Has anyone here read the Jacqueline Wilson Faraway Tree book yet? I saw it in one of the supermarkets last week and was thinking of buying it to give it a go. But then it's so long since I last read the original books that I think I would have to re-read them first, just to make sure they're fresh in my mind, before I read this modern author's attempt at a new one... maybe I should do just that?
I did leaf through the first few pages and could immediately see that Wilson isn't trying to imitate the original author's style too closely — she describes one of the children as having a big stuffed toy (was it a teddy? I can't quite remember, as I only looked at this briefly) that, we're told, he loved "passionately". "Passionately" is definitely not a Blyton word!! But it remains to be seen whether she (Wilson) has caught the spirit of the original books at all. I'd be interested to hear what others here think of it too.
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
I intend to try Jacqueline Wilson's book at some point but I've got other books on the go/lined up to read so it'll be a while before I get round to it.
"Heyho for a starry night and a heathery bed!" - Jack, The Secret Island.
"There is no bond like the bond of having read and liked the same books."
- E. Nesbit, The Wonderful Garden.
It sounds bliddy awful. I might read it if I ever go blind and don't know what's put in front of me.
Society Member
I'm just an old fashioned girl with an old fashioned mind
Not sophisticated, I'm the sweet and simple kind
I want an old fashioned house, with an old fashioned fence
And A̶n̶ ̶o̶l̶d̶ ̶f̶a̶s̶h̶i̶o̶n̶e̶d̶ ̶m̶i̶l̶l̶i̶o̶n̶a̶i̶r̶e̶
She hasn't tried to mimic Blyton's style, which I don't mind as it can be hard to do. Bad mimicry is worse than just sticking to your own style. Her Faraway Tree book is not the best books of hers I've read - I've just read her version of The Railway Children and thought that was better. But then I like the original Railway Children better than the original Faraway Tree.
I think children will love it (which is the important thing) but for adults it's not going to live up to the originals.
"It's the ash! It's falling!" yelled Julian, almost startling Dick out of his wits...
"Listen to its terrible groans and creaks!" yelled Julian, almost beside himself with impatience.
Thanks, Fiona. Very interesting to read your thoughts! It sounds pretty much as I was imagining it — a nice kind of homage to Enid, slightly more "modern" but not in a heavy-handed way. I'm not desperate to rush out and read it, but I'm glad Wilson has obviously done a good job with it and I may read it too at some stage.
You've got me intrigued about the hints of romance between Silky and Moon-Face. Enid herself of course never alludes to any such thing in the original books, but I remember noticing that by the last book, Silky nearly always seemed to be at Moon-Face's house with him when the children arrived there, instead of them stopping first at her own house to collect her, so — even as a 4-year-old or so — I did wonder amusedly if there might be something going on between those two...
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
I recently finished reading Jacqueline Wilson's The Magic Faraway Tree - A New Adventure and found it reasonably enjoyable, though it didn't feel special or move me in the way that Jacqueline Wilson's Four Children and It did (which pays homage to E. Nesbit's Five Children and It).
The book is about three contemporary children who go up the Faraway Tree (siblings Milo, Mia and Birdy). They get to know the tree folk (Silky and Moonface feature prominently) and visit magic lands, my favourite being the stirring-sounding Land of Unicorns. We're in today's world so I don't mind references to modern things as far as the children and their parents are concerned, but I'd prefer it if the Faraway Tree and the lands had been kept traditionally Blytonian. As it is, we have Silky making cheesy pancakes and saying to the children, "Careful, careful, my loves!", and a Land of Bouncy Castles where snacks include a carton of juice, a triangle of pizza, a bag of crisps and tea served in "sippy cups". Incidentally, Silky has wings (illustrators have given her wings before, but I'm not sure that Enid herself did!) and Moonface is messy and incompetent, though good-hearted. One plotline dwells on romance in a way that Enid Blyton wouldn't have done (as was said earlier in the thread), and the tone of the book as a whole feels what would traditionally have been described as "girly", with lots of emphasis on all that's cute, sparkly, pretty and princess-ish (which is quite typical of Jacqueline Wilson, as many of her books are aimed mainly at a female audience). With the focus on "sugar and spice", the prolonged episodes of alarm and danger that we encounter in the original books are lacking.
On the plus side, Jacqueline Wilson places more emphasis on the children as individuals and she includes plenty of delightful little Blytonesque touches, such as Silky making honey cakes which hum when they're bitten into, and Dame Washalot (whose first name is said to be Wilma) having a friend called Iris Ironallday, who went to Laundry School with her.
Only a few parts of the story held me spellbound in the way that Enid Blyton's original books do, one being Mia's reaction to the unicorns. I bet I'd have felt the same, and if I had the chance to go to one of Jacqueline Wilson's lands it would be the Land of Unicorns for sure.
"Heyho for a starry night and a heathery bed!" - Jack, The Secret Island.
"There is no bond like the bond of having read and liked the same books."
- E. Nesbit, The Wonderful Garden.
One thing I forgot to mention is that time works differently in Jacqueline Wilson's book. However long the children spend in the Enchanted Wood, only a few minutes have passed when they return to their cottage. Their parents don't know about the magic and, although one or two slightly surreal things do happen to Mum and Dad (things that are out of the ordinary but don't appear supernatural from their perspective), they're unaware of the link to the Faraway Tree. I think this is actually more convincing than the set-up in Enid Blyton's originals, where Mother knows all about the Faraway Tree and even gets to meet some of the tree-folk.
Oh, and "a mop cap" is mentioned twice (in relation to Dame Washalot and Iris Ironallday) when it ought to be "a mob cap". Goodness knows what happened there!
"Heyho for a starry night and a heathery bed!" - Jack, The Secret Island.
"There is no bond like the bond of having read and liked the same books."
- E. Nesbit, The Wonderful Garden.
Thanks for that detailed review, Anita. I saw the book in the supermarket a few months ago and read the first several paragraphs, but it didn't grab me, so I haven't felt inclined to read the rest of it. Going by what you say, I don't think it would appeal to me, but it's nice to see a popular modern author paying open and affectionate tribute to Enid Blyton, even if she doesn't quite seem to have captured the magic of the original books. I'd definitely want to visit the Land of Unicorns as well!
Anita Bensoussane wrote: ↑15 Mar 2023, 11:37
One thing I forgot to mention is that time works differently in Jacqueline Wilson's book. However long the children spend in the Enchanted Wood, only a few minutes have passed when they return to their cottage.
And if C.S. Lewis was still around and could sue for plagiarism...
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
The notion of no time/very little time having passed on returning from a fantasy world or from a visit to a different era (past or future) is an idea that's been around in literature for a long time. It's there in Alison Uttley's A Traveller in Time (1939) and E. Nesbit's The Story of the Amulet (1906), and no doubt in earlier fiction too. C. S. Lewis loved The Story of the Amulet and it had a great influence on his Narnia series.
"Heyho for a starry night and a heathery bed!" - Jack, The Secret Island.
"There is no bond like the bond of having read and liked the same books."
- E. Nesbit, The Wonderful Garden.
Oh of course, yes — I read The Story of the Amulet years ago, but haven't re-read it since and had forgotten that detail. My sister had A Traveller in Time and recommended it to me, but I couldn't get into it and soon gave up. (I think I was a bit disappointed that although the main character was stepping back into a past era, there was no magic there of the dragons / fairies / wizards variety!! Maybe I should try it again now I'm a few years older and can appreciate a wider variety of literature...)
Society Member
It was a nuisance. An adventure was one thing - but an adventure without anything to eat was quite another thing. That wouldn't do at all. (The Valley of Adventure)
I can see why they might go for the traditional back from a fantasy land with no time gone, however that wasn't the original, so I'm disappointed that she chose to change something that makes it inconsistent. It also goes against the "don't go with someone your parents don't know", stranger danger which I find an odd change, as it's the sort of thing older books get criticised for.
For the original, I always got the impression that the children's parents thought the stories the children told when they got back were them making their day sound more exciting. I mean, my son came back from school one day telling me he'd piloted the Concorde to France and back, and he's less imaginative than one of my daughters from whom I had far taller tales! So it's perfectly plausible that the parents say "oh that's lovely, darling, and what's at the top tomorrow?" thinking it's a lovely game they're playing and no consideration that it was true. Even when they meet the people from the Faraway Tree they kind of dismiss them as "funny little man". That's the beauty of it because the reader knows it's real, and it's a secret between the children and the reader.
I suppose at least she didn't make it a dream, which is one of my real hatreds in reading a book-finding out it was all a dream at the end. I'll forgive Alice in Wonderland, I think.
I'm not fond of "It was all a dream" endings either, Debbie. John Masefield's The Box of Delights ends like that, thereby undermining the entire adventure and its prequel - The Midnight Folk. Personally, I choose to view the part where Kay says it's a dream as being just a dream, and to view all the action prior to that as having really happened.
Courtenay, A Traveller in Time is an intense, solemn book and I don't find the conclusion wholly satisfactory, but it evokes Elizabethan England beautifully and I soon find myself caught up in the two worlds of Penelope.
Going back to Enid Blyton's Faraway Tree books, the parents may not be aware of the magic lands but they do know that the children climb a tree and sometimes bring extraordinary things back from the Enchanted Wood. Bessie might be able to keep her wings secret, but Mother and Father must know about Jo's pony and probably Fanny's "living doll" too (which is joined by two more "living dolls" in Up the Faraway Tree). The children even bring back a spade for their father and seven green-and-yellow hens for their mother from the Land of Take-What-You-Want. Jo says, doubtfully, "Do you suppose Mother would like hens this colour?" only for Bessie to reply, "I don't see why not. They are very pretty." The children acquire a goat as well as the hens, which is white except for two blue spots near its tail. We don't see much of Father but Mother seems to accept these things without asking too many questions!
"Heyho for a starry night and a heathery bed!" - Jack, The Secret Island.
"There is no bond like the bond of having read and liked the same books."
- E. Nesbit, The Wonderful Garden.
@Anita I totally agree about The Box of Delights. It's the one that really annoys me because, as you say, The Midnight Folk is presented as real. So there was no need to make it a dream.
One of the most disappointing endings. At least make it ambiguous.
I'd forgotten about them bringing things back for the parents. The doll they'd have assumed was a present from their Faraway Tree friends, and just marvelled about how wonderful it was, and I assumed they wouldn't tell them about the wings because even the most sensible parents wouldn't want them flying round the garden at midnight!
Maybe the parents were just gullible when told "it's a new sort of hen".
I couldn't remember whether the children's parents knew about the lands in Enid Blyton's Faraway Tree books, but it seems that they do (or at least Mother does, so I imagine Father does too). The following passage comes from The Folk of the Faraway Tree, when Connie has had a spell put on her which has left her unable to speak (as a punishment for listening to something she shouldn't have listened to). Mrs. Saucepan has come to the cottage, bringing cakes for the children's mother, and Mother has invited her to stay for tea.
She [Mrs. Saucepan] shook her head when she saw that Connie still could not speak.
"A pity," she said. "A great pity. It just doesn't do to poke your nose into other people's affairs. I hope the poor child will be put right soon. The Land of Enchantments will be at the top of the Tree to-morrow... You'll have to be just a bit careful in the Land of Enchantments, though. It's so easy to get enchanted there, without knowing it."
"Whatever do you mean?" said Mother, in alarm. "I don't think I want the children to go there, if there is any danger."
"I'll send Saucepan with them," said the old lady. "I'll give him a powerful spell, which will get anyone out of an enchantment if they get into it by mistake. You needn't worry."
... The next day was very rainy, and Mother didn't want the children to go up the Tree. But Connie's eyes filled with tears, and Mother saw how badly she longed to go.
"Well, put on your macs," she said, "and take umbrellas. Then you'll be all right. It may not be raining in the Land of Enchantments. And do remember what Mrs. Saucepan said, Jo, and be very careful."
I suppose the remark about taking macs and umbrellas and "Then you'll be all right" isn't meant to be funny, but it seems both hilarious and horrifying to me as an adult!
"Heyho for a starry night and a heathery bed!" - Jack, The Secret Island.
"There is no bond like the bond of having read and liked the same books."
- E. Nesbit, The Wonderful Garden.
If you read it as Mum thinks Mrs Saucepan is humouring the children though, you can then take it that Mum only is thinking really about the rain, and playing along with the idea of "magic".
Like when a child comes to you with an empty cup and you pretend to drink it saying "yum", and then tell them you'll give them a special spell to do the washing up quickly. Adults do play along with children's fantasies.
But it remains to be seen whether she (Wilson) has caught the spirit of the original books at all. I'd be interested to hear what others here think of it too.
