Amber (The Literary Phoenix)
Written on Jul 24, 2020
I want to discuss those first, because I believe it's smart to rip off the band-aid and have done with it.
As a whole, Peter Pan is racist and sexist. There's no talking around it - it's quite glaring and abhorrent. The language used to describe native peoples is inappropriate. Tiger Lily and her tribe are grossly characitured. There is nothing, absolutely nothing redeeming that can be said for the story in this respect. It is honestly awful.
As far as sexism goes, we have six female characters here. In Neverland, we have Tinkerbell and Tiger Lily. In England, there is Mrs. Darling, Liza, Nana, and of course between both worlds we have Wendy. Tiger Lily's entire role is to be rescued by Peter. Mrs. Darling, Liza, Nana, and Wendy all exist to be housekeepers and caregivers. The importance of a mother is a strong theme in this book, and while that is sweet in some ways, this book very clearly lays out that the role of the woman is to keep house and have babies. Um!? The character with the most potential of spirit and individuality is Tinkerbell, and while she has never been a favorite before, I think I have a begrudging respecter her now.
Except, of course, that all the young ladies are desperately in love with the clueless Peter Pan, and everything they do, they do for love of him. Excuse me now.
This is such a waste, because removing the problematic elements, Neverland is so wonderful. The voice in which this story is told is charming and exciting, like a story being told to you, something you can treasure close to your heart. Of course Peter Pan has captured the hearts of so many - it's easy to see, what with the wonderful possibility of a secret adventure, shared childhood memories, and also - how lovely would it be to fly? The world itself is disarmingly wonderful. Except for the racism and sexism. Oh why, oh why, J. M. Barrie. Why.
There is an addendum in the audiobook cautioning that the words in this book are not the opinions of the narrator, and are a product of the time of publication, 1906. Even Audible knows there's some sketchy sketchy nope stuff.
It's really a shame because Neverland is such a presence, and I want its magic to endure. And I think in modern retellings, it does! I'd skip the Disney adaptation, but later plays and retellings do a wonderful job taking the magic in this story, and stripping it of its harmful elements. Still, those harmful elements do exist in the source material and because of them, we need to be cautious about perpetuating the story. It's a complicated moral decision to make.
Story-wise, I really like the cyclical feel of it, the way things rotate and change so quickly, and the strange and perfect balance of roles and the blurry line between good and evil. I wasn't altogether crazy about the group dynamics, but I did like individual characters. Toodles and Smee, of course, are precious. And I really like the voice this story was told in (the narrator was good too, but I mean the writing voice in this case). Peter, or course, is the absolute worst, but I think I liked that about him too, because it made human interesting character. Seriously though - what a brat.
You will have to make your own choice about Peter Pan. On the one hand, I enjoyed the magic in this storytelling a lot. But the racism and sexism drew me out of the story, so I had a really mixed experience. The good elements are so, so good, but the bad elements are quite bad. This story is so deeply entwined in our cultural consciousness, though, that you, dear reader, probably know the magic of it without needing to read the book.
______________
Original Review: 5 Stars (October 2007)
