Talk:The Little White Bird
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] merge proposal for Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens
For reference, there is an article merge proposal here: Talk:Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens --Linda 07:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] sequel or adaption or...
Regarding this edit summary in the article history:
04:21, 2 December 2007 (the play and novel were sequels to TLWB, not adaptations) -
This is something that would need a reference to support it. I have not seen any authors refer to Peter and Wendy (the novel), or Peter Pan, or the Boy Who Would Not Grow Up (the play) as a "sequel" to Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens. They are related mostly by the presence of the Peter Pan character, and the structural plot device of a short segment in London followed by a longer story in a fantasy world, followed by a short return to London. Other than Peter Pan, the characters and settings are different and there is no consistent backstory that connects the two stories. For example, in Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens, the narrator says that Peter Pan never ages, yet in Peter and Wendy, Peter Pan is portrayed as several years older. There are many more examples.
There is clearly a literary progression between the stories, but they are not sequels and also are not adaptations. (The later novel is however, an adaptation of the play, as stated by references).
Either way though, it's not up to us to decide, we can only describe the relationship between the stories as it is reported by references. If we don't have the references, all we can say is that the later stories include literary development of the character of Peter Pan, the boy who would not grow up, introduced in the earlier story; and his adventures with human children in a fantasy world. To go beyond that and call it a sequel or adaptation, we would need references to support that idea. --Linda 08:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- You're correct that "sequel" isn't the right word. My point was to correct the implication in the article that TLWB was simply an earlier version of the story in the play. I didn't call it a "sequel" in the article itself, and I think it's a bit much to ask for footnotes to comments made only in edit summaries. Whether the two stories are mutually compatible is in fact a valid subject for debate; the continuity differences are arguably no greater than those between the original Star Trek pilot and Enterprise. :) - JasonAQuest (talk) 17:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)