Started: August 6, 2021
Finished: August 7, 2021
My History With This Book
Much of what I said about Charlotte's Web is also true of this book.
It was read outloud to me in elementary school by our teachers for daily storytime.
I can't remember clearly, but I believe it was read to us multiple times in different grades.
As far as I can recall, I never physically read this book myself, but I definitely remember it from teacher's reading it aloud to us. And, like everybody, I have fond memories of this book.
And I also saw the movies. The classic 1971 movie was shown to us in school. I don't think I've seen the 1971 movie in its entirety since elementary school, but I've seen clips of it since then. And last year I watched Red Letter Media's retrospective on the movie.
I saw the 2005 Johnny Depp remake in theaters when it first came out. (I didn't start regularly reviewing movies on this blog until 2007, so I never reviewed either movie on this blog.)
Why I'm Re-reading it Now
So, we've been in lockdown here in Ho Chi Minh City for several weeks now. My wife has been trying to pass away the time by reading books, but she's read through all her books in our apartment.
"What are some books in English that you can recommend for me?" she asked.
(My wife is Vietnamese, so English is her second language. So I try to recommend easy children's books for her.)
"Well," I said, "Roald Dahl is always good."
My wife had never heard of Roald Dahl before, but she searched the website of the local Ho Chi Minh bookstores, and got some books delivered to her. (Fortunately we can still get books shipped over during the lockdown.)
She ordered Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator and absolutely loved both of them (and she is currently ordering more Roald Dahl).
It was at this point that I decided I was overdue for a re-read of these childhood classics myself. And that I should just grab them and re-read them now while they were in my apartment, or I'd lose the moment. Which was also the reason why I re-read Charlotte's Web last week, and am now moving on to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory now.
The Review
Oh man, this book was so much fun!
I had completely forgotten how much fun this book was.
I had remembered the main plot points, of course. I had remembered (more or less) the fates of the 4 bratty children, and I had remembered Roald Dahl's dark humor.
But I had completely forgotten how much fun the book is.
You all know the basic plot of this book. (I'm assuming here an audience like me--people who read this book long ago when they were children, but haven't come back to it since.)
But what you've probably forgotten is all the little details. And there is so much fun in all the little details.
The story, for example, which is told in chapter 3 about Willy Wonka and the Indian prince. Or the story in chapter 16 about how Willy Wonka found the Oompa Loompas in Loompaland. Or the story about how Willy Wonka lost one of his Oompa Loompas because he drank the experimental soda, floated up into the sky, and wouldn't burp. (Burping is what makes you come back down after drinking the soda).
Or the dialogue. The dialogue in this book can be so funny.
For example, after Violet Beauregarde gets turned into a big purple blueberry from the experimental gum, Willy Wonka comments:
"...That’s what comes from chewing disgusting gum all day long!""If you think gum is so disgusting," said Mike Teavee, "then why do you make it in your factory?""I do wish you wouldn’t mumble," said Mr Wonka. "I can’t hear a word you’re saying. Come on! Off we go! Hurry up! Follow me..." (p.120)
As I was reading this book, I was constantly chuckling to myself, and saying to my wife, "This part is really good. Do you remember this part? Listen." And then reading her parts of the book. (She had just read it herself only a few days before herself, but I couldn't resist.)
I'm tempted to quote all the funny parts here, but that would ruin the book, wouldn't it? Just pick this book up and re-read it for yourself. You won't regret it.
As you can see from my started and finished dates above, I finished this book off in a day and a half. And that's at a leisurely pace. I could easily have finished it in a day.
Other Notes
* You know, I think I actually appreciate the humor in this book now more as an adult than as a child. As a child, I found Roald Dahl's dark humor almost more horrifying than I did funny. (Those poor kids!) Now that I'm an adult, I can detach myself from the story a lot easier than I could as a child. (It's not real, it's just a silly story.)
I also think I appreciate the bizarre humor in this book more as an adult. When I was a child, I don't think I fully appreciated how comically ridiculous most of Willy Wonka's stories are.
The one thing about this book that does work better from a child's perspective, however, is the appreciation for chocolate. Chocolate and sweets are the most wonderful thing to a child, and the sections of the book in which the narrator talks about all the wonderful chocolate and candies that Wonka produced, and how delicious they are, hits a child's sensibilities perfectly. The book is constantly talking about how sweet and creamy and frothy Willy Wonka's chocolate is.
Now, as an adult, I think to myself, "Oh, sure, the first bite of that candy bar is going to taste great. But after a couple of them, you're going to feel sick." But as a child, you never think this.
(Partly because as a child I was watched very closely by my parents, and never even had the opportunity to eat myself sick by eating chocolate. And partly because, maybe, children have a higher tolerance for sweets than adults? I don't know.)
I have a vague memory of a 1st grade teacher who actually gave us chocolate M&Ms to eat while we listened to the book. The logic was that this is the kind of book that you just have to eat chocolate while you read it. And it is true that reading this book does make one want to go out and buy a lot of chocolate. (Unfortunately we're in lockdown over here in Ho Chi Minh city, so I couldn't just go out and buy myself a bunch of chocolate. But if there had been no lockdown, I totally would have gone out and spent money on chocolate while reading.)
At the same time, the delicious chocolate that you imagine while you read this book is bound to be better than whatever you find in the local convenience store. So maybe it's better just to imagine the chocolate instead.
* So, parts of this book are concerned with the fact that kids these days are watching too much TV. Specifically the sections about the character of Mike Teavee--the kid who watches too much TV. But then when the Oompa-Loompas sing about his predicament, they generalize the concern so that the song is a general lament about how television is rotting kids brains nowadays. This book was published all the way back in 1964, but it's an interesting reminder that concerns about too much screen time are not something that started with the invention of the smartphone.
Years ago, I wrote in my review of Rabbit Redux:
I often find myself thinking, “My generation has been raised on cable TV, video games, computers and the internet. These days everyone just sits in front of the TV at home. But back in the day people actually used to have lives. They would actually go out and do exciting stuff in their free time.”What was most interesting to me about “Rabbit Redux” is the portrayal of how boring suburban life was even back in the 60s. The demonstrations and inner city riots are all stuff that happens on the TV, and might as well be in another country. Rabbit and his family waste just as much time sitting around the TV as people do today. There was just less on back then.
As with Rabbit Redux, this book is a reminder that people spending all day watching screens is nothing new. As long as television has existed, there have apparently been people who just wanted to sit and watch it all day. It's not the fault of Netflix.
Roald Dahl (or at least his Oompa-Loompas) do a lot of moralizing about how bad TV is for kids. The Oompa-Loompas sing that watching too much TV will turn your brain into mush, and that TV doesn't have the same imagination of books.
On the first point... possibly. Watching TV does seem to dull your brain. You feel sluggish and slow after watching TV for too long in a way that you don't feel after reading for long periods--although who knows whether or not this actually affects your intelligence in the long term. (TV is also, as I've noted here, strangely addictive). But the effects of television and screens is a much debated topic and this book review isn't the place to get into the whole thing.
As to the second point--that TV doesn't have the same imagination of books--this one I'm more skeptical on. You can have all the same types of fantastic stories on TV that you can have in books, right? But of course, we are now living in the golden age of TV content. In 1964, television probably was a lot blander. (The Oompa-Loompas mention specifically the works of Beatrix Potter and The Wind in the Willows as works of imagination whose pleasure cannot be duplicated by TV.)
I'm tempted to accuse Roald Dahl of being just a conservative moralist on the television question, except...according to his Wikipedia bio, he actually did a lot of work on TV programs. So he obviously couldn't have thought TV was that bad. Maybe the whole character of Mike Teavee was just a quick gag and an excuse for an Oompa-Loompa song and nothing serious? Who knows.
* As I wrote above, I haven't seen the movies in years. So I can't give a detailed commentary about how the book is different from the movies.
One thing that does stick in my mind, however, is the scene where Charlie and his grandfather stole fizzy-lifting drinks, and then subsequently get rejected by Willy Wonka at the end.
That whole little subplot is completely absent from the book. In the book it's all the other children who break the rules, but never Charlie.
I can understand why they added it in the movie, because it's a nice little character arc for Charlie to learn from his mistakes, and also provides a second act low point for the screenplay.
But I was relieved to find out it wasn't in the book. This kind of character building and self-reflection would only distract from the zaniness of the book. And the book is just pure zany antics from one chapter to another. No need to slow down for any self-reflection or learning.
But I was relieved to find out it wasn't in the book. This kind of character building and self-reflection would only distract from the zaniness of the book. And the book is just pure zany antics from one chapter to another. No need to slow down for any self-reflection or learning.
* According to Wikipedia, there was a controversy about whether or not the Oompa-Loompas were racist stereotypes. The back and forth between Roald Dahl and his critics are indexed on this website here, if anyone is interested. I don't really have any strong opinions on this, so I'm going to just side step this controversy. Let me know in the comments if you have any opinions.
Video Review (Playlist HERE)
No comments:
Post a Comment