Dino Pan?

Er....

oooo00000kaaAAY....

What on earth?

(And be sure to notice Robinson Crusoe the Lost Jedi Knight)

Taking a bit of liberty, aren't they?

I doubt it's "contiguous" with Barrie's stories, so I suppose it's harmless fun.




It does get me to thinking, though... Dinosaur Island could very well be a location on NeverWorld.  After all, it's a planet of mostly islands and kids dream of dinosaurs all the time, no?

Captain GEORGE Hook?

Mr. George Darling & Captain Jas. Hook

There’s often a tendency to think that these two are symbolically related. That some aspect of Hook lies in Darling or vice-versa. As in Wendy, John & Michael are trying to escape the ‘tyranny’ (to whatever degree) of their father’s insistence that their want of play time is nonsense. (Which is also sort of a speculative view.)

This belief arises from the fact that in most productions, Darling & Hook are played by the same man. Does this mean, then, that Hook represents the dark side of their father? Actually, no.

The reason that Darling and Hook are portrayed by a single actor is simply double-casting. It gave the actor, who would otherwise have had a small part, more to do. Granted, the same can be said of the actress who takes on Mrs. Darling - after the children leave she isn’t seen again (in the play) until the end. Consider, though, that at one point Mrs. Darling had been the one double-cast!

Just as Peter Pan being played a by a girl/woman is no way supposed to be commentary on his nature or attributes, there’s nothing in Darling/Hook that’s really meant to be “read into” concerning the aspects of a scary authority figure or some projected extension of the Darling kids' imaginations. It’s just a matter of convenience.

Sure, there’s bound to be some imprint of their father’s influence that helped make the Neverland seem enticing. But certainly not to the degree that many would have us believe.

Yet another misconception of the story of Peter Pan.

Playing Around

I had just been thumbing thru the script to the play Peter Pan.  As I have said before, it's not as saturated in me as so with the novel, since I tend to deal with the book.

I had to share this, as I truly laughed out loud.  In Barrie's description of how to portray Nana, he writes:

...must never be on two legs except on those rare occasions when an ordinary nurse would be on four.

Ah, the cleverness of Barrie!

Five Past the Century Mark

I know I said I'd return next year... but I couldn't let this day (having not honored it before on this site) go by - especially since it is a 'special' date in that...

one hundred and five years ago today,
Peter Pan, or the Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up
took the stage. The famous adventure (as opposed to the "lesser known" Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens) of the eternal boy has not ceased since.

Bravo, Sir J. M. Barrie!

And thank you!

A Million Thanks for Millicent...

Note: This post contains a spoiler of the 2003 movie.

In my review of P.J. Hogan’s film of Peter Pan, I express great pleasure at the added character of Aunt Millicent. She’s a revision, actually, of the maid Liza in the original play and the novel. I’ve already explained the brilliance of Hogan’s tweak in the post, see there for more.

There's another reason that Aunt Millicent is terrific.
She’s the solution to something Barrie had never been able to work out.

Anyone heard of the “Beautiful Mothers Scene" that used to be in the play? [Barrie constantly made changes up to and including opening night and beyond, as well as each year.] I know Andrea Jones (author of Hook & Jill) has… but for those of you who haven’t: It takes place when the Darlings return and the Lost Boys come with them. What happens now, of course, is that the Darlings adopt the rest of the boys. What Barrie initially tried to do is match up a “new” mother for each boy. I put “new” in quotes because it varied. In some incarnations of this scene, a group of lovely young ladies just shows up on a gut level, aching and yearning to be a mother and sensing boys who need a home. In another, Wendy has Peter Pan go out and search for each of the boys’ true mothers, bring them to the Nursery to claim them and return them home. If I recall right, in another there’s a sort of ad placed. But as charming and heart-warming as this idea (in any form) is, it just doesn’t blend in quite right -- and Barrie knew it, for he settled on the Darling adoption.

That’s where Aunt Millicent comes in…

Part of her reason for being there had been to take Wendy away from the Nursery, to have her under wing, to guide and mold her into adulthood. Obviously, it wouldn’t just have been for Wendy’s benefit (or detriment, depending on how one views it) but for Millicent’s as well. In subtext, she wanted to care for a child.

Cut now to the arrival of the Darlings with the Lost Boys. All of the boys are there - except one. Millicent looks on with tears of joy at the happy reunion. Again, her subtext shows through. Enter Slightly. He’d says he went to the wrong door, and so, arrived late…and now he didn’t have a mother. In an interesting and delightful use of fairy magic, Tinker Bell whispers and/or blows a kiss of sorts to Millicent. “Is your name…Slightly?” she asks. Slightly is amazed, of course. Millicent insists that she is his mother in a Barriesque moment.

Thus, this fascinating new character of Hogan’s also fulfills the Barrie-generated notion of a mother awaiting a boy with open arms, or finding a long lost child.

Hooray for Aunt Millicent. Brava, Lynn Redgrave for a magnificent performance.
Bravo to Hogan for working her in so seamlessly.

Line Up, Children...

Know what I’ve been wondering all day?
(I mean besides when I’m going to be able to stop hearing “Sham-wow” over and over in my head.)

Who has more lines in the play (and/or novel) of Peter Pan (Peter and Wendy)?
Peter or Wendy?
Since Wendy’s around in the story before Peter, one might guess her.
Then again, Peter has more lines than her while fighting Hook.
And yet, Wendy does an awful lot of talking in the Underground House.
But Peter does his share of explaining about the Neverland and his adventures.
I’m just not sure. And I really don’t think I want to sit and count.
I looked it up on the world wide web… but nothing close to the answer came up due to how many things are out there stuck to the web.
Not that it matters, but who do you reckon is more of a chatterbox?
Pan or Darling?

Pan Inspires Me YET AGAIN...

Thumbing through the play of Peter Pan, a little bit of it leapt out at me. Truthfully I am not as familiar with the play as the novel (as I worked with Pan in that medium) so some of the minor details go out of my head from time to time, much like Pan’s own memory skills. Thus, when perusing, sometimes it’s a big adventure all over again.

The bit that “leapt out” hit the part of me which writes. Suddenly a little trickle of story cried out to be written. Sorry, I’m going to keep which part inspired me a secret, but the passage shows up near the beginning. But I will tell you what it inspired.

I had a vision of the “mother” in Peter Pan’s NeverWorld, Amy Alexis Richards. I explored the possibility of her exploring the possibility of the eternal boy. From my novel, we know that she’s a firm believer in Pan and is quite versed in stories about him. But when did she first hear of the Boy Who Never Grew Up? There had to have been a moment when she encountered the “legend.” Fortunately, Barrie provided the answer. (If I had a moment in mind while writing the book, this new idea supersedes it.)

And so, at some point (although I cannot say when) I will be writing a companion piece to NeverWorld, based around Amy, delving further into her backstory and giving us a richer understanding of her character other than her becoming the latest acquisition to playful motherhood of the Lost Boys. I do not expect it to be novel length. Nor do I envision a short story. Besides what I have said in this post, it seems like a shorter piece cannot do justice to the unfolding events in my head. By the same token, a feature-length seems like overkill for the idea. A novella, perhaps?

My current plans are for it to be an online-only text, one that can be accessed for free. The story will (or should) be able to be read with or without having read Peter Pan’s NeverWorld, enriching the text either way.

I’ll update, of course.

In the meantime, when did YOU first hear of Peter Pan?
And aren’t you curious how it happened for Ms. Richards?

Shadow of a Doubt

Don’t you just love Peter Pan’s shadow?
How it moves around like a living entity all its own?
I don’t.

Sorry to rain on the balloon, but I’m going to have to pop the parade.

The “living shadow” does not appear in the play Peter Pan nor does it happen in the book Peter and Wendy. It’s yet another concoction of the House of Mouse. And a slightly (pun noted) damaging one at that, for the free-roaming silhouette has become part of pop culture. (Much like the ruby slippers of Oz.) The mischievous moving shadow even shows up in P.J. Hogan’s version. In fact, he devotes quite a bit of time to it. (Time which might have been spent putting some other aspect of the book onto the screen.)

Please don’t take offense to me pointing it out that it’s not correct. I’ll grant you that it’s a charming idea. But don’t forget that I’m a Pan purist. It’s just my nature to sigh at misrepresentation.

You may now be wondering what DOES happen according to Barrie. You probably remember some of it correctly: Peter’s shadow is snapped off when Nana slams the window down on it as he is escaping from the Darlings’ home. Now for the parts you might not know. Mrs. Darling finds it in Nana’s mouth (after checking for a little boy’s body outside as she saw him leap out a window). She keeps it, rolls it up and stuffs it in a drawer. (You likely remember the drawer.) But what you probably don’t recall is Mrs. Darling's intial inclination. At first she hangs it out the window: He is sure to come back for it; let us put it where he can get it easily without disturbing the children. The narrator goes on to say: But unfortunately Mrs. Darling could not leave it hanging out at the window, it looked so like the washing and lowered the whole tone of the house. So you see, in Barrie’s vision, a shadow does not behave like an inky flat person of free-will. It’s rather like a piece of laundry. I know what you may be thinking…what with all the magic that Peter Pan has been exposed to, wouldn’t his shadow have obtained magical qualities? No, apparently not: You may be sure Mrs. Darling examined the shadow carefully, but it was quite the ordinary kind.
Again, sorry to have debunked Disney’s touch for those who liked it. But let us assume that it is a sentient shadow for a moment. It’s just not logical (outside of it being utterly fantastical). What happens to the shadow when it is re-attached to Peter? It behaves normally, so… does that mean it is now dead, so to speak? Or is it still “alive” and a slave to Pan’s motions? Either notion is creepy. It just doesn’t work, if you ask me.

Now it’s entirely possible that Barrie himself would have relished this idea. If stage effects had been sophisticated enough to have produced a living shadow, would he have wanted one? (Chances are it could be easily accomplished with a scrim and backlighting.) Animation had been in its infancy when the play premiered in 1904. Barrie probably would not have readily thought to produce an animated Pan. And if he had, it would have remained silent anyway. So we are left wondering whether or not he would have enjoyed the “living shadow” concept. There is no way to know for sure. However, I'll admit that it does indeed have a Barriesque quality.

For Peter Pan’s NeverWorld, I decided to make a compromise. Since the idea is in fact ingrained into popular culture but nevertheless incorrect, how could I reconcile the two, as it were? I solved it thus: Peter’s shadow is again “lost” when he arrives on NeverWorld and it is roaming around freely. Did I go against my own rant? No. You see, the shadow is not willfully flitting around. Rather it’s being blown about by the wind. Naturally, I couldn't simply separate him from it without cause. As for what that reason is or how Peter Pan is re-acquainted with his pesky shadow… you’ll have to read the book to find out, of course.