Jemima Puddleduck original story

[user1471517900]

We had a box set gifted to us so thought we would read Jemima last night by request. Dear god that book has a needlessly horrific ending (was hurriedly changed in our reading). Dogs save her from the fox.... Then eat her eggs and then it states she's a rubbish mum for no real reason. What is wrong with Beatrix Potter?! Last three pages attached - apologies if a couple are sideways.

Did everyone else know about these original stories?

Yeah, slut in Dahl is the same as in the poem Farewell Rewards and Fairies - "Farewell rewards and fairies, good housewives now may say, for now foul sluts in dairies, do fare as well as they" . Slut equals bad housewife not promiscuous woman.

If OP doesn't like Jemima's end, what about Chicken Licken, they all get eaten!

I think one of the things with Beatrix Potter and other books of the period (like Thomas the Tank Engine), is that nowadays they are marketed for pre-school/reception age, but the langage and vocabulary is quite complex and seems more suited to much older children - more like ages 7-9. My daughter had read most of the Roald Dahl books by the end of year 1 but only really started enjoying Beatrix Potter in about year 3. Before that she found the vocab too difficult but in year 3 she really enjoyed them.

But because the Beatrix Potter and Thomas the Tank Engine stories are now firmly pegged as stories for pre-schoolers, modern children are unlikely to be interested in reading the originals at the age at which they can manage the language.

"Ring A Ring O' Roses" is charming: all about the Bubonic Plague.

The "roses" (or rosies) refers to the horrific telltale skin rash, the stench of which, apparently, required "a pocketful of posies" to mask it.

Before it then killed 15% of the UK population: "we all fall down"

I've always been a bit upset by Jemima Puddle-Duck. It's not just what happens but the way she's presented as a bit naive and pathetic. :(

I do accept that horrible things happen in the books and I still loved them as a child (apart from JPD and a couple of the others I found more boring)

I ADORE Pigling Bland and The Taylor of Gloucester. The romance and emotions in them are so strong... so I suppose that's the flip side of facing everything head-on.

Grimm Fairyales are available free on Kindle.

As for Roald Dahl, the more I read the more I seriously worry about him! I think he has to say the least an alarming view of children and that's apart from all the racism and misogyny. It was fairly normal for a man of his time and background but still. There's something sadistic about so many of the things that happen in his books.

Great storyteller and literary giant of course but some people do date horribly more than others do.

My favourite story when I was a child was The Little Match Girl.

My mum always complained that it was sad when I requested it as a bedtime story. The little girl's death went over my head, I thought it had a happy ending (in a way it did because her suffering was over).

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Match_Girl

My favourite story when I was a child was The Little Match Girl

Agree Dahl was a sadist, but I'd take him over Andersen's maudlin sentimentality any time. But, then, children often like sentimentality - and sadism

Ha ha Selma - that's me!

I am sure you have matured TopKitty

Ronald Dahl suffered a head injury during the 2WW, which may have lead to a slight change in his personality. He became more disinhibited, and freely said things that many people may think, but don't say. He may also have lost that internal filter which stops people following a particular train of thought because they know that it is unacceptable.

But ducks are very bad sitters. Potter was just describing actual animal behaviour and anthropomorphising it!

I remember a gruesome book supposedly for children called Struwelpeter.
I don't imagine that would be encouraged today!

I’ve never understood why Dahl is so popular, and why saying his books are twisted and bordering on deranged gets you flamed.

I loved Samuel Whiskers. There was something vaguely comforting about the cadence of BP’s books and the familiarity of the characters. Even now I can remember passages from the books and the illustrations that went with them.

I would agree with pp that BP is probably better suited to slightly older children, but if you edit all the unpleasant bits from books you might as well never read.

Enid Blyton was another whose books were full of scary characters... the Faraway Tree had a nasty teacher who beat the children! Kids know it's just a story, and love the excitement and danger. I was quite said to see that they'd been modernised to be honest.

Had you never had Potter read to you as a child or was it just that you didn’t remember the ending? I think kids can probably handle it - mine always liked to be scared while safely snuggled up with me, a way of confronting danger without actually being in danger. Now they are teenagers they love nothing more than to snuggle up and watch a horror film. They know it’s not real, just as they knew those children’s stories were not real (though that’s not to say realistic in the case of Jemima Puddleduck - just in case anyone was thinking foxes were cuddly or that dogs don’t like eggs).

What's so wrong with that? It's a duck, children don't empathise with fictional animals in the same way they would with fictional people so it's not like they would find it traumatic. It seems like a very good way to introduce the concept of infant mortality at s time when many children died before they reached adulthood. The reference to her own failing may have helped children to better understand the way that their mothers would have felt when they lost a sibling. I think that stories like these help to teach children about the fragility of life and the importance of parental obligations and feelings from a young age.

If you look back at a huge proportion of children's literature from the last 100 years or so as an adult there are a lot of themes that seem wildly unsuitable in the modern age. DP has just done a module on racism in children's literature, it was eye opening to discuss the racism that is in Dr Seuss and Enid Blyton's works, two of the most celebrated children's authors. The attitudes of the times were very different, and while children may not actively pick up on racist themes or situations consciously there will be a subconscious effect. I am undecided on whether to read these to DD as a mixed race child as I wouldn't want her to pick up on negative attitudes towards non white people, but equally a lot of the stories are entertaining and have positive lessons within the narratives.

Personally as a child I wasn't distressed by BPs books, I was very into animals but only realistic depictions, I hated animal toys with attached blankets or hats, my favourite TV to watch was Attenborough documentaries so I didn't get upset seeing a lion kill an antelope because it was 'the circle of life' (thanks Lion King) I think it's good that children are aware of the realities of how animals live, and where our food comes from. BP simply anthropomorphised the animals in her books and the real dangers that they faced from both humans and other animals.

@Sirrah, we are reading the Faraway Tree at the moment and the modernisations make no sense! Everytime someone got slapped, they now get "a scolding", which leads to the bizarre image of someone dodging round a room to avoid their "scolding". And Dame Slap (now Snap) now shouts in children's ears instead of smacking them, which actually seems worse to me - every time I read it I think "their eardrums!" And rather than whip them all soundly and send them to bed the Old Woman Who Lives In A Shoe makes a child stand with their arms in the air or something...

And why change Beth to Bess? I don't understand that at all.

Struwwelpeter was one of my favourite books as a child. A few years back, I came across an animated version online. Like the book itself wasn't terrifying enough...

Ah, poor Harriet who played with matches.

Yes, Maroon, exactly - Fanny and Dick need changing, but what is wrong with Bess?!?!?!?!!!

Bessie even. And why does Jo have to gain an e and be Joe?!

The little match girl turned me into a lefty! Probably not what my very conservative, right of Thatcher mum intended when she encouraged me to read widely as a child.

@MaroonPencil I know, ridiculous! Yes, Fanny and Dick had to change, but changing the story so much was unnecessary.