Book Review: Peter Pan
Although I've talked more about Jane Eyre, Peter Pan is actually the first of the English classics I'm working on that I've finished.
It clearly became a classic because of the plays and the Disney movie, because the book -
1. The redskins. Who call Peter their Great White Father. *headdesk*
2. Wendy spends most of the books darning socks - no, really, I'm not exaggerating. And that's actually the least disturbing thing about her character, because when she's not darning socks she's either in a jealous snit with one of the other female characters (there are three, and they're all in love with Peter), or somehow putting them all in danger - Barrie has carefully contrived things so that every time danger arrives, it's either Wendy's fault, or she somehow makes it worse.
3. The authorial voice is intrusive. I didn't find it to bad, but I have experience with Victorian/Edwardian literature; I think a kid might find it more obnoxious.
4. Especially given that the authorial voice is intruding to inform the reader that Wendy and John and Michael really deserved for their mother to close the window and lock them out of the nursery because they were such bad children (although of course she never did), or that children are "innocent and heartless." I defy you to find me a child who would describe herself that way, or take kindly to hearing such a description.
It isn't, though it's ostensibly a children's book, really a book about children from their own point of view. Nor is it an adult looking back at childhood with rose-tinted nostalgia (which I think is what most people think it is); and it isn't even an adult book masquerading as a children's book. It's really more along the lines of a selfish parent looking at his offspring, emotional needy and incapable of reciprocating for emotional support as offspring, and going "My God, you bratty little children, you're emotional vampires. And you're doing it on purpose because you're SO SELFISH."
5. This is most clearly visible in the character of Peter Pan, who is pretty close to sociopathic. He's cruel to the Lost Boys; he regularly forgets that other people exist (including occasionally forgetting even Wendy's names); he's just, all around, a very unpleasant character.
All that being said, I understand why the stage versions (and later the movie version) became so popular. It would cut out the overbearing authorial voice entirely, which would be a big improvement, and an actor playing Peter Pan (with a few adjustments to the character) could make him very charming. The Neverland concept, of an ever-changing world of children's dreams and nightmares, is really pretty spiffy; and infinitely adjustable to change with changing times, as well.
It clearly became a classic because of the plays and the Disney movie, because the book -
1. The redskins. Who call Peter their Great White Father. *headdesk*
2. Wendy spends most of the books darning socks - no, really, I'm not exaggerating. And that's actually the least disturbing thing about her character, because when she's not darning socks she's either in a jealous snit with one of the other female characters (there are three, and they're all in love with Peter), or somehow putting them all in danger - Barrie has carefully contrived things so that every time danger arrives, it's either Wendy's fault, or she somehow makes it worse.
3. The authorial voice is intrusive. I didn't find it to bad, but I have experience with Victorian/Edwardian literature; I think a kid might find it more obnoxious.
4. Especially given that the authorial voice is intruding to inform the reader that Wendy and John and Michael really deserved for their mother to close the window and lock them out of the nursery because they were such bad children (although of course she never did), or that children are "innocent and heartless." I defy you to find me a child who would describe herself that way, or take kindly to hearing such a description.
It isn't, though it's ostensibly a children's book, really a book about children from their own point of view. Nor is it an adult looking back at childhood with rose-tinted nostalgia (which I think is what most people think it is); and it isn't even an adult book masquerading as a children's book. It's really more along the lines of a selfish parent looking at his offspring, emotional needy and incapable of reciprocating for emotional support as offspring, and going "My God, you bratty little children, you're emotional vampires. And you're doing it on purpose because you're SO SELFISH."
5. This is most clearly visible in the character of Peter Pan, who is pretty close to sociopathic. He's cruel to the Lost Boys; he regularly forgets that other people exist (including occasionally forgetting even Wendy's names); he's just, all around, a very unpleasant character.
All that being said, I understand why the stage versions (and later the movie version) became so popular. It would cut out the overbearing authorial voice entirely, which would be a big improvement, and an actor playing Peter Pan (with a few adjustments to the character) could make him very charming. The Neverland concept, of an ever-changing world of children's dreams and nightmares, is really pretty spiffy; and infinitely adjustable to change with changing times, as well.