Wildwood
is a new children's book written by Colin Meloy (of the Portland band The Decemberists) and lavishly illustrated by Carson Ellis, his wife and a very talented artist. It's 541 pages and has a bit of violence in it, so it's intended for older kids. This book has created quite a stir in Portland, because it's been received as an homage to our city. Much of the setting is based on Forest Park. Forest Park is the nation's largest forested park in city limits, yet the park itself remains enigmatic and less accessible than it should be. There is not a single all inclusive trail map of Forest Park, there are no fancy visitor centers, and signage for trailheads and trails are hit-or-miss. It's easy to feel completely on your own exploring it. (If you are interested in getting to know Forest Park, the book One City's Wilderness: Portland's Forest Park, 3rd edition
is a great resource.) In "Wildwood", Forest Park is re-imagined as the "Impassible Wilderness", a place no outsider dares to tread. It's a good story, well worth reading. The illustrations are exquisite. But there were some things that gave me pause. While the book is filled to the brim, like Portland itself, with quirky characters, the story maintains a fairly serious tone. So it kind of hit a sour note for me when it's revealed that the villain's evil plot involves using ivy to take over the forest and strangle every living thing. Invasives are often cited as the number one threat to our local natural areas, and English ivy is one of the worst. In Portland, there is a constant call for volunteers to join ivy removal teams. So imagining the invasive ivy as the ultimate evil, a force out to strangle everyone, seemed almost to be sarcastically poking fun at conservationists.
The other thing which over and over served as a distraction to my ability to enjoy this story is the uncanny resemblance it bears to another story, Samuel Blink and the Forbidden Forest
. Published four years earlier, this book is, in my opinion, not as well written as "Wildwood"', although still a good story. "Samuel Blink" throws in a lot of quirky details about Norway, and "Wildwood" throws in a lot of quirky details about Portland. In both stories, a boy and a girl venture deep into forests that all the townspeople know are absolutely forbidden and dangerous, forests that are guarded by magic from outsiders. The forests turn out to be inhabited by communities of magical, talking creatures. In both cases, the mission is to rescue a sibling. The boy and girl quickly become separated, and have separate adventures, not to be reunited until the very end. In one book, the girl has the remarkable experience of flying, borne by a bird. In the other, the girl becomes a bird. In both stories, the forests have a tree of enormous stature, standing out from all the others, with mysterious magical powers. The forests have evil rulers with sinister plots, seeking to sacrifice the forest's creatures while maintaining that it's all for the common good. Both are people who started out as regular folks, but through terrible pain and loss they have become evildoers. And of course in the end the children must confront the evildoers face to face. And a tree reaches down and grabs someone.
Of course, the concept of a forbidden forest is certainly an ancient one. The story of Hansel and Gretel comes to mind right away, but there are many more. And given that bookstores and library shelves have been bulging with "kids going to wizarding school" stories for many years now with nary a plagiarism lawsuit from J.K. Rowling in sight, I am positive the connections between these two books are far too weak to draw any conclusions of deliberate imitation. I think they both explore some of the same storytelling conventions. They both do result in very readable adventures. Reading other books with similar themes probably wouldn't ruin the story of "Wildwood" for most kids. But I think if you are a writer and you choose to explore literary themes that have been explored many times before, if you do not do something really new with them, your story isn't all that it could be. And while setting the story in Portland does make it especially meaningful to Portlanders, who pick up on the many local references, this isn't what I'm talking about. I think it's a good story that deserves to be read, but I concluded that it doesn't cover much new ground.
. Published four years earlier, this book is, in my opinion, not as well written as "Wildwood"', although still a good story. "Samuel Blink" throws in a lot of quirky details about Norway, and "Wildwood" throws in a lot of quirky details about Portland. In both stories, a boy and a girl venture deep into forests that all the townspeople know are absolutely forbidden and dangerous, forests that are guarded by magic from outsiders. The forests turn out to be inhabited by communities of magical, talking creatures. In both cases, the mission is to rescue a sibling. The boy and girl quickly become separated, and have separate adventures, not to be reunited until the very end. In one book, the girl has the remarkable experience of flying, borne by a bird. In the other, the girl becomes a bird. In both stories, the forests have a tree of enormous stature, standing out from all the others, with mysterious magical powers. The forests have evil rulers with sinister plots, seeking to sacrifice the forest's creatures while maintaining that it's all for the common good. Both are people who started out as regular folks, but through terrible pain and loss they have become evildoers. And of course in the end the children must confront the evildoers face to face. And a tree reaches down and grabs someone. Of course, the concept of a forbidden forest is certainly an ancient one. The story of Hansel and Gretel comes to mind right away, but there are many more. And given that bookstores and library shelves have been bulging with "kids going to wizarding school" stories for many years now with nary a plagiarism lawsuit from J.K. Rowling in sight, I am positive the connections between these two books are far too weak to draw any conclusions of deliberate imitation. I think they both explore some of the same storytelling conventions. They both do result in very readable adventures. Reading other books with similar themes probably wouldn't ruin the story of "Wildwood" for most kids. But I think if you are a writer and you choose to explore literary themes that have been explored many times before, if you do not do something really new with them, your story isn't all that it could be. And while setting the story in Portland does make it especially meaningful to Portlanders, who pick up on the many local references, this isn't what I'm talking about. I think it's a good story that deserves to be read, but I concluded that it doesn't cover much new ground.
Comments