
List price: $16.95 (that's 30% off!)



List price: $18.95 (that's 30% off!)





This play is as dark as they come. David is a complex character who does everything he can to make his family understand the terrible consequences of war. He represents the anger and hatred that many of us feel when confronted by images and stories of the casualties of battle. His family is the perfect foil for him. The ignorance and racism they exhibit when David tries to explain to them what he's been through is what finally pushes him over the edge. The end is a surprise that sends shivers down my back at the mere thought. All in all, this has everything that makes a play out to be truly great.











The first four chapters of the book, peppered with the somewhat off-putting jargon of literary theory, deplore the vertical integration of publishing empires, the marketing of books in association with toys, games, gadgets, T-shirts, etc., which results in "cultural homogenization" of the children. Adults decide "what's good for children" and use literature, among other tools, to manipulate and control them.
In chapters 5-9, the discussion gains momentum by using concrete examples of literature written for children. Changing attitudes toward Grimms' Fairy Tales and the "Struwwelpeter" stories of Heinrich Hoffmann have spawned multiple translations, bowdlerizations, dramatizations and parodies. The author shows how the "sexist" content of most fairy tales (the hero is almost always a male) has triggered feminist re-interpretations. Finally, there is no "authentic" version of fairy tales; all of them, including the ones collected by the Brothers Grimm, have been "contaminated", i.e. adapted and collated from multiple sources.
The final chapter on the phenomenal success of the Harry Potter books seems to be the one most American readers have focused on. It stresses the stereotypical aspects of the stories and the commercial hype that attended their release, and, again, their sexist nature - one of the author's pet peeves.
While some of these arguments seem excessively gloomy, all of them deserve our thoughtful consideration.

Zipes misses the point on the importance of the scar - the scar is the central metaphor of the series and the importance of scars and wounding says something about our culture's adoption of this particular hero.



