Sir William Newzam Prior Nicholson was an English painter of still-life, landscape and portraits, also known for his work as a wood-engraver, illustrator, author of children's books and designer for the theatre.
Clever Bill is a toy soldier. When Mary is invited to go to her aunt's house, she packs her suitcase full of toys, but somehow Clever Bill is left out.
The simplest of stories, but somehow quite perfect and delightful.
I never could find a copy of this book at the library, but, happily, I found it as a YouTube Video. The woman who reads the story, it says in the caption, was a library teacher for 46 years, and she has a cockatoo who lived with her in her library. Here's the link if you'd like to listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqXl4...
This is like the Citizen Kane of picture-story books - one of the earliest. I love toy soldiers and Clever Bill is steadfast and true. The story is very basic - and hand written (which I love) - the illustrations are lovely. I don't know why but this story chokes me up when I think about it. I originally rated it at four stars but have changed it to five as it has become my favorite picture/story book. It's just dear to me.
1001 Children's Books list Age group: 3+ Their list: 48/1001 Mine: 77/1001
Why they say you should read it? An influential artist who did a new look for illustration.
My kids thoughts? I admit, it gets harder to get the right set of audience if you read these category of books later. All my children are over 5 now and some of these books are targeted for smaller readers. That being said, some books are just timeless, such as this one. Although this wasn't our favorite as far as engaging, it's definitely good
I love the details of this title. We picked it up via the library request because it was on the list of a 1,001 books to read before growing up. This was a 1977 American printing, while this title was first published in 1926. I enjoyed the illustrations and the cursive print, it was unexpected and quite charming. I also enjoyed the to and from detail on the inside cover, imagine if more books had this feature. Love. I’m glad we read this, and learning the details about the author/illustrator.
How has this toy soldier gained sentience and a sense of direction enough to find the little girl who forgot to pack him up? Why is this girl not surprised by being saluted by a toy with artificial intelligence?
I'm so confused by the story, but at least the pictures are pretty. I wonder if Toy Story might have been inspired in some part by this.
I can see how this would have been such an influential book in the 1920s- the repetition would help with learning new words and the toys and items popular at the time would have made the story interesting for children. Plus, it’s a short story good for new readers.
I enjoyed this picturebook (1926) very much and can see how illustrators like Maurice Sendak have become influenced by William Nicholson's work. The story is a simple one of an abandoned toy trying to make its way back to its owner but the black framing, captions and lovely writing each add to the joy of the illustrations. I immediately saw how Nicholson encourages the reader to turn the page through not finishing sentences and understand that Sendak gives Nicholson a nod by using the very same technique in Where the Wild Things Are.
This book is old, but it has a timeless story. It is about a little girl packing her toys in preparation for at trip.
I like the asthetics of this book. The handprinting of this story didn't bother me and I think a child would appreciate novlety of seeing the handwriten script. I also really liked the fun interchange between the story and the illustration.
I read this as part of my goal to read all "1001 Children's Books You Must Read Before You Grow Up."
This was the first book I ever read; I'm not sure exactly how old I was, but no more than 4. The interaction between the words and the pictures swept me in, as did the pictures' action. Many people are complaining that hand-written script was used for the words.... all I can tell you is that at less than 5 years old, before going to kindergarten, I found myself able to read them. And I then read the book over and over, each time finding the ending satisfying.
This was an interesting little book to read. The illustrations were somewhat difficult to make out because of the printing technique used. The story was a cute one though but not one that children today would really be able to identify with. I can only recommend this book to folks who are interested in ephemera of early children's literature.