AccueilGroupesDiscussionsPlusTendances
Site de recherche
Ce site utilise des cookies pour fournir nos services, optimiser les performances, pour les analyses, et (si vous n'êtes pas connecté) pour les publicités. En utilisant Librarything, vous reconnaissez avoir lu et compris nos conditions générales d'utilisation et de services. Votre utilisation du site et de ses services vaut acceptation de ces conditions et termes.

Résultats trouvés sur Google Books

Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.

Chargement...

Il était une fois... et pour toujours : A propos de la littérature enfantine (2003)

par Alison Lurie

MembresCritiquesPopularitéÉvaluation moyenneMentions
2115127,303 (3.64)7
"In this engaging series of essays, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Alison Lurie explores the theory that the best children's book authors have often preferred the world of young people to the world of adults. Lurie looks at children's classics from every era and relates them to the authors who wrote them, including Little Women author Louisa May Alcott and Wizard of Oz author Frank Baum, as well as Dr. Seuss and Salman Rushdie. In the process she reveals how these gifted writers have used children's literature to transfigure sorrow, nostalgia, and the struggles of their own experiences."--BOOK JACKET.… (plus d'informations)
Aucun
Chargement...

Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre

Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre.

» Voir aussi les 7 mentions

5 sur 5
Engaging to the point of 3.5 stars for fans of children's classics and for scholars. I have enjoyed several other works by Lurie, and so am rounding up my rating.

This one is not as unified or as compelling as the description would have you believe - some chapters were essays not adapted to reinforce the theme but just included so the book would be long enough to sell, for example. The chapter on [a:Tove Jansson|45230|Tove Jansson|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1356941725p2/45230.jpg] and her Moomintrolls was particularly disappointing, as it was mainly a recitation of plots and very little analysis.

I did appreciate that Lurie pointed out something I'd never noted before. Remember the chapter in [b:The Wind in the Willows|5659|The Wind in the Willows|Kenneth Grahame|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1327869222s/5659.jpg|1061285] about the (unnamed but obviously) god Pan? Well, Lurie points out that he (it?) was a popular subject in the literature of the time, hence the 'surname' of a magical lad, first name Peter, famed for never growing up...

Lurie also points out what exactly is wrong with the Disney versions of the classics, so read that chapter next time you're trying to articulate your distaste to a fan of the movies.... ( )
  Cheryl_in_CC_NV | Jun 6, 2016 |
Lurie's collection of essays on children's literature starts well, devoting the first half to the analysis of writers and poets who have written principally for children. Included in her review are Alcott, Rowling, de la Mare, Dr. Seuss, Masefield, Baum and, though not a children's writer for the most part, Rushdie. Her premise is that these writers retained an essentially child- like view of the world. Her evaluation of de la Mare and Masefield along these lines is keenly sympathetic. It is a shame that their works are no longer easily found.

The second half is more of a hodge-podge of literary criticism and reviews. One focuses on the Opie's study of children's play and rhymes, a work into which I have long wanted to delve. Others on near magical quality of nature in children's stories, illustration as enhancement as well as clues to social values, and of the need for fairy tales are lacking. Little is said here that hasn't been said before, and, often, better. The second set of essays has an catalogue style. Overall, Lurie seems to add little original insight into the study of children's literature. Her sprinkling of author trivia tidbits (Masefield ironically suffered horribly from sea sickness) keeps the book enough on the right side of fun. However, it is not likely that any intelligent reader of these works would not have been able to come to the same conclusions. (This is really a 3.5 star book because of the floundering, unfocused 2nd half.) ( )
  lucybrown | Sep 27, 2015 |
Lurie's collection of essays on children's literature starts well, devoting the first half to the analysis of writers and poets who have written principally for children. Included in her review are Alcott, Rowling, de la Mare, Dr. Seuss, Masefield, Baum and, though not a children's writer for the most part, Rushdie. Her premise is that these writers retained an essentially child- like view of the world. Her evaluation of de la Mare and Masefield along these lines is keenly sympathetic. It is a shame that their works are no longer easily found.

The second half is more of a hodge-podge of literary criticism and reviews. One focuses on the Opie's study of children's play and rhymes, a work into which I have long wanted to delve. Others on near magical quality of nature in children's stories, illustration as enhancement as well as clues to social values, and of the need for fairy tales are lacking. Little is said here that hasn't been said before, and, often, better. The second set of essays has an catalogue style. Overall, Lurie seems to add little original insight into the study of children's literature. Her sprinkling of author trivia tidbits (Masefield ironically suffered horribly from sea sickness) keeps the book enough on the right side of fun. However, it is not likely that any intelligent reader of these works would not have been able to come to the same conclusions. (This is really a 3.5 star book because of the floundering, unfocused 2nd half.) ( )
  lucybrown | Sep 27, 2015 |
Lurie's collection of essays on children's literature starts well, devoting the first half to the analysis of writers and poets who have written principally for children. Included in her review are Alcott, Rowling, de la Mare, Dr. Seuss, Masefield, Baum and, though not a children's writer for the most part, Rushdie. Her premise is that these writers retained an essentially child- like view of the world. Her evaluation of de la Mare and Masefield along these lines is keenly sympathetic. It is a shame that their works are no longer easily found.

The second half is more of a hodge-podge of literary criticism and reviews. One focuses on the Opie's study of children's play and rhymes, a work into which I have long wanted to delve. Others on near magical quality of nature in children's stories, illustration as enhancement as well as clues to social values, and of the need for fairy tales are lacking. Little is said here that hasn't been said before, and, often, better. The second set of essays has an catalogue style. Overall, Lurie seems to add little original insight into the study of children's literature. Her sprinkling of author trivia tidbits (Masefield ironically suffered horribly from sea sickness) keeps the book enough on the right side of fun. However, it is not likely that any intelligent reader of these works would not have been able to come to the same conclusions. (This is really a 3.5 star book because of the floundering, unfocused 2nd half.) ( )
  lucybrown | Sep 27, 2015 |
Children's literature can be examined from many different angles: what do the stories say about the mores of the time, what can we learn about the characters from their creators, how have these stories been received? Lurie's gift as an author is that she can present all of these ideas together to give a well-rounded look at children's literature and the authors who write it. Or, at least, she could do this in her last book, Don't Tell the Grown Ups. Something happened between that book and this.

Boys and Girls Forever examines several children's authors and their backgrounds, the stories they popularized, and their characters. Lurie also examines fairy stories, poetry, children's games, and illustrations. Unlike Don't Tell the Grownups, Boys and Girls forever is weakly written and disorganized. Lurie occasionally gives overviews of the author's works (juvenile and adult) and sometimes gives in-depth histories of the authors, but without the same intrigue she managed in her previous book. She continues to have glaring omissions in the authors she considers (still not Twain, Roald Dahl, Lois Lowry, Judy Blume). But even the ones she includes are desperatly lacking. Her essay on Dr. Seuss is one of the weakest I've read. She approached the authors in her last book with the same kind of passion children approach their works with. The only one she came even close to doing this with was Frank Baum. But her Dr. Seuss piece felt like filler. Actually, most of the book felt like filler. There's no common thread for the stories of these authors. I thought she was going to discuss the child-like mind these authors had to have, but she only rarely shoves in some mention of their minds as she writes.

The last chapters not about a certain author were weak, felt tacked on, and didn't continue any theme. It's as if she got a call from her editor and was told she needed more chapters and she knew she wasn't going to write another book on children's lit, so she threw in something weak about play, pictures, and fairy tales. It weakened her theme irreparably. Furthermore, her books would greatly benefit from illustrations-she loosely describes images from books, especially picture books, but without a familiarity of the actual work, her descriptions are not sufficient enough for the reader to visualize the pictures.

This book seemed cobbled together and less impassioned than Don't Tell the Grownups. If Don't Tell the Grown-Ups was Lurie's final term paper, Boys and Girls Forever was the grade she knew the professor was going to drop. She needed to find a theme and stick to it. ( )
  kaelirenee | May 14, 2008 |
5 sur 5
aucune critique | ajouter une critique
Vous devez vous identifier pour modifier le Partage des connaissances.
Pour plus d'aide, voir la page Aide sur le Partage des connaissances [en anglais].
Titre canonique
Titre original
Titres alternatifs
Date de première publication
Personnes ou personnages
Lieux importants
Évènements importants
Films connexes
Épigraphe
Dédicace
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
For Alexander, Susanna, and Wells Bishop
Premiers mots
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
It often seems that the most gifted authors of books for children are not like other writers: instead, in some essential way, they are children themselves.
Citations
Derniers mots
Notice de désambigüisation
Directeur de publication
Courtes éloges de critiques
Langue d'origine
DDC/MDS canonique
LCC canonique

Références à cette œuvre sur des ressources externes.

Wikipédia en anglais

Aucun

"In this engaging series of essays, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Alison Lurie explores the theory that the best children's book authors have often preferred the world of young people to the world of adults. Lurie looks at children's classics from every era and relates them to the authors who wrote them, including Little Women author Louisa May Alcott and Wizard of Oz author Frank Baum, as well as Dr. Seuss and Salman Rushdie. In the process she reveals how these gifted writers have used children's literature to transfigure sorrow, nostalgia, and the struggles of their own experiences."--BOOK JACKET.

Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque

Description du livre
Résumé sous forme de haïku

Discussion en cours

Aucun

Couvertures populaires

Vos raccourcis

Évaluation

Moyenne: (3.64)
0.5
1
1.5
2 1
2.5 1
3 4
3.5 2
4 8
4.5
5 2

Est-ce vous ?

Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing.

 

À propos | Contact | LibraryThing.com | Respect de la vie privée et règles d'utilisation | Aide/FAQ | Blog | Boutique | APIs | TinyCat | Bibliothèques historiques | Critiques en avant-première | Partage des connaissances | 203,185,859 livres! | Barre supérieure: Toujours visible