Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Childhood Favorites (First of Two Posts)

Two books were particular favorites of mine when I was a child, A Little Princess by Frances Hodgson Burnett and Daddy Long Legs by Jean Webster.  They have a lot to say about females, education, class and character -- and they were published within 10 years of each other (one is set in the US, the other in the UK) a hundred years ago.

Despite its age, A Little Princess has a lot of elements that will sound familiar:  Mean Girls, a new face on the scene who gets undue attention and is resented and punished for that attention, then a fall from grace at which point the heroine shows her character, and is rewarded for her virtue by an incredible reversal of fortunes.  But while all those things are there -- the difficulties of negotiating the nastiness that girls can show other girls, for example -- that's not what makes me love this book.

Now, I'll just say this up front:  If you think the plot in A Little Princess is absurd, I won't be able to convince you otherwise.  I can well see how people might react that way.  I love it, but not everyone has to love what I love.  (No, really!)

Sara Crewe is the pampered only child of Captain Ralph Crewe.  As the book starts, he brings her from India to London when she turns seven so that she can be a "parlor-boarder" at Miss Minchin's Select Seminary for Girls, which was recommended to him by friends.  He buys her an absurd amount of clothes, and a special doll, Emily, who also gets an absurd amount of clothes.  When he leaves, she's bereft but determined to be brave like a proper soldier.

School is a bit of a mixed bag for Sara.  She loves books and studying, but she doesn't like being singled out by Miss Minchin as the "star pupil."  There's a wonderful scene when Miss Minchin assumes that Sara will resist learning French when, in fact, she's already fluent in the language.  Miss Minchin won't let Sara explain herself so, when the French master shows up, she speaks to him in French.  He's thrilled with her, and Miss Minchin is furious.

For four years, Sara is the rich student liked by some and despised by others.  Then, on her eleventh birthday, her father's solicitor arrives to say that Ralph Crewe has died . . . penniless.  (Diamond mines, good friend from Eton, lost everything, yadda yadda.)  All the clothes are gone, as is the French maid, the private parlor, and the rest of the trappings of wealth and privilege.

At this point, I need to explain about the title.  While she is still rich, Sara imagines that she is a princess.  It's pretty clear this is intended to convey both superiority of class but also character; that a princess -- a real princess -- would be gracious, calm and generous no matter what her personal situation.  The Mean Girls find out about this and mock her, but their barbs don't have the desired effect.  When all the money is gone, Sara is turned into an unpaid teacher's aide and errand-running drudge at Miss Minchin's, and she has to draw upon her imagination and her inner resources to keep her composure.  (Which makes her sound like a prig, but Burnett sticks in just enough age-appropriate emotional outbursts to keep Sara this side of insufferable.)

When I was a child, the loneliness in A Little Princess was its emotional core: the feeling of being forsaken and yet still determined to survive even as the people around you undercut your efforts.  (I can really relate to that.)  But re-reading it for this post, I was struck by the following passage, where Sara is alone with her doll, Emily, who never answers Sara's questions:
"As to answering, though," said Sara, trying to console herself, "I don't answer very often. I never answer when I can help it.  When people are insulting you, there is nothing so good for them as not to say a word -- just to look at them and think.  Miss Minchin turns pale with rage when I do it, Miss Amelia looks frightened, and so do the girls.  When you will not fly into a passion people know you are stronger than they are, because you are strong enough to hold in your rage, and they are not, and they say stupid things they wish they hadn't said afterward.  There's nothing so strong as rage, except what makes you hold it in -- that's stronger.  It's a good thing not to answer your enemies.  I scarcely ever do.  Perhaps Emily is more like me than I am like myself.  Perhaps she would rather not answer her friends, even.  She keeps it all in her heart."

But though she tried to satisfy herself with these arguments, she did not find it easy.  When, after a long, hard day, in which she had been sent here and there, sometimes on long errands through wind and cold and rain, she came in wet and hungry, and was sent out again because nobody chose to remember that she was only a child, and that her slim legs might be tired and her small body might be chilled; when she had been given only harsh words and cold, slighting looks for thanks; when the cook had been vulgar and insolent; when Miss Minchin had been in her worst mood, and when she had seen the girls sneering among themselves at her shabbiness -- then she was not always able to comfort her sore, proud, desolate heart with fancies when Emily merely sat upright in her old chair and stared.

I love both the determination to be good and the reality of what it costs her to accomplish it.  What really grabbed my attention was the very Zen notion that the only thing stronger than rage is the ability to hold it in.  There's a lot to be said for the judicious use of anger, and a lot to be said for the deliberate decision to refrain from anger -- particularly in response to someone else's outburst.

I won't keep you in suspense.  After some very Dickensian scenes of hunger and corresponding generosity by our young heroine, she is the beneficiary of some lovely gifts, and then the restoration of her fortune.  (Diamond mines pay off, Ralph's good friend finds her, etc., etc.)  But no amount of money is as good as having family again.  And at the very end, you get a glimpse of what Sara is likely to do with her wealth.  (No, tearing down Miss Minchin's Select Seminary is not on the list.)

When I was much younger (and desperately unhappy), I gobbled up the happy ending that comes only after all that despair.  Now that I've had my own happy ending(s), I find Sara's character, her efforts to be a better person than those around her, are elements I'd not noticed before.  Of course, it's an absurd image of childhood; a real life child in Sara's position would almost certainly have been unable to keep it together the way Sara does.  But there's a Sara inside of me: a lost child in need of rescuing.  I learned after many year that the role of rescuer often falls on the person needing to be rescued.  (Being loved helps a lot.)  I think Sara rescues herself emotionally; although I admit it's a good thing someone showed up with some food just in time.

Three additional points:  First, if you want to get this book for yourself, please look for an edition with Ethel Franklin Betts' illustrations.  (Her cover art work is shown above.)  I feel really strongly about this -- she so perfectly expresses the darkness of Edwardian London.  (Tasha Tudor also illustrated A Little Princess.  I will refrain from saying what I think of her illustrations.  And while I haven't made an exhaustive study of more recent illustrators, I find it hard to imagine anyone has improved on Betts' art work.)

Second, there are those who prefer The Secret Garden by Burnett.  (I suppose that someone might love both books equally, but it seems unlikely.  As I like to say: The world is divided into two groups -- those who think the world is divided into two groups and those who don't.)  I suspect The Secret Garden addresses very different emotional issues, ones that have nothing to do with my personal situation.  Thus I respect the preferences of others, and I don't suggest that either book is "better" than the other.

Finally, the edition I have has the same typography as the original, and it's an interesting lesson in the evolution of written English.  Contractions are used, but only as two words where the second is shrunk down with the use of an apostrophe.  Thus, I wouldn't is shown as I would n't.  The possessive use of the apostrophe is as we know it today: Miss Minchin's, Sara's -- and there's even I don't without the space -- but it's striking to realize that all those contractions we don't find in Jane Austen's books are here presented in the form of an evolutionary "missing link" -- written as they sound when spoken but not yet single words.


  1. As I fall into the category of people who slightly, very slightly, prefer A Secret Garden, I hope that won't preclude me from saying I loved this review. I couldn't possibly count the number of times I've read both books. What I remember most vividly about A Little Princess is how cold she was. Bone-chilling cold ... and cold inside too ... and then, in scenes that only imagination can bring to life, some warmth starts to seep in, in the most magical way. Truly a review that sends a reader straight back to the book!

  2. I have always loved 'A Little Princess', though on balance 'The Secret Garden' was my favorite. I guess it was the enclosed safety of the garden itself (though I loathe gardening!) and helping the crippled child to walk. In 'The Little Princess' - when Sara wakes up in the cold attic room and it's been transformed into a place of warmth and beauty and nice food, it spoke to my Baby Boomer love of STUFF!

  3. I didn't read Burnett until I was in college, but I loved her books.

    My A Little Princess/The Secret Garden preference depends on my mood. Also the time of year.

  4. Although I enjoyed 'The Secret Garden', my personal favourite was 'The Little Princess'. I first read it in an abridged version by Ladybird for children learning to read. I can still remember the illustrations vividly. I later read the original version and also loved it.

    Speaking of 'The Secret Garden': have you read 'The Forgotten Garden' by Kate Morton? It's a book for adults and a very good read. Here's a link to the blurb at The Book Depository: http://www.bookdepository.co.uk/book/9780330449601/The-Forgotten-Garden

  5. Smashing review!
    I loved them both, but Secret Garden definitely pulled in front for me.
    Always been a heroine girl, and for some reason the SG lead appealed more.
    I am actually very tempted to pick them both back up again though.

  6. Thanks, everyone --

    I'm fascinated by the ease with which we know which we prefer, A Little Princess or The Secret Garden. If you think about it, that wouldn't seem to be true of a lot of children's authors. Favorite Beatrix Potter? (I rather like The Tailor of Gloucester -- "Need more twist" -- but that's because I lusted after the resulting embroidered vest!) Favorite Dr. Seuss? (Okay, so I really liked Thidwicke The Big Hearted Moose -- I may be disproving my own theory here!)

    But there's something about these two books by Hodgson Burnett such that one is very enjoyable, while the other speaks to the heart. I do think she managed to capture two very distinct childhood experiences, loneliness and a need to give and receive friendship, in these two books.

    So how come Little Lord Fauntleroy isn't as popular?

  7. Because Little Lord F is SICKENINGLY sentimental. I just don't think it can appeal to modern tastes (it was hugely popular when published, probably more so than the others). I think they move down in scale from sentimental to less so--I love Little Princess, but Secret Garden is much less sentimental and more impatient with its heroine; she's a more flawed character.

    It's interesting that both these books got film treatments (not necessarily faithful to the book, but both good, I think) from top-notch directors in the 90s: Alfonso Cuaron for Princess and Agnieszka Holland for Secret Garden. There's obviously some magic in those stories that really appeals.


  8. http://www.whitegauntlet.com.au/noelstreatfeild/ChildFiction/BooksPaintedGarden.htm ... another "connected" book to The Secret Garden ... by British author Noel Streatfield. Very good!

  9. I have to say I'm more of a Secret Garden girl. The characters just spoke to me a little more than those in A Little Princess. Also, I was fascinated with the mentions of India in there. I can't wait to see the review of Daddy Long Legs - I LOVE that book!

  10. Liz --

    I didn't mind the movie version of The Secret Garden but the Alfonso Cuaron version of A Little Princess was so completely different from my vision of the book (which is pretty much in line with the Betts illustrations) that I found it watchable only as an adaptation of some *other* book. I mean, c'mon -- Sara Crewe as a pretty blonde girl with huge eyes? Who was he kidding?

    I agree with you that Little Lord Fauntleroy is very sentimental; Wikipedia says it was vastly more popular during Hodgson Burnett's lifetime. I think what really put me off The Secret Garden was too many bad-tempered children. Bad tempered children in *my* childhood experience meant really bad acts. I'll take all the self-control and Zen mind tricks that Sara Crewe employs any day!

  11. I also didn't read this book until I was much older, but I was then able to introduce it to my own daughter when she was quite young. We own(ed?) an old copy of my favorite video version (yes, it's VHS) - it was a tv mini-series made in the late 1980's - much better than the more recent movie.

    I also like The Secret Garden (though, like Trish, I loathe gardening). I'm not too put off by the naughty children...they are both in need healing and that's what happens.

    Favorite? Depends on my mood.

  12. Betty Debbie -- I wonder if I can get that mini-series...

    Oh, great wizard Amazon -- Send it to me, please! (I love "One Click.")

    And it's on DVD. I'll lend it to you, if you like.


Hi. This is a moribund blog, so it gets spammed from time to time. Please feel free to comment, but know that your comment may take a few hours to appear simply as a result of the spam blocking in place.