a problem with Nancy Drew changing to fit modern society.

Even when the version has problems, I still get some pleasure out of it.  I also actually do enjoy reading the Nancy Drew Diaries series.  The books are seriously flawed, but I get a kick out of writing my reviews.  I am especially proud of my Heliotrope Lane review, which is why I keep linking to it.  Oops, I did it again.

Did my use of "not my Nancy Drew" offend you when I applied it to the original text books?  If so, then that's why fans of more modern versions get so upset when "not my Nancy Drew" is used.  I do not get offended by that phrase, but I wish people would quit using it due to the trouble it causes.

I would never use "not my Nancy Drew" aside from what I just did in this post because I have always thought of Nancy Drew as the composite of every Nancy Drew that has ever been.  My Nancy Drew is actually every single one of them combined.  Nancy Drew is the sum total of every version of Nancy Drew that has ever existed.  She is that brash girl from 1930, that poised young woman from 1965, and that quirky girl detective from 2003.  She is Pamela Sue Martin, Emma Roberts, Maggie Lawson, Sophia Lillis, Tracy Ryan, Bonita Granville, and soon to be Kennedy McMann.

Nancy Drew is so much more than the character from the original text books.  She has become part of our culture.  As Nancy Drew changes with the times, the essence of the character remains the same.  Nancy Drew transcends time and space.  She has existed since 1930 and will exist so long as published or filmed versions remain available.  She represents many different things to many people, but at her core is a confident young woman who likes to solve mysteries.

Long live Nancy Drew!