If You're Gonna Write a Review of a "Sequel". . .
. . . at least familiarize yourself with the source material!
Dinitia Smith's obvious lack of readership of the REAL Peter Pan is indicated here:
(Barrie’s original fairy, Tinker Bell, seems to have disappeared.)
If you'd read the book in the first place, you silly ass, you'd know that Tink doesn't reappear when Peter comes back for Wendy at a later "spring cleaning" time, nor does she accompany him when he retreives Wendy's daughter Jane. . .or her granddaughter, Margaret. . .because Tink has gone the way all fairies go when there are no children to believe in them.
Duh! Ignorance is irritating in the general population, but it's positively intolerable in a critic.
(My personal favorite edition of Peter Pan has drawings by Scott Gustafson. I think that they are particularly charming and really accompany the story, rather than try to tell it.)
posted by Lizzy Wednesday @ 1:50 PM
7 Comments:
Well, shoot, Lizzy, don't you know that the movie versions are always verbatim. All she has to do is pop in the Disney classic and know all there is to know about Peter. ;o)
Bite me.
Disney "updated" the story to make it palatable for a "modern" American audience who's as uncomfortable with death as the Victorians were realistic about it.
They also made Wendy into a helpless, fawning-over-Peter, jealous little snit. And Peter became more like a misogynist Puck in A Midsummer Night's Dream than simply a little boy who didn't grow up.
There's a part in Peter Pan where Wendy asks if there aren't any "Lost Girls" and Peter answers that Girls are "far too clever" to fall out of their 'prams while their nurses aren't watching, so, no, there aren't Lost Girls. Only Lost Boys.
Bottom line? This chick needs to read Peter Pan, not pop in the Disney version, you silly ass.
You mean Disney got it wrong? So unlike them. Next thing you're going to tell me is that the Little Mermaid never lived happily-ever-after with Prince Eric. Or that there was no glass slipper in Cinderella. I mean, really, Lizzy, we all know that Disney are known truth mongers and they would NEVER fabricate a story.
You must have read it wrong. ;o)
Disney is EVIL.
True, there was a glass slipper in the Perrault version of Cinderella (which is the version Disney adapted for their animated film), but I think it was a little bit gorier and more, um, sexual. I've not read it, so I can't really say.
In the Grimm brothers version of the story, the festival lasts for 3 days, she doesn't have a fairy godmother, and she gets her finery from a bird in the hazel bush she planted at her mother's grave and watered with her tears. On the 3rd night, she loses a golden slipper in pitch the Prince has ordered spread on the steps outside.
And when her step-sisters try the shoe on, they willingly mutilate their feet to "win" . . . and the bird in the hazel bush makes the Prince turn back both times. Cinderella only goes off to marry the Prince after she proves her foot fits into the by-now blood-and-gore-soaked slipper (eww!)
Oh, and the stepsisters get their eyes pecked out by the birds as they're throwing rice after the wedding.
And don't get me started on the Little Mermaid, although I'm a sucker for happy endings because Hans Christian Anderson was severely Scandinavian.
Hey! I'm Scandinavian. Well, part.
It's the weather, it makes our insides frigid to match the outsides.
No, it's the midnight sun.
It makes you all insane.
Nah, we're just crazy like foxes. ;o)
Post a Comment
<< Home