Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland (1865) and Through the Looking Glass (1871) are among the most enduring works in the English language. In the decades following their publication, writers on both sides of the Atlantic produced no fewer than two hundred imitations, revisions, and parodies of Carroll's fantasies for children. Carolyn Sigler has gathered the most interesting and original of these responses to the Alice books, many of them long out of print.
Produced between 1869 and 1930, these works trace the extraordinarily creative, and often critical, response of diverse writers. These writers―male and female, radical and conservative―appropriated Carroll's structures, motifs, and themes in their Alice-inspired works in order to engage in larger cultural debates. Their stories range from Christina Rossetti's angry subversion of Alice's adventures, Speaking Likenesses (1874), to G.E. Farrow's witty fantasy adventure, The Wallypug of Why (1895), to Edward Hope's hilarious parody of social and political foibles, Alice in the Delighted States (1928). Anyone who has ever followed Alice down the rabbit hole will enjoy the adventures of her literary siblings in the wide Wonderland of the human imagination.
Liked "Amelia and the Dwarfs" - a classic fairies/brownies kind of story. Naughty kid falls into the world of dwarfs who reform her (though perhaps not on purpose?). E. Nesbit's "Justnowland" has crows teaching us ... socialist lessons, I guess.
This collection's useful Introduction explains the impact of Alice and the stories Carroll's book inspired. Three or four selections were enough for me; some were way too twee, too Victorian.
The title is a little misleading since many of the stories have no Alice, have no girl lead, and are related to the original stories only in that they are fantasy stories. Also, a number of the entries are only a chapter or a few chapters at most from a particular book so this is like a sampling of things. Mopsa the Fairy, 1869. Part of a book using a strong female lead. Amelia and the Dwarfs, 1870: It's a nice story although it is utterly unrelated to Alice. Speaking Likenesses, 1874: Heavily moralistic. Behind the White Brick, 1879. By the person that wrote A Secret Garden, this is a good story and has the feel of the original. She's talking to Santa Claus and he says 'And don't be too fond of flourishing your rights in people's faces-that's the worst of all, Miss Midget. Folks who make such a fuss about their rights turn them into wrongs sometimes.' Wanted-A King: 1890. A good story but not related to Alice. A New Alice in the Old Wonderland, 1895. It's okay. Justnow Land, 1912. A story supporting socialism. Good. Ernest, 1969. This has a male lead. From Nowhere to the North Pole, 1875. Another male lead. Down the Snow Stairs, 1887. One chapter only. Davy and the Goblin, 1885. One chapter. The Wallypug of Why, 1895. New Adventures of Alice, 1907. A girl finds a third Alice book in a room where books that were wished to be written can be found. Uncle Wiggily in Wonderland, 1916. David Blaize and the Blue Door, 1919. Quite boring. The Westminister Alice, 1900-1902. It's poking fun of the British government at the time. Clara in Blunderland, 1902. Also outdated. Alice and the Stork, 1915. Alice in the Delighted States, 1928. Overall it's sort of a disappointing book.
This book is made up almost entirely of Alice in Wonderland pastiches, some intentional and some accidental on the part of their authors. Yes, there are some stories which subvert the common Victorian children's literature tropes more than the Alice books already do, but not signficantly more. And there are a few political parodies towards the end, but, on the whole, it's a book of Victorian and Edwardian Alice pastiches, some more successful than others.
None, even the more successful ones, come anywhere close to the wit and style of the Alice books, which makes this anthology a disappointment to someone coming to try to read more books in that vein. Rather, it's simply fascinating as a study of Victorian literature, and the effect Lewis Carroll had on it. The sentimentality and didacticism can get simply overwhelming if one isn't prepared for them, and I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone without a particular interest in Victorian children's literature - it's too overwhelming to foist on the ususpecting.