Compare!

The first thing I noticed (and was annoyed by) is that in the books Erik van der Woodsen is Serena's older, not younger brother...

I've also heard that in the show, Dan's father and Serena's mother went to the same high school.

Jenny in the books is well endowed and that's certainly not the case in the show. That was a central part of her character in the books, so I really don't know how her character is going to be in the show.

Also, Rufus is way older in the books.

In the books most of the main characters were seniors. I am going to guess that they will be juniors on the show in order to stretch out the high school years.

The Humphrey family has moved from the Upper West Side to Brooklyn.

No Vanessa? Why isn't Vanessa cast?

Oh and also Jenny is blonde on the show? What happened to that curly brown hair?

She has been.

Not a spoiler: There will be Vanessa, just not right away.

I guess for me I just think that Josh Schwartz is totally going to set this up like the OC all over again with the love triangle between Serena/Nate/Blair - like the books but Dan is being totally pegged as the "wrong guy from the other side of the tracks." I really don't like how he's made out to be almost like Ryan Atwood. Maybe I should start a compare/contrast with Josh's show if there isn't one already started?

Example: I feel like the trailers are misleading. If you read the books, essentially Dan dates Serena for like a few chapters and ...it looks like Josh Schwartz is totally going to drag it out.

I always found one of the best aspects of The OC was that it burned through story so fast. There wasn't a triangle in the first season that lasted more than a few episodes, and even the slower-paced third season still showed at least as much movement as any given book in the series. Maybe I'm not understanding your point.

I agree with you, I don't think I made my point clear enough. I hope that Josh will follow the pace of the quick books like he did in the first season of the O.C. I just think Josh has a tendency to do the same things repeatedly. I hope he's learned not to do the same things over again because that can get boring.

I always cheered more in the books for Serena/Nate because I thought they were more compatible for each other. It'll be interesting to see if Josh makes this one big theme for the entire season or if he will wrap it up quickly and move on to other plotlines.

I saw your post in the other thread after I replied, and it cleared up what you meant -- I should have come back to edit. I definitely agree that they're a great pair, and that it would suck to watch them be in love indefinitely and have various obstacles thrown in their paths, etc. If every relationship could be more Seth/Summer and less Marissa/Ryan, I'd be happy. Every relationship on TV, frankly, could fall closer to the S/S line there, and I say that as a loud Marissa lover.

I also think that a lot of the differences already noted in this thread point to a more open playing field, as far as the drama and relationships that are possible in the show. Rufus and Lily, Eric and Jenny ... they're all viable within their age groups in ways they kind of aren't, in the books. I think that's a good indicator that the relationships will be as fluid, if not moreso, than in the books.

The characters, just from the pilot alone, are nearly all already more complex and layered than they managed to be in a dozen books. That is to say, the plots and plot differences don't matter to me as much as watching the living, breathing characters that the writers and actors are creating.

I love the books, but I'd love it if they burned through the whole series in the first season or so, and just got on with it. I personally think The O.C.'s finest hour was S4, where nearly all of the show's original dynamics were completely 180 from where they started. It was brilliant!

I wonder what they are going to do re: Jenny. In the books she goes all wild-child and gets kicked out of Constance Billard and of course gets her own spin-off novel in which she attends Waverly Academy. With the blonde/boobless make-over show Jenny has recieved, I doubt they are going to follow the book storyline, but it will be intersting to see.

Mini-thing: in the books, the Humphreys lived on the Upper West Side; in the show, they live in Brooklyn. I read an interview where Josh Schwartz said that this was because the difference between West Side (more creative/liberal) and the East Side (Wall Street/conservative) was very local knowledge (as opposed to Brooklyn, which spells out the differences in a more obvious manner), but as a person from NY who lived on the Upper West Side pretty close to where Dan and Jenny were supposed to live, I loved it.

I actually kind of hope that Josh does drag the story lines out a little longer than intended with the books. That was a really huge problem I had whenever I read a GG book. I hated how everything was moved around so quickly. I barely had time to invest in the characters and couples. When I watch a show, I need to care about the people on it. If they have Serena, Nate, and Blair switching up partners over and over and over again the way they did in the books, it's going to be hard for me to give a crap about those relationships, the same way I didn't when I read about them in the books. I'm not saying I want a repetitive Blair/Nate/Serena triangle that drags along for two whole seasons, but it would be nice to have it slowly developed one that I can get invested in.

I think that the best thing for the show would be to go through as much as they need from the book for everything to make sense, and then ditch the books entirely à la Roswell. Although I like the books, I would like to see the writers come up with new characters and storylines that I haven't seen or read a thousand times.

Agreed. I read like half a dozen of the books earlier this summer, and plot-wise, the only things in the pilot I found interesting were the ones that differed from the books. I hope they abandon the books as quickly as possible and just let the series do its own thing.

When I was watching I kept getting annoyed with how the show deviated from the books, but then I remembered that the books are kind of crappy. Now I'm interested in seeing how it all unfolds.

Aside from the obvious character differences (Serena's brother, Blair's mom, Jenny, Rufus), Dan seems more attractive and likeable on the show and not so self-involved and pretentious. But he's not writing awful poetry yet.

While I love the books (in a purely "they entertain me" way), I was pretty happy with the changes made for the show, mostly because they entertained me also. Except for the whole thing with Jenny. Why not make her have curly hair and big boobs? Then I would believe more that she is unpopular and believe how much she has to fight for it. I hope they make her fight to be be popular and everything, that is one character I don't want them to change completely. I also don't like Serena all that much, she's supposed to be so charming and beautiful... On the show she just makes me go, "Eh".

Well, she's frosch. She's new to the whole world. After a long time reading GG.net, she's now entered the very school that Serena and Blair have ruled. It makes sense that she'd worry about popularity and fighting to be popular, just based on age.

One of the best deviations from the books (IMO) is that they didn't make Rufus a 50/60s beat writer-- That never made sense to me, time-line wise in the books, as he should be way older, as should his kids, if this was true... the has-been 90s rock star is more realistic.

One thing that bothers me about the show is all the new connections they've made -- now Chuck is Nate's friend, Dan's dad and Serena's mom have a history, Serena's mom is seeing Chuck's dad, etc. It's all a little too convenient (and complicated). I'd rather see those connections develop over time, rather than start out with them all in place.

But mostly, I miss the characters of the books. The GG books aren't great literature, but their characters are actually well-developed and unique -- the fact that pothead Nate was the son of an admiral said something about him, as did the fact that Serena adored and missed her older brother, and Blair was obsessed with Audrey Hepburn and Yale. The Humphreys' hippie dad and missing mom made it clear just how much they did not fit into the GG world, and made Jenny's awkwardness and longing to belong with the "perfect" kids a little more meaningful. But now the characters are all so interchangeable. (I'm still not sure I can tell the difference between Nate and Chuck.) And their conflicts are so black-and-white (Blair vs. Serena, popular vs. unpopular), whereas in the books they were more nuanced.

And in the books, didn't these kids kind of...enjoy life? They're all so miserable on the show.

If I'm not mistaken, didn't Serena bring over Breakfast at Tiffany's to Blair's house in tonight's epiosde? So Blair still may be obsessed with Audrey. And I think that Serena adores her younger brother on the show just as much as she adored her older brother in the books. She seems to really care about him, and she seems to visit him and talk to him a lot (from what we've seen so far).

I feel like, in the books (all of which I read, despite the fact that I kind of despised them and all the characters contained therein), they enjoyed having the money and power, but their lives were really, really screwed up (Hi, Serena-Blair-Nate and your ENTIRELY fucked up relationship).

I like the show so much more than the books and, as a literary nerd/English major, I never thought I'd say something like that.

Also? Did anyone else get a much more effeminate/slightly-gay vibe from Chuck in the books? I kind of like this Chuck better (even though he's basically evil.)

Count me among those who are irritated at how much they changed Jenny.

Edited because "getting" a vibe and "gaying" a vibe are different.

Chuck in the books is effeminate/slightly-gay to me. The vibe is so there.

As for Jenny, it does not bother me. I knew that there is no way Jenny would have DD chest, have hair issues and be short. Just like Vanessa will not have a shaved head. She will have a normal hair on the show.

The Vanessa thing wouldn't bother me so much, I think, because I hated her in the books. Any change is an improvement, IMHO.

I just finished reading the first book and I was kind of amazed that an awesome show like Gossip Girl could come from such a shitty book, the same way I thought about Devil Wears Prada. Like the Gossip Girl books are just so ridiculously bad and over-the-top in all the wrong ways, and I think the TV series is sidestepping a lot of that because I think GG books were trying so hard to be edgy reading for tweens.

In the later books he does have a relationship with a guy. I'm personally hoping that Chuck's monkey makes an appearance on the show.

I'm glad about the changes to Dan. In the books he comes across as a pretentious artist, whereas in the show he just comes across as a normal guy to contrast against the rich kids.

Rufus was an editor of obscure Beat poets, not a Beat writer, but it's much more interesting to make him a musician.

Yeah, his heydey appears to have been the late 80s/early 1990's.

Everytime I see Chuck I imagine him with that monkey. He could totally work it.

I wish they'd kept Rufus as a poet. I see that changing his character lets him have the plotlines he does, but I liked his book character better just because it made Dan and Jenny believable. Why hasn't Dan touched a pot of coffee or a cigarette? When V comes along, they're going to be harder to believe than Dan and Serena.

edited because I spelled Jenny like my stupid friend does

It seems like Rufus probably wrote or helped to write the songs for his band, so that's kind of like being a poet.

Chiming in to complain about the re-characterisation of Jenny. I agree with most of the posts already up: half of Jenny's (Problems? Character? Confidence or lack thereof?) came from the fact that she was too short, her hair was too curly, and her boobs were too big. Taylor's Jenny really only suffers from being too poor, being on the wrong side of NY and being too young. She's too cute (what is up with those legs!) I don't think that TVJenny going the same way as BookJenny will be as entertaining - more like watching a train wreck than watching the gossip columns.

In light of the newly released GG prequel, I must add my two cents. One of the books biggest areas of conflict is the B/N/S triangle, which I don't think the show is going to explore to the same degree at all. And Dan is so hugely different in the books, its like he's a new character they invented for TV. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily like book Dan, but he's much more private in the books.

So, when I normally read a book that has been adapted in to a movie/ show, most of the time I end up picturing the actor...but not always. For GG though, I never see the actor, but the people I pictured in my head. Except for maybe Blair. It could be because I'd already read 11 books before seeing the show and had a set picture in my mind, but I think it might also be that the small character differences in everyone set them apart from their book character. But Blair is the most similar to her book character, so I think I see her in the books most clearly. Does this make any sense?

I have a hard time picturing book Serena, mainly because they make her out to be this fantastic beauty. The books do a good job in describing Rufus, Dan, and Jenny. Of course, book Rufus wouldn't be that appealing to have on TV, book Dan is a lot less attractive than TV Dan, and Jenny is completely different in look but similar in attitude. Book Blair was described fairly well and the TV version fits that description. Book Nate and TV Nate seem to be two completely different people, mainly because they've taken away large portions of his personality (e.g., the playing sports with the guys in the park and sailing). Book and TV Chuck are close, although I noticed that his scarf isn't monogrammed.

I used to be a devoted (albeit for the most part silent) fan of Veronica Mars, diligently tuning in to TWOP weekly to read Couch Baron's recaps and hunt out any spoilers. The only reason I tuned into Gossip Girl was because of Kristen Bell. (I admit I don't always like her voiceovers, but it's the lines and definitely not her delivery that's to blame.) I was soon hooked to my Wednesday's guilty pleasure.

I decided to post first in this topic because I have a couple of questions regarding the differences between the books and the tv series. I have never read the books, so I have no clue what happens in them except for what I've read here. Blatant descriptive differences aside (Nate not being blond and green-eyed, Jenny brunette and big-chested, etc) I would like to know what happens with the "parent plot" in the books? Was there even one? I know about the remarriage of Eleanor Waldorf to Cyrus Rose and the subsequent birth of Blair's half-sister.

But what happened with the van der Woodsen and Humphrey parents? Was there a triangle as exists on the show between Lily, Rufus and Alison? What happened to Mr van der Woodsen (Serena's dad)? And her stepfathers (since Lily apparently has married several times)? And did Lily ever get together with Bart Bass or anything along those lines in the books?

Any help with these queries is much appreciated. =)

n.b. With regard to tjl's post above, I believe TV Nate also goes sailing - not shown (yet), but GG made passing reference to him being on the Archibald family yacht to explain his absence in the most recent episode.

As far as I remember, there was never a romance between the Humphreys and van der Woodsens, outside of Serena and Dan. I think that was something the show made (but it's been a while since I picked up any of the books and payed attention to the parents, so I could be wrong). The only parents who really got mentioned were Blair's.

Serena's were almost nonexistant, except for her image-concious mom. The only emphasis on Serena's family was Erik.

I think I like the book characters more, to be honest. It's probably why Blair is my favorite on the show-- she's pretty much the only one who resembles her book character in the least. Not that the change is bad, per se, it's just made the show entirely different from what I thought it would be, and I think a lot of the things that made the books enjoyable were lost in the shuffle. Don't even get me started on the Humphreys; they were pretentious assholes in the books, but they were loveable, realistic, pretentious assholes. Now they rub me the wrong way. Hopefully Dan will be changed once Vanessa is in the picture.

That may be, but in the books it is a big part of his character, and in the show it is practically non-existant.

As gabrieller92 already stated, there was no romance (or, I think, interaction of any kind) between the van der Woodsen and Humphrey parents in the books. Also, Dan's mother in the books was living in Prague with a count, not in upstate New York with Alexander Bancroft. Mr. van der Woodsen was around (I believe he went on the ski trip to Sun Valley), so, while he was not an important character in the books, I don't think Mrs. van der Woodsen was the serial wife she is on the show. And Lily never did anything with Bart Bass in the books.

Thanks for all your replies. I guess then the show is proceeding in a completely new direction with the parent plot. I'm not sure if this is spoiler-y, but the Rufus/Lily/Alison triangle is going to be a pretty big deal on the show, apparently. And there seems to be a substantial storyline involving Captain Archibald coming up as well.

What have they done to Vanessa! Vanessa is not meant to have hair! Vanessa....she was the anti-girl, who filmed pigeons pecking at condoms and only wore black clothing and couldn't care less about, well, everything! I loved Book Vanessa - she was so different from Blair and Serena and the other Constance Billiard girls, yet she was so strong and passionate and that made her cool in her own right. And sure, she pined after Dan, but it was hidden pining! It wasn't running away, and coming back and pretending to be friends.....grrrrr!

Sorry, I'm sure after a day or so I'll calm down and be able to discuss this rationally. Until then.

becbec, I agree with you completely. This is the first critical casting fuckup on the show to date.

I feel no charisma from the actor as yet, but I look at it this way: at the least, Vanessa will be a real person, which I never felt from the books. I always thought of her (reader bias?) as a total joke, like Dan Times Ten: less a moral compass and more something to laugh at. I also felt this way about Dan in the books. So, if they do have as good a job at making Vanessa real and lovable as they did Dan, I'm not worried at all. I'd rather have a real life Vanessa that I can love and hate in the story, than a book-Vanessa whose every move pissed me off.

I guess if I was buying book-Vanessa I would hate show-Vanessa, but she was always my total enemy in the books, so I'm grateful for the opportunity to see her as a real character whose changing relationships with the other characters are more than just signs of development. Blair's friendship with V was about Blair getting cooler, not about V: I never felt V changed at all. This way, I feel like Vanessa can be the balance.

Obviously, she's going to represent the part of himself that Dan is losing, at least for awhile. That's good TV. But keeping her in the cast is, I think, essential. She can be a real person. I think she can bridge the gap a lot better than Dan's going to, and I think once the character calms down and stops trying to impress us, she could be really neat. Look how far Dan's come!

I didn't like Vanessa in the books either, but I still am kinda upset about the drastic change in character on the show, if that makes any sense. It's just a HUGE change.. because in the books, I felt like Vanessa and Dan fit well together because of their similarities. On the show, it doesn't seem like they're that similar at all. Or maybe they are and we just don't know it yet. I don't know, I guess I shouldn't really be judging her so soon because we've only seen her in one episode so far, but I can't help it.

That's my take. I feel like appearances aside, she serves the same or a better purpose in the show. I'm sad to lose bald Vanessa, but not if it makes her as human and wonderful as show-Dan has become.

Heh. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa.

Perhaps I should just jump off my high horse and give the show a chance to show me where they're going to take the character of Vanessa - but honestly, unless that girl gets a camera in her hand and a spine in her body soon.....No, no. I'll be nice. I promise. I'm just not very patient.

Ooh, I hate hate HATE TV Vanessa! I was never a huge book V fan, but come on. I mean, she doesn't like balls and makes Ukranian food. Oooh, she is sooo different than Serena. What's a Dan to do? Sigh. I am so disappointed with her and Dan on the show. Maybe it wouldn't translate well, but its definitely bugging me.

Oh, that's exactly how I feel. I couldn't care less about Vanessa in the books, but it's like they introduced a completely different (in all aspects) person who happens to also be named Vanessa.