Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass - Lewis Carroll

I very much wanted to write Lewis Carroll’s Alice books a great review, yet I could not in good consciousness do so. There have been many positive reviews written on these children’s classics already, therefore my humble contribution would be insignificant. When all is said and done, these books are for children and whilst undeniably well-written, I simply could not enjoy them as much as I had hoped. The sheer nonsense was frustrating beyond endurance and I struggled from chapter to chapter almost dozing off like the dormouse at the mad tea party. Perhaps I approached them in the wrong spirit, for I was not entertained or amused. The culture surrounding these books is, in my opinion, completely over hyped. That is not to say I think they are bad books; they were certainly pioneering for their day and massively inspirational.

This is my first instance of reviewing two books at once. I could have reviewed them separately, but as my opinions of them are the same and as they were printed together in my edition, I see no reason why I should. Almost everybody is familiar with at least the events and characters of the first book, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, so an overview of these is unnecessary. The sequel, Through the Looking-Glass, is a bit more obscure, despite many of its characters being plucked for numerous screen adaptations. Both contain twelve chapters dealing with nonsense, broken logic, word play, parodic poetry and anthropomorphic mayhem; Wonderland using a pack of cards as its central motif and Looking-Glass a game of chess. I found the premise of Wonderland, a surreal world defying yet simultaneously complying with all the rules of logic, an excellent idea, despite being dissatisfied with its execution.

When I read a story, I like there to be a plot. Although very loosely plotted, the Alice books are mostly made up of successive encounters with the various denizens of Wonderland, each of these revolving around some kind of nonsensical conversation. Carroll (or Charles Dodgson) was a finicky mathematician at heart and his prose can come across as dry as algebra. Much of the vibrancy and character of his world are provided by the famous illustrations of Tenniel, of which there is a comforting abundance. Many readers of this review are no doubt thinking that I am missing the point of Carroll’s masterpieces and that I am blind to the dazzling wit, genius, irony and often scathing social commentary running throughout. I picked up on all these things, but I rate books on how much I enjoyed reading them and not what they have achieved for literature in general. The most interesting part of the books for me was the introduction which explained all about Lewis’s paedophilic tendencies and his obsession with Alice Liddell (model of his heroine) and little girls in general.

It is clear that the Alice books are not the fantastical escapism one would expect. At the bottom of the rabbit hole and on the other side of the mirror, the world is a reflection of the Victorian stuffiness and pedantry which Alice has supposedly escaped from. It is a realm which abounds in bullying, contradictory authority figures and blundering, pathetic imbeciles. Alice stands as the voice of reason and sanity amidst the ordered chaos. In this world of homicidal queens, hookah smoking caterpillars, grinning Cheshire cats and mad hatters lies a dark undertone of child abuse, cruelty and neglect. Not immediately obvious to the casual reader, these themes lurk in wait for those who know where to look. One could argue that Wonderland is the product of a diseased mind; brilliant yes, but also deeply disturbed. Despite my gripes with these revolutionary fantasy tales, I cannot deny that Carroll succeeded in bringing to life some of the most memorable characters ever conceived. I should probably have read these books a long time ago through the less judgemental eyes of a child. Recommended to kids and kidults of all ages, for they can be read as either nonsense fairy-tales, or as philosophical and allegorical critiques.

Rating: 2/5