Scan barcode
crankylibrarian's review against another edition
3.0
I first read 101 Dalmatians as a 9 year old on a European bus tour, and its canny insights into midcentury British culture (notably dog worship) stuck with me. Discovering its surreal sequel, The Starlight Barking 50 years later was a bit of a shock, since it questions the assumptions of the original. In Smith's original conception, dogs see humans as their "pets", gently humoring them in their delusion of being in charge. The sequel abruptly reverses course, pointing out that it is the dogs who are deluded, and offering them an escape to a world where they would truly be in control of their own destinies.
This is a bit of a shocker, and made me take a new look at 101 Dalmatians . At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I began to see darker elements in this wholesome story of loving canines and there beloved humans. Though the Dearlys (Darlings in the movie) are devoted and trustworthy "pets"; the heartbreaking story of Perdita, forcibly separated from her mate and puppies, resembles a slave narrative. While Pongo assures Missis that the Dearlys will never sell their own puppies, it's clear that the dogs have absolutely no control here and are dependent on on the goodwill of these "kind masters" to keep their children from being sold away from them.
Even more disturbing are the novel's evocations of the Holocaust. Pongo and Missis struggle valiantly to get the puppies to safety, escorted from safe house to safe house by an underground canine resistance network, eventually disguising themselves to escape detection by brutal killers. The callousness of Cruella and her henchmen towards nonhuman children (Cruella also routinely drowns kittens) is about as poignant an indictment of Nazism as I've ever seen in a children's book. Cruella may be the epitome of evil, yet her assumption that her dogskin coat will only be a problem "until people forget abut the Dealry's pups" suggests the overall human indifference to animal suffering.
This is a bit of a shocker, and made me take a new look at 101 Dalmatians . At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I began to see darker elements in this wholesome story of loving canines and there beloved humans. Though the Dearlys (Darlings in the movie) are devoted and trustworthy "pets"; the heartbreaking story of Perdita, forcibly separated from her mate and puppies, resembles a slave narrative. While Pongo assures Missis that the Dearlys will never sell their own puppies, it's clear that the dogs have absolutely no control here and are dependent on on the goodwill of these "kind masters" to keep their children from being sold away from them.
Even more disturbing are the novel's evocations of the Holocaust. Pongo and Missis struggle valiantly to get the puppies to safety, escorted from safe house to safe house by an underground canine resistance network, eventually disguising themselves to escape detection by brutal killers. The callousness of Cruella and her henchmen towards nonhuman children (Cruella also routinely drowns kittens) is about as poignant an indictment of Nazism as I've ever seen in a children's book. Cruella may be the epitome of evil, yet her assumption that her dogskin coat will only be a problem "until people forget abut the Dealry's pups" suggests the overall human indifference to animal suffering.
wanderingstories's review against another edition
3.0
A wagging tail can mean so many things. Humans knows that it means a dog is pleased, but not what dog is saying about his pleasedness.
The Hundred and one Dalmatians is a cute and funny story about a Dalmatian family living with their "pets" Mr and Mrs Dearly. The two main characters Pongo and Missis (dalmatians) go on an 'adventure' across country to get their babies back while meeting many different dogs on their way (who help Pongo and Missis) and get into all kinds of messes and sorting them out again.
This was a sort of fun book, which I'm sure would many children love (and probably adults alike) and cherish everything within this story. But for me there were some bits and pieces that wasn't so sweet and I thought Missis was kinda whiny and not very bright while Pongo always seemed to know everything and being totally dominant of every situation (well there were exceptions but only very few).
The Hundred and one Dalmatians is a cute and funny story about a Dalmatian family living with their "pets" Mr and Mrs Dearly. The two main characters Pongo and Missis (dalmatians) go on an 'adventure' across country to get their babies back while meeting many different dogs on their way (who help Pongo and Missis) and get into all kinds of messes and sorting them out again.
This was a sort of fun book, which I'm sure would many children love (and probably adults alike) and cherish everything within this story. But for me there were some bits and pieces that wasn't so sweet and I thought Missis was kinda whiny and not very bright while Pongo always seemed to know everything and being totally dominant of every situation (well there were exceptions but only very few).
cyanide_latte's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
It's been a very long time since I read the original novel, but I wanted to take my partner through it and it was a nice change in pace from other things we've been reading.
I would like to begin by making it clear this book is very dated, and I have an older copy of it (so I can't speak to whether or not things were edited or removed from newer printings.) Simply be aware that the edition I own contains racist depictions of Romani people, racially insensitive moments here and there otherwise, and a very questionable depiction of the intellect of Missis Pongo. (Perdita here being a separate dog.) I'm sure there are other things I cannot immediately recall but the book is aged, and not all of it has aged very gracefully.
I think one of my biggest frustrations with this is that while the humor and comedic elements do have their place and they are important to the story, I often feel like they are overdone and tend to take away from the narrative as often as they add to it. I also often feel like Missis seems intentionally very one-note and falls into a trap of making Pongo look better, because her character development is fraught with repetitive behaviors from her, whereas Pongo doesn't really feel like he develops much at all if one really examines his character from start to finish. So I have my reservations about Missis constantly being handled in a way that makes her seem like a "silly woman" character to balance out Pongo's actual one-note character.
But otherwise, I do feel like the story is fun and a fairly rich children's book for what it is. I remember reading it as a child multiple times and being utterly taken with it, just as much as I was with Disney's film adaptation. I've always found the puppies to be a delight (and the few puppies we have named in here do have some good characterization) and I love the way the book depicts Cruella. She's one of the few villains who scared me as a kid and still gives me chills even now, and I feel like she could really be utilized well in a literary analysis of the concept of the monstrous feminine, both as she is in the book as well as all of her Disney film depictions.
This book has stuck with me for so long, and while I take it with a large grain of salt now that I'm an adult, it does still hold a special place in my heart.
(Also, I do recall Nanny Cook and Nanny Butler giving older lesbian vibes, but I'd forgotten about Jim and Bill! Something about them also gives gay vibes, and I'm absolutely loving that.)
I would like to begin by making it clear this book is very dated, and I have an older copy of it (so I can't speak to whether or not things were edited or removed from newer printings.) Simply be aware that the edition I own contains racist depictions of Romani people, racially insensitive moments here and there otherwise, and a very questionable depiction of the intellect of Missis Pongo. (Perdita here being a separate dog.) I'm sure there are other things I cannot immediately recall but the book is aged, and not all of it has aged very gracefully.
I think one of my biggest frustrations with this is that while the humor and comedic elements do have their place and they are important to the story, I often feel like they are overdone and tend to take away from the narrative as often as they add to it. I also often feel like Missis seems intentionally very one-note and falls into a trap of making Pongo look better, because her character development is fraught with repetitive behaviors from her, whereas Pongo doesn't really feel like he develops much at all if one really examines his character from start to finish. So I have my reservations about Missis constantly being handled in a way that makes her seem like a "silly woman" character to balance out Pongo's actual one-note character.
But otherwise, I do feel like the story is fun and a fairly rich children's book for what it is. I remember reading it as a child multiple times and being utterly taken with it, just as much as I was with Disney's film adaptation. I've always found the puppies to be a delight (and the few puppies we have named in here do have some good characterization) and I love the way the book depicts Cruella. She's one of the few villains who scared me as a kid and still gives me chills even now, and I feel like she could really be utilized well in a literary analysis of the concept of the monstrous feminine, both as she is in the book as well as all of her Disney film depictions.
This book has stuck with me for so long, and while I take it with a large grain of salt now that I'm an adult, it does still hold a special place in my heart.
(Also, I do recall Nanny Cook and Nanny Butler giving older lesbian vibes, but I'd forgotten about Jim and Bill! Something about them also gives gay vibes, and I'm absolutely loving that.)
bidpat's review against another edition
adventurous
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
melissa_keen's review against another edition
adventurous
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
3.75
A lovely children's book that is surprisingly close in details to the Disney cartoon film! I remember this being read to me as a child so I found it very sweet and nostalgic. There are some slightly darker bits that young children may not like.
Content Warnings
Minor: Animal cruelty
rosekk's review against another edition
4.0
The books morals were a bit old-fashioned (being a creation of the 50s, and aimed at children), but it was a fun story.
The illustrations in this edition were great as well.
The illustrations in this edition were great as well.
dichap's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
funny
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
It's a bit dated
Content Warnings
Moderate: Sexism
Minor: Animal cruelty
mossiefae's review against another edition
adventurous
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
5.0
bedussey's review against another edition
hopeful
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
ciaraohara's review against another edition
2.0
I very much understand why Disney made a lot of the changes for the film. Unfortunately I do prefer the film! And I did find it very confusing trying to remember that in the novel Perdita is effectively just a nanny dog and Pongo’s partner is called Missis. Probably just because I’ve seen the film too many times. The novel is still amusing and I love the whole concept of dogs seeing humans as pets, but perhaps this one just wasn’t for me.