Brad’s review of Peter Pan > Likes and Comments

Comments (showing 1-20 of 20) (20 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Larry (new)

Larry Bassett If by watching the movie, you mean the 2000 DVD with Cathy Rigby, I wonder how you liked it. I cannot quite see how a four year old could follow the book version. If it were not for the movie, I am not sure my seven year old would have agreed to "suffer" through the book to the end.

message 2: by Anna (new)

Anna It's a children's book, the Darlings go to Never-land in their sleep. I have seen Peter Pan 2003, all the violence is a sword-fight between Peter and Hook and that is not bloody only Peter gets a cut on his face but that's it.

message 3: by Brad (new)

Brad Being a children's story doesn't excuse the poor quality of the book, though; moreover, violence is all in the action not the bloodshed. If anything the cleansing of a violent act by taking away the blood or reducing it is more damaging than an act of violence with the gore intact because it fails to show true consequences.

message 4: by Ariana (last edited Sep 18, 2010 11:49AM) (new)

Ariana I don't think you should consider "violence" a bad quality in a book. It's overbearing parents like you who push to get beloved classics banned from schools. If you don't like violence, don't read it. Many of the original versions of fairytales were violent themselves (ie, Little Red Riding Hood, Hansel and Gretal, etc.). Children should be exposed, not sheltered, from such topics.

message 5: by Brad (new)

Brad I appreciate that you took the time to weigh in, Ari. But I think you and I may be closer in our views than you think. I actually read this entire book to my kids right after reading The Complete Grimm's Fairy Tales, and those contain some pretty serious violence, but I kept reading nonetheless.

So I am not totally opposed to violence being in kids books, although when it becomes the reason or one of the main reasons why the "bad guys" are bad (as is the case in Peter Pan) and the only way the "good guys" can find to combat the bad is to be violent in return, I think it is sending an unhealthy message that the answer to violence is violence, and so I make sure that my kids and I discuss the violence in books together (amongst other issues) and what it means rather than censoring the violence from their sight.

I am not a parent who ever wants to see classics banned from school, nor do I want to see them sanitized (after all, one of the reasons my kids liked this book was that despite my feelings I put in a pretty good reading performance and breathed life into characters I was increasingly sick of), but I also don't want the classics to get a free pass just because they are beloved either. If my kids want to read this book -- or any other -- I back their right to do it, but I will always make sure I read it too so that we can talk about what's important to them, their mother and me.

So I am with you about exposing our kids to this stuff. Even if I am against the violence, I think it is better that I and they read it so we can all talk about it rather than me simply refusing to read it because I am not comfortable with something that happens in the book.

message 6: by Ariana (new)

Ariana I'm glad we feel similarly! There are too many parents out there who are opposed to the reading of such books, and I'm so sorry I've mistakenly accused you of one. I hate seeing children put off from books that adults think are unsuitable (in my own experience, the Giver, A Wrinkle in Time, among others) for their age group. Furthermore, it's lovely to see a parent who encourages reading!

I don't know if you caught on to this, but Captain Hook is really George Darling. Even on the stage (and the 2003 live action film), George and Hook are played by the same actor. Perhaps the seemingly unwarranted violence makes a bit more sense to you now? ;)

message 7: by Brad (new)

Brad I did know that about George Darling and Hook, Ari. It's definitely an interesting undercurrent in the story. It doesn't change my views of the violence in the book, though, but it is definitely an element I can appreciate, particularly in the film and stage adaptations of the story.

Have you ever had anyone take away books from you? A parent? A teacher? An overzealous librarian? I remember my father taking away music from me when I was a kid. He even broke one of my LPs because it "blasphemed." I'm definitely never going to be that kind of parent.

message 8: by Marina (new)

Marina Schulz my mom didn't want me to read "the girl with the pearl earing"; granted i was young, (11 or so) but even re-reading i see nothing wrong with it, much. She also didn't like me reading "Ali Baba And The 40Thieves Killed By a Slave Girl", because the original version is really bloody. I agreed with her but liked it all the same.
Still, i think that if parent's tell you not to read this or that (exept some books which are innapropriate; for instance no way in hell would i let any kid under 13 read the House Of Night series. The first few books. The latter you should be at the very least 15) and forces the child to read "wholesome" books, it discourages the child from reading, and might even make him or her resent books.

message 9: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca How did this turn into a parenting argument? It's just a book, you silly people. Get over it.

message 10: by Brad (new)

Brad I respectively submit that nothing is just a book, silly Rebecca.

message 11: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Brad wrote: "I respectively submit that nothing is just a book, silly Rebecca."

We don't need to get mad at each other over a book. It's a book, we're people. We're more important.

message 12: by Brad (new)

Brad Books are worth getting mad over. Books are what keep people important and help us improve as people and sometimes getting mad over a book can even save people.

message 13: by Rebecca (new)

Rebecca Brad wrote: "Books are worth getting mad over. Books are what keep people important and help us improve as people and sometimes getting mad over a book can even save people."

Then I'm Captain Hook!

message 14: by Starbubbles (new)

Starbubbles I completely agree. I preferred the Disney version. I actually liked both the animated and live-action versions better than this. I think what made the violence difficult for me to take was the lack of value in life. I was utterly surprised by all of the death in the book. I was unpleasantly surprised by a lot of things in there though. It was nice coming across your review and seeing that I am not alone.

message 15: by Lily (new)

Lily The Disney version is so amazing compared to this! I was amazed when I read this about how terrible some of the original versions of our favorite disney movies are. (Example: in the original Cinderella, the stepsisters cut their feet to fit the shoe!)

message 16: by Mackenzie (new)

Mackenzie There are different retellings of Peter Pan. If you didn't like this one, I'd defiantly try another (classic) retelling of Peter Pan.

message 17: by Rose (new)

Rose Did you new Peter from the day

message 18: by Rose (new)

Rose I want to have sex with her

message 19: by Elizabeth (new)

Elizabeth You may really like Peter and the Starcatcher. It's written by Dave Barry as a prequel to Peter Pan, sort of like the musical Wicked is for Wizard of Oz. The book is meant for preteens or teens, but with Dave Barry's wit, it truly is a great read. They have made it into a stage version, but the reading of the story is great.

message 20: by Audrey Kidd (new)

Audrey Kidd peter pan is so cute i love him

back to top