Customer Reviews

Peter Pan in Scarlet

5 star:		(19)
4 star:		(12)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

Geraldine McCaughrean's "Peter Pan in Scarlet" is different from all other additions to the Peter Pan mythos in that it reads like an extention of the original story instead of a fanfiction. There is a comforting feel to reading this book, like the feeling of coming home. It was definately a treat to read after having read the original novel.

This book fills in many holes left by it's predecessor, and answers all the nagging questions that haunted me after reading the first one. It expands and deepens the characters of all the familiar faces, including the Lost Boys, the Darlings, and even Captain Hook himself. I was especially moved by Hook's story and fell in love with the character all over again.

For anyone who is worried that this is just a badly written marketing ploy, or a violation of their childhood, I say that there is nothing to fear. This book is a marvel and a fitting tribute to an amazing writer. Buy the book, and even if you don't enjoy the story within it's pages at least you will be helping a children's hospital in need.

"Peter Pan in Scarlet" will have an honored place next to "Peter Pan" on my bookshelf.

Before I get into this review I will warn you, I am over-critical of things I care about, and Peter Pan is one of those things. So sometimes this review will sound like an obsessed fan whining and for that, I apologize, but I will try to keep it to a minimum.

Peter Pan in Scarlet is a good book; I will read it again. However, that does not mean it is a classic in the making, following in the ever so hard to fill footsteps of the original. It is not great, is not sensational, and at the very least is worth waiting for the paperbound edition. And if you have dotted on Peter since you were small enough to fly to Neverland you will probably feel an underlying wrongness in this book.

First the whining part, the crowing. I know Peter crows. Acknowledged, accepted, but to have it spelled out, repeatedly, in double-sized print, bothered me. The end. And since when did Captain Codfish have two first mates? Starkey and Smee where both credited the post here. There are other inconsistencies as well, like the shadows and flying. But enough of that, let's move on.

The writing style was a shadow of Barrie's, in my opinion. Almost as if the author would forget that she was trying mimic it, the style would wander away, popping back now and then in a bizarre game of hide and seek.

The theme of the story was rather violent, mature one could say. Yes, there were dangers in the original, lives threatened, but still, it was held together with the magic of child's innocence that Peter Pan is meant to encompass. This story ripped that rug right out from underneath you.

Peter does seem not quite his-self, though in the beginning that can rather well be attributed to his being completely alone. No one to share his adventures with, no one to tell stories to, I wasn't surprised by it. And later, well, clothes do make the man, or boy, and that theme is well used in this book. Though it isn't the first time I've run into it. Fox Network had a cartoon series called Peter Pan and the Pirates about fifteen years ago. Very good series, but I do remember an episode with Hook's Hat.

So in short, this is a good book, but not worth the hardbound price. Enjoy!

Geraldine McCaughrean has created a fantastic sequal for all of us who believe in NeverLand! In this wonderful follow-up to Peter Pan, we are taken back to Neverland, where there is great adventure waiting Peter and his crew of familiar and unfamiliar cast. However, Neverland is a bit darker and more dangerous than what Peter first experienced, and the challanges he faces is much more than what he expects! From one adventure to another, readers of all sorts will completely cherish this wonderful book that picks up in rythem and beat from the initial story about the young boy who never wanted to grow up. I can simply say that the world at large has waited for THIS book written by THIS author. Ms. McCaughrean has done an amazing job in creating a sequeal that is as much a continuation as it is a new adventure. Peter Pan in Scarlet is a must read for every person who reads. Take flight and let your imagination soar . . . and fly with Peter Pan!

I was really looking forward to this book because I loved Peter Pan and Wendy, and Geraldine McCaughrean's The White Darkness. However, the writing was just terrible! I was surprised. Some of my reasons for disliking it -

Continuity - There were so many problems with continuity, I was getting really annoyed and frustrated with G.M.'s lazyness. First, we're told that Peter Pan doesn't sleep. He even spends one evening flying around gathering food for the Darlings, because he wants to keep busy while they sleep and he's awake. Then, towards the end of the book, Peter goes to sleep and has a dream. Ooo... kay... then why did she make such a point of telling us he never sleeps?

No Plot - None. Nothing moves the story forward. The Darlings return to Neverland, and bumble from one side of the island to the other, with the vague goal of finding treasure.

Climax - is frustratingly predictable. I don't want to give anything away, but I saw it coming from page 30... and I'm usually pretty oblivious. :)

But then again, it WAS written for children, and I'm a grown-up. :)

Climax - is the exact same as in The White Darkness. Main character goes into a frenzy of madness atop a frigid mountaintop/glacier. I liked The White Darkness when I read it the first time. I didn't want to read it twice.

Characters - are lame. Raveling Man at the end is very weak. No one has any serious motivations.

Better luck next time, G.M. Your first chapter was excellent... wish you'd been able to keep that voice and tone in the rest of the story.

In the words of another reviewer, when one is a devoted Pan Fan, her reviews might come across as fanatically picky. But I am about to review "Peter Pan"'s official sequel: not some spin-off from the Disney film, not a half-hearted attempt at the biographies of Wendy, Tink, or Hook. Don't get me wrong. I loved 'Peter Pan in Scarlet'. It was fun, I reread it, and it was worth four stars. But I feel I must warn you - in writing a gentler, updated sequel, and a good inventive story, Geraldine McCaughrean somewhat sacrificed J.M. Barrie's original dark purpose of incriminating adults and glorifying children. And as it IS the OFFICIAL SEQUEL, it needs a little criticism.
I'm sure you already know the summary: 'Peter Pan in Scarlet' finds Wendy and the Lost Boys where we left them last - as adults in London. All of a sudden they begin to have humorously vivid dreams of Neverland; they decide they must return to Neverland and right any wrongs that have occurred in their twenty year absence. Of course Peter Pan, the Marvelous Boy is absolutely fine, and now that there are friends to share his adventures with, he decides to take them on a treasure hunt to the top of Neverpeak, joining forces with the Circusmaster Ravello along the way.
As the world's top Pan Fan, I immediately discovered a few inconsistencies with this book: the shadow/flying explanation, of course; several mistakes in respect to the pirates; the over-stressing of 'clothes making the man'. These basically unimportant mistakes can be attributed to the difficult task of creating a new storyline. But my MAIN COMPLAINT comes with a VERY BIG SPOILER: When the Darlings meet Ravello the Circusmaster, they are actually meeting none other than a disguised Hook! Of course this was obvious from the beginning, but remember, Hook was DEAD by the end of 'Peter Pan'. In this story, he survived in the crocodile's stomach but was mutated by stomach acid, then one day his poison killed the crocodile and he was able to claw his way out. But this backstory just seems so outlandish. Besides, why MUST they bring Hook back at all? I would have preferred an all-new villian, rather than the revival of old, overused Hook. I was also disappointed in McCaughrean's rather weak description of his childhood; I like to think of Hook as academically-geared, not a sportsman; and I also like it when instances in Hook's life mirror those in Barrie's life. J.V. Hart's 'Capt. Hook' gave an excellent backstory (although it was awfully violent), and I think McCaughrean could have used some of Hart's ideas, as his book was also GOSH-authorized. By the end of 'Peter Pan in Scarlet', Hook is alive and thriving; defeating the purpose of the original novel's great battle. By the way, how DID Hook become an animal-loving Circusmaster in the first place? This is not explained, and it contrasts with Hook's usually violent, oppressive nature.
Another problem I found: the story actually has too happy of an ending. In any non-Pan book I like a happy ending, but as this was the official sequel I'm surprised at such a departure from J.M. Barrie's ending and it's original dark quality. Ms. McCaughrean softens all the 'consequences' outlined in the original novel - she does not only revive Captain Hook, who was supposed to be triumphed over by Peter Pan and eternal youth, she also reunites the Lost Boys and the Roarers with their mothers, who were supposed to have heartlessly forgotten them; she even redeems Peter's mother, the woman who technically caused the birth of Neverland itself. This was certainly not what Barrie intended.
So why, after all this complaining, did I drop only one star? Because the book is STILL VERY GOOD. It is very well-written, and I must congratulate the author on her imaginative storyline. It is a bit eerie in spots but not dark, and Geraldine McCaughrean is extremely creative. I loved her statements of "Your summer has turned to winter", "Time passing where no time should have passed", and "Sleep is a great healer". I'm surprised Barrie didn't think up the Roarers and the Maze of Regrets himself. And nearly every character in the book was expanded upon - I just adored Curly, Slightly, and Fireflyer (who speaks in tiny letters), and Wendy and John were much improved! (Although I do miss the mermaids.) Except for a few temper tantrums, Peter Pan is just like always; I think his dialogue was perfect (especially through the first half), and you know he was "awfully clever." The adventures in this book are also entertaining - the League of Pan meets up with the pirate Starkey, who has his own ship and a crew of trained Indian children; the story includes a frightening journey through the Maze of Witches, supposedly haunted by revengeful nursemaids; and the League cleverly escapes a Reds vs. Blues fairy war.

If you were not pleased by the way things worked out in "Peter Pan", this story is wonderful. It is a good book in many respects, the best sequel, just not worthy of the title "Official Sequel", as it takes away so much from Barrie's original story. McCaughrean insists on the good-hearted, well-meaning, and caring nature of adults, and although this is generally true, Barrie's story viewed adults in a bitter, cynical light. Nothing outdoes Barrie's original - little even comes close to comparison. Still, for a difficult-to-write modern sequel, I think "Peter Pan in Scarlet" (minus Hook's poor backstory) was a creative alternative, standing head and shoulders above all other sequels, and worthy of reading.

P.S. Check out the other Peter Pan-related reviews by Tinkerbell III!

Though most people thought that doing a sequel to a beloved story would be a bad idea, I think that Geraldine did an amazing job. The characters are true to how they were in the first book but carrying the weight around as an adult when it came to simple pleasures. I couldn't put the book down as I read it and the story is somewhat predictable, it was still fun to go back to Neverland and follow the adventures of Peter Pan and the "lost boys". There is a few brief periods of uneasyness (the Nannies part was eerie to say the least) but the ending was heartfelt and a great ending to a stellar sequel. If you love the story of Peter Pan, pick it up and start reading. You won't want to put it down. =+)

While I found the book to be J.M. Barrie's style, for the most part, I thought it lacked his spirit. The original Peter Pan was full of fun, adventure, laughter. It was uplifting and made me wish I was a child again so I could join Peter and the others. This story could have done so much more with the characters. I found the story somewhat depressing. There was no fun. I missed the characters of the first story. Where was Smee? How can there be a Peter Pan without Smee and the crocodile? This story was dark. Peter was angry, depressed, greedy and full of negativity. Why would I want my child to read this? He almost wasn't the main character. Ravello was. A sequel to a famous story such as Peter Pan should continue with the positivity and joy of the first and this book certainly didn't do that.

Nothing special, or particularly delightful. Frankly I was hoping for something with a bit more substance and magic to it that would cause a thrill the way the first Harry Potter book did. This feels like what it was: a contest winning entry. It almost feels as if the prerequisite for the winning book had to somehow include all the previous characters without letting the author branch out and develop new ones. I'll give the book the benefit of the doubt and say the age level is probably much lower than what I had thought it would be, which is why I was left a bit bored. Unfortunately, this is one parent that won't want to revisit this drab Neverland with my kids when they're old enough.

I pick up any sequel to Peter Pan with much skepticisim, however is this was the first that has been officially sanctioned I figured I would give it a go. I was pleasantly surprised. It holds very true to Barrie's tale, McCaughrean is clearly familiar with not only the original work, but Barrie's life and his other writings (I caught at least on allusion to his other work). It also has a sort of wistful sadness that I have encountered in the non-Pan writings of Barrie's that I have read.

What was great about this was how she found a way to bring back the characters that are essential for any Neverland tale, instead of creating a whole slew of new ones. And she tells it in a way that is very much Barrie, of course the way to get to Neverland is the fly, and to fly you have to be a child--how do grownups like Mrs.Wendy become children again? I love it! And it has some very interesting outcomes.

The Darlings have been having dreams of Neverland, dreams so vivid that when they wake up they've brought part of it back with them (water from the Mermaid lagoon, Indian warpaint, etc). Knowing something must be wrong they resolve to return to Neverland and help Peter Pan fix the problem.

They return to Neverland and the longer they are there the more they forget about why they are there, thus a series of adventures happen. Including meeting up with some pirates and a Traveling Man, Ravello. He is probably the jewel of this book, with him the plot drives further and the reader wants to turn more pages. Peter as his arrogant self can only inspire so much. In addition to Ravello there is another great new character, Firefly, a male fairy--and very hungry, everytime he pops up I found myself laughing at something.

I loved the illustrations on the inside, like black cutouts that used to be the chapter pages in older children's books, very appropriate--also like shadows (Very important).


There are a few minor quibbles I have with the book, 1) she states that one cannot fly without a shadow--yet Peter flies in at the begining of Barrie's book looking for his shadow--thus, he can fly without one. 2) I'm not sure how much I like the big reveal of Hook's past, while it does seem to fit in with what perhaps Barrie spoke of for him...it seems to make him less piratey.

That being said, I really enjoyed this book, it will be a great book to read aloud at bed times or for a gift for a child, the reading level isn't super advances so probably 3rd or 4th grade.

I am a big Peter Pan fan. I have read the original book, seen the stage plays and of course Disney and Universals feature films. Also I have read the two "Prequel" Pan books as well. I was in high anticipation of this new sequel.

The book is a delight, but for some it may be a little hard to get into. The writing is very Victorian to match that of the original. It takes a while to get going, so to speak, but when it does it just plows ahead. The bits and pieces that explain certain things about Neverland are very cleverly worked out and its fun to have the whole gang (and how an adult Wendy and the now adult Lost Boys who came back with Wendy at the end of the Original book become young again is fun. You must believe in magic and fairies to enjoy this book, and I do and did.