It seems to me that all my ideas come when I’m watching the movie. It kind of gives me a perspective on what all is going on. I don’t always have to rely on my imagination to come up with what people and creatures look at. But while watching the movie I came to a realization. Although this book was easy for me to read, I don’t see how this would be appealing to a child. Too much confusion and a confusing plot and too much going on for even me to understand. I still don’t understand what’s happening at the end! Or what most of these English words are. Which brings up the question, is this REALLY a children’s book? If so what makes it a children’s book? If not why? Is it the language? The (somewhat) adult references?
This blog was also inspired by Alex C.’s blog, where he posed a question, what constitutes as a children’s book? Here is what I said:
When I first thought about your question I thought that if the story teaches a lesson in a cute and funny way then it’s a children’s book. But then again don’t all books? Whether they’re for children or not? And I actually can’t think of a lesson that this book teaches. Except for what the Duchess says. But those aren’t necessarily lessons the book teaches with experience, like Little Red Riding Hood, or the story about the Gingerbread House. But it isn’t hard to separate a children’s book from a novel. Just look at the cover. Sometimes it can tell you a lot.
After thinking about this for a while I realized that Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland doesn’t have to be considered a children’s book. There isn’t a MAIN lesson learned. The plot is confusing. The language and references would also be hard for a child to understand.
So why write it? Perhaps I’ll think of it while watching the rest of the movie.