Re: [mythsoc] The Magic Thanksgiving Pudding and Philip Pullet-man
- HI fellow Mythopoeics:
Great input in my inbox this morning. Wendell, Diamond's Arthurian tale, DB & CH's
all good. Thank you for being my colleagues! And thanks to the cosmos
for everything else.
I have an angle on Pullman & Narnia & Christianity, but I want to warn folks that some
find it...well...not to their liking. I expect to take some flak for it if I put it
out there publicly. Perhaps I should send it to interested persons off-list.
> I presently reading an Australian children's fantasy novel called _The Magic
> Pudding_ written and illustrated by Norman Lindsay. It was first published
> in 1918 and is now back in print in the U.S. from The New York Review
> Children's Collection. This edition has an introduction by Philip Pullman in which
> he calls it "the funniest children's book ever written." Perhaps it's not
> quite as great as Pullman claims it to be, although it's very good. It's a
> little bit reminiscent of the Alice books, as the (reasonably polite) main
> character meets a bunch of characters who are constantly bickering with each other
> over nothing. Maybe it's also a bit like _The Adventures of Huckleberry
> Finn_, in which a younger character is accompanied on his travels by a couple of
> older con-man characters. Indeed, in some sense it's a picaresque novel,
> being about the travels of rogues.
> The reason why I mention this book is something that Pullman says in the
> introduction. He says that Lindsay "had a great cause, which was to persecute
> his mortal enemy, the wowser" (where "wowser" is the Australian slang term for
> a "prim, narrow-minded, pompous, Puritanical, humorless, spoilsport"
> person). In a way though, this misreads Lindsay's intentions. It's not a book in
> which the rogues are entirely treated as the heroes. This would be like
> claiming that the Mad Hatter or the Cheshire Cat are the heroes of the Alice
> books. And it's this sort of overemphasizing the rule-breaking aspects of this
> novel that shows me why Pullman dislikes Narnia so much. He can't accept that
> a great novel might not be about kicking down the walls of the establishment.
> This is why I don't want to read only novels that are recommended by a
> single person. Heck, I don't even want my own literary opinions to rule. I want
> books to express lots of different opinions, tastes, and personalities. It's
> possible to like both the Narnia books and _The Magic Pudding_.
> Wendell Wagner
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
> Yahoo! Groups Links
- --- Bonnie Callahan <bonolatm@...> wrote:
> HI fellow Mythopoeics:SOME CUT
> I have an angle on Pullman & Narnia & Christianity,
> but I want to warn folks that some
> find it...well...not to their liking. I expect to
> take some flak for it if I put it
> out there publicly. Perhaps I should send it to
> interested persons off-list.
I would like to see it.
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> --- Bonnie Callahan <bonolatm@...> wrote:Hey, I'm interested too.
>> I have an angle on Pullman & Narnia & Christianity,
>> but I want to warn folks that some
>> find it...well...not to their liking. I expect to
>> take some flak for it if I put it
>> out there publicly. Perhaps I should send it to
>> interested persons off-list.
Btw, if anyone doubted it, that story about the Loathly Lady, more typically
starring Sir Gawain, is definitely out there in the early literature. I
read it as a kid in Bulfinch's MYTHOLOGY,
and Roger Lancelyn Green, friend of CSL, retells it in his own kids' version
(and a good one it was) of the Arthurian tales.
In fact, it's the tale Chaucer gives to the Wife of Bath, though with a
slightly different ending.