...
Show More
Roald Dahl is considered one of the great children's writers of the 20th century, and I can see why. His children's stories are highly original, and his use of language is unique.
However, I have very mixed feelings about his work, and in most of his stories I find a streak of nastiness and a tendency to extreme caricature which I don't personally like. His many evil characters are without any positive features, which, while it may make for entertaining reading for children - and is consistent with the tradition of fairytales in which ogres and other malefactors are thoroughly evil - does not reflect human nature, and does not convey an impression to young readers which I would wish to convey. These characters do not tend to be redeemed. This is interesting - and again, consistent with many fairy tales - but I find it disturbing. In the same tradition, the good characters in Dahl's books are almost unequivocally good, without significant flaws.
This compendium contains three well-known stories. The BFG is a particularly memorable story which I consider one of his greatest, with its touching relationship between a "good" and kindly giant, who is a runt and castoff among his own kind, and a little girl. This relationship is developed more fully than some others in Dahl's tales, and is genuinely sweet but not soppy. Among its other virtues, the book conveys a laudable message of non-violence and humane action, sometimes lacking in Dahl's other work, and it is allowed that the man-eating giants may not be able to help their nature, and are no worse than animal-eating humans. Indeed, it is even suggested that humans are worse, being the only creatures which kill their own kind (which even giants never do.) Although the giants' malapropisms (more or less) get a wee bit trying after a while, the dialogue is done very well and is mostly amusing and effective. Like many of Dahl's tales, the structure of the story is somewhat uneven, with a protracted first half in which the true aim and motivation of the tale which drives the second part is not really developed. But overall this story on its own is one of Dahl's very best and deserves five stars.
Matilda seems to be many people's favourite Dahl stories, but this is one in which I find the caricature characters particularly disturbing. The Dickensian influence is obvious, but to take it to this extreme in the latter part of the 20th century is problematic in my opinion. There is also a worrying class bias, in which the "bad" parents are portrayed as caricatures of the then working class, with no virtues of any kind and no love for their children, and the "good" schoolteacher is the daughter of a doctor. The ogreish headmistress is extreme. None of these "bad" characters undergo any development throughout the story, nor any kind of redemption. I find this leaves a rather nasty taste in the mouth. Similarly, the unpleasant tricks which the small child prodigy Matilda plays on her parents are never considered as anything other than fully justified, which I also find a little worrying, and her severance from her natural parents at the end is presented as an unequivocally good thing. This lack of complexity in human natures and relationships is problematic. Many children, especially if they feel lonely and neglected, may fantasize at times about the benefits of losing their parents, but the reality of such situations is almost invariably entirely different, and such fantasies should not necessarily be encouraged.
I find the third story in the book, George's Marvellous Medicine, almost impossible to read. I know that others like it, but I do not. Among other problems, I find the endless list of the ingredients of George's medicine very trying and dull to read, but this is as an adult, and some children will enjoy it.
However, I have very mixed feelings about his work, and in most of his stories I find a streak of nastiness and a tendency to extreme caricature which I don't personally like. His many evil characters are without any positive features, which, while it may make for entertaining reading for children - and is consistent with the tradition of fairytales in which ogres and other malefactors are thoroughly evil - does not reflect human nature, and does not convey an impression to young readers which I would wish to convey. These characters do not tend to be redeemed. This is interesting - and again, consistent with many fairy tales - but I find it disturbing. In the same tradition, the good characters in Dahl's books are almost unequivocally good, without significant flaws.
This compendium contains three well-known stories. The BFG is a particularly memorable story which I consider one of his greatest, with its touching relationship between a "good" and kindly giant, who is a runt and castoff among his own kind, and a little girl. This relationship is developed more fully than some others in Dahl's tales, and is genuinely sweet but not soppy. Among its other virtues, the book conveys a laudable message of non-violence and humane action, sometimes lacking in Dahl's other work, and it is allowed that the man-eating giants may not be able to help their nature, and are no worse than animal-eating humans. Indeed, it is even suggested that humans are worse, being the only creatures which kill their own kind (which even giants never do.) Although the giants' malapropisms (more or less) get a wee bit trying after a while, the dialogue is done very well and is mostly amusing and effective. Like many of Dahl's tales, the structure of the story is somewhat uneven, with a protracted first half in which the true aim and motivation of the tale which drives the second part is not really developed. But overall this story on its own is one of Dahl's very best and deserves five stars.
Matilda seems to be many people's favourite Dahl stories, but this is one in which I find the caricature characters particularly disturbing. The Dickensian influence is obvious, but to take it to this extreme in the latter part of the 20th century is problematic in my opinion. There is also a worrying class bias, in which the "bad" parents are portrayed as caricatures of the then working class, with no virtues of any kind and no love for their children, and the "good" schoolteacher is the daughter of a doctor. The ogreish headmistress is extreme. None of these "bad" characters undergo any development throughout the story, nor any kind of redemption. I find this leaves a rather nasty taste in the mouth. Similarly, the unpleasant tricks which the small child prodigy Matilda plays on her parents are never considered as anything other than fully justified, which I also find a little worrying, and her severance from her natural parents at the end is presented as an unequivocally good thing. This lack of complexity in human natures and relationships is problematic. Many children, especially if they feel lonely and neglected, may fantasize at times about the benefits of losing their parents, but the reality of such situations is almost invariably entirely different, and such fantasies should not necessarily be encouraged.
I find the third story in the book, George's Marvellous Medicine, almost impossible to read. I know that others like it, but I do not. Among other problems, I find the endless list of the ingredients of George's medicine very trying and dull to read, but this is as an adult, and some children will enjoy it.
