When The Little White Bird was published in 1902, it was hailed by The Times Literary Supplement as "an exquisite piece of work" and "one of the most charming books ever written". The same review also declared, "If a book exists which contains more knowledge and more love of children, we do not know it." But a modern reader might feel less straightforwardly celebratory. Take, for example, the following passage, when the narrator describes his night alone with the child: "David and I had a tremendous adventure. It was this - he passed the night with me... I took [his boots] off with all the coolness of an old hand, and then I placed him on my knee, and removed his blouse. This was a delightful experience, but I think I remained wonderfully calm until I came somewhat too suddenly to his little braces, which agitated me profoundly... I cannot proceed in public with the disrobing of David." After some time, David climbs into bed with the narrator. "For the rest of the night he lay on me and across me, and sometimes his feet were at the bottom of the bed and sometimes on the pillow, but he always retained possession of my finger..." Meanwhile, the adult lies awake, thinking of "this little boy, who in the midst of his play while I undressed him, had suddenly buried his head on my knee" and of his "dripping little form in the bath, and how when I essayed to catch him he had slipped from my arms like a trout."😅Gerald du Maurier's biographer, James Harding, was made decidedly uncomfortable by this scene, though veered away from any accusation of impropriety. "One needs a tough stomach to put up with Barrie in this mood," he wrote, in 1989. "No writer today would publish such an account without inviting accusations of paedophilia or worse. Yet Barrie, in the manner of Lewis Carroll and his nude photographs of little girls, was consciously innocent. His snapshots of the tiny lads [the Llewelyn Davies boys] frolicking bare-bottomed on the beach, the cowboy and Indian adventures he made up for them... were a means to enjoy the pleasures of fatherhood with none of the pains. In Sylvia du Maurier's children he discovered the ideal outlet for the frustrations which obsessed him." Dudgeon is unconvinced by Harding's phrasing - "How did he know that Barrie's innocence was conscious?" - but there is still no evidence to settle the argument. Having read Dudgeon's book, and re-read Birkin's, and then returned to my own research notes from the du Maurier archive and elsewhere, I remain just as uncertain about JM Barrie, whose chief aim seemed to be not to corrupt boys into adult desire, but for himself to rejoin them in the innocence of eternal boyhood, a Neverland where children fly away from their mothers and no one need grow old. True, there are letters of his that are odd, such as the one he wrote to Michael on the eve of his eighth birthday, in June 1908: "I wish I could be with you and your candles. You can look on me as one of your candles, the one that burns badly - the greasy one that is bent in the middle. But still, hurray, I am Michael's candle. I wish I could see you putting on the redskin's clothes for the first time... Dear Michael, I am very fond of you, but don't tell anybody."This is one of the few letters that have survived - Peter Llewelyn Davies destroyed nearly all of Barrie's vast correspondence with Michael in the melancholic period before he killed himself by diving under a Tube train at Sloane Square station. ("They were too much," was his only comment on the letters between Barrie and Michael.) Elsewhere, there are moments when Barrie seems to display an unsettling streak of casual sadism (not dissimilar to Peter Pan, whose capacity for cruelty was eradicated in the Disney version). For example, in The Little White Bird, the narrator declares, "I once had a photograph taken of David being hanged on a tree", which he sends to the child's mother: "You can't think of all the subtle ways of grieving her I have." Telegraph UK not sure what that all means🤷🏻♀️
It doesn't cost much to commission a statue and place it in a garden - also, in the white bird book, kennsington garden is the birthplace of the myth - the sparse garden is where many children walk through and play, and people love Peter Pan - it was a modest and perfect edition, adding to a magic about the place. People wanted him to elaborate on the character, to write peter pan, so it's always been for the people, so is the statue. I would love to see it.
Congratulations on a wonderfully interesting account of Jamie’s life and works. What a struggle he had! Thank you for this research and video production.
I have a question for you. If you have read the Lost Boys by Christina Henry, what did you think of it? So much of the lore has dark foundation that after reading that novel I can't seem to shake the idea of Peter being very ignorant and selfish, just like a child that doesn't understand the consequences of his actions. It only makes sense and I think that's what is scariest.
I loved this informative documentary. What a horrid, cruel "mother" he had! "...it's just me," caused me to burst into tears. I loved and encouraged my children EQUALLY. It is always the puritanical, legalistic & religious ones that are the cruelest.
Yes, I agree. I think it was his dead brother who was the boy who never grew up. That brother's image hovered over them, magically mesmerising his mother, never growing old, slightly mischievous because Barrie could never successfully compete with him for his mother's attention ... so J.M. Barrie became the boy who never grew up, too. He never sexually matured. Women felt too uneasy about him to be attracted to him and he couldn't relax enough with them to respond sexually to them. Poor man ... but he was brave and kept trying to make something of his life.
Where are your statistics? We might hope for more from people who say they follow the God of Love, but just like Stalin and Hitler destroyed millions more than any "religious wars" ever did, I'm sure that non-religious, non-legalistic parents have been equally or even more cruel.
@@mosart7025 I agree, Mosart. I think people who didn't experience love when they were growing up are the ones most likely to become harsh parents, regardless of whether they were religious or not. However some parents who got no love as children, nevertheless can become caring, encouraging parents.
What a hellish string of personal tragedies. From J.M. Barrie's mother Margaret who had to act as a mother to her own family starting at the age of only 8 years old, to the entire Barrie family with all their early childhood deaths and emotional suffering, J.M.'s wife Mary Ansell stuck in a chaste marriage for all those years, and of course the entire Llewelyn Davies family and all the death and depression they suffered... not to mention the sketchy way J.M. Barrie worked his way into the Llewelyn Davies' lives, and the quite possibly illegal way he took charge of the boys after their mother's death... this was a one hell of a depressing documentary about a complicated and fascinating subject.
@@swymaj02UA-cam hides my (long answer) comments. I think I should write again. search on the internet The story that actually happened is long and it's best if you know the whole thing warn(As he grows up, he becomes toxic and creepy and he should not be near children because of his mess and his obsession It affects those children )(I don't want to type it….it just so fuck up) after knowing about *the letter* it terrifying me and you will too (and fuck there are more then just that letter that creepy)…. I still wish I forgot about it🥲….kill me
I gotta say that Conan Doyle being the only good cricketer is just like Tom Grennan being the only good footballer in last years Soccer Aid. Not trying to attack ppl, in case ur wondering.
I gotta be honest, I had seen most movie versions of Peter Pan growing up, the 1953 Disney version being my favorite, but when I finally read the book originally title Peter and Wendy, I was sadly disappointed and I went in with an open mind. Normally, the book is better, but having read it three times, I feel that the movie versions told the story better, minus the 1924 silent movie version (I didn't bother with the the 2023 Disney remake). Here's why I feel that way: Many times when I was reading it, I honestly felt like I was reading a first draft--that's something ideally a reader should never feel when reading a finished work. In addition, Captain Hook and the pirates not only felt like an afterthought, they were an afterthought from a behind-the-scenes standpoint. It also felt like Barrie did a lot telling instead of showing--the rule is "show, don't tell", not the other way around. Furthermore, with one stark line in the prose, he turns Peter Pan from a cocky brat with some redeeming qualities into a sleazy cult leader with the memory of Dory from Finding Nemo. If that's the intent, so be it, but Wendy never makes that discovery for herself, so what was the point of including that one throwaway line to begin with? Even non-horror stories would take advantage of that. If Wendy did learn that, I highly doubt she would look back on Neverland with fondness like you would a good summer camp, and she wouldn't let her daughter and granddaughter go there either. Who would? I'm not expecting realism in a story like this, but a little credibility would've benefited the story immensely. Even back then it feels like a stranger danger PSA that misses the mark. I sure as hell didn't have these kind of issues when I read Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, and even The Chronicles of Narnia. Out of those four isekai stories, I rank Peter Pan dead last. J.M. Barrie can be thanked for that initial spark, but as I said before, I feel that most of the movie versions told the story better.
Barrie provided far more than a spark, my friend. Read the 1904 theater script of ‘Peter Pan, or the Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Up ‘ (slightly revised in later years, but the play that made Peter famous years before Barrie wrote the novel). It’s available from Project Gutenberg/Australia and includes a remarkable preface by Barrie.
At least the narrator was honest at the outset about Mr J M BARRY & his predilection for the company of children. One of my most treasured possessions was " Peter Pan ". As an undergrad. I was somewhat disheartened to learn about this behaviour. I can only hope he chose to refrain & channelled his energy into erecting statues and writing wonderful stories.
@@tracesprite6078 "I hope that he refrained from exploiting the children sexually." Since, as you say, there is no indication in the video that he harmed them in any way - and one of those children as an adult pointedly states that he didn't - why would you even be 'hoping' that he "refrained", etc.? Even the word "refrained" suggests that he was sorely tempted, but, we hope, held himself back. Look, all I know about Barrie is what's in this doc; maybe he was a monster, but I don't see the need for these insinuations of the most vile behaviour when there is no evidence for it, here at least.
Your Jane Austen doc was fabulous. I'm not sure if it's that Barrie's life story isn't interesting, it's not very well written or that the narration is monotonous and lacklustre but whatever the reason i didn't even get a third of the way through. Sorry but it's just too dull 😴
@@AuthorDocumentaries I thought it was well done - although I thought you should have jumped into the bio. earlier - all the talk about the statue and other business at the beginning does not really work the way it's supposed to, to my mind.
I totally agree. I was in Kirriemuir a few days ago, not in Kirriemare, and I was on the Breech('ch', like the 'ch' of loch) Road and it's Thrums not Thurms. It shows an ignorance and laziness. I'm not even Scottish.
Good solid information, sadly peppered with a sexist bias throughout. ie 'died an old made at 54.' and endless unsympathetic comments of the mother. The repeated use of the word 'ladies' for women...etc .And not least, omitting to conclude that the use of the phrase 'He's a Peter Pan' is a derogatory term for... he's immature and irresponsible.
"And not least, omitting to conclude that the use of the phrase 'He's a Peter Pan' is a derogatory term for... he's immature and irresponsible." How does that indicate a "sexist bias"?
Starting this film with an advertisement for vasectomies is just the same as punching your viewers in the testicles. The whole idea behind J.M. Barrie and Peter Pan was to inject some faith into childrearing. Add a little mystery too, and some hope for a better future. I guess you missed the thesis in the Peter Pan story, or perhaps it's more likely you never even watched the Peter Pan movie.
Another enjoyable documentary , sensitively approached and interesting. Thank you.
When The Little White Bird was published in 1902, it was hailed by The Times Literary Supplement as "an exquisite piece of work" and "one of the most charming books ever written". The same review also declared, "If a book exists which contains more knowledge and more love of children, we do not know it." But a modern reader might feel less straightforwardly celebratory. Take, for example, the following passage, when the narrator describes his night alone with the child: "David and I had a tremendous adventure. It was this - he passed the night with me... I took [his boots] off with all the coolness of an old hand, and then I placed him on my knee, and removed his blouse. This was a delightful experience, but I think I remained wonderfully calm until I came somewhat too suddenly to his little braces, which agitated me profoundly... I cannot proceed in public with the disrobing of David."
After some time, David climbs into bed with the narrator. "For the rest of the night he lay on me and across me, and sometimes his feet were at the bottom of the bed and sometimes on the pillow, but he always retained possession of my finger..." Meanwhile, the adult lies awake, thinking of "this little boy, who in the midst of his play while I undressed him, had suddenly buried his head on my knee" and of his "dripping little form in the bath, and how when I essayed to catch him he had slipped from my arms like a trout."😅Gerald du Maurier's biographer, James Harding, was made decidedly uncomfortable by this scene, though veered away from any accusation of impropriety. "One needs a tough stomach to put up with Barrie in this mood," he wrote, in 1989. "No writer today would publish such an account without inviting accusations of paedophilia or worse. Yet Barrie, in the manner of Lewis Carroll and his nude photographs of little girls, was consciously innocent. His snapshots of the tiny lads [the Llewelyn Davies boys] frolicking bare-bottomed on the beach, the cowboy and Indian adventures he made up for them... were a means to enjoy the pleasures of fatherhood with none of the pains. In Sylvia du Maurier's children he discovered the ideal outlet for the frustrations which obsessed him."
Dudgeon is unconvinced by Harding's phrasing - "How did he know that Barrie's innocence was conscious?" - but there is still no evidence to settle the argument. Having read Dudgeon's book, and re-read Birkin's, and then returned to my own research notes from the du Maurier archive and elsewhere, I remain just as uncertain about JM Barrie, whose chief aim seemed to be not to corrupt boys into adult desire, but for himself to rejoin them in the innocence of eternal boyhood, a Neverland where children fly away from their mothers and no one need grow old.
True, there are letters of his that are odd, such as the one he wrote to Michael on the eve of his eighth birthday, in June 1908: "I wish I could be with you and your candles. You can look on me as one of your candles, the one that burns badly - the greasy one that is bent in the middle. But still, hurray, I am Michael's candle. I wish I could see you putting on the redskin's clothes for the first time... Dear Michael, I am very fond of you, but don't tell anybody."This is one of the few letters that have survived - Peter Llewelyn Davies destroyed nearly all of Barrie's vast correspondence with Michael in the melancholic period before he killed himself by diving under a Tube train at Sloane Square station. ("They were too much," was his only comment on the letters between Barrie and Michael.)
Elsewhere, there are moments when Barrie seems to display an unsettling streak of casual sadism (not dissimilar to Peter Pan, whose capacity for cruelty was eradicated in the Disney version). For example, in The Little White Bird, the narrator declares, "I once had a photograph taken of David being hanged on a tree", which he sends to the child's mother: "You can't think of all the subtle ways of grieving her I have."
Telegraph UK
not sure what that all means🤷🏻♀️
It doesn't cost much to commission a statue and place it in a garden - also, in the white bird book, kennsington garden is the birthplace of the myth - the sparse garden is where many children walk through and play, and people love Peter Pan - it was a modest and perfect edition, adding to a magic about the place. People wanted him to elaborate on the character, to write peter pan, so it's always been for the people, so is the statue. I would love to see it.
I would never call it a "sparse garden".
Agree.
@@tootles444 thanks kindly
Congratulations on a wonderfully interesting account of Jamie’s life and works. What a struggle he had! Thank you for this research and video production.
To live and die will be an awfully big adventure. Thank you for making this video.
Tender, informative and of course, enchanting. Thank you.
You're much welcome
This was very well done. I have read several biographies of Barrie, and there was still information in this film that I did not know.
I have a question for you.
If you have read the Lost Boys by Christina Henry, what did you think of it?
So much of the lore has dark foundation that after reading that novel I can't seem to shake the idea of Peter being very ignorant and selfish, just like a child that doesn't understand the consequences of his actions.
It only makes sense and I think that's what is scariest.
Thank you so much. That was lovely and well done.
I just subscribed to your channel! Thank you for this!
Perfectly done!
Love this. ❤️
I loved this informative documentary. What a horrid, cruel "mother" he had! "...it's just me," caused me to burst into tears. I loved and encouraged my children EQUALLY. It is always the puritanical, legalistic & religious ones that are the cruelest.
Yes, I agree. I think it was his dead brother who was the boy who never grew up. That brother's image hovered over them, magically mesmerising his mother, never growing old, slightly mischievous because Barrie could never successfully compete with him for his mother's attention ... so J.M. Barrie became the boy who never grew up, too. He never sexually matured. Women felt too uneasy about him to be attracted to him and he couldn't relax enough with them to respond sexually to them. Poor man ... but he was brave and kept trying to make something of his life.
Where are your statistics? We might hope for more from people who say they follow the God of Love, but just like Stalin and Hitler destroyed millions more than any "religious wars" ever did, I'm sure that non-religious, non-legalistic parents have been equally or even more cruel.
@@mosart7025 I agree, Mosart. I think people who didn't experience love when they were growing up are the ones most likely to become harsh parents, regardless of whether they were religious or not. However some parents who got no love as children, nevertheless can become caring, encouraging parents.
Aaron Jones did a fantastic enjoyable job on J. M. Barrie's documentary. Could you do one of my favorite authors O. Henry? Thanks!!!
This is an instance wherein I'm introduced to a new author.
Right on 👍
@@AuthorDocumentaries Thank you so much for making this available to us. Much appreciated!
What a hellish string of personal tragedies.
From J.M. Barrie's mother Margaret who had to act as a mother to her own family starting at the age of only 8 years old, to the entire Barrie family with all their early childhood deaths and emotional suffering, J.M.'s wife Mary Ansell stuck in a chaste marriage for all those years, and of course the entire Llewelyn Davies family and all the death and depression they suffered... not to mention the sketchy way J.M. Barrie worked his way into the Llewelyn Davies' lives, and the quite possibly illegal way he took charge of the boys after their mother's death... this was a one hell of a depressing documentary about a complicated and fascinating subject.
What he did sounds illegal.
Yes, it is quite anguishing to read of people whose whole lives seemed blighted.
@@swymaj02short answer He forged documents.
The person the children's parents trust to take care of their children is their aunt.
@@swymaj02UA-cam hides my (long answer) comments. I think I should write again.
search on the internet The story that actually happened is long and it's best if you know the whole thing
warn(As he grows up, he becomes toxic and creepy and he should not be near children because of his mess and his obsession It affects those children )(I don't want to type it….it just so fuck up)
after knowing about *the letter* it terrifying me and you will too (and fuck there are more then just that letter that creepy)….
I still wish I forgot about it🥲….kill me
@@swymaj02 He had actual money, Lot of kids would have seen orphanage.
So interesting.
I gotta say that Conan Doyle being the only good cricketer is just like Tom Grennan being the only good footballer in last years Soccer Aid. Not trying to attack ppl, in case ur wondering.
I gotta be honest, I had seen most movie versions of Peter Pan growing up, the 1953 Disney version being my favorite, but when I finally read the book originally title Peter and Wendy, I was sadly disappointed and I went in with an open mind. Normally, the book is better, but having read it three times, I feel that the movie versions told the story better, minus the 1924 silent movie version (I didn't bother with the the 2023 Disney remake). Here's why I feel that way: Many times when I was reading it, I honestly felt like I was reading a first draft--that's something ideally a reader should never feel when reading a finished work. In addition, Captain Hook and the pirates not only felt like an afterthought, they were an afterthought from a behind-the-scenes standpoint. It also felt like Barrie did a lot telling instead of showing--the rule is "show, don't tell", not the other way around. Furthermore, with one stark line in the prose, he turns Peter Pan from a cocky brat with some redeeming qualities into a sleazy cult leader with the memory of Dory from Finding Nemo. If that's the intent, so be it, but Wendy never makes that discovery for herself, so what was the point of including that one throwaway line to begin with? Even non-horror stories would take advantage of that. If Wendy did learn that, I highly doubt she would look back on Neverland with fondness like you would a good summer camp, and she wouldn't let her daughter and granddaughter go there either. Who would? I'm not expecting realism in a story like this, but a little credibility would've benefited the story immensely. Even back then it feels like a stranger danger PSA that misses the mark. I sure as hell didn't have these kind of issues when I read Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, and even The Chronicles of Narnia. Out of those four isekai stories, I rank Peter Pan dead last. J.M. Barrie can be thanked for that initial spark, but as I said before, I feel that most of the movie versions told the story better.
Barrie provided far more than a spark, my friend. Read the 1904 theater script of ‘Peter Pan, or the Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Up ‘ (slightly revised in later years, but the play that made Peter famous years before Barrie wrote the novel). It’s available from Project Gutenberg/Australia and includes a remarkable preface by Barrie.
@@jackatherton0111 I wasn't talking about the play, I was talking about the book Barrie wrote in 1911.
@@KTChamberlain 😂agreed!
Interesting
I feel as though there were some things left out.
At least the narrator was honest at the outset about Mr J M BARRY & his predilection for the company of children.
One of my most treasured possessions was " Peter Pan ". As an undergrad. I was somewhat disheartened to learn about this behaviour. I can only hope he chose to refrain & channelled his energy into erecting statues and writing wonderful stories.
Why 'disheartened'? What is disheartening about 'his predilection for the company of children'? Oh - and 'chose to refrain' ... from what?
@@hilariousname6826 I hope that he refrained from exploiting the children sexually. The video suggests that he didn't harm them in that way.
@@tracesprite6078 "I hope that he refrained from exploiting the children sexually." Since, as you say, there is no indication in the video that he harmed them in any way - and one of those children as an adult pointedly states that he didn't - why would you even be 'hoping' that he "refrained", etc.? Even the word "refrained" suggests that he was sorely tempted, but, we hope, held himself back. Look, all I know about Barrie is what's in this doc; maybe he was a monster, but I don't see the need for these insinuations of the most vile behaviour when there is no evidence for it, here at least.
@@hilariousname6826 stop burying your head in the ground. He was creepy with them, let's hope he wasn't outright predatory to them.
@@hilariousname6826 they lie to you He is terrifying around children
He was obsessed and obsessed with the kid that he *forged documents to get*
Thrums not Thurms.
TS 31:40 disease possibility (this note is for my own use) 🤔 TS 41:38 Cricket Players
🎂Sir James Matthew Barrie 05-09-2022
Your Jane Austen doc was fabulous.
I'm not sure if it's that Barrie's life story isn't interesting, it's not very well written or that the narration is monotonous and lacklustre but whatever the reason i didn't even get a third of the way through.
Sorry but it's just too dull 😴
That's okay. Some will be hit or miss for people. I will say there were a lot of long pauses in this one.
@@AuthorDocumentaries I thought it was well done - although I thought you should have jumped into the bio. earlier - all the talk about the statue and other business at the beginning does not really work the way it's supposed to, to my mind.
The narrator mispronounced several words. One example: the word "ancestral" becomes "ancestrial". Why wasn't someone else chosen?
Could it be an accent?
I totally agree. I was in Kirriemuir a few days ago, not in Kirriemare, and I was on the Breech('ch', like the 'ch' of loch) Road and it's Thrums not Thurms. It shows an ignorance and laziness. I'm not even Scottish.
the voice of the commentator is penible and I don't like the moderns images .
Very good. Shame about the terrible Scottish accent 😀
Good solid information, sadly peppered with a sexist bias throughout. ie 'died an old made at 54.' and endless unsympathetic comments of the mother. The repeated use of the word 'ladies' for women...etc .And not least, omitting to conclude that the use of the phrase 'He's a Peter Pan' is a derogatory term for... he's immature and irresponsible.
"And not least, omitting to conclude that the use of the phrase 'He's a Peter Pan' is a derogatory term for... he's immature and irresponsible." How does that indicate a "sexist bias"?
@@hilariousname6826 _"How does that indicate a "sexist bias"?"_ - It doesn't. But the comment itself doesn't seem to be from an unbiased person.
Starting this film with an advertisement for vasectomies is just the same as punching your viewers in the testicles. The whole idea behind J.M. Barrie and Peter Pan was to inject some faith into childrearing. Add a little mystery too, and some hope for a better future. I guess you missed the thesis in the Peter Pan story, or perhaps it's more likely you never even watched the Peter Pan movie.
I don't believe the uploader of the video is consulted in any way about what ads youtube chooses to append to their video.
What a disrespectful and derogatory term old maid is. Please choose your words with a little more care