Monday, June 18, 2012

peter and the starcatchers by dave barry and ridley pearson

this has been on my to-read list for quite some time. i love children's literature, and i love, love peter pan. the book was a fun, lighthearted read, but i didn't love it.

the story was born when one of the author's daughters asked how peter pan and captain hook met. 

it tells the story of how peter became the boy who never grew up, where tinkerbell came from, how captain hook got his hook, how mermaids came to be, the location of never land, and the true substance of pixie dust. 

it was a fun book, and i'm sure it would be delightful to read as a child. but it lacked the depth and moral message that i really value in children's literature. i know it's the first in a series of book, but i'm not to sure i'd make a point to read the others. however, i have a sneaking suspicion that the series could only improve. there was so much to set up in this first book it lost some of the whimsical quality that draws me to peter pan. i'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts on the series.

i am, however, quite interested in seeing the broadway production of peter and the starcatcher. i hear great things about it.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

So nice to hear that someone had a problem with this book! So many people seem to love it blindly.

As a Pan fan, did you notice that it has a TON of mistakes in it as compared to Barrie's original tale(s)? Pan HAS a backstory and this is NOT it. And it's not just fact-checking problems they have - they've changed the very persoanlity of Peter!

On its own, sure, it's pretty darn fun. But as a prequel to Pan? Fail.

Gotta make sure you know about these two books. They're both great in their own right.

A story based on Barrie’s own idea for more:
And a'What if?' adventure (but it's not for the kids!): Click!