Since this is about a TV show, I’m it moving to Cafe Society.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Sometimes they are labeled as victims of “genericide,” but there’s no special term for them. A generic term is a generic term. A trademark owner might dispute that it is generic, but that’s a different issue.
I take it you don’t watch The First 48. It’s a documentary series, with real homicide cops talking to real witnesses with 48 hours of the crime. The Pampers people would really have to be on the ball to get in there and set up a product placement deal.
The Simpson’s is one double play on words after another. You should always assume that if a double meaning is possible, they mean the sacastic one, not the dictionary definition.
Did anyone else expect this thread to be about “Sneed’s Seed & Feed?”
Nope, it’s the diaper thing. I swear, that’s always the first place my mind goes whenever I hear the word.
IME, Pampers is used, often in preference, to diapers. This is very much the same way that a lot of people will say Kleenix instead of tissue or Xerox instead of photocopy. I concur with the diaper interpretation, more specifically, what GuanoLad said. That is, we assume that he associates pampers with diapers and thus “to be pampered” to mean “to be put in diapers”.
As for product placement, I REALLY don’t think that’s the case here. In fact, I recall Cecil doing a column a few months ago about copyright, patents, and trademarks in which he cited cases where trademarks were difficult to enforce because the product name had begun to replace the generic name
Can I tack on my own Simpsons reference question?
Homer just got a pimp ice cream truck, courtesy of Otto. He then says something to the effect of, “now I’m going to get dressed in a very unusual fashion”. Spotlight on Homer, and all his clothes come hurtling at him piece by piece. I imagine it’s from some sort of action movie I haven’t seen? I dunno.
It is the openning sequency to “Da Ali G show”.
…
Well, I thought I was editing the first post, but it turns out to be a double post. Then i try and delete the double post and that doesn’t work either, so here I am on my third try.
It is a reference to the openning scene to “Da Ali G Show” starring Sascha Baron Cohen, whom you probably best recognize as Borat.
And to complete the hijack:
Why, yes… yes, I did.
Furthermore, remember that Bart is young, and most Americans learn the “diapers” meaning long before they learn the original meaning. It’s not outside the realm of possibility that Bart just doesn’t know the word has some other meaning. The erudite Lisa, of course, is another story.
And even if they did they wouldn’t want their product name used as a synonym for diapers.
[hijack] At the end of the Lord of the Flies-like episode, Jame Earl Jones (?) intones that the kids are rescued by “oh, say, Moe” or something like that. Is that just a quirk or is there some allusion that I’m missing?[/hijack]
I think that’s just an anti-ending, which is something they did way too much for my taste as the show got older. It feels like they’re not doing it quite as much now, though.
However, they’ve hinted a few times that Moe is nicer than he lets on, like when he cries while reading Little Women to the men at the homeless shelter, or his friendship with Maggie, or his adventures after the end of Homer’s boxing career.
But how does “Not literally” explain anything then?
Ok, the plot thickens:
Now that makes sense! Bart’s worried that they will literally cram him full of food.
That’s exactly what I posited and then retracted, up in posts #5 and 7 (and, uh, which you quoted, in #9). Given the large number of people who interpret it as being about diapers (both here and elsewhere on the Internet), and the utter lack of anyone else who felt it had to do with being crammed with food, I’m sticking with the retraction.