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.
No comments:
Post a Comment