I finished up a first-ever reading of Alice in Wonderland, a few nights ago. I'd been reading the book, more or less a chapter a night, to Lucy. One of the first things you pick up on in taking on a chapter book in this venue, even one like Alice..., which is ostensibly written for children and from a child's perspective, is how dificult it is for a four year old to get her head around all the moving pieces. In fact, it is doubly and triply the case with this book, since many characters are introduced and then forgotten (until the trial near the end, if you're familiar with the story). Plus, there's all these bygone terms and expressions from early-part-of-the-century England, which bear constant explaining, defining, and putting in context. I don't know. There's a lot of kids out there Lucy's age that are just plopped in front of PG movies and left to drift from one moment of stark, physical comedy (man makes a man's pants fall down, penguin burps, etc.) to the next. My sense has always been that it's an odd, almost demeaning sort of feeling that 77% of literature/entertainment is just simply something you're not going to get and so just deal with it. So, if there's something in the DVD player and Lucy's watching it, we are sitting next to her (or have already at some point, with that particular piece of entertainment), pausing and explaining/talking about things. Constantly. Well, that was happening in Alice.... Constantly. Anyway - looking back at the experience, I'm not sure I would have taken it on, knowing what I know now. And I wonder if a part of my interest had been selfish in nature. I, personally, felt it was high time to make it through this classic tale; from which I can see innumerous cultural trappings that are the fruits of its literary loins. But as for the tale itself (and maybe this is after an experience of trying to make it reconcile with the mind of a surprisingly logical four year old girl), I simply can't believe how pointless/plotless? the whole thing was. I'm not even sure if that's a critique, or simply a rumination of surprise because I did find it fun. Perhaps truly the first in a long line of "it was all just a dream!" in the arts, the whole series of barely-connected scenes played out like (with apologies to Joseph Gehaw), simple, unmotivated bizarreness. Trippy. Mind-blowing, it seems, that it gained such popularity in America's infamously grim and stogy classrooms of the mid-century. How did that happen?
Red Dwarf: I'll make this a lot shorter. BBC sci-fi comedy from the 80s, available on Netflix' "Watch Now," so I thought I'd take a chance. Not all that impressed after the first episode or two, but (realizing that sometimes comedy series have to come into their own a bit) stuck it out for an entire six. If it picks up steam in season 2, I'll never know. Life is too short, and too full of wonderful BBC series such as Father Ted and Blackadder, that are delivering pause-and-watch-again-worthy bellylaughs from the get-go.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
I think Alice is ultimately an adult's perception of a child's perception of trying to understand the adult world. in Victorian England, children were supposed be little adults - it must have been ghastly trying to live up to middle-class Victorian expectations. There is a good version of Alice called "The Annotated Alice" that you might want to read to discover some of the more subversive elements in the work.
I also recommend (tho not for your 4 year old) watching Jan Svankmejer's stop animation film version of the story, simply called "Alice." If you go back through my blog in the earlier part of 2007, you'll see a clip from YouTube that I posted. I own the film and you're welcome to borrow it. I felt it best captured the spirit of the novel more than any other adaptation.
In the end, I like Alice, cuz she's caught up in a world that's dangerous - she gets pots thrown at her, she's put on trial, and yet she has the sensibility to realize that the whole thing is ridiculous, nothing but a deck of cards. And in the context of higher child mortality rates, and living in an empire that at that point dominated much of the world, I think it's a pretty interesting message. It is a kid's story and told from the standpoint of a child's imagination, yet I think it resonates a lot more with adults.
Interesting thoughts. I guess it's the context (given time & place when it was written), more than any intentional "hidden message," that is the true significance of the story and character of Alice.
She was nothing if not a brave and confident little girl.
I actually just used the "Watch Now" to watch the first two episodes last night while on the stationary bike. I've seen it in my sister's queue/watched items lists for a while. After two episodes I think I am liking it more than you did.
I didn't revile it. But I definitely thought the writing wasn't up to par with the best BBC comedy has to offer.
A bonus is the Liverpuddlian accent of Dave Lister (LisTAH).
How many more people are watching Red Dwarf as a result of "Watch Now" than would otherwise?
I seem to recall reading AiW and its follow up Through the Looking Glass in either late high school or eraly college, just 'cuz.
My recollections of them were that they were by no means children's books, just as Gulliver's Travels is not a children's book. These were thinly veiled commentaries on political/social situations of their day that if read out of that context might be enjoyable to children.
I do remember finding them interesting and enjoyable, but by no means did I 'get' them, far removed from the world of Victorian England.
As to Red Dwarf - I have known of it for a long time, but have never felt especially motivated to watch, even 'free' on Netflix.
Post a Comment