[HPforGrownups] Peter and Potter

[Amanda Lewanski]

No: HPFGUIDX 4735

foxmoth at qnet.com wrote:

>         I think the words <redeeming charm> above are revealing. Disney
> has conditioned us to expect charm from our kidlit  and we're
> disappointed if we don't get it.

A clarification. In order for me to be attracted to a character, there must
be something about them I like. Charm was what I was expecting from Mary
Poppins, somewhat due to the Disney version, but also because I'd heard the
books described as such. I was disappointed at not finding it in a place I'd
been led to believe I would. Hence my "redeeming charm" comment.

I don't expect children's literature to be charming, as a generalization.
Anyone who's read honest-to-Buddha fairy tales, before Disneyization, knows
there's loads of uncharming, downright terrifying characters in there. And
it's the archetypal tales that I, and now my kids, are most fond of.

>         Pippin the heretic who hates Disney versions (ducking sharp
> objects now) but loved the Mary Martin Peter Pan, ropes and all.

I'm kind of two minds on the Disney thing. One, they have such a PR and
marketing machine going, that anything they make quickly becomes the Official
Version, and I'm too much a lover of the traditional to like that. On the
other hand, there's precious little anymore that's pan-cultural besides such
modern icons. And very few places in the modern world are just the way you
remembered it as a kid, that you can go back to and show your kids, etc.,
like Disney parks. And lastly, there are the kids in whom it engraves a
lasting memory and prompts further investigation or study, like all the
paleontologists I've read who lay the beginnings of their love of the field
at the feet of "Fantasia" (which was an altered interpretation of the
composer's intended scenario, too).

On the other hand, I *still* won't, and never will, allow my kids to have
"Pocohontas." When they begin to change history, as opposed to fiction, I
lose my charitable outlook.

--Amanda