Customer Reviews

Wishing for Tomorrow

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(21)
3 star:		(10)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I tend to cringe when I see someone has written a "sequel" of a classic, but this time I didn't: I was pretty hopeful about Hilary McKay writing a sequel to Frances Hodgson Burnett's A Little Princess. Why? Because I'm crazy about McKay's Casson family books and figured that if anyone could do A Little Princess justice, she could. Happily--oh, so happily--hope was absolutely the right emotion for this book, which I read yesterday and then put down with a thoroughly blissful sigh. What a lovely book it is, imbued, not only with humor, but with subtle touches of tenderness.

Have you ever found yourself wondering what happens to the secondary characters after the end of a book? Hilary McKay proceeds to answer that question, mostly from the point of view of Ermengarde, her new heroine. Lumpish, awkward, insecure Ermengarde slowly comes into her own in this book, becoming a lot less lumpish without losing her essential Ermengarde-ness. One interesting story arc is Ermengarde's mixed feelings about Sara leaving her behind. We also learn that Lavinia has a secret and Miss Minchin is being haunted by her own feelings about Sara Crewe, while Lottie makes friends with the cat next door and blithely causes trouble. (McKay's Lottie owes a nod to her marvelous Rose from the Casson books. And perhaps to the irrepressible Posie of Noel Streatfeild's Ballet Shoes.)

Burnett's characters are rich and their encounters sometimes amusing, yet very few people writing today can show off the quirky thinking of children better than Hilary McKay. For example, when Jessica loans Ermengarde her silk dress to wear to see a performance of Peter Pan with her aunt, she warns Ermengarde not to cry because salt water will stain the silk:

"'...but you've got to promise that while you're wearing it you won't cry a single drip!'
'Are there sad bits in Peter Pan?'
'Yes.'
Ermengarde groaned.
'Very sad bits, actually! But you can't cry in them because if you do, you've got to take off your dress--my dress, don't forget! Take off my dress...'
'In the middle of the Duke of York's Theatre?'
'Yes! And watch the rest of the play in your petticoats!'"

The book further offers episodes such as Lottie's antics in church and the deviously hilarious way Lavinia arranges to take "piano lessons" in the house next door. And we are given insight into some of the events that took place while Sara was still at Miss Minchin's.

Hilary McKay is less inclined to believe in Magic than her predecessor, but like Burnett, she finds a kind of magic in people. In addition to developing existing secondary characters such as Ermengarde, Lottie, and Lavinia, the author adds a new and bolder housemaid named Alice and a scholarly gentleman next door whose nephew, Tristram, appears to be a match for the girls at Miss Minchin's. Even the vicar gets a bigger role.

The book ends with a highly dramatic turn, but it seems fitting in the romanticized Victorian setting, and the final pages bring further satisfaction. We do get to see Sara again, in case you were wondering.

After reading Wishing for Tomorrow, I think you'll feel, as I did, that you know and love Sara and her friends from A Little Princess more than ever. Enriching the original while creating a new world in the setting of Miss Minchin's, Hilary McKay has taken the risky, even brazen idea of a sequel to classic literature and written the proverbial tour de force.

WISHING FOR TOMORROW follows the lives of the the girls, Ermengarde, Lavinia and Lottie, that Sara Crew left behind when she came into her fortune at the end of "A Little Princess".

Why I picked it up: I named my middle daughter after Sara Crewe of A LITTLE PRINCESS. My copy has been read to bits. I tracked down Burnett's adult novels in second hand bookstores and read them too. It was with high expectations that I opened this book.

Why I finished it: Grimly, I followed the book to the end. WISHING FOR TOMORROW is indeed a 'sweet and wistful' book, as Joanne Harris describes it. But I loved A LITTLE PRINCESS because of its harsh ugliness, missing form McKay's modern treatment. For example, Becky the scullery maid has gone to be Sara's companion, and Alice is hired in her place. But Alice has the gumption that Becky lacked, cheeks the Miss Minchins on a daily basis and is never, ever scolded by the cook. Out the window goes the cruel truth that life, and the life of young working class girls, was worth almost nothing in turn of the century London. A LITTLE PRINCESS was a cold book; you could feel the damp chill on your bones as you suffered with poor Sara shivering under the thin covers of her narrow attic bed. The strength of A LITTLE PRINCESS was its simple plot: Sara goes from riches to rags and back to riches, all the time remaining a strong and good person. Sara Crewe was a heroine, a little princess because she behaved generously to others in the worst of circumstances, when she was starving and poor, as well as when a carriage was at her disposal.

Ermengarde could have been a heroine too, but she faces no harsh difficulties. The dragon Miss Minchin is having a nervous breakdown; Miss Amelia is entertaining a crush on the vicar; Lavinia is amusing rather than vicious; and Lottie is comic relief. Ermengarde just suffers from angst, flakiness and bad eyesight.

Sweet. Cotton candy, melting away. An aunt appears deus ex machina. A surprise ending jumps out at us. A LITTLE PRINCESS had real bones in it a child could gnaw on. I judge this book harshly. Its author has chosen to write a sequel to a classic, using the fame of A LITTLE PRINCESS to structure her book and sell it as well. It's not enough for her to manufacture a happy little tale. I might have been happier if there were zombies or time travel or some other kind of nonsense in it.

Length:: 2:10 Mins

A Littlest Pet Shop Cat Reviews a Neo-Classic

As a small child, I remember reading Frances Hodgson Burnett's "A Little Princess" for the first time when I was in the first grade. I was taken away by the magic that surrounded Sara Crewe and I was able to envision myself living at Miss Minchin's with Sara, Lavinia, Ermengarde and Lottie. I never saw myself as Sara, but rather as yet another girl, being ignored but surrounded by Sara's magic.

When I saw that a sequel was available for my favorite childhood book, I was skeptical. Sequels are rarely as good as the original, although the Toy Story 2 film is a rare exception. Plus this sequel was written decades later by a different author. Unfortunately, my skepticism was right on the money.

Sara is mostly absent in this sequel. There's no real adversity to be overcome, just the regular problems of everyday life for girls in Victorian England. While the minor characters from the original are more fleshed out and we learn more about their lives, those lives don't always ring true and they just aren't as interesting as the original story of Sara, magic, having it all, losing it all, and then gaining most of it back again. I cared about the characters in the original book while I just wasn't interested in them in the sequel.

While the book was a quick read, and not horrible, it by no means measures up to the original. I still haven't decided if this one can stand alone on its own merits or whether you need to have read the book upon which it is based in order to understand the characters.

This is a sequel to Frances Hodgson Burnett's A Little Princess. So, I re-read A Little Princess before I started listening this Audio book. It started seamlessly,and most of characters didn't change that much.

Of course it's not really A little Princess. This is mostly a story of the Miss Minchin's Select Seminary after Sarah leaves. Sarah doesn't appear most of the story. From now and then some girls' behavior felt too silly and it bothered me, but mostly it was charming. I especially liked the voice actress's English accent. She portrayed every character perfectly.

This Audio book made my daily driving more fun than just listening to music.

Honestly I was never a big fan of "A Little Princess" because I thought it was just too teary and sentimental. In this sequel, those poor oppressed little girls become liberated women... not to horrifying extremes... it's just like the petticoats get lighter. This sequel actually makes me more likely to approach "A Little Princess" again, knowing that in the end it's all okay for everyone.

Sara doesn't come into this story much; the main character is Ermengarde. Lottie and Lavinia are strong personalities who end up being heroic, each in their own ways. Miss Minchin's Select Seminary gets a new housekeeper who is far too independent for a scullery maid, but is just what the girls need. There's a fat, selfish cat, and an equally fat, intelligent rat. No one goes hungry. No one suffers much. The book is full of entertaining yet innocent antics. Wonderful.

This review is specifically for the audiobook version of Wishing for Tomorrow.

As a child who grew up with "A Little Princess," both in the wonderful book by Frances Hodgson Burnett and the film version starring Shirley Temple, I was thrilled that a sequel was now available.

But this particular story is more than a sequel to the original novel (where Sara Crewe was powerless), but it is a contemporary version of the novel, where all of the girls (including the new maid) accept responsibility for their own actions and set boundaries about how they are to be treated.

Good is still good, and bad is still bad (as are some of the behaviors of the girls), but I appreciated the full story.

A special note, since I had the opportunity to hear this story as an audiobook: This story is well read, and I found myself forgetting the voice that was reading it and simply enjoying the story as it was told. I give the audiobook 5 stars just for the reader alone!

The entire book is five hours long - and has been wonderfully edited to 99 tracks per cd, so that you can easily continue the story where ever you leave off - and not have to review a long chapter to get back to "your spot.

Other than the smallest children, I feel this would be a great story for the whole family. However, because of its length, I recommend this for longer trips, or for younger kids who enjoy an evening "bedtime story" to listen in installments.

Well worth purchasing or picking up to listen to through your local library.

Frances Hodgson Burnett herself declared that, "Between the lines of every story there is another story, and that is one that is never heard and can only be guessed at by the people who are good at guessing."

So as Sara heads into her "happily ever after" life, readers of _A Little Princess_ may wonder what happens to her friends and if the Magic might leave with Sara.

_A Little Princess_ is one of my favorite childhood books, and for anyone who has read it, the Magic in the book has probably stuck with you, even if you read it years ago. As a beloved classic children's book author, Frances Hodgson Burnett's shoes are tough ones to fill. Part of the problem in creating a sequel is in staying true to the original author's intentions. Unfortunately, I don't think McKay has in mind the same future that Burnett did. At the end of the original book, Sara is set to live next door to her friends, her guardian begins experiencing a miraculous recovery (back then, diseases were little understood, and Sara's appearance cures him), and plans are put in place for her to use her wealth to improve the city she lives in and help the poor. McKay, however, has Sara move far away from all of her friends. Part of Sara's appeal in _A Little Princess_ is her love for people who are unlovable, from the boring dunce Ermengarde (who becomes her best friend) to bratty Lottie (who she "adopts"). But McKay makes them, and even school bully Lavinia, interesting and more likeable characters. Ermengarde especially here is not the Ermengarde in _A Little Princess_. She is more intelligent, a letter writer, and seems to mostly just lack confidence in herself. Even the teachers are characters here, with insight into their family dynamic and why they behave the way they do.

Sara is virtually absent and doesn't seem to remember things she knew in the original book. For example, here she writes Ermengarde to ask if she has read a book she gave her--but in _A Little Princess_, Sara understands that Ermengarde doesn't read, so she reads books and then tells Ermengarde all about them. A related deviation is that in _Wishing for Tomorrow_, Sarah is mentioned many times as having previously read to other children, when instead she was a storyteller who created her own stories or added on to old ones. Sara even cries in this book, and while she did in the original, it was a highly unusual thing for her to do, and for something more major than what occurs in this one.

There are also modern mentalities that seem to sneak into books written today that were foreign when _A Little Princess_ was written; for example, why is Becky (the former maid of the boarding school) now a maid for Sara--couldn't she have another job? And school bully Lavinia declares that marriage is a trap. These are not the types of things Burnett would have included in _A Little Princess_. When it was written, Becky's new job as a maid for Sara was a major move up in life and a chance to remain with her friend. Perhaps the most disappointing aspect is that the Magic is gone from this book; Burnett was so good at creating plots that mixed fairyland with realism in a believable way. I think this is why her books' plots stick with so many girls.

There are some aspects fans of the original book will appreciate, though, including that Melchisedec is still around and Lottie is perhaps even more of a handful here! Lavinia is still delightfully wicked, and Sara is present a bit, mostly in epistolary form.

Would I call this _the_ sequel to _A Little Princess_? No. It's "a" sequel--and only McKay's opinion of what might happen to the characters in the original story. I prefer the ending that Burnett chose in the original novel. However, as a stand-alone book, trying not to be such a stickler for staying true to the original, it's an enjoyable read about a few delightful characters. Just don't expect them to be quite the same as the ones you knew before.

This is one of those books where you end up kind of wondering if it was really worth the 5.5 hours you spent listening to it...Th book picks up before the end of "The Little Princess" and continues on after Sara leaves, however much like a plant without water this book has a hard time keeping up the same feel as "The Little Princess". When you read "The Little Princess" you felt like you were in the house with the girls, you felt for them, cried when they cried, screamed out at their injustices, rejoiced at their triumphs. This book just lacks this "umph", and at times I ended up wondering why I should care since the character did not seem to...(This might be partially the fault of the narrator, whose voice seems to almost never change- or at least, not much. (Except when she does Becky's voice.)) The tone of this book is completely different from "The Little Princess", and if you removed the first couple of chapters Sara would not be in it at all. However, it is an interesting take on what happened to the rest of the girls after Sara leaves, and it does give a nice, Happy, pat ending.

This book utterly lacks the Dickensian elements that made the original worth reading over and over. It also lacks the grammatical precision that made each line of A Little Princess a lovely thing unto itself. A Little Princess was my first chapter book, and, perhaps, for that reason, I am approaching this book with unfairly high standards.

However, if the author is going to call the book a sequel to the now public domain masterpiece, practically a rite of passage for girls as they learn to read, I believe she owes it to the readers to maintain both the original tone and the high stylistic standards of the book on which she is trying to capitalize.

The author fails on both counts. Additionally, her book falls into the pit of so many modern sequels: the trap of too, too much exposition in the first chapters. If you've got a story worthy of a new book, get on with it. Don't spend a dozen pages or more on a recap. The book either stands on its own or doesn't. This one might have, had it remained true to the tone, and not just the setting, of the original.

That said, I do think she did a reasonably good job with most of the characterizations. I love her takes on Lottie and Ermengarde, though I believe the softening of Lavinia does a bit of violence to the original story. The author clearly lacks the will to write excellent villains.

I was excited about reading this book, but I was disappointed within the first few paragraphs. The disappointment continued throughout the book, even after the interminable exposition mostly ended. It's a gentle book, and even when the action ramps up a bit, there's not a lot of drama or suspense or moral judgment.

I don't think I would recommend it to most of the young girls in my life. Maybe if one actually expressed a strong interest in what happened to Ermengarde or Lottie. Or if I really needed help explaining how some people just really aren't as awful as you might think.