|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 9, 2008 7:23:32 GMT -5
Is it a better book? It's more constructed. More composed. But does it have the sheer genius of the first?
|
|
|
|
Post by rhiannon on Feb 9, 2008 7:36:23 GMT -5
I love both books, but I feel that Wonderland is streets ahead. Probably because of the fact he created it specifically for one little girl, it's very alive and immortal.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheep on Mar 13, 2008 5:15:26 GMT -5
Way better. No contest IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by bettyboop on Mar 13, 2008 5:20:42 GMT -5
I always prefered TLG for some reason. The Tweedles are the best thing isn it by a long way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joel on Mar 14, 2008 10:56:25 GMT -5
Looking-Glass is better unless you like Wonderland more, in which case Wonderland is better. That's logic. I think Looking-Glass is more of a book for the mind and Wonderland is a book for the heart. I can't choose between them. I just enjoy them both.
|
|
|
|
Post by lily42 on Mar 14, 2008 14:06:58 GMT -5
I think the characters in Wonderland are on the whole better, LG is better constructed as a book and "Jabberwocky" and "The Walrus and the Carpenter" are both great poems and by far the best known from the two books..
|
|
|
|
Post by mikeindex on Mar 14, 2008 16:06:46 GMT -5
Well done, little Joel. The best answer I've had yet.
I always had a slight preference for TLG - I think when I was young the more mathematical schema appealed to me. (Weird kid, I was). Nowadays it's the greater depth, particularly of the White Knight chapter.
I think his greatest work is the Snark, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by lillienchew on Mar 15, 2008 22:41:46 GMT -5
I prefer Wonderland because, as someone pointed out, it's a book for the heart rather than the mind. It was created for the entertainment of a personal friend, rather than written as a sequel of sorts. While I can appreciate the depth of TLG, it can at times seem over-thought, or feel as if it was written under some degree of pressure.
|
|
frockmaker
Rook
"I'm forty, unmarried and I work in musiclal theatre - you do the math"
Posts: 22
|
Post by frockmaker on Mar 17, 2008 4:18:15 GMT -5
Joel is right. I agree with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheshirecat51 on Mar 17, 2008 13:43:10 GMT -5
I like both Alice books. However, when I read both books to my 4th grade students, they preferred the first one.
|
|
|
|
Post by jules on Mar 17, 2008 14:41:05 GMT -5
I always liked TLG better as a child. I think I preferred the added structure. And I am fascinated at the thought it's a real chess game from the POV of a pawn! I know its authenticity is disputed (I had to read it up extensively for my uni work), but seriously - what an amazing idea!
|
|
|
|
Post by johntufail on Mar 17, 2008 20:37:01 GMT -5
Nicwe little debate here - but surely based on a false premise. It is impossible to compare AiW with LG in terms of which is 'better'. It is almost a mischievous question. The books are so different that they are literally beyond comparison. They are both works of genious and stand alone. I would also say that they have different requirements of the reader -so obviously different readers will have their own preferences. This does not mean that one book is better than the other - that would be to reduce both books to the sort of shallow comparisons we see in programmes like 'Pop Idol'
I love both books - but for different reasons. I cannot, with hand on heart say that one, in anyway, is better than the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntufail on Mar 17, 2008 20:58:15 GMT -5
Just to add to my last post. I think the best analogy I can think of in illustrating the futility of the question in logical terms is to ask the list to argue which is the 'best' colour, red or blue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joel on Mar 17, 2008 22:17:20 GMT -5
John,
You're joking, right? Blue is clearly better.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntufail on Mar 18, 2008 3:44:11 GMT -5
Only to a Republican!
|
|
