The Wanlorn (
the_wanlorn) wrote2007-01-16 08:17 am
Entry tags:
Roald Dahl
Gods, I love Roald Dahl. That man is a master of ambiguous characterization.
Let's look at Charlie Bucket, shall we? Charlie was given the chocolate factory because he was a good little pauper, correct? He exhibited princely behaviour and did no wrong and was a little boy that all other children should look up to as a role model, correct?
Ha! Ha ha!
Charlie was just as much of a little shit as the rest of the kids. Remember the fizzy lifting juice? The only difference was that he did not get caught. I think that Wonka even talks about that, arguing with Charlie over whether or not he deserves the prize.
No, Charlie is the Noble Pauper. And, as such, most readers overlook his faults, missing what I think is one of the most interesting and deep (ie, characters with depth as opposed to flat characters) pieces of Dahl's writing: the ambiguity of his main characters.
What of Matilda and Miss Honey? Look at what they did to Trunchbull. Is desire for revenge, motivation to carry out your revenge, and admirable trait? Well, I believe so, but that probably means it isn't. Especially revenge that violent (the doll bit) and that traumatizing (the father bit).
Did Trunchbull deserve it? Of course! That's the point, that she was a Bad Bad Person and gets exactly what she deserves.
But that doesn't make Matilda and Miss Honey good. It also doesn't make them bad.
It makes them morally ambiguous, and that is awesome. That's what makes his books continue to have appeal, even as you grow up and leave your childhood behind.

no subject
no subject
I hated the bookI only read the book once.Which would totally suck, because fizzy lifting juice was the coolest part of the movie. =(
no subject
oh wells
no subject
no subject
And you're very correct. Fantastic Mr. Fox was a vicious little thief, too. It worries me, because in today's world where children are being sheltered more and more from everything that could conceivably be a negative influence(my 5-year-old sister isn't allowed to watch classic Disney movies where there's only one parent--it's ridiculous and pisses me off), I can imagine Roald Dahl being thrown by the wayside for mind-numbingly trite crap that wouldn't stimulate an original thought in the world. That would be a travesty.
On a more fun note, I have the original version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory where the Ooompa Loompas are African pygmies!
no subject
Yeah, I grew up reading original (read: super-gorey) versions of fairytales and having stuff like Poe as my bedtime stories, and I was horrified when my kindergarten teacher was reading Snow White and there weren't any iron shoes.
no subject
SOMEone's been reading more and more fairytales, hasn't she? =D
no subject
no subject
...
Hmm... like another 'hero' I know...
no subject