J. M. BarrieRezensionen

Supposedly a children's classic, this book is quite disturbing, and not at all suitable for young or sensitive children. Perhaps the abridged versions make it more acceptable; the film versions sanitise it somewhat, too.

But this original, written 120 years ago, is not just dated - it's inherently sexist (the remarks about mothers are very bizarre), racist, and extremely violent in places. There's a mixture of 'reality' (in an odd kind of way, with a large dog as nurse) and fantasy, but far too much commentary from the author, and asides that don't fit in at all with the plot - such as the evil Captain Hook reminiscing about his boyhood years at Eton School.

As for Peter Pan, the 'boy who never grew up', he's manipulative, demanding and selfish... not someone I would wish to know.

Longer review here: https://suesbookreviews.blogspot.com/2024/04/peter-pan-by-jm-barrie.html

I still can't get the fairy orgy out of my mind. I mean, even if Tinkerbell and her flickering friends really were getting at it in the forest just to kill the time, did Barrie really have to unveil this to us before the kids had gone to bed?

Writing: 4.5; Theme: 4.5; Content: 4.5; Language: 5.0; Overall: 4.5

The adventures of Peter Pan, the Wild Boys, and the Darling children. Highly recommend.

***April 8, 2024***½

It’s great when you’ve seen the Disney film before reading the book. Parts of it seem weird when you’re imagining them as the Disney characters rather than the versions of them in the book. Especially with the conflict between Pan and Hook. However in this Pan is completely different to how they portray him in the Disney version (as that’s the only film I’ve seen) because the Book Peter is weird to say.

Despite having a different feel to modern books it was a decent read. Commonly reading it in school also made it a great read.

And still with the 150 page length, I still took a long time to read it.

I started reading this to better understand a more recent novel, Darling Girl by Liz Michalski. Not sure I can finish this. It is so scary and inhumane. I am shocked. The original could not have been written as a children's story. How many people know this??½

We all know the story of the boy who never grew up - or at least we think we know the story, as it has been adapted so very many times for the big screen. But the original is an astonishingly good read - the final chapter is the most bittersweet I can think of in children's literature. Beautiful.

Incredibly charming and exceedingly pleasant - I’m a philistine as I vaped the whole time whilst I read it, what a loser. Well…. that’s not strictly true. I managed to get through the first 100 pages or so on a break from that tediously adolescent and unattractive habit, but Barrie soon won me back on the subject of nicotine (and seeing as I don’t drink anymore I figure I can allow myself at least one vice, that and the excessive masturbation of course), so I decided to give my lungs the good kicking that they deserve. My body is a temple, but the temple is the Hindu’s Karni Mata and there’s rat shit all over it. I’d recommend the book to all, the moments of 19th century (mostly harmless) misogyny be damned, just settle in with the Arcadia gang and their lovely collection of briars and meerschaums, you might even get a chance to hear about another woman Marriot has fallen in love with, or perhaps snuggle up and hear Barrie admit to the murder of three bothersome drunkards outside his window, and if you’re so inclined you could even join in one of the most terrible sounding boat trips committed to paper. Only having finished this did I find out that this bastard created Peter Pan, and for those who are curious that all-important Arcadia Mixture turns out to be a different moniker for the now discontinued Craven mixture (https://pipesmagazine.com/forums/threads/arcadia-mixture.6347/) so…. stick that in your pipe and smoke it!!

I love this edition of the story. The illustrations added so much to it and kept me so intrigued with what was happening. Minalima did a GREAT job and I can't wait to see what book they come out with next. That said, this is a children's classic and if you're looking for the Disney version of the story this is not it, though they didn't stray too, too far from the original. I would recommend this story to anyone. 4.5 out of 5 stars.

Peter Pan and Tinkerbell lead the three Darling children over the rooftops of London and away to Neverland - the island where the lost boys play. Magic and mischief is in the air but if villainous Captain Hook has his way, before long someone will be swimming with the crocodiles . . .

«Todos los niños, menos uno, crecen». Así comienza la historia de ese jovencito que se resiste con vehemencia a convertirse en adulto, ese atribulado y domesticado engranaje necesario para el sistema social. El País de Nunca Jamás es su hogar, su resistencia; allí es un pequeño caballero, valeroso guerrero espadachín. Alicia lo saluda desde el País de las Maravillas, seguro. Pinocho, desde «la eternidad pueril de la madera encantada», como dice Juan Villoro, tal vez lo entiende; Dorothy, desde la Tierra de Oz, lo admira, y hasta quizá sienta envidia, pues, a diferencia de Peter, algún día todos ellos crecerán. Pero solo ese niño conoce (y valora) el secreto de la infancia eterna.

A lot darker than the Disneyfied version, Neverland is half nightmare and Pan much more of a capricious and immoral god of his realm. The appeals to courage being couched in terms of a british spirit have also been lost to time in modern adaptations. While the indians were actually part of the Disney movie, they've been quietly excised since.

This is the first book that has made me cry. I never knew it was so sad, and so violent! They actually kill people and there's a lot of blood. The should seriously consider making a grown-up movie about him. And I liked the introduction, never thought of Hook and Peter Pan as the battle between youth and maturity. That really was something that got me thinking. But what really surprising is how sad it really is, and how depressed Peter really is but won't acknowledge.

Wendy, Michael, and John are sleeping when the window of their nursery blows open and lets in a boy, Peter Pan, and his fairy, Tinker Bell. But Peter soon entices the three children from their beds and out through the window to Neverland. There, they encounter mermaids, fairies, the Lost Boys, and the Indian princess Tiger Lily and her tribe; and do battle with a villainous gang of pirates and their leader, the sinister Captain Hook, in a magical adventure which has enchanted generations of children and adults.

J.M. Barrie was a wonderful writer (and creator of Peter Pan). But this, his last play, is problematic. It tells a story of the biblical David and his friendship with King Saul, who both loved and feared him. A foreword by Harley Granville-Barker suggests that Barrie sought to anchor the story in a reality more conducive to drama than mythic or poetic King James Version language would allow. But Barrie's own formalized dialog is no more realistic than that he replaces, and thus the entire enterprise takes on the character of a fairy tale for children. Now, as the author of Peter Pan, Barrie was on familiar territory, but it appears not to be what he intended. There is possibly a dramatic potential for a stage version of the story of Saul, David, and Goliath, and, indeed, some elements of that potential are felt in reading The Boy David. But overall, it is a play far out of its time, with little of the verisimilitude and believable behavior its author purported to achieve. While the play is mildly interesting reading, it is perhaps not surprising that it is rarely, if ever, performed, despite the pedigree of J.M. Barrie.

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 got this book as it is the very book wherein Peter Pan makes his first appearance. The parts of this book that include Peter Pan were published later as ‘Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens’ which is not to be confused with the full Peter pan story, which was subsequently published as ‘Peter and Wendy’.

I know, it gets quite confusing tracking down the origins of these Vic Lit legends, you get the same shenanigans with ‘Alice in Wonderland’. But, it does add a little challenge to your reading, which would normally just consist of buying a book you like the look of and reading it.

Anyways, i’ve read in some reviews people saying they couldn’t understand this book and they kept on getting confused. Obviously they didn’t factor in that this is written in beautiful Victorian prose and is not some standard contemporary novel. I do feel that in order to fully enjoy Vic Lit then you really need to read a few books to get up to speed on the use of the language by these writers. Most of these books were written by very well educated Victorians, and not the lower classes, and they used the language quite differently to how we use it today with words that have completely escaped the lexicon altogether.

I do humbly believe, that anyone who will take a few books to adjust to Victorian prose will find the effort is well rewarded. Victorian prose is, to my mind at least, the most delightful and eloquent English prose i’ve ever read.

I digress, tangents become me, let’s to the story… ‘The Little White Bird’ is at it’s heart a strange, ‘lost love’ story, that gets played out and revealed through the book. It has our ageing, bachelor, protagonist getting caught up baby sitting a child that he never actually meant to get involved with, and having had no involvement with children and their ways can only cope with them by comparing them to his St Bernard dog, and at times seems to think the St Bernard is far superior in most respects. His adventures with the child, David, are where this book gets it’s other title ‘Adventures in Kensington Gardens’, as they spend a lot of time there.

Throughout the beautiful Victorian prose there is an undoubted light heartedness, a certain tongue in cheekness, to this book, that is both captivating and enjoyable, and using that it’s descriptiveness of the habits of Victorian upper class children and their wards within Kensington Gardens at that time is delightful – Barrie is a master wordsmith.

Oddly, although it was the reason for reading this book in the first place, i found the Peter Pan bit, and it is only a bit, to be a tiny bit annoying as i got so enthralled in the every day descriptions of Victorian life around Kensington Gardens and our protagonist’s story that i just wanted to get away from the habits of Peter Pan and the fairies and back to the habits of the humans. At the same time, it is also something i wouldn’t have wanted left out, as it gives the full back story of Peter Pan, how he came to be and why he is like he is.

All in all, an absolute must for anyone who enjoys Victorian Literature, it really is an absolute gem. And also an absolute must for anyone who loves Peter Pan and wants the full history of the character in the context from which he first flew.

And did i mention, this Kindle version is completely free – what’s not to like?

Having just read The Little White Bird and Peter Pan, it struck me that there may have been a little more to the characters than at first appears.

The character of Peter Pan was based on James' brother, David, who died aged 13 (so never grew up), leaving the 6 year old James having to try and fill his shoes for his mother. So it made me wonder who Hook was based on. At first i thought Hook represented the parents but having read this book i've totally had a change of mind.

So my thoughts on the matter are thus... I suppose the clue is in Hook's first name, also James. The hand that gets cut off by Peter, a metaphor for the part of James' childhood, and life, that was taken from him the day his brother died. The hand is then fed to the ticking crocodile that follows Hook around wanting to consume the rest of him because it likes the taste - so is this another metaphor concerning the inevitable ticking clock of life, and that James felt the loss of his brother was continuously haunting and wanting to consume more of him and his family?

Then there's Wendy, which having read this book cannot be based upon anyone other than Margaret Ogilvy herself. He mentions in the book how after his brother died, other local women who lost children would come to her to talk. Again, Wendy and the lost boys - the lost boys representing the children of the other women who went to join his brother David in heaven (Neverland).

But all that aside, this book was a heartfelt view into James' home life and very much his relationship with his mother - who he obviously cared about immensely - and is an absolute must read for all fans of J.M. Barrie's writing. The book also covers James' early literary career and what made him want to become a writer. So a very worth while read.

So what's next? After 3 books in a row, i'll be taking a literary break away from Peter Pan, Neverland and J.M. Barrie as i've got a big 'to read' folder on my Kindle that's continuously nagging to get read. But i'll definitely be coming back to these three topics in my reading in the not too distant future.

Well worth reading The Little White Bird; or, Adventures in Kensington Gardens before this because that's where Peter Pan is first introduced into the world.

But onwards to my review about this book:

I'm quite confused by this story.

At 54 years old i really don't remember 'Peter Pan' from my childhood days, but i admit that i had the impression from films and things that he was quite a nice character - as was Tinkerbell. But, in this, the real story behind it all, Peter Pan, in general, isn't at all a nice character - and Tinkerbell certainly isn't either.

Most of the time, Peter is nothing but a gloating little spoiled brat who always has to have his way, else he spits his dummy out of his pram, and Tinkerbell, it has to be said, is a complete little bitch. But then you get moments in the story, in complete contrast, where the 2 of them are bestowed with all manner of wonderful virtues.

Who i did find interesting, however, was the character of James Hook, who was far more complex than the films, etc., would have us believe - frightened and out of his depth, yet somehow always managing to survive - until the end.

Apparently, the character of Peter Pan was based on Barrie's older brother who died as a child, and therefore never grew up. So it does make one wonder just what Barrie thought about his older brother and how he was affected by his death and his parent's attitude to it. He was 6 when his brother died and then sent away, from home to school, at 8. Barrie did write a biographical piece about his mother which maybe would unearth some clues, so i'm going to read that next to find out.

At the end of it, for now at least, i'm left thinking that this is nothing but a critique by Barrie of how his parents handled his brother's death, and also parenting in general (as seems to be quite a bit of The Little White Bird). Although Barrie became a ward of other children, he never had any children of his own, so there is this to factor into these stories.

One of the things that also stands out for me, is how Peter chops of Hook's hand and feeds it to the crocodile that is always ticking and haunting Hook for the rest of his life. Is this a metaphor concerning the death of his brother taking a piece of his parents with him and their inability to move on from the tragedy for the rest of their lives, forever ticking away reminding them of their own mortality? And Hook's view towards the children maybe adds more clues.

At the end of the day, you can read Peter Pan as a shallow, children's, make believe, bedtime story book, or you can look deeper into what Barrie's drive was to write these books in the first place. It's certainly very different to Lewis carroll's drive to write the Alice and Wonderland books - less said about that the better, i think. But whichever way you decide to read Peter Pan i think you'll certainly enjoy it. It's a beautifully written piece of Victorian literature that has stood the test of time and will undoubtedly stand up to a lot more time in the future.

As a bonus, this version of Peter Pan has a "Classic Literature, Words and Phrases" dictionary at the end (which is nearly as big as the book itself). So a great help for anyone wanting to have a good Vic Lit adventure.

This book isn't often listed as an example of the dadaism, but I would argue that it is, as an example of experimental prose specifically. It doesn't strictly follow a chronological narrative, and gives the impression of time being warped as it goes. It is written as if by a child, both in the structure of the story and the voice it is told in.
The psychology of this book fascinates me to no end, I could read and analyze it forever.

Such a beautiful book...after growing up with more child-friendly Peter Pan adaptations, it was refreshing to read this novel. I loved the cruelness/childlike nature of Peter himself, as well as the interactions between him, the pirates, and the lost boys. It has its rightful place as being a classic, and is an excellent and quick read.

I just couldn't get into this classic. I persisted for a while and then abandoned it. I did not enjoy the characters and style of writing which I found to be disjointed.

Comme beaucoup probablement, ma première rencontre avec Peter Pan s’est faite en regardant le dessin animé de Walt Disney (eh non, je n’ai jamais eu la chance, enfant, de le voir apparaître à ma fenêtre, je crois que j’ai toujours été trop rationnelle et terre à terre pour que Peter Pan vienne me voir dans la vraie vie...). C’est bien plus tard que j’ai appris l’existence du livre, et encore bien plus tard que je le lis enfin. Et c’est une lecture d’extraits du [Petit Oiseau blanc]sur France Culture qui m’a décidée à sauter le pas. Le Petit Oiseau blanc est un autre texte de James Barrie, qui présente beaucoup de similitudes avec Peter Pan dans son exploration de l’enfance et de la relation qu’un adulte peut entretenir avec un enfant, comme si ce texte de 1902 était comme un galop d’essai pour Peter Pan qui sera publié en 1928, même s’il est beaucoup plus qu’un galop d’essai et que, pourtant moins connu, il m’a je crois plus touchée que Peter Pan.
Peter Pan, donc, est une œuvre riche, qui se contredit même parfois, ce qui permet d’en proposer des interprétations toujours renouvelées. Pas la peine de résumer l’histoire, elle est connue, et étrangement Walt Disney lui est resté bien plus fidèle que ce qu’il a fait pour d’autres œuvres. Je trouvais Peter Pan assez égoïste chez Disney, il est plus que cela dans le livre. Egoïste, oui, prétentieux aussi, incapable d’accepter une contrariété ou même une idée différente de la sienne, petit chefaillon qui ne pense qu’à son propre plaisir… En somme la description de beaucoup d’enfants qui sans s’en rendent compte jouent au tyran. Et c’est là que le roman de Barrie est un joli portrait de l’enfance, car il en dit le merveilleux (chacun a son île à lui, avec sa géographie propre), les rêves que rien ne vient contrecarrer, mais il en dit aussi tous les travers. Et Peter Pan, cet enfant qui ne veut pas grandir, c’est aussi celui qui ne veut pas renoncer à sa toute puissance imaginaire ni à ses fantasmes de grandeur, c’est celui qui ne veut pas apprendre à vivre en société, à se comporter en fonction de lui-même et aussi des autres, et c’est peut-être une des choses que James Barrie montre en creux, de façon consciente ou non, que l’éducation d’un enfant (et le faire grandir), c’est avant tout en faire un personnage social.
Et bien sûr, à côté de Peter Pan, il y a Wendy. Ah Wendy… Je l’ai toujours détestée celle-là. Dans le dessin animé, mais peut-être encore plus dans le livre. Son petit côté « je joue à la maman parfaite » m’a toujours horripilé. Je sais, c’est d’époque, et je reproche au personnage de Wendy de ne pas ressembler à un idéal féminin un peu plus moderne, mais tout de même ! Pour être honnête, je dois préciser qu’il y a bien tout de même quelques piques dans la façon dont les relations entre Mr et Mrs Darling sont décrites qui rachètent un peu ce tableau très sexiste : la façon dont Mr Darling a obtenu la main de sa femme par exemple, ou bien la différence à plusieurs reprises entre ce que dit un personnage et ce que comprend Mr Darling (qui n’est pas loin parfois d’être aussi dépendant du regard des autres que Peter Pan l’est lui-même).
Et puis il y a aussi quelques excentricités que j’ai du mal à faire rentrer dans le tableau général, comme la nounou chien (je pensais que c’était une invention de Disney, mais non!) et quelques autres. Comme si la frontière entre le Londres réel et le Pays imaginaire n’était finalement peut-être pas aussi étanche qu’on pourrait le croire à l’âge adulte.
Un livre qui se lit facilement, qui fait sourire, et qui est bien plus que le livre pour enfants que l’on veut nous faire croire. Une belle évocation de l’enfance, avec toute son exubérance et toutes ses contradictions. Je suis contente de l’avoir enfin lu, et je me dis qu’il serait dommage de s’arrêter là dans la découverte de l’œuvre de James Barrie.

Encore l’écoute un peu au hasard d’un podcast France Culture, et je suis tombée sous le charme de cette œuvre. Bien sûr, je connais James Matthew Barrie. Bien sûr, comme la plupart, j’ai vu la version Disney de Peter Pan mais je n’ai pas lu le livre (bien qu’il soit sur les étagères de ma bibliothèque, au rayon jeunesse, un classement que je soupçonne d’être trop hâtif). J’ai aussi vu il y a longtemps le film Neverland qui évoque l’amitié de James Barrie avec la famille Llewelyn Davies et la création de Peter Pan d’une façon assez éloignée de la réalité je le sais, mais j’avais bien aimé l’atmosphère de ce film.
Voilà donc un long préambule pour dire que je connais sans connaître James Matthew Barrie et que c’est dans ces dispositions que j’ai écouté ce livre. On y entend des échos de Peter Pan et de la vie de J.M. Barrie bien sûr, avec l’amitié forte entre un adulte et un enfant qui n’est pas de sa famille, avec de nombreux passages rêveurs et joueurs. Et c’est presque plus l’adulte qui ne veut pas que son jeune ami grandisse que l’enfant qui ne veut pas grandir.
C’est aussi un livre sur la paternité, sur l’amour, sur la solitude, tout cela dans un style doux, inventif, parfois sarcastique, souvent triste. Un vrai petit bijou m’a-t-il semblé lors de cette première écoute, si bien que je n’ai pas résisté et que je vais devoir me procurer ce livre pour le lire en entier et pour le savourer entièrement. Une merveilleuse découverte qui a illuminé ma journée.

Really, it's about Wendy growing up.

FROM BARNES & NOBLE: Neverland is home to Peter Pan, a young boy who has never grown up. On one of his visits to London, Peter makes the acquaintance of young Wendy Darling, whom he invites to travel with him to Neverland and become the mother of his gang of Lost Boys. Flying through the night sky to Neverland, Wendy and her brothers John and Michael soon become caught up in marvelous adventures with the Indian Princess Tiger Lily, the loyal fairy Tinker Bell, and Peter's nemesis, the sinister hook-handed pirate known as Captain Hook.