Peter & Wendy

I was surprised by how much adult nostalgia had to do with this novel. The adventures are necessarily the things of childlike imagining and the juxtaposition of inevitable maturing vs the desire to remain innocent. Peter is the ultimate innocent - blithely jumping from one thing to another, never remembering, never really caring about anyone, only in life for the adventure to be had. It is an exciting place to be, but also one that is stagnant.

I confess, I really liked it.

I say "confess" because Peter Pan includes those "of its time" issues: sexist stereotypes and racist expressions that make one wince today. Rightly so.

It can be a dilemma for readers.

I resolve the dilemma by judging a book by its heart. If a book (looking at you A Princess of Mars) has a violent, lurid message of racial and male superiority that might once have seemed, um, harmless, and that is its primary message, then I am not going to hold back my critical disdain of it. Regardless of its "time."

On the other hand, I don't feel like the issues are its heart in Peter Pan. I feel Barrie's story is intended to revel in a child's naturally wild as well as fearful sensibilities, done so wittily and tenderly show more that I forgive his inability to fly into the future to see how we would view phrases like "red skins" and "Great White Father," and the relegating a female's function to motherhood (except Tink, who is equally as wild and unapologetic as Peter). The dilemma lies in what you believe was his intention, don't you think?

As to its banning in some locations of the U.S., it is with utter respect that I believe it is the parents responsiblity to decide for themselves if this remains appropriate for their children. Banning has always been ridiculous and, thankfully, ineffective. And now, with the Internet, even more ridiculous and ineffective.

And bad reviews, some verging on loathing for this story? I heartily agree with them! What I'm agreeing with, though, is my distaste for oppressions, then and now. I am offended by it, but that doesn't change that it once was so, and continues. That continuation is likely why the story is offensive, since plenty of classic literature is rife with what we find intolerable now. Are we offended today by Pride and Prejudice with its focus on desperate husband-hunting? Generally speaking, no, because our Western society has gone beyond that and so it has little power to be offensive.

Reading now just for my own self (and I'm also of my time, as we all are), I recognize there are books that can transcend their time while still being of their time. Peter Pan has done that, in spite of those parts of itself, much like fairy tales have.

It remains timeless...

"...so long as children are gay and innocent and heartless." show less

I love whimsical intro though it is naturally discarded as the children enter into Neverland. Peter is much more capricious than I'd imagined, and the role of boys to play while girls mother or pine over boys, is a bit irksome. This aside, the varied adventures (though many only mentioned in passing), and gaiety of the characters make this a fun and memorable read.

A simply magical book that is also very cleverly written. Barrie's narrator is heavily involved in the story, hiding in the brush on Neverland to watch the Lost Boys tramp by, selecting a pirate for Hook to kill, and passing judgement on the Darling children (the part where he says basically, "Well if Mrs. Darling loves her rubbishy children, that's her business" just about made me burst out laughing on the bus). His world is vivid and alive, with plenty of room for children having this story read to them to imagine what everything looks like for themselves. The only downside is the rather antiquated view of Native American people, as portrayed in the Piccaninny tribe that lives on Neverland. (Even so, one can use this portrayal as a show more constructive exercise in stereotype and critical thinking about what you read.) But overall this is a wonderful addition to any child's bookshelf. show less

Substance: Peter Pan is not so charming in this book, with a disturbing psychological neurosis driving his refusal to grow up. Barrie's cynical interpolations in the novel version of his play give it a much darker and meaner aspect. Not a book I would give to children. A subversive fairy tale in the sense used by Jack Zipes about the 17th-18thc. French literary tales.
Style: Deceptively borrows the style of Victorian children's literature, with snide asides to keep adults sniggering. See Hilaire Beloc's "Matilda Who Told LIes and Was Burned to Death" and P.L. Travers' "Mary Poppins" series.

Forget the Disney film and the jolly pantomimes. The original book is quite dark and scary, with real killing and some psychological cruelty (maybe we won't let Mrs Darling have her children back?) Peter Pan is callous and vain much of the time, and Wendy's highest happiness is to cook and darn for the Lost Boys.... It's also very whimsical and quite funny. A nice newish Puffin paperback from a charity shop, it will join my children's collection as a classic.

"All children, except one, grow up," declares the narrator of this classic children's fantasy, in an opening line that has become - like the novel's elfin hero, his piratical adversary, or the fantastical land in which he lives - almost a byword for the enchantment of youth and the make-believe of childhood. Who doesn't know the eternally young Peter Pan, his child-mother Wendy, or his melancholy enemy, Captain Hook? Who hasn't heard of Neverland, that magical island to be found somewhere out there in the Milky Way, if one flies in the direction of the "second star to the right, and straight on till morning?"

References to the story of Peter Pan, who first saw light as a character in J.M Barrie's 1902 adult novel, The Little White show more Bird**, before becoming the subject of a 1904 stage play, Peter Pan; or, the Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up, and then eventually the hero of his own book, Peter and Wendy (also published over the years as Peter Pan and Wendy, as well as just Peter Pan) in 1911, pop up quite frequently in the world of children's literature, and well beyond. From contemporary sequels like Geraldine McCaughrean's Peter Pan in Scarlet, penned long after the fact, to fantasy series such as Dave Barry and Ridley Pearson's Peter and the Starcatchers, that take the characters from the original story, and create their own world; from film retellings like Disney's 1953 animated Peter Pan, or revisionist live action ones like the 1991 Hook, to the recent Finding Neverland, which examined the story behind the story, it is evident that this character, and his creator, are still very much with us.

All of which makes reading Peter Pan for the very first time as an adult, having grown up thinking that it was a story that I knew, a revelatory experience. Almost immediately, one begins to notice little differences, and to suspect that the various adaptations of the story, down through the years, have also played a role in our perception of it - its presence in our culture. I was surprised to discover, for instance, that the original does not speak of Neverland as lying in the direction of the "second star to the right," a quote used to great effect at the conclusion of Star Trek IV: The Undiscovered Country (which also features some fabulous Shakespearean quotations... but I digress), but rather has Peter mention it as being "second to the right..." Apparently it was Disney who inserted the "star" that made this such a pertinent Star Trek quote - who knew?!! Of course there's also the fact that in the story Peter is simply ad-libbing, and the "directions" to Neverland, such as they are, are never meant to be taken seriously.

On a deeper level, I was completely unprepared for the tone of Barrie's work, and for the elements of tragedy that are apparent, in the character of Peter Pan, and in his interaction with those around him. I had always just assumed, from the way in which this character and his story was presented to me - in adaptations of course, but especially by other readers, and the way they spoke about him - that his was meant to be a joyfully youthful experience. Carefree. Lighthearted and thoughtless, and entirely free from sorrow. And certainly, it is all that. But it's not just that, as I discovered! Peter Pan may live in Neverland, but he also lives in limbo. He is a being who knows pleasure, and experiences some manner of joy, but who, because he cannot change - or perhaps, because he has been too long cut off from others - is forever barred from some of the fundamental experiences that make us human. He cannot form permanent bonds with others, and although he feels intensely in the moment, he eventually forgets even those he loves. There is a deep sadness to the way in which he is portrayed, at times, that was unexpected.

That this melancholy was intentional, in Barrie's characterization, is hinted at by the name Peter Pan itself, I think, with the reference to Pan, the ancient Greek god of the wild. Is Peter's story that of a child who never wishes to grow up, or that of a person who has become separated from the human experience, and cannot find his way back? Or perhaps both? Is the rejection of boring adulthood, of the conventionality of becoming a man, really just a rejection of the human condition, with all its imperfections? Has Peter become, not a boy - who is, after all, a young human - but something inhuman? I'm sure some scholar must have long since picked this theme apart - I will have to look for some good Barrie criticism!

Having finally read the novel Peter Pan, as part of our August discussion, over in The Children's Fiction Club to which I belong, I was left with much to ponder. There were, of course, elements of the story that did not come as a surprise, and were less thought-provoking than they were (sadly) demeaning. The dehumanizing depiction of Native Americans here - somewhere in the vicinity of the Noble Savage, I would say - the many little chauvinistic asides about "women" (which usually, although not always, meant Wendy) just naturally liking certain things, were about what I was expecting. I think that quite a bit of this could do with some in-depth examination - and I'm sure some critic has already done it! - and imagine that Wendy's story would make just as interesting a topic as Peter's. After all, it isn't an accident that the book was originally styled Peter and Wendy. Still, despite noting these issues, in my reading, the largest portion of my attention, when not given over to the story itself, was engaged by this question of Peter's humanity (or lack thereof), and his fate, and the tragic way in which both were depicted. All of which is to say: this wasn't what I was expecting! I mean that in the best possible way...

**The chapters involving Peter, in Barrie's The Little White Bird were eventually extracted, and published separately in 1906, under the title Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens show less