In 1942, Crockett Johnson created the cartoon Barnaby, in which we see Mr O'Malley through the eyes of a boy who wishes for a fairy Godmother, but instead is presented with a short, fat, flying, conceited and not altogether competent fairy Godfather.



The cartoon was a big hit within the Left intelligentia in the US. Dorothy Parker adored it, Duke Ellington was chuffed to be part of one of the strips. He even wrote a letter to the editor of PM to say so. The Roosevelts were avid followers. It was syndicated - not a big syndication by US standards, but nonetheless to newspapers which had a combined readership of 5.5M or so. It was a cartoon strip for adults that kids read. Johnson was a cartoonist's cartoonist, original - perhaps radical - in his technical vision of the strip and highly influential on those who came after him in the US.



The influence of this cartoon was, however, by no means limited to that country. When the editor of The Daily Mail in the UK saw it, he wanted one like it. This led to the creation of Flook, an indispensable part of the cartoon scene in the UK for over forty years. However much Flook may have been inspired by Mr O'Malley, however, and despite its subversive role as a cartoon for adults read by children, Flook is different enough in looks and character that one needs to have the inspiration pointed out.



Not so in the case of Karlsson. Here Astrid Lindgren has taken the figure of Mr O'Malley in a way that one could say is nothing short of brazen. It has prompted me to write to an expert on Johnson, curious to know what he had to say about Lindgren's take, a word I use advisedly. Mr O'Malley even has the stock phrases that are so important to the nature of Karlsson. Different ones, of course - Cushlamochree - an exclamation of surprise meaning 'pulse of my heart'.



Same physical qualities, though they fly by different methods, and same character. That is not to say, however, there is no difference in output. Barnaby is an intellectual cartoon with a sophisticated take on the politics of the period, (which is not to say that it was always political). Perhaps that is why Barnaby has been the influential publication whilst Karlsson has been the popular one. Lindgren has taken the intellectual content out of Barnaby and created something that is straightforwardly for children.

Rest here:

https://alittleteaalittlechat.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/karlsson-on-the-roof-by-a...


( )

In 1942, Crockett Johnson created the cartoon Barnaby, in which we see Mr O'Malley through the eyes of a boy who wishes for a fairy Godmother, but instead is presented with a short, fat, flying, conceited and not altogether competent fairy Godfather.



The cartoon was a big hit within the Left intelligentia in the US. Dorothy Parker adored it, Duke Ellington was chuffed to be part of one of the strips. He even wrote a letter to the editor of PM to say so. The Roosevelts were avid followers. It was syndicated - not a big syndication by US standards, but nonetheless to newspapers which had a combined readership of 5.5M or so. It was a cartoon strip for adults that kids read. Johnson was a cartoonist's cartoonist, original - perhaps radical - in his technical vision of the strip and highly influential on those who came after him in the US.



The influence of this cartoon was, however, by no means limited to that country. When the editor of The Daily Mail in the UK saw it, he wanted one like it. This led to the creation of Flook, an indispensable part of the cartoon scene in the UK for over forty years. However much Flook may have been inspired by Mr O'Malley, however, and despite its subversive role as a cartoon for adults read by children, Flook is different enough in looks and character that one needs to have the inspiration pointed out.



Not so in the case of Karlsson. Here Astrid Lindgren has taken the figure of Mr O'Malley in a way that one could say is nothing short of brazen. It has prompted me to write to an expert on Johnson, curious to know what he had to say about Lindgren's take, a word I use advisedly. Mr O'Malley even has the stock phrases that are so important to the nature of Karlsson. Different ones, of course - Cushlamochree - an exclamation of surprise meaning 'pulse of my heart'.



Same physical qualities, though they fly by different methods, and same character. That is not to say, however, there is no difference in output. Barnaby is an intellectual cartoon with a sophisticated take on the politics of the period, (which is not to say that it was always political). Perhaps that is why Barnaby has been the influential publication whilst Karlsson has been the popular one. Lindgren has taken the intellectual content out of Barnaby and created something that is straightforwardly for children.

Rest here:

https://alittleteaalittlechat.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/karlsson-on-the-roof-by-a...


( )

This book is adventurous and hilarious. From the looks over the cover, it looks like it will be boring but, it's the exact opposite of that. I highly recommend this book to children and even adults. Never judge a book by its cover! ( )

Cute enough, if you can accept that Smidge" (as the little brother is known as in the English version) is fond of the little man despite his strangeness, greed, and unreliability. The 'jiggery-pokery' with the burglars was pretty darn clever.

But there were other odd bits that threw me off, too. Just the fact that the children's names were 'translated' but the town names weren't was troublesome. And I guess the following is supposed to be playful, as it's portrayed so matter-of-factly:

"Shut your eyes a minute, Mum," said Smidge...
"Why have I got to shut my eyes?"
"So you don't see me eating sugar of course, and I'm just going to take a lump."

Maybe the translation was the main part of what bothered me. We know Lindgren understands children:

"Oh, he'd been waiting so long for this birthday... almost since his last one! It was curious how long it was between birthdays, almost as long as between Christmases."

Or maybe I had trouble with Tony Ross's illustrations. While they were delightful, they also made me feel that Smidge was about 10 or 11, whereas he's really only 7.

Btw, the illustrations do very much remind me of the ones [a:Jules Feiffer|5116|Jules Feiffer|http://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1208540516p2/5116.jpg] has done for many of the books by [a:Roald Dahl|4273|Roald Dahl|http://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1311554908p2/4273.jpg]

So, bottom line - some people will love this, and I can guess why, but it just wasn't all I wanted it to be." ( )

Match found. Different edition.