CindyTOP 1000 COMMENTATEURSVOIX VINE le 7 janvier 2008
Une suite étonnante !! Geraldine McCaughrean a su conserver la magie et l'univers créés par J.M. Barrie, tout en nous présentant le monde de Peter Pan complètement changé : l'été s'est mué en hiver, les paysages paradisiaques sont devenus des lieux de désolation ... Wendy et les autres enfants perdus, ayant maintenant grandi, se rendent compte que quelque chose cloche, car cela a des répercutions jusque dans leurs rêves ... C'est pourquoi ils décident de retourner au pays imaginaire. Ils vont se lancer, aux côtés de Peter Pan, dans une quête périlleuse qui leur fera vivre bon nombre d'aventures, et rencontrer des personnages inquiétants ... On n'apprend la raison de cette soudaine transformation pratiquement qu'à la fin, et cette réponse s'accompagne d'autres révélations bien plus surprenantes encore !! Ce livre est vraiment une petite merveille pour les petits comme pour les grands. Je l'ai lu en anglais. Pour ceux qui veulent s'y essayer, la lecture en est très facile, vous pouvez vous lancer sans hésiter !
PETER PAN IN SCARLET by Geraldine McCaughrean should be read by every fan of J.M. Barrie's PETER PAN.
The reader will return to the age at which they first read the original and re-experience the wonder of seeing the world through the eyes of Peter Pan and his gang of comrades in adventure. It is the first approved sequel to the original tale, and the author manages to capture the style and excitement of Mr. Barrie's classic. It is remarkable in every sense of the word and, like the original, proceeds go to the Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital and not to Barrie's estate.
Set in the 1920s, nightmares are slipping out of Neverland and into the real world to find Wendy and the original Lost Boys, who are now respectable adults with children of their own. They revert to children in a magical way and the adventure begins.
Neverland is no longer a land of eternal summer. It is currently Autumn, something that has not happened before. When Wendy and the Lost Boys make it back to Neverland, they meet Peter, who is alone but still the essence of Boy. After fighting through the denial of Peter, who loves Neverland in reds and golds as much as he does in shades of green, it is up to them to save it.
They face their worst fears, remember who they once were, and deal with the sadness of loss and the joy of love with a youthful exuberance that J.M. Barrie would be proud of. His creations are treated with the utmost respect and tenderness by an author who is truly in love with her story.
Commentaires client les plus utiles sur Amazon.com (beta)
43 internautes sur 44 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
Fits the original like a hand in a glove.13 octobre 2006
- Publié sur Amazon.com
Geraldine McCaughrean's "Peter Pan in Scarlet" is different from all other additions to the Peter Pan mythos in that it reads like an extention of the original story instead of a fanfiction. There is a comforting feel to reading this book, like the feeling of coming home. It was definately a treat to read after having read the original novel.
This book fills in many holes left by it's predecessor, and answers all the nagging questions that haunted me after reading the first one. It expands and deepens the characters of all the familiar faces, including the Lost Boys, the Darlings, and even Captain Hook himself. I was especially moved by Hook's story and fell in love with the character all over again.
For anyone who is worried that this is just a badly written marketing ploy, or a violation of their childhood, I say that there is nothing to fear. This book is a marvel and a fitting tribute to an amazing writer. Buy the book, and even if you don't enjoy the story within it's pages at least you will be helping a children's hospital in need.
"Peter Pan in Scarlet" will have an honored place next to "Peter Pan" on my bookshelf.
24 internautes sur 26 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
A wish for Neverland only Half-Granted30 octobre 2006
- Publié sur Amazon.com
Before I get into this review I will warn you, I am over-critical of things I care about, and Peter Pan is one of those things. So sometimes this review will sound like an obsessed fan whining and for that, I apologize, but I will try to keep it to a minimum.
Peter Pan in Scarlet is a good book; I will read it again. However, that does not mean it is a classic in the making, following in the ever so hard to fill footsteps of the original. It is not great, is not sensational, and at the very least is worth waiting for the paperbound edition. And if you have dotted on Peter since you were small enough to fly to Neverland you will probably feel an underlying wrongness in this book.
First the whining part, the crowing. I know Peter crows. Acknowledged, accepted, but to have it spelled out, repeatedly, in double-sized print, bothered me. The end. And since when did Captain Codfish have two first mates? Starkey and Smee where both credited the post here. There are other inconsistencies as well, like the shadows and flying. But enough of that, let's move on.
The writing style was a shadow of Barrie's, in my opinion. Almost as if the author would forget that she was trying mimic it, the style would wander away, popping back now and then in a bizarre game of hide and seek.
The theme of the story was rather violent, mature one could say. Yes, there were dangers in the original, lives threatened, but still, it was held together with the magic of child's innocence that Peter Pan is meant to encompass. This story ripped that rug right out from underneath you.
Peter does seem not quite his-self, though in the beginning that can rather well be attributed to his being completely alone. No one to share his adventures with, no one to tell stories to, I wasn't surprised by it. And later, well, clothes do make the man, or boy, and that theme is well used in this book. Though it isn't the first time I've run into it. Fox Network had a cartoon series called Peter Pan and the Pirates about fifteen years ago. Very good series, but I do remember an episode with Hook's Hat.
So in short, this is a good book, but not worth the hardbound price. Enjoy!
33 internautes sur 40 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
Fly Peter, Fly!!!! Wonderful!6 octobre 2006
Peter Thomas Senese - Author.
- Publié sur Amazon.com
Geraldine McCaughrean has created a fantastic sequal for all of us who believe in NeverLand! In this wonderful follow-up to Peter Pan, we are taken back to Neverland, where there is great adventure waiting Peter and his crew of familiar and unfamiliar cast. However, Neverland is a bit darker and more dangerous than what Peter first experienced, and the challanges he faces is much more than what he expects! From one adventure to another, readers of all sorts will completely cherish this wonderful book that picks up in rythem and beat from the initial story about the young boy who never wanted to grow up. I can simply say that the world at large has waited for THIS book written by THIS author. Ms. McCaughrean has done an amazing job in creating a sequeal that is as much a continuation as it is a new adventure. Peter Pan in Scarlet is a must read for every person who reads. Take flight and let your imagination soar . . . and fly with Peter Pan!
11 internautes sur 13 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
The Long Review - by Tinkerbell III10 novembre 2006
L'évaluation d'un enfant
- Publié sur Amazon.com
In the words of another reviewer, when one is a devoted Pan Fan, her reviews might come across as fanatically picky. But I am about to review "Peter Pan"'s official sequel: not some spin-off from the Disney film, not a half-hearted attempt at the biographies of Wendy, Tink, or Hook. Don't get me wrong. I loved 'Peter Pan in Scarlet'. It was fun, I reread it, and it was worth four stars. But I feel I must warn you - in writing a gentler, updated sequel, and a good inventive story, Geraldine McCaughrean somewhat sacrificed J.M. Barrie's original dark purpose of incriminating adults and glorifying children. And as it IS the OFFICIAL SEQUEL, it needs a little criticism.
I'm sure you already know the summary: 'Peter Pan in Scarlet' finds Wendy and the Lost Boys where we left them last - as adults in London. All of a sudden they begin to have humorously vivid dreams of Neverland; they decide they must return to Neverland and right any wrongs that have occurred in their twenty year absence. Of course Peter Pan, the Marvelous Boy is absolutely fine, and now that there are friends to share his adventures with, he decides to take them on a treasure hunt to the top of Neverpeak, joining forces with the Circusmaster Ravello along the way.
As the world's top Pan Fan, I immediately discovered a few inconsistencies with this book: the shadow/flying explanation, of course; several mistakes in respect to the pirates; the over-stressing of 'clothes making the man'. These basically unimportant mistakes can be attributed to the difficult task of creating a new storyline. But my MAIN COMPLAINT comes with a VERY BIG SPOILER: When the Darlings meet Ravello the Circusmaster, they are actually meeting none other than a disguised Hook! Of course this was obvious from the beginning, but remember, Hook was DEAD by the end of 'Peter Pan'. In this story, he survived in the crocodile's stomach but was mutated by stomach acid, then one day his poison killed the crocodile and he was able to claw his way out. But this backstory just seems so outlandish. Besides, why MUST they bring Hook back at all? I would have preferred an all-new villian, rather than the revival of old, overused Hook. I was also disappointed in McCaughrean's rather weak description of his childhood; I like to think of Hook as academically-geared, not a sportsman; and I also like it when instances in Hook's life mirror those in Barrie's life. J.V. Hart's 'Capt. Hook' gave an excellent backstory (although it was awfully violent), and I think McCaughrean could have used some of Hart's ideas, as his book was also GOSH-authorized. By the end of 'Peter Pan in Scarlet', Hook is alive and thriving; defeating the purpose of the original novel's great battle. By the way, how DID Hook become an animal-loving Circusmaster in the first place? This is not explained, and it contrasts with Hook's usually violent, oppressive nature.
Another problem I found: the story actually has too happy of an ending. In any non-Pan book I like a happy ending, but as this was the official sequel I'm surprised at such a departure from J.M. Barrie's ending and it's original dark quality. Ms. McCaughrean softens all the 'consequences' outlined in the original novel - she does not only revive Captain Hook, who was supposed to be triumphed over by Peter Pan and eternal youth, she also reunites the Lost Boys and the Roarers with their mothers, who were supposed to have heartlessly forgotten them; she even redeems Peter's mother, the woman who technically caused the birth of Neverland itself. This was certainly not what Barrie intended.
So why, after all this complaining, did I drop only one star? Because the book is STILL VERY GOOD. It is very well-written, and I must congratulate the author on her imaginative storyline. It is a bit eerie in spots but not dark, and Geraldine McCaughrean is extremely creative. I loved her statements of "Your summer has turned to winter", "Time passing where no time should have passed", and "Sleep is a great healer". I'm surprised Barrie didn't think up the Roarers and the Maze of Regrets himself. And nearly every character in the book was expanded upon - I just adored Curly, Slightly, and Fireflyer (who speaks in tiny letters), and Wendy and John were much improved! (Although I do miss the mermaids.) Except for a few temper tantrums, Peter Pan is just like always; I think his dialogue was perfect (especially through the first half), and you know he was "awfully clever." The adventures in this book are also entertaining - the League of Pan meets up with the pirate Starkey, who has his own ship and a crew of trained Indian children; the story includes a frightening journey through the Maze of Witches, supposedly haunted by revengeful nursemaids; and the League cleverly escapes a Reds vs. Blues fairy war.
If you were not pleased by the way things worked out in "Peter Pan", this story is wonderful. It is a good book in many respects, the best sequel, just not worthy of the title "Official Sequel", as it takes away so much from Barrie's original story. McCaughrean insists on the good-hearted, well-meaning, and caring nature of adults, and although this is generally true, Barrie's story viewed adults in a bitter, cynical light. Nothing outdoes Barrie's original - little even comes close to comparison. Still, for a difficult-to-write modern sequel, I think "Peter Pan in Scarlet" (minus Hook's poor backstory) was a creative alternative, standing head and shoulders above all other sequels, and worthy of reading.
P.S. Check out the other Peter Pan-related reviews by Tinkerbell III!
8 internautes sur 9 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
Peter Pan Nightmare!9 août 2010
- Publié sur Amazon.com
Format: Format Kindle
i love peter pan. i know i'm 12 and all, but j.m. barrie was an amazing author and i fell in love with the starcatchers prequel. naturally, i bought this. i have a LOT of problems with this book, which is weird for me because i like books in general.
1. peter pan. he was so dark, and mean, and a total jerk. isn't he supposed to be a gallant hero, the crowing boy who chats with mermaids and fights hook on skull rock: just to save tiger lily?! this was not the peter in Peter Pan in Scarlet.
2. tinker bell. where the heck was she? not peter messy mop of red hair, that's for sure. no, she doesn't come til the end. instead we get a whiny lying fairy. ugh!
3.michael. where was he? he wouldn't miss out on an adventure like this. wait. you had him killed? in a war? oh, you cruel woman!
4. hook. he should'nt come back. barrie said he's dead, so he's dead. but, not only do you bring him back, you make him weak! you make him a sniveling school boy! he's a pirate, for pete's sake! we remember fearing him and the jolly roger, with his sharp steel hook, and eyes that turn red right before he cuts your belly open! this was not the hook i had nightmares about!
5. the lost boys. slightly was banished. need i say more?
6. neverland. this wasn't the neverland i remember. it was fun, and exotic, not filled with banished lost boys and crying mothers.
geraldine, i'm sure you are an extremely nice lady, but i cannot bring myself to like your book. peter just wasn't meant to crow like this.