Victorians! discussion

Well, here we are one day early for Week One. We will go to the regular schedule next week.

Many of us may read this book first as a child and then discovered it is quite a different book when we read it as an adult. It presents us with a story that is, at once, both familiar and foreign. Much like Gulliver's Travels or even Star Trek, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland (AAIW) is a story of travels and trekking, of discovery and then returning home a somewhat altered person.

Since we will be covering six chapters per week, I plan to offer an idea or two that I found interesting from each of those chapters as possible discussion points. I imagine we will have much to discuss, question and offer to the group.

Chapter I

All in the golden afternoon
Full leisurely we glide;
...
The dream-child moving through a land
Of wonders wild and new

Time seems to be a concept that is important in this chapter. Indeed, the first illustration has the White Rabbit looking at his watch. Is time very different when we are children?

Chapter II

"Curiouser and curiouser!" And so life is. "Who in the world am I? Ah, that's the great puzzle!" Can a child discover the puzzle of the world better than an adult?

Chapter III

"It is a long tail certainly." Or should we read that as It's a long tale? After The Bible and Shakespeare this novel is quoted and referenced more than almost all books in the English language. What are your favourite lines, words, puns, phrases or just plain nonsense.

Chapter IV

"It's rather curious, you know, this sort of life!"

What is so curious about the novel to you? how do you explain it to yourself ... and the rest of us?

Chapter V

"Who are you?"

Now Alice is questioned. Do you think Alice knows the answer to the question, or really even cares?

Chapter VI

"How am I to get in?" When Alice does get into the house, what does she really find?

These are just starting points. Let's all tumble down the rabbit hole and wander around together.

I've just read quite literally the first page (and an iPhone Kindle page at that) and am already struck by ...

- the fact that we are straight into the story, no messing around.

- we are invited to suspend our disbelief from page one.

I realise that with children's fiction in particular there is little place for the kind of drawn-out mises-en-scène which is found in "adult" fiction - even modern fiction (*cough The Luminaries cough*) - but, additionally, by hurrying us along in this way, we are forced breathlessly into Alice's world and into sharing her actions with no time to question. A fabulous, frantic start to the books!

One other minor observation: the rabbit hole is beneath a hedge, not a tree; presumably popular, visual incarnations of Alice have put a tree into my head where no tree is to be found in the original.

As I say - all this from very briefly perusing just the first couple of paragraphs.

So Alice's mother sent her and her sister outdoors on a lovely day, gave the sister a book but not Alice (who would apparently have been willing to look at a picture book, but not a silly, useless book without pictures or conversations). So Alice is a) unsupervised (her sister being apparently immersed in her book and uncaring what happens to her sister) and b) bored. And it's a hot afternoon and she's feeling very sleep.

The conclusion I take is that she dozes off in the hot sun, and all her adventures occur in a dream state. Did she see a "normal" rabbit just before she dozed off, and so a rabbit was in her thoughts and, as so often happens at least to me, shows up in her dream but in a different guise? Are the other things that happen to her in what I take to be a dream linked to things that would normally occur in a child's life and could be expected to show up, in a different guise, in her sleepy summer daytime dream?

Isn't it almost every young child's wish at some point to see what's inside that hole in the hedge that the rabbit lives in? Or at least, was when outdoors and nature were the child's playground world instead of TV and videogames.

I know I used to play with my friends out in the woods and fields all summer, and look at the animals we saw and wonder about their lives, wonder where they lived and what their homes were like (a feature which makes Wind in the Willows such a wonderful book too). It seems very natural that Alice, either in a real dream or in a daydream world (I'm modifying my comment above to include either one as the option, and in fact think a semi-alert drowsy daydream may be more likely than a full fledged dream) would wonder, and then start imagining, what could be down that hole and what the rabbit's home life might be like.

This is my first time reading AW-LG and I find the book quite enchanting.

Chapter 1:
I agree with Everyman that Alice transition into the fantasy world in the rabbit hole through a dream as she dozes off and in a dream anything is possible.

I find the logic impeccable. "Why, I wouldn’t say anything about it, even if I fell off the top of the house!” (Which was very likely true.)” This is Alice's comment about her fall and Carroll's commentary. No she would not say anything I'd she fell off the top of the house as she would be dead!

Carroll has a sneaky way of enticing children to learn. Alice does not know what latitude and longitudes are, but the words sound grand. Now would you not want to find out what they are!

After a few pages it looks like Carroll gives the imagination free reign: "For, you see, so many out-of-the-way things had happened lately that Alice had begun to think that very few things indeed were really impossible.”

DRINK ME/EAT ME: Carroll must have had faith in the intelligence of children that they would not eat or drink dangerous things. Alice just made sure it did not say poison.

Pip wrote: "I've just read quite literally the first page (and an iPhone Kindle page at that) and am already struck by ...

- the fact that we are straight into the story, no messing around.

- we are invited ..."

The frantic pace seems to mirror the frantic happenings to Alice

My first time reading Alice. While I can't refute Everyman's logic re a dream, I prefer to think of her as actually experiencing these things. Alice seems to be a child filled with curiosity, yet wants things to be logical. Many times in life they aren't. Two things that really stood out to me. Time being so different for a child. Summer's off from school felt endless yet as adults we blink and it's gone. The question arises of how much time is really passing during these adventures.

The other is the question who are you. Does a child really understand who they are or are they learning about themselves in relation to the world. How many of us dreamt of being a certain profession that was totally improbable while we were children. How would we as an adult answer who we are? I think the caterpillar was looking for something more in depth than a name. It also brings up the confusion in search of identity, and is that confusion ever really resolved.

I have to say I've loved the read so far. Such great fun.

Peter wrote: "Well, here we are one day early for Week One. We will go to the regular schedule next week.

Many of us may read this book first as a child and then discovered it is quite a different book when we..."

Chapter 1:
I believe the White Rabbit is symbolic of an innocent child's rush to "grow up". Out of all the characters we experience in the first few chapters, the White Rabbit is the only one described in detail, especially his attire. (The rest we need to rely more on Tenniel's illustrations which is also a masterful stroke by Carroll, allowing the illustrations to be an integral part of the story and not just a supplement.)
It is almost as if Carroll wanted to emphasize the silliness of a cute little rabbit in adult attire acting formal and important much the way a child in a rush not to be "treated like a child" would attempt to imitate the adults around them. (How many of us remember insisting on a sip of beer or coffee before our time? Or rebelling against taking a nap or an early bedtime which we felt we had outgrown?)
Alice's early repeated changes in size during these chapters are connected to the rabbit as well - his fan, the cake. Which could speak to the unpredictable, awkwardness of a child trying to act like an adult one minute but reverting back to being a child the next. Carroll is just twisting the timeline to and fro.

Chapter Two
I love how Carroll sneaks in the eternal question of self-identity but despite the deep, thoughtful and far-reaching aspects such a question should provoke...as still a child, Alice dismisses the idea as simply "curious". Throughout the upcoming chapters we see hints of philosophical questions and ideas that as an adult would give us pause and reflection but as seen through the frank, unblinking eyes of a child are dismissed as nonsense and folly. While her physical body may be changing, her mind is still innocent and child-like.

As such, the early chapters seem to capture the tension of growing up perfectly! Feeling as if your body is not under your own control anymore. Having an awareness of bigger ideas and knowledge out there but not quite able to put your finger on it. Asking the important questions but still having a child's impatience by not caring about the answers. Being ruled by curiosity and easily angered and frustrated at being ordered about "like a child" but yet still obeying.

Deborah wrote: "My first time reading Alice. While I can't refute Everyman's logic re a dream, I prefer to think of her as actually experiencing these things. Alice seems to be a child filled with curiosity, yet w..."

Excellent comments!

Deborah wrote: "My first time reading Alice. While I can't refute Everyman's logic re a dream, I prefer to think of her as actually experiencing these things. Alice seems to be a child filled with curiosity, yet w..."

Deb. Time is certainly a factor in this novel. I wanted to start the thread early just in case something went wrong which is an adult concern. As a child, when the thread opened would not have been a concern. Is that life imitating art or art imitating life? Carroll probably would ask if that question really matters.

I was interested to see this is your first time through the story. I read AA long ago. This reading is a far different experience. The wonder and belief that the story was/could be true is now faded, but what Carroll has accomplished in this novel is a new-found adult wonder.

Victoria wrote: "Peter wrote: "Well, here we are one day early for Week One. We will go to the regular schedule next week.

Many of us may read this book first as a child and then discovered it is quite a differen..."

Victoria: I agree that clothing is a very interesting aspect in the novel and can help us come to understand and appreciate the story more. Tenniel's illustrations remained in my mind after much of the story of Alice had faded from my memory when I first read it so long ago. When Alice asks in the very first paragraph of the book "what is the use of a book ... without pictures" I want to cheer.

A question that can never be answered would be how popular the book would have been originally, and even today, without the initial presence of Tenniel. Somehow I cannot separate Carroll's AA from Tenniel's illustrations.

Peter wrote: "Deborah wrote: "My first time reading Alice. While I can't refute Everyman's logic re a dream, I prefer to think of her as actually experiencing these things. Alice seems to be a child filled with ..."

I have a tendency to be Pollyanna like :)

Peter wrote: "Victoria wrote: "Peter wrote: "Well, here we are one day early for Week One. We will go to the regular schedule next week.

Many of us may read this book first as a child and then discovered it is..."

Tenniel was the second to illustrate it. Carroll did the preliminary ones. He also made Tenniel crazy.

Peter wrote: "Victoria wrote: "Peter wrote: "Well, here we are one day early for Week One. We will go to the regular schedule next week.

Many of us may read this book first as a child and then discovered it is..."

I read an interesting commentary that stated bc Carroll was so involved with the illustration process (a little too involved I'm sure according to Tenniel) that any new printing of Alice that showed different illustrations for a "different artistic vision" was tantamount to changing the author's own words.

Deborah wrote: "Peter wrote: "Victoria wrote: "Peter wrote: "Well, here we are one day early for Week One. We will go to the regular schedule next week.

Many of us may read this book first as a child and then di..."
I've read that as well. Apparently Carroll was frustrated at his lack of drawing ability and was forced to hire an illustrator...who he drove crazy. I think it is particularly funny that Tenniel deliberately ignored Carroll's instructions for the final drawing of the White Knight.

I read the first chapter on my way to work this morning and for the next hours I took every opportunity to go on until I reached chapter 6. There I set the limit, for it was beginning to get really hard for me to crawl out of the rabbit-hole and back to the real world, ha, ha.

As for chapter 1, I really think time is different when we are children. In this case for example, Alice falling down the rabbit-hole is a mystery: For how long was she just going down and down? To Alice it seemed like hours, or enough time at least to joke about getting to the other side of the Earth, but was her journey down the hole that long, really? Well, I guess no one can tell how deep one have to dig to get to Wonderland.
Then, again. Once Alice is there (W) she gets used to everything (including all the “craziness”) real fast, like kids do when their environment change. She soon feels comfortable talking familiarly to animals like they were people. Yes, time and the world itself are not the same when we are children, although they do not forget, they do resent changes like Alice did but that did not stop her from moving forward.

Flashback from my childhood: when I looked at the first illustration I remembered my older sister’s copy of this book. I had forgotten flicking through it as a child. This made me think that Alice is right, pictures in books are important. Personally, I think John Tenniel did an amazing job with the illustrations. I watched Disney’s version of this movie so many times as a child and yet, after glancing to just the first picture in my book, I have had no problems imagining that Alice instead of the Disney blond-blue-dressed one.
Funny, I did not recall Alice also complained about not finding conversations as well as pictures in her sister’s book. Again, as children dialogues do encourage us to make it through a whole page, it makes reading look easier.

Rut wrote: "I read the first chapter on my way to work this morning and for the next hours I took every opportunity to go on until I reached chapter 6. There I set the limit, for it was beginning to get really..."

Speaking of pictures ... Frances mentioned in a post before we began our discussion of AA that there was a pop-up version of the novel. Having just read your comments and memories of the book and the existence of a"3D" version make me want to go to our local bookstores and try and find that pop-up version. The more versions the merrier.

My guess is that Carroll would be delighted with the idea of a pop-up Alice.

Alice's test to find out if she is still herself is to see if she still knows the same things. She recites a poem that has obviously been one of her lessons, and "the words did not come the same as they used to do:" Well, I do remember my mother reciting the preachy, boring original poem to me as an attempt to modify my rebellious behavior:

How doth the little busy bee
Improve each shining hour,
And gather honey all the day
From every opening flower!
...For satan finds some mischief still
For idle hands to do.

And so on. The whole poem is included in the Annotated edition. I think even a 5 year old would be so thrilled with the irreverent parody and find it a hilarious relief from the expectations in the original.

I really have no memory of reading this book as a child. Perhaps my Mother (bless her loving departed soul) felt it was too subversive for someone as disobedient as myself.

Peter wrote: "...Having just read your comments and memories of the book and the existence of a"3D" version make me want to go to our local bookstores and try and find that pop-up version. The more versions the merrier...."

Apparently two were released in 2003:

Alice in (pop-up) Wonderland by J. Otto Seibold (Orchard, 2003) (Goodreads says an earlier edition was published in 1978.)

Alice's Adventures in Wonderland: A Pop-Up Adaptation by Robert James Sabuda (Little Simon, 2003)

The second seems to get the nod as the better of the two. It is offered by MMOA. (Not sure about Siebold's version.)

The following is from Amazon:
(view spoiler)[
*Starred Review* Reviewed with J. Otto Seibold's Alice in Pop-Up Wonderland.

What is it about Alice? This season two well-known children's book creators have tackled the challenge of shoehorning Alice's Adventures in Wonderland into pop-up books only six spreads long. Larded with dioramas, flaps, and other displays of paste-and-paper bravura, both versions are likely to create buzz among Alice collectors and aficionados of movable books. But the two renditions of the same story could hardly be more different.

Seibold's "super dimensional" Alice, which he both designed and illustrated, plunges children into a psychedelic universe straight out of the Jefferson Airplane's "White Rabbit." It features Carroll's original text in brief, cherry-picked excerpts, so the finished product is more a series of interpretive highlights than a thorough presentation of the story, and the rococo, tough-to-decipher typeface adds to the impression that the book is meant to be viewed, not read. Seibold's trademark palette of beiges and pea greens, and a slightly grotesque Alice with Ronald McDonald clown feet, seem to dare readers to prefer Disney's prettiness or Tenniel's Victorian placidity. The pops conceived by Seibold and paper engineer James R. Diaz are a lot of fun. Each spread contains a dizzying array of devices and effects, including a particularly clever rendering of the vanishing Cheshire cat. In the end, however, all of this somehow seems less the point than the book's air of hipster irony.

The version by Sabuda, creator of a previous pop-up adaptation of a classic, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (2000), cleaves more closely to the original; its full-color artwork is "in John Tenniel's classic style," and the abridged text, cleverly tucked into minibooks on each spread, is fairly comprehensive. It's also the more successful of the two, partly because this faithfulness preserves the contrast between the drawing-room politeness of Tenniel's illustrations and the lunacy of Carroll's imaginings. Where the pops in Seibold's version creak open a bit grudgingly and sometimes need a hand from the reader to work properly, Sabuda's don't pop so much as gracefully unfurl--and then collapse upon themselves with jaw-dropping ease that leaves one flipping the pages back and forth in amazement. Few readers will peep through the expandable tube that simulates Alice's tumble down the rabbit hole, or admire the closing spread's intricately die-cut, gravity-defying arc of playing cards, without feeling a bit bereft when the adventure comes to an end. This will very likely come to be seen as the definitive pop-up version of Alice, but it will also further establish Sabuda as the foremost visionary of the genre. REVWR
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved (hide spoiler)]

http://www.amazon.com/Alices-Adventur...

I also see another possibility:

Alice's Pop Up Wonderland by Nick Denchfield (Gerstenberg, Macmillan, 2000)

For some various illustrated editions, see:
https://play.google.com/store/books/d...

Peter wrote: "Rut wrote: "I read the first chapter on my way to work this morning and for the next hours I took every opportunity to go on until I reached chapter 6. There I set the limit, for it was beginning t..."

I guess he would be. A pop-up version sound interesting. Thanks for the links Lily!

Lily wrote: "Peter wrote: "...Having just read your comments and memories of the book and the existence of a"3D" version make me want to go to our local bookstores and try and find that pop-up version. The more..."

Lily

Thank you for all the links. I will be going to the bookstores, both new and used, this weekend. With Christmas just around the corner a pop up Alice would be perfect ... for a child of any age.

"If I get to the ocean I can take the train back." I liked how Carroll captured a child's logic here. "When I went to A, B happened, so B must always happen when I go to A " I have a nephew who thinks the colour red is called stop, because you should always stop when you see a red traffic light. Sort of the same logic.

I can't read this book without picturing Carroll reading it to Alice and her sisters and watching them laugh at the little jokes he put in, like "she often gave herself very good advice, though she very seldom followed it ", or the poem about the busy bee becoming the lazy crocodile. There is such a feeling of merry laughter and cozyness that leap from the pages, as well as Carroll's fond celebration of childhood

This book is a perfect test for the question whether a book means what the author intended it to mean, or whether it means what the readers and critics think it means. (Okay, that's not necessarily an either-or, but it presents the basic question.)

There is obviously a lot that Carroll intended to slip into the book. But there is also a lot that critics and readers find that I have a great deal of trouble believing that Carroll intended to put into it. It's fine to get more out of a book than the author intended to put into it, but is it honest to attribute those meanings directly to the author?

Well said Everyman. We can read into written works quite easily.

I figured I would not have much to add to this discussion as I read the book from an adults reading to a child point of view. That means I simply enjoy the way he let his imagination have free reign. I enjoy the trust he has in children's ability to to know right from wrong (he trust they will not eat or drink something just because it does not say poison) and his wry sense of humor(giving advice, but rarely taking your own advice).

Everyman wrote: "This book is a perfect test for the question whether a book means what the author intended it to mean, or whether it means what the readers and critics think it means. (Okay, that's not necessaril..."

As Brit commented above I can't think of any book that is more open to your question than AA. You mentioned, I remember, that you have an annotated edition. I do as well. I have found myself at times silently praising the various insights of critics and readers and at other times rolling my eyes and shaking my head in disbelief at how far the interpretation has been (in my mind, at least) stretched and twisted.

The book is chock full of allusions, satire, and puns. Children often do not "get" these, so they must be there for the enjoyment of the adults reading to the children, making the stories something children of all ages can share. I think this is fairly common. A few examples that pop into my head are Dr. Seuss, Lemony Snicket, and the Narnia books.

Trying to get dry by listening to a very "dry" bit of history, the long "tale", the "caucus-race". And the idea that the animals represent the adults in the child's life. All wonderful ways to allow fun and irreverence. If Alice identifies the mouse as her governess, and tells her "But you're so easily offended" --to talk back to her governess, which she is probably not allowed to do in real life.

I haven't read in detail all the annotations, but I haven't found any that I felt detracted from the story. Which interpretations do you think are unlikely or imposed?

Ginny

First, good for you for not using an annotated version as a fine-toothed comb. At times, I wish I had followed your lead. As a child AA was just a great story with neat pictures.

I think the annotations offer some excellent insights. I hesitate to mention too much because we have readers who are just enjoying the story as a story. Perhaps one example won't be too much of a spoiler, especially if it does not directly relate to the novel. One commentary states that Lewis Carroll adopted his new last name to align with Alice Liddell's last name. One consonant, followed by a vowel, followed by a double consonant, followed by another vowel and ending with a double consonant. ... Carroll - Liddell ...

Charles Lutwidge Dodgson first used Lewis Carroll in a little known publication called "The Train" in March 1856. Alice Liddell was born 4 May 1852. The Liddell family moved to Oxford in 1856. Historians and biographers tell us that Carroll and Alice met soon after the move to Oxford which makes sense. Still, to me, at least, it is a bit of a stretch to have the Liddell/Carroll connection work. Of course, in a twist of logic, I have just been as obscure in my comment as others I disagree with and so it seems Carroll does have the last laugh at my expense. Of course, I do wonder why not much is made or said about the Jefferson Airplane song "White Rabbit" in the annotations, but that is just me searching for my lost youth. :-)

Peter wrote: "...I have found myself at times silently praising the various insights of critics and readers and at other times rolling my eyes and shaking my head in disbelief at how far the interpretation has been (in my mind, at least) stretched and twisted. ..."

;-) Quite agree, Peter. But, then I have a bit of rolling my eyes and shaking my head when reading AAiW without the annotations, too.

My first impulse is to agree that Alice is either playing or (day)dreaming. My second impulse is to be a little sad that I'm so old that I can't read a children's fantasy story without demythologizing it. That's the explanation of a grown-up! Of course, I'm a grown-up so it's quite natural, but I think it's worth remembering that a child who reads this hasn't any need to fetter her imagination with anything so restrictive as realism. Nonetheless, I can't help but read it as the wandering imagination of a child.

Ginny wrote: "The book is chock full of allusions, satire, and puns. Children often do not "get" these, so they must be there for the enjoyment of the adults reading to the children, making the stories somethin..."

Having not read AA or LG in childhood, this is my first experience with the book. I have chosen to first read through a "straight" non-annotated version so that I could just experience the language and story without clouding my mind with interpretations, allusions, etc. Now that I have finished, I am re-reading the annotated version to help highlight the nuances I may have missed.

Basically I am following my H.S. teacher's long ago advice on how to read a poem. Once for Language. Twice for Meaning. Thrice for Enjoyment.

Peter wrote: "Ginny

First, good for you for not using an annotated version as a fine-toothed comb. At times, I wish I had followed your lead. As a child AA was just a great story with neat pictures.

I think..."

I found this on Wikipedia which admittedly can be a dubious source but it sounds reasonable and more in keeping with his scholarly mind.

This pseudonym was a play on his real name: Lewis was the anglicised form of Ludovicus, which was the Latin for Lutwidge, and Carroll an Irish surname similar to the Latin name Carolus, from which comes the name Charles.[8] The transition went as follows: "Charles Lutwidge" translated into Latin as "Carolus Ludovicus". This was then translated back into English as "Carroll Lewis" and then reversed to make "Lewis Carroll".[36] This pseudonym was chosen by editor Edmund Yates from a list of four submitted by Dodgson; the others being Edgar Cuthwellis, Edgar U. C. Westhill and Louis Carroll.

Jacob wrote: "My first impulse is to agree that Alice is either playing or (day)dreaming. My second impulse is to be a little sad that I'm so old that I can't read a children's fantasy story without demythologiz..."

Well said. Completely agree.

Victoria wrote: "Basically I am following my H.S. teacher's long ago advice on how to read a poem. Once for Language. Twice for Meaning. Thrice for Enjoyment.
..."

Excellent advice. And this brings up another point--this book is often more poetry than prose. And then there all all the parodies of boring poems. I am going to include a quote from the notations. I don't think there are any spoilers here, but

"Most of the poems in the two Alice books are parodies of poems or popular songs that were well known to Carroll's contemporary readers. With few exceptions the originals have now been forgotten, their titles kept alive only by the fact that Carroll chose to poke fun at them. Because much of the wit and burlesque is missed if one is not familiar with what is being caricatured..."

I suggest that knowing the original would give the modern reader a better feel for the spontaneous experience of the Victorian reader, adult and child alike.

Victoria wrote: "Peter wrote: "Ginny

First, good for you for not using an annotated version as a fine-toothed comb. At times, I wish I had followed your lead. As a child AA was just a great story with neat pict..."

Yes. the name change did come about on account of Yates' insistence. Yates is one of the forgotten Victorians. He did, however, rub shoulders with many major figures such as Carroll, Dickens, Oscar Wilde and G.B. Shaw.

Jacob wrote: "My first impulse is to agree that Alice is either playing or (day)dreaming. My second impulse is to be a little sad that I'm so old that I can't read a children's fantasy story without demythologiz..."

Yes. I often wish I could clear my mind of what I know (or think I know) so I could simply enjoy a book, an event, an experience or a place without the shackles of so called maturity.

Does anyone have a young person you are sharing this read with? How do they respond to the whimsy?

Ginny wrote: "Does anyone have a young person you are sharing this read with? How do they respond to the whimsy?"

We are still waiting for our first grandchild. To celebrate the birth I plan to buy two pop up AAIW's, one for the new baby and one for me.

Peter wrote: "Ginny wrote: "Does anyone have a young person you are sharing this read with? How do they respond to the whimsy?"

We are still waiting for our first grandchild. To celebrate the birth I plan to ..."

Congrats Peter. It's a perfect gift

Deborah wrote: "Peter wrote: "Ginny wrote: "Does anyone have a young person you are sharing this read with? How do they respond to the whimsy?"

We are still waiting for our first grandchild. To celebrate the bi..."

I know Peter's grandchild will be outstandingly precocious, but I'd suggest including Pat the Bunny in that purchase. Or maybe even one of those cloth books.

Lily wrote: "Deborah wrote: "Peter wrote: "Ginny wrote: "Does anyone have a young person you are sharing this read with? How do they respond to the whimsy?"

We are still waiting for our first grandchild. To ..."

Lily: Thanks for another book suggestion. Perhaps with a pop up Alice, Pat the Bunny and Watership Down we would have a great start for a bunny-themed bookcase.

Peter wrote: "...a bunny-themed bookcase...."

I've always been a fan of Peter Rabbit, the collection of the nice little books with the cute pictures of the mischievous rabbit who kept getting himself in trouble and of his barnyard companions. We also had at least one pop-up version when our son was young, but it is the little books with their Beatrix Potter illustrations that have survived.

Jacob wrote: "My first impulse is to agree that Alice is either playing or (day)dreaming. My second impulse is to be a little sad that I'm so old that I can't read a children's fantasy story without demythologizing it. That's the explanation of a grown-up! Of course, I'm a grown-up so it's quite natural, but I think it's worth remembering that a child who reads this hasn't any need to fetter her imagination with anything so restrictive as realism. Nonetheless, I can't help but read it as the wandering imagination of a child. "

I like that comment enough. Grown-ups for the most part are much less imaginative than children; we can't believe that a white rabbit with a watch could actually exist, but children don't need to willingly suspend disbelief, as adults are told to do; their imaginations can do it all by themselves.

Ginny wrote: "Does anyone have a young person you are sharing this read with? How do they respond to the whimsy?"

Great question. Maybe I'll try to read it to some of the grandchildren when I get a chance, which sadly won't be soon since I have to go for a workshop this weekend, which is when they have time for me to read to them (as soon as school is over they rush outdoors to play until dinnertime, and evening time is spent at their house not ours.)

Lily wrote: "Peter wrote: "...a bunny-themed bookcase...."

I've always been a fan of Peter Rabbit, the collection of the nice little books with the cute pictures of the mischievous rabbit who kep..."

I was brought up on those. As were my children. And my grandchildren. Classics are classics!

Everyman wrote: "Lily wrote: "Peter wrote: "...a bunny-themed bookcase...."

I've always been a fan of Peter Rabbit, the collection of the nice little books with the cute pictures of the mischievous r..."

But I am also a fan of a much newer story: The Velveteen Rabbit. I bought it in several forms (different illustrators) to deliberately demonstrate the impact of different editions to our son. But that was when much older than a newborn, of course.

Lily wrote: "Peter wrote: "...a bunny-themed bookcase...."

I've always been a fan of Peter Rabbit, the collection of the nice little books with the cute pictures of the mischievous rabbit who kep..."

I still have all my Beatrix Potter books from when I was a child. They are treasured possessions. Timeless and beautiful.

Congratulations, Peter, on the imminent arrival of your grandchild! Let us know when s/he pops up (?!!!) and I'll crack open a bottle of cava to his/her health :-))

Ginny wrote: "Does anyone have a young person you are sharing this read with? How do they respond to the whimsy?"

I read the books to my children last year. It was delightful. I think there is an extra joy in reading this book aloud too as it really makes you appreciate how clever the word play is, and also how philosophical certain phrases are.
For the children, my daughter loved the Caucus race best.

Pip wrote: "Lily wrote: "Peter wrote: "...a bunny-themed bookcase...."

I've always been a fan of Peter Rabbit, the collection of the nice little books with the cute pictures of the mischievous r..."

Gee. Thanks to you all for the best wishes. If I have misdirected you I am sorry. My wife and I are anxiously awaiting the birth of our first grandchild. The only delay is that both our son and daughter and their significant others do not seem to be in any rush to become parents. While we have made great plans (the latest being my creating a rabbit-themed bookcase thanks to you all) they both seem blissfully unaware of our eagerness to hop on a plane back to Toronto to celebrate even the announcement of a coming birth.

And so we sit here in Victoria, waiting ;-)

Clari wrote: "For the children, my daughter loved the Caucus race best..."
Based on this recommendation, I re-read the instructions for the Caucus-race. I think I rushed through it the first time. This time I had a laugh. We have a house with a circle track--through the kitchen dining area, down the hall, around into the front room and back into the dining area. When our children were little, adults would be sitting at the table or in the front room and the Caucus-race with no beginning and no end would go around and around with anywhere from 2 to 10 participants (our 3 plus cousins) until the adults could not stand it anymore. The children seemed to never get tired. Sometimes for all the running we would give them a "prize" (read bribe) and declare the race finished.

I am sad that Alice was not a book I had read in my childhood, and I missed my chance to enjoy with my children. (And my grandchild, who is now 17, and no likelihood of any more.) Never too late, though, to have a happy childhood, as they say.

Ginny wrote: "Clari wrote: "For the children, my daughter loved the Caucus race best..."
Based on this recommendation, I re-read the instructions for the Caucus-race. I think I rushed through it the first time...."

My left eyebrow carries the permanent scar of a missed turn of a Caucus race, into a dining table chair leg!