Tumgik
#blossoming books
blossomingbooks · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media
"(...) ‘there doesn’t seem to be no need for no one to be contrary when there’s flowers an’ such like, an’ such lots o’ friendly wild things runnin’ about makin’ homes for themselves, or buildin’ nests an’ singin’ an’ whistling, does there?’"
🥀🪴⚘️🌿
I can’t pinpoint the moment when I first heard about The Secret Garden. I remember seeing a picture of it (don’t even remember if it was from the 1993 film or something else) somewhere in my childhood and it lived quietly in the back of my mind ever since. Then at some point during my teens I decided to watch the film adaptation to know what it was about; and since then the need to read the book has never left me. I’ve had this beautiful Special Puffin Classics edition on my shelf for too long and for some reason, it was this summer when I finally felt like I had to pick it up and put the other book I had started reading on hold.
I absolutely love how the narrative begins with such a gothic feel to it, which is quite unusual in a children’s novel. There are some eerie mysteries surrounding Misselthwaite Manor, reminiscent of Charlotte Brontë or even Ann Radcliffe. But this is not the 19th century; this is the beginning of the 20th century, and the gothic narrative devices are only used in order to shine the light on childhoods filled with darkness. Spoiled and sulky, recently orphaned Mary Lennox arrives in Yorkshire (whose accent the author makes sure to transcribe to the page) to unearth things she never knew of before — beauty, friendship and even magic. Along with moor-child Dickon and her sickly cousin Colin, she brings a secret garden back to life, while simultaneously so are their spirits revived: “Slowly — slowly — for no reason that he knew of — he was ‘coming alive’ with the garden”. The juxtaposition between the flowers and greens growing and both the psychological and physical growth of the children is heart-warming, and a clear influence of Frances Hodgson Burnett’s interest in Christian Science (which believed that illness is a mental rather than a physical disorder), as well as Spiritualism and Theosophy:
"One of the new things people began to find out in the last century was that thoughts — just mere thoughts — are as powerful as electric batteries — as good for one as sunlight is, or as bad for one as poison. To let a sad thought or a bad one get into your mind is as dangerous as letting a scarlet fever germ get into your body. If you let it stay there after it has got in you may never get over it as long as you live."
But I would go so far as to interpret this narrative as pantheist, being so devoted to nature in its core, with protagonists who even see it as magic: “Everything is made out of Magic, leaves and trees, flowers and birds, badgers and foxes and squirrels and people”. The novel mentions the church and even includes a doxology, but it surprisingly never defines itself as a narrative of christian morals, leaving the door of the garden open in an almost agnostic approach (“How can we know the exact names of everything?”). In this way, Burnett lets the characters, as well as the readers, attach the magic of nature to whatever they might feel is right for them: “Never thee stop believin’ in th’ Big Good Thing an’ knowin’ th’ world’s full of it — an’ call it what tha’ likes.”
7 notes · View notes
k-worlddd · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
lulumoonowlbooks
8K notes · View notes
clarissasbakery · 7 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
the worlds most pretentious book club
2K notes · View notes
derangedrhythms · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
Anna Akhmatova, The Complete Poems of Anna Akhmatova: Seventh Book; from ‘Don't be afraid⁠—I can still portray...' tr. Judith Hemschemeyer
801 notes · View notes
alexbutrandomthoughts · 5 months
Text
After some careful examination, I've came to a conclusion that my favorite ship dynamic is literally just "divorced but never married".
392 notes · View notes
fleur-aesthetic · 1 year
Text
Tumblr media
instagram | kawowekadry
642 notes · View notes
allthingstv · 5 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
HEARTSTOPPER 🥰
The scenes which perfectly match the book..🎥📖
265 notes · View notes
tanyaluca · 4 days
Text
Tumblr media
April Window…by Tanya Luca
116 notes · View notes
blossomingbooks · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
Ever since I wrote my masters' dissertation on Lemony Snicket I've been wanting to read something by Roald Dahl, since he was such an influence for Daniel Handler. And, because my childhood weekends were spent rewatching the 2005 film adaptation of his Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (1964) — which I've been revisiting, alongside with the 1971 version, in view of the release of Wonka —, it seemed just right to start with this one.
Having these film adaptations as references, it's hard not to go into a comparative analysis, but I do want to go over some points because reading the original text gave me a new appreciation for the film that was so dear for me in childhood. Although the 1971 adaptation is widely beloved and even taken a lot as the canonic reference of the Wonka universe, it must be said that Tim Burton's version is much more considerate of the original source — starting with the title itself, which focuses on Charlie and not on the character of Willy Wonka. Roald Dahl himself didn't appreciate the first adaptation, which is understandable considering that — with the exception of some chilling moments such as "The Wondrous Boat Ride", recited by Gene Wilder word for word with a delivery that borders the psychopathic — most of the film has a very wholesome tone. The book, although clearly written for children with a very accessible and childish writing style, has some deeply dark humor undertones. A key example of this are the musical numbers, which are also much more well adapted in the 2005 version. Although "Oompa loompa doompety doo" became an iconic reference in our collective memory, the songs from the 1971 film are much simpler and loosely-based on the text; on the other hand, Roald Dahl is actually credited as a writer in Danny Elfman's 2005 soundtrack, which uses many verses from the songs written in the books.
On the other hand, the downside of only getting a Roald Dahl book in 2023 is that I accidently read an expurgated version of his work... This feels particularly wrong after learning that Dahl himself warned his publishers before dying against "so much as change a single comma in one of my books". Moreover, it doesn't seem like he was completely insensitive, taking into account his own 1973 revision which changed the ethnicity of the Oompa Loompas (who previously recalled African slaves a bit too much). In my opinion, this type of revision is understandable and very valid, however, what happened with Puffin Books last year seems a bit too extreme: they removed words like "fat", "mad", "crazy" and "queer", references to toy guns and to corporal punishment. Even if some of those concepts might be used in an offensive and problematic way, I can't see this kind of censorship as very useful, since all it does is whitewash the work, devoiding the reader of critical thinking and counter-productively absolving the author of his wrongdoings. I understand that it gets trickier considering the younger target audience, but I personally can't help but feel like I've been deprived of something by having read this version.
5 notes · View notes
fairydrowning · 1 year
Text
CHERRY BLOSSOM TREES.
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
931 notes · View notes
happyheidi · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
3K notes · View notes
modern-fairy · 1 month
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
Reading among the cherry blossoms 🌸
82 notes · View notes