You think that's Tink?

Peter Pan is always with Tinker Bell, right?

Okay, he’s not in Peter Pan’s NeverWorld.  I didn’t see the need to ‘magically’ resurrect Tink when Barrie put in the extra sad touch of her ultimate demise.  After all, she’d already been saved from death once.   I gave Peter his own fairy, literally.

And thus, not counting my book or the final chapter (and whenever upon she ceased to be prior to his visit to grown-up Wendy), Peter Pan is never without Tink.  Right?

Perhaps not!  Two bits of Barrie leapt out at me when last going through the novel, which, in conjunction with each other, just might prove otherwise.

Among Peter’s visits to the Darling nursery (to hear the stories), we read:

He was accompanied by a strange light, no bigger than your fist, which darted about the room like a living thing and I think it must have been this light that wakened Mrs. Darling.

And later, having come back to fetch his shadow:

It was not really a light; it made this light by flashing about so quickly, but when it came to rest for a second you saw it was a fairy, no longer than your hand, but still growing.

We can say for certain that this second light/fairy is in fact Tink.  Why?  The next line, of course:

It was a girl called Tinker Bell...

All right, so Pan has a fairy with him both times.  Note, however, that Barrie doesn’t specify the first one as the popular Tink.  Granted, that doesn’t mean it isn’t her, and the natural assumption is to think it is.   But examination of what’s there yields the difference between a ‘fist’ and a ‘hand.’  Those are similar, yes, but not quite the same.  Try it.  Look at your fist rather than your hand - vastly dissimilar actually.  This alone might prove enough to question whether or not the fairy with him when Mrs. Darling encountered the boy is Tink.   But what really jarred me is the curious word ‘growing’ that Barrie wrote.   Why does it matter?  Well, only one week elapses between when Peter’s shadow had been torn off by the window and when he returns to fetch it. 

She decided to roll the shadow up and put it away carefully in a drawer, until a fitting opportunity came for telling her husband. Ah me!  The opportunity came a week later, on that never-to-be-forgotten Friday.

To think of Peter without his shadow for a whole week!   But in terms of the matter at wing, that’s not all that much time, really.  So are we to believe, then, that the first light had grown from a fist to hand size in just seven days?  And the fairy (Tink?) still growing?  If fairies kept getting bigger as such in as little time as a week, she’d be HUGE after the amount of time that the Darlings spent in the Neverland.  [Don’t believe me?  See this post.]  Unless, of course, she stopped growing after the week.  It’s entirely possible, given that a week seems to have some sort of magic property in the world of Pan. [i.e. Peter flew away from home in seven days (as per Narrator of Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens) and the seven days of boys before they are ‘lost.’]  Possible, sure, but is it likely? 

You see, if it can be surmised that a fairy grows in a week, then isn’t also true that Tink is a new fairy?  Thus, she hadn’t been with Peter all that long [if any time at all!] before the Mrs. Darling encounter.

All right, then, if the fairy with Pan & Mrs. Darling is in fact not Tinker Bell, then it suggests that fairies are different sizes just as humans are!  And even if it is Tink then, she’s now another size it would seem.

A lot to think about, no? 

I’m not stating outright that the first fairy is not Tink.  Nor am I saying that it is.  I haven’t made a decision.  And right now I don’t have to do so, as I have no plans on writing stories with Tinker Bell in them.  So I don’t have to bang my head to figure it out just yet.

But it does raise an interesting notion - not only on fairy sizing, but as to whether or not Tinker Bell “always” accompanies Pan.

Is THIS Rubbish?

You know, I'd just said to someone (okay, I typed it to Jesse Rowden [a.k.a. Musapan], ) the other day that I'd like to read the other submissions for the 'Peter Pan Sequel' contest held many years back.

It turns out another one of the authors whose work had been entered decided to unleash theirs upon the world as well.  Peter Pan and the Amazing Machine of Lord Rubbish by Max J. Aldridge.

Peter Pan and the Amazing Machine of Lord Rubbish is a sequel to J. M. Barrie’s Peter Pan. It is set in 1907 in the same location as the original story. At school, Wendy becomes best friends with Betty, a little orphan who is under the care of her uncle, Lord Bryan, a wealthy businessman who runs two orphanages in the heart of London and has recently won the City Council contract to dispose the city’s rubbish. Wendy whispers a secret to Betty: Peter Pan has promised to come and fetch her as well as her brothers and they will spend a few days in the Neverland before going back to school. For his part, Lord Bryan is more worried about making good use of the enormous amount of rubbish that lies in the city dump. As such he forces the young boys who live in his orphanages (who call him Lord Rubbish) to sift through the garbage and pick out anything that is of economic value. But Lord Bryan’s greatest dream is to utilize the refuse to produce cheap food to sell to the poor.

Granted, I have not read this one yet, so I can make no official judgment as per se.  But there already is a contradiction from just there in the story description: Wendy's brothers never went back to the Neverland.  And what of the Lost Boys who became Darling children?  They don't seem to be around at the beginning of this book (from what can be read online.)  It cannot be considered as a tale "inserted into" the original novel, since they would have to be there.

There doesn't seem to be much effort to recreate Barrie's style, though - an observation, not a slam.

It's also interesting to note that a kind of environmental angle has been taken with this novel, too.  Though if I may say so (without having fully realized the scope of this novel) it's material that seems to fit better when magnifying the island to a planet as I have done. 

I can only imagine that Hook is still running amok in the Neverland in this, since one of the requirements for the sequel in the contest had been that he be in the book as well.

I suppose at some point I will have to read it for myself... but I don't have too much anticipation of it being inserted into the Pan-theon of the Boy's adventures. 

All in all, it just goes to show the enduring power of Pan.

And to play my own pipe - I still think the sequel should have something from Barrie in it.  Which is one of the reasons I love Michael Pan especially.

A Capital Idea

There is a small difference between Barrie’s Pan tales and mine by way of some capitalization. Specifically the Native American characters as a race and Pan’s “gang.” i.e. Redskins & Lost Boys.

It’s true, Barrie does not have them with capital letters. Yet I do. Am I being inconsistent, against what I claim? I suppose on one level, yes. But on another, no. (Could have expected that, right?)

Why do I make them proper nouns instead? In the case of the “Redskins” I just think it entirely disrespectful toward the Native Tribes of the Americas that we don’t give them such a distinction. After all, it’s not exactly the nicest way to refer to them. Yet I cannot have them listed as something other than what’s in the original text. (And I give a reason as to Barrie's motives for doing so in my Foreword.)  Thus, I’ve tried to rectify the situation a little by giving them a shred of dignity as per their moniker.

As for the boys... well, they’ve become quite iconic since Barrie first introduced them, no? It’s my belief that we tend to think of them as a “tribe” in their own right, and so I’ve capitalized them now as well. Within the world of Pan [story-wise], tales of the eternal boy are retold and passed down... so who is to say that they haven’t acquired “proper noun” status by the time the events of Peter Pan’s NeverWorld roll around?

I can just hear someone with a counter-argument using this notion [i.e. that the story is passed down over generations] in the sense of being able to therefore disregard any of what’s in the story by chalking it up to being altered by oral tradition. Consider, though, this text from the Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens : ...if you ask her whether he rode on a goat in those days, she says she never heard of his having a goat. Then is it to be believed? Of course it is. For the Narrator goes on to say: Perhaps she has forgotten, just as she sometimes forgets your name and calls you Mildred, which is your mother's name. Still, she could hardly forget such an important thing as the goat. Therefore there was no goat when your grandmother was a little girl. This shows that, in telling the story of Peter Pan, to begin with the goat (as most people do) is as silly as to put on your jacket before your vest.

Therefore, the establishment of certain elements of Peter Pan’s history can’t be ignored or forgotten. We have the cannon text. It [a la the Narrator] obviously knows what from what and when from when, so we have to follow strictly. Something as trivial as whether or not “Lost Boys” is capitalized, though, well, that’s subject to change - either in thought or in the text as per how much importance one winds up placing on them. And as I’ve said, the Lost Boys, in my opinion, have earned the right to be given proper credit with a proper noun.  And the Native People?  Let's give them the respect they deserve, too.

Gee, I’m not too hyper-speculative or anything, am I?  ;)

For Those Who Care...

Seems the movie adaptation of Peter and the Starcatchers is moving forward at Disney.  Just reporting it, as it's Peter Pan related.

As you either know (or as can be inferred from my posts and such), I am not fond of this book/series outside of it being a fun adventure tale on its own.  A prequel to Peter Pan?  To Disney's, perhaps.  To Barrie?  No.  I often wonder if the authors even read Peter and Wendy.

I hope that all who like the book are satisfied with the movie... for I know how upsetting that can be otherwise.  I also hope all who like this book actually read Peter and Wendy and discover the truth about the depth, psychology and magnitude of Barrie's genius as opposed to the watered down, erroneous presentation of Pan past.

(Find the staggering list of differences [aka blatant disregard] to Barrie's novels here.)

Tock-ing about the Croc

Imagine this... but I've just gone through Peter and Wendy again.  There's a reason... but I'll save that for later.  I know, I'm a tease that way.  Suffice to say I've mentioned it before to the tune of restoration... but another development has come up, too.  I'll reveal the 'news' soon.

SO, what (among much) did I notice this time around?

Disney calls the crocodile "Tick-Tock."  Clever.
(Oops, got some sarcasm on you.)

Well, in the book, the crocodile never TOCKS.  Just ticks.

Just saying...

A-Scoring Fans?

My friend Doc Holiday, who doesn’t get mentioned on here all that much (by no reason other than circumstance) has a crazy dream:

The Magic Scoreboard.

That’s what he calls it. What does it do? Well, it can answer any question. ANY question at all, so long as the query can be put forth numerically. Doc Holiday claims that it’s possible. If one knew how to phrase “The Meaning of Life” in terms of Mathematics, all would be revealed. (42?)

But the real reason to have this “Magic Scoreboard” is to be able to know certain odd things as they arise. Like, say you’re wondering how many pitchers have had a perfect record in the history of baseball. Voila. Answer appears. Okay, perhaps the internet would tell us... but he thought of it long before the internet, folks.  Consider, though, that the query doesn’t even have to be plausibly able to be discerned (after all, it is a MAGIC Scoreboard!) For instance: How many people seated in a car [at the time of asking] are wearing purple in their outfits? Voila, it would know and display. Granted, who would need to know such a percentage? {Shrug} Not the point... stuff just arises in curiosity, ya’ know?

So, okay, I’m mentioning the Magic Scoreboard because I have a question to pose it:

What percentage of devout fans of the original (or TV reboot) of Dark Shadows are up in arms about the new Tim Burton version? Really. I’d like to know!  For you see, I do sympathize with them. How could I not, purist that I am?

Okay, it’s true that I haven’t been, nor am I now, a fan of the show. [Vampire. See this post.] But that isn’t to say I haven’t seen it (both versions) a little. I make no judgment calls on either one.  But I did get enough of a gist to know that a Fish-Out-of-Water Screwball Comedy is NOT the nature of the series. So, again, how many purists of Dark Shadows are disgruntled about such a depiction?

Note that I am not saying that one cannot or should not make such a deviation in a film version. Done right and with purpose, a parody or the like can be welcomed for sure. Had that been the intent? If I had anything invested in it other than this cheap curiosity, I’d look into it. But as it stands, I don’t have to do so. However, that does not negate my utter sympathy for those who are upset by the treatment.

But how many are there?

If only the Magic Scoreboard could say....

Books DO Burn Up

Often ideas or novels being written will go on the back burner. For any number of reasons. Perhaps it’s not fully formed quite yet. Or it’s not flowing. Or another project demands action instead. Whatever the cause, there always seem to be simmering stories.

But can they ever burn up completely?

Probably not officially, as one can just never tell what will rise from the ashes if they do. But that’s not to say that they can’t become ash first.

I suspect They Never Left, a novel of mine on said back burner, will no longer have more written upon it. It’s kind of sad, I suppose. But then again, there’s so much else to be done, I can’t really cry over blank pages. Why is it allegedly defunct now? A few reasons, actually.

Not in order of importance, one factor is that the world in which it takes place is rapidly diminishing. The irony here, of course, is that I’d set it in non-fictional Chicago. Sounds like it’s not possible, right? But back in this post, I explained how many of the actual locales I’d written into the tale no longer exist. Lots which have been vacant for many years have been built up, for instance, or shops have gone away. How can I create real-Chicago on paper when the places I want to use keep disappearing - or else have new additions? Turns out Gil lives very near one of the most important locations in the book... and I see there’s now a statue there. [I don’t want the statue there! ;) ]  (Not to mentiion a crucial bit being painted over.)

Another issue is that I’m finding the “point” behind the tale might better be served in a different book on the back burner. It seems issues I’m addressing in narrative form have a bit of crossover. That’s to be expected, given the issues are important to me. But if one tale is able to carry the same message just as well as the other, do both need to be written?

That, I suspect, depends on the power of the story. Does each hold enough merit to warrant its own novel? If I’m to be honest with myself, thinking back on it, there’s not much excitement to hold interest in They Never Left. At least for me. And if I’m not "gung ho" about it, can I really expect others to be? They Never Left, as it stands, tells of two buddies (a guy & a girl) who are out to assemble a particular group. Thus, right now it’s naught more than solving puzzles to find each member and convince them to reconvene... fun and engaging as it happens, sure – but on the whole? Once the group is assembled, it will likely turn out to just be a “heady” novel without much action. Probably best not explored, especially when the seed concept can be incorporated into a better tale  It is true, though, that two folks read what I have so far [Doodles and Air] and they enjoyed what they read.  But to reiterate, it doesn't have the potential to pan out into something great.  There is one particular line that I’m reluctant to lose, though. But it’s certainly not worth completing the novel for that one stab at reality. Maybe I can work it into the other novel, but it doesn’t fit as well that I can see at this moment.

I will, however, absolutely hate to abandon the one character. I’ve gotten pretty darn fond of him. Mostly because of his defiant nature. Not so much within the storyline, but with me. He’s a strong-willed creation who has no trouble telling me what he does and doesn’t like or just what’s up in general. [Such as that hairstyle as seen in the pic.  He INSISTS on it!]  Sometimes I miss him... which stands to reason that I shouldn’t throw him away. And I don’t have to, certainly, but then – how can I get rid of his best friend? He’ll squawk at me for sure! Don’t get the impression that I dislike her. On the contrary. It’s just that she’s the catalyst for the novel’s progression – she’s the one who’s determined to find the group. Besides that, she’s sort of set up to be in this story. And I just don’t see her truly functioning outside of her namesake.

I also really like the ending.  It's the sort that establishes another part of the story, too.  A la sequel.  In fact, They Never Left had been meant to spawn any number of sequels, limited only by the resource materials.  And there'd been quite a bit.  Truth is, though, that beyond book two the notions were too vague.  But it would have been a terrific conclusion/cliff-hanger!

One might think that the solution is easy... to place these two friends as characters in the other novel instead. Won’t work, however. At least not how I conceived the other novel. This one is the “ghost story” that I’m dealing with – and the living characters in it are not meant to be prominent. As I’ve already said, the guy I like is quite outspoken and he just wouldn’t stand for being secondary. Or not hearing his name.  [It's quite a name.]

And thus, I’m thinking that They Never Left to have charred away instead of simmered. 'Tis a pity, for a ton of research and work went into this book.  But then, that's true of any book I write.  Naturally, I can rescue the guy and girl from the pages. They might not fit in the other novel, but who’s to say they won’t have another adventure I need to write? I hope so. For I really do like him.

But one thing is for sure – should these two show up again in my pages, they’ll be living in a fictionalized Chicago – or at least one that's not so damn accurate.