From time to time there is controversy about the allege
political sig. nificance of Alice in Wonderland. A prize of £5 was offered for a lean to the Press protesting against the' political implications of one of the following : Peter. Pan, Little Lord Fauntleroy, The Treasure Seekers, The Wizard of Oz, Little Women or The Adventures of Rupert the Chick.
By far the most suspect of these works of propaganda is Peter Pan. Fauntleroy is well behind as the runner-up, and I am sorry to say that the Earl of Dorincourt's superficial right-wing tendencies effectively disguised what I have always felt to be Marxist sympathies—vide the lowering of an iron curtain between himself (plus satellite) and his
, American daughter-in-law.
Both Peter Pan and Captain Hook were, curiously enough, iden- tified with A. J. Balfour, and Nana with all manner of figures from " T.U.C. moderates " to Churchill. Generally speaking, competitors were agreed that the Barrie book was Soviet propaganda, though Frances Collingwood, as Secretary of the No Camps Group, struck an original note in deploring its pan-Butlin partiality. I particularly liked Terence Kelly's " Can we imagine children reading about a Never Never Land ' cram full of flowers and kisses and fairy ladies ' enjoying the beauty of rising production figures or resisting the fascinating Peter Pan—a youth of obviously Hitlerian tendencies ?"
H. V. T. Burton, whose entry was excellent but well over the word limit, saw Fauntleroy as Bevan, winning over by his insidious charm " the Earl of Error (Conservative England). Rupert was largely neglected, but the Rev. Ronald Born is worth quoting : " On the front page Rupert is seen in the company of Father Time. What does Father Time carry ? A sickle I Exactly a year later . . . Rupert is seen driving a nail into a wall. What is he hammering it in with A hammer 1"
R. Kennard Davis's entry is outstandingly the best, and I recommend a first prize of £3, the remaining £2 to be shared by Mrs. E. M. Water- house and Margaret Usborne (only room to print the first, I fear).
FIRST PRIZE , To the Editor of Pravda.
Comrade,—I must point out that the recently produced play for Young Communists, Piotr Pansky, while preserving in the main a correct Marxist-Leninist trend, exhibits dangerous deviationist errors.
The play satirises the parasitic life of degenerate bourgeois society. The position of the domestic slave is finely symbolised by representing her as a dog. The neglected children of the regime seek refuge in the " Never Never Land "—obviously the U.S.S.R. On the way they have to fight the capitalist pirates, whose leader (doubtless intended for Churchill) meets a well-merited fate between the jaws of a crocodile. All this is admirable : but the hero, Piotr, who represents Eternal Soviet Youth, shows regrettable signs of individualistic mentality. Again, the fugitives are aided by a " fairy," Katinka, standing no doubt for Dialectical Materialism, in whom the atklience are asked to avow belief. Such superstitious anthropomorphism is reactionary ; a portrait of our beloved Generalissimo should be substituted. Finally, the reconciliatory ending is utterly inconsistent with proletarian ideology. Marxist realism demands that Piotr should lead the heroic forces of " Never Never Land " to blast the Darling home with an atom
bomb.—Yours fraternally, MOLOTOFF.
SECOND PRIZE
Sir,—I recently bought The Treasure Seekers, recommended in your columns. It was lucky I glanced through this before giving it to my daughter, for I found it packed with subversive ideas. In the back- ground of the story is a widower who has lost money in business. Instead of drawing the obvious moral of the results of the mismanage- ment of private enterprise, the . whole tone is of sympathy for the capitalist. His children, instead of studying during the holidays to fit themselves for work in State industry, go about " seeking treasure "- i.e. unearned increment. True, one of the boys tries to sell his verses to a newspaper : even then the editor, instead of explaining kindly that he is snatching work from union members, actually encourages him in his blackleg work. The end of this book is even more disgraceful : a " rich uncle " turns up (from India, so the idea is not too fart-ical) and provides a home for the entire family.
It is nothing less than a 'crime to alloy young people to be perverted by such a picture of false values, and the matter will not stop here.
Previous page
