To echo many of my classmates, I did not remember much of the plot that occurs in Mary Poppins, much less in Mary Poppins Comes Back. The familiar, jovial tunes such as Spoonful of Sugar and Let’s Go Fly a Kite were ingrained in my head since youth, but other than that I had a very limited recollection of the plot. Perhaps I have a tendency to romanticize the past, but the Mary Poppins from P.L. Travers’s novels bore little resemblance to the cheerful, magical Poppins that I fondly remembered. In her place is, instead, a terse, vain, rude, strange, yet magical woman. Stylistically the novel reminded me of the Harry Potter series, as discussed in class, with a slew of unexplainable characters, the emphasis on the house number, and the British tone. Additionally, it reminded me of The Phantom Tollbooth and Alice in Wonderland, where things “magically” happen with no explanation, such as Mr. Turvy’s confusing bad day and the floating tea party at Mary Poppins’ uncle's house. Broadly speaking, I enjoyed the two novels immensely, more than I enjoyed either Snow White the film or the movie, although they did wander from how my memory preserved them.
To adapt a novel into a film is a daunting task, as characters in text can be molded by the readers, each creating their own description and vision of each character. However, as soon as the text is translated into film, the character becomes rigid, becoming the actor that plays the role. Julie Andrews is so lovely and beautiful it is nearly impossible to dislike her. However, the same cannot be said for the Mary Poppins that exists within the text. If she existed in the age of social media, her platforms would be chock full of selfies and highly-edited photos that scream, “look at me”! I did not know it was possible to spend time deciding which arm to carry your bag, so it is a good thing that Mary Poppins does! Her vanity is not the only thing that makes her unlovable. She never answers any of the children’s questions and claims that all of the inextricable things that seem to happen exist only in the children’s imaginations. Additionally, whenever asked the question of, “how long she will stay”? She responds flippantly with either, “I’ll stay until the chain breaks” or “I will stay until the wind changes”. These things combined make for a more complex, but less saccharin, character, yet the Banks children are still infatuated with her and the running of the house comes to a halt when she leaves.
Perhaps this seemingly blind admiration from the Banks children is a reflection of Travers’ own childhood. As we discussed in class, her father died and her mother was absent, leaving an emptiness in her childhood. This manifests in the Banks’ children as they, too, do not seem to have the affection of their parents; thus when they get even a shred of attention, they relish it. Although Mary Poppins can be harsh and vain and all the other negative adjectives previously mentioned, she gives the children her undivided attention, unlike any of the other adults in their lives, and is always there to save the day, though she routinely denies doing it.
On the topic of adult to child relationships, Mary Poppins and Mary Poppins Comes Back put forth an interesting depiction of this complex dichotomy. In present society, adults are seen as having the ultimate authority, with children’s opinions often being discounted, with the excuse that they know little yet. However, Travers flips this notion on its head. The adults are irresponsible: Mr. Banks wanting to leave town on a ship as soon as trouble arose and Mrs. Banks being unable to do even the most simple of household tasks. Conversely, the children are able to take care of each other and handle tasks such as patching holes in their clothing.
In conclusion, Mary Poppins and Mary Poppins Comes Back was a welcome dose of magic in an otherwise dreary week of midterms.
No comments:
Post a Comment