Professor Popinjay's Compendium of Perspicacity

(Inhale)

A Non-Review by Professor Popinjay

Beatrix Potter’s stories were published at a time when most children’s publications consisted of dreary moralistic tales of caution collected and published by the Brothers Grimm almost 100 years previous.

Nothing against morals, or even dreariness for that matter, but good lord, Jacob! Read the room, Wilhelm! How many witches are burnt alive in your stories? How many children are in danger of being eaten and do? I get it. I’ve seen Germany’s trio of Christmas terrors: Ruprecht, Krampus, and Frau Perchta. Terrifying children into good behavior is very effective and, by the time they realize they need therapy to overcome their crippling anxiety, it’ll be their own problem, not yours. At least they’re not eating old ladies’ candy houses. Ya done good, Dad! Great parenting!

But Beatrix’ stories were cute and lighthearted. Sure there was an element of danger now and then but no one was being immolated and cannibalized! Not on screen anyway. The world was due something fun for children and Beatrix Potter stepped up. Since her first publication in 1902, she has captured the hearts of children and the childlike for generations. Her stories and illustrations have made for timeless classics that remain in our hearts long into adulthood.

So how do we pay homage to Ms. Potter and present her adorable stories to a modern generation almost a century later? Well it’s a classic right? It’s very old, yeah? Potter’s life is the story of a woman’s perseverance in a male-dominated world, is it not? I know! Let’s start this beloved children’s tale with a drably dressed woman gingerly sauntering through a boring English country village while a castrato trills something indecipherable and melancholy. That should get the kids excited!

I’m sorry. This is one of my biggest pet peeves. I feel like creators, who want to recreate something they loved as a child, often get caught up in recreating the feelings they have for it as an adult, more than accurately recreating the thing itself, and so produce this quaint, counterfeit, overly-heartfelt super preachy BS. I can’t stand it.

The re-creator forgets that the thing wasn’t about their feelings, it was a sincere and passionate extension of the original artist’s ideas that just happened to make them feel a certain way. So when the recreator makes something that exemplifies their feelings, they’re completely missing the point. It’s been done numerous times to The Munsters, it’s been done to Whinnie the Pooh, and it’s been done to just about every live action version of an animated Disney film. It’s soulless emotionalism and it’s boring.

That’s just the intro though, the rest of the show is fine. The kid they got to read as Peter was just a kid so I shan’t tell you he sucked.

Compare this, however, with the version narrated by Carol Burnett! While the artwork still reflects Potter’s original designs and the feeling as a whole still resembles a period piece, it does well to appeal to actual children with zero patience for slow shots of the English countryside. It’s not Peter Rabbit in sunglasses, backward hat, plaid unbuttoned shirt and ripped jeans, carrying a skateboard. It’s respectful of its source and yet it presents the story and characters in a sincere way to which my kids responded favorably even though this was made 15 years before they were born.

Carol Burnett is lively and fun and knows exactly who her audience is and clearly cares deeply about them. It’s kids who want to love Peter Rabbit and Benjamin Bunny and couldn’t care less, at least at this point in their lives, about Beatrix Potter. And I think Beatrix would have it no other way.