Scan barcode
willemstfrancis's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
inspiring
lighthearted
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
its a children book, a series of chapters about children trying to be rich again to make their father happy again after their mother passed away. its sweet but I read it all at once and it started repeating itself. my fault
krobart's review against another edition
4.0
See my review here:
https://whatmeread.wordpress.com/2016/08/03/day-946-the-story-of-the-treasure-seekers/
https://whatmeread.wordpress.com/2016/08/03/day-946-the-story-of-the-treasure-seekers/
anneofgreenplaces's review against another edition
4.0
Charming and hilarious, deft combination of children's logic with adult satire, really could have been written entirely for adults for the number of knowing winks and sophistication of the humor; the episodic nature of it makes it less substantial and it's not particularly deep, but still effective for its purpose. Really interesting window onto turn-of-the-century England, the technologies and business practices and current books and the sweets and toys on which kids liked to spend their half-sovereigns they found under floorbards, and dashes of imperialism here and there ; plus the landscape of London, which hasn't changed all that much (in terms of train stations and landmarks--they live by Blackheath).
Spoiler
(in the end their fortune is made by charming their Indian Uncle who lives in a mansion full of tiger skins and silks)kaatiba's review against another edition
I LOVE E. NESBIT. it is both my childhood, and my mom's childhood, and therefore great. you gotta read these books on a lazy summer day while in or under a tree, eating freezies tho. otherwise its kinda hard to keep going because these books are delightful nonsense, an experience and not an adventure. definitely The Worst when you gotta read it for school during january canadian winter hell because u have 0% patience.
_thelittleredrobin_'s review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
inspiring
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
mangademim's review against another edition
2.0
The characters are annoying, the writing is so confusing because you’re not supposed to know who the narrator is but then they tell you right in the beginning who it is and it’s been a nightmare tbh. However, these kids are so out of pocket and unhinged I found myself laughing out loud. The end is unexpectedly gay, maybe it’s wishful thinking, maybe it’s maybelline.
ehays84's review against another edition
4.0
(Update July 2023: read this to the kids and they loved it. I think on second reading, I enjoyed it a little more. An absolute classic of children's literature.)
I read 5 Children and It a long time ago because it inspired the Half Magic books that I grew up loving, but this is somehow only the second Nesbit book I have ever read. Of course, she is a giant in the field, and her impact is immense. You can see why in this book, although it is pretty dated in some ways. I think really the interesting thing is that we think of this book as sort of the grandmother of Rowling, etc., which of course it is, but the book makes clear that it is the progeny of other works written for younger audiences (like Kipling and Robert Louis Stevenson). So, the point is really that every book, even in a genre like this that we think of as quite recently created, is a part of a history of similar works in its genre that are all in conversation with each other.
As for the story itself, it is quite charming with its classic (it was already classic when this was written) story of children trying to restore their family's fortunes. The narrative style, written from the perspective of one of the children yet with plenty for older readers like myself to pick up on a chuckle over, is probably the main strength of this book. The children also get into plenty of hijinx in their quest for treasure, and this made me laugh out loud at some points, whether I happened to be reading out loud to my son at the time or not.
Now, for the dated parts: it does use the N word once, has a very stereotyped element with a Jewish character, and has some fun at the expense of "Indians" from North America vs. Actual India. This is not really a complaint I guess because every work is a product of its time, but it is still something to be aware of when praising or even mentioning this book. And I suppose you could say the book was somewhat progressive (which I know Nesbit was extremely progressive for her time being in the Fabian Society and all) in the way that the kind of fairy godmother character was Indian. My only other issue really is the poor eldest sister who gets such a bad rap despite doing so much it the absence of their deceased mother.
Anyway, I am hopeful about at least that part of the story improving over the course of this series, and I certainly will read them eventually. I believe I remember reading that C. S. Lewis would read The Wind in the Willows and the Bastable books when he was convalescing, and what was good enough for him should be more than good enough for me.
I read 5 Children and It a long time ago because it inspired the Half Magic books that I grew up loving, but this is somehow only the second Nesbit book I have ever read. Of course, she is a giant in the field, and her impact is immense. You can see why in this book, although it is pretty dated in some ways. I think really the interesting thing is that we think of this book as sort of the grandmother of Rowling, etc., which of course it is, but the book makes clear that it is the progeny of other works written for younger audiences (like Kipling and Robert Louis Stevenson). So, the point is really that every book, even in a genre like this that we think of as quite recently created, is a part of a history of similar works in its genre that are all in conversation with each other.
As for the story itself, it is quite charming with its classic (it was already classic when this was written) story of children trying to restore their family's fortunes. The narrative style, written from the perspective of one of the children yet with plenty for older readers like myself to pick up on a chuckle over, is probably the main strength of this book. The children also get into plenty of hijinx in their quest for treasure, and this made me laugh out loud at some points, whether I happened to be reading out loud to my son at the time or not.
Now, for the dated parts: it does use the N word once, has a very stereotyped element with a Jewish character, and has some fun at the expense of "Indians" from North America vs. Actual India. This is not really a complaint I guess because every work is a product of its time, but it is still something to be aware of when praising or even mentioning this book. And I suppose you could say the book was somewhat progressive (which I know Nesbit was extremely progressive for her time being in the Fabian Society and all) in the way that the kind of fairy godmother character was Indian. My only other issue really is the poor eldest sister who gets such a bad rap despite doing so much it the absence of their deceased mother.
Anyway, I am hopeful about at least that part of the story improving over the course of this series, and I certainly will read them eventually. I believe I remember reading that C. S. Lewis would read The Wind in the Willows and the Bastable books when he was convalescing, and what was good enough for him should be more than good enough for me.
tracey_stewart's review against another edition
5.0
E. Nesbit did not write for children.
Oh, yes, I quite enjoyed Five Children and It and The Phoenix and the Carpet and so on when I was a child; they're magnificent children's books. But listening to the Librivox recording of The Story of the Treasure-Seekers makes it very, very clear that the magnificent Ms. Nesbit had very firmly in mind the parents who would be reading the books aloud at bedtime. One beautiful example is a scene in which an adult abruptly rises from his seat and walks away to stand at the window with his back to the children in his office. The narrator says he believes the man was trying to conceal his emotions. Which is very true; the emotions, however, were not what the narrator thought. But the narrator, and any child reading or listening who has utter faith that all is just as the narrator perceives it, may believe one thing; the beautiful layer of comedy in the moment is reserved for the grown-ups.
Thank goodness we get something; in almost everything else the children are the fortunate ones.
The Bastable children possess an innocence which I'm very much afraid is impossible for even a twelve-year-old today. I've seen comments out there amongst the reviews about "imperialist overtones" and casual racism. Thing is, though, this was first published in 1899, and like it or not the world was a very different place then, and as I read it even what could be considered racist has an innocence that keeps it from being offensive. The children are given to understand that a visitor is an Indian, and – fed on adventure novels – assume Amerind, and ask him about beavers. He's India Indian, though, and has no information on such creatures. I honestly don't see how the children's honest excitement about and sympathy for someone from far away who describes himself as a poor broken-down fellow (which they also take literally) can be translated as racist, especially in 1899, and the one extremely unfortunate exclamation (the same as is found in L.M. Montgomery's A Tangled Web) was, sadly, a much more common epithet a hundred years ago.
These are the sort of fictional children that make me despair over today's kids: imaginative, well-read, well-spoken, thoughtful under the childish self-centeredness, and self-sufficient; they make today's kids (American, at least) look like Neanderthals. They're not perfect little angels – E. Nesbit was never stupid. But they do set a ludicrously high standard. Were kids really like that in the 19th century? Probably not. But my guess is they were closer to it.
Dora, the eldest (at 13 or 14?), comes off as a bit of a prig (though this is dealt with in a later chapter in such a way that it made me cry), desperately trying to maintain some moral high ground in a horde of siblings who think it would be absolutely smashing if there were still highwaymen on the heath – or, even better, if they could be highwaymen on the heath. Her objection is that it's "wrong" – as in illegal and people hang for such things, not so much as in the victims of the highwaymen didn't think it was quite so smashing. The again-innocent bloodthirstiness of the kids is remarkable, and just fun.
Oswald, the oldest boy at 12 and (you might guess, or you might not!) the narrator of the story, is very nearly as brave and honourable as he wants to appear, and very straightforward. It's rather lovely to see him reluctantly, realistically doing the right thing throughout the book, proceeding quietly and alone when practical – the older ones all do that, shouldering responsibility and striving to make things right when they go wrong. The fierce affection and loyalty among the siblings is, like their father's poverty and worries, never explicitly stated: it doesn't have to be. It is shown, not told.
The four younger children – Noel and Alice and H.O. and Dickie, ranging down to I believe six years old – are every one expected by their elder siblings to be just as sharp and responsible and willing and able to contribute as Oswald and Dora. Some allowances are made for their extreme youth, but for the most part they are equal partners in the treasure-seeking, receiving an equal share in any profits – though sometimes excused by protective siblings from punishments.
I don't remember E. Nesbit reducing me to tears in the past. This did. And, yes, I laughed out loud. I missed the magic element of some of the other books – but only at first. It didn't take long to realize that most of the magic of E. Nesbit's writing is actually in E. Nesbit's writing.
To that point: "No book is really worth reading at the age of ten which is not equally – and often far more – worth reading at the age of fifty and beyond." ~ C.S. Lewis. I look forward to reading E. Nesbit when I'm fifty, and beyond.
Oh, yes, I quite enjoyed Five Children and It and The Phoenix and the Carpet and so on when I was a child; they're magnificent children's books. But listening to the Librivox recording of The Story of the Treasure-Seekers makes it very, very clear that the magnificent Ms. Nesbit had very firmly in mind the parents who would be reading the books aloud at bedtime. One beautiful example is a scene in which an adult abruptly rises from his seat and walks away to stand at the window with his back to the children in his office. The narrator says he believes the man was trying to conceal his emotions. Which is very true; the emotions, however, were not what the narrator thought. But the narrator, and any child reading or listening who has utter faith that all is just as the narrator perceives it, may believe one thing; the beautiful layer of comedy in the moment is reserved for the grown-ups.
Thank goodness we get something; in almost everything else the children are the fortunate ones.
The Bastable children possess an innocence which I'm very much afraid is impossible for even a twelve-year-old today. I've seen comments out there amongst the reviews about "imperialist overtones" and casual racism. Thing is, though, this was first published in 1899, and like it or not the world was a very different place then, and as I read it even what could be considered racist has an innocence that keeps it from being offensive. The children are given to understand that a visitor is an Indian, and – fed on adventure novels – assume Amerind, and ask him about beavers. He's India Indian, though, and has no information on such creatures. I honestly don't see how the children's honest excitement about and sympathy for someone from far away who describes himself as a poor broken-down fellow (which they also take literally) can be translated as racist, especially in 1899, and the one extremely unfortunate exclamation (the same as is found in L.M. Montgomery's A Tangled Web) was, sadly, a much more common epithet a hundred years ago.
These are the sort of fictional children that make me despair over today's kids: imaginative, well-read, well-spoken, thoughtful under the childish self-centeredness, and self-sufficient; they make today's kids (American, at least) look like Neanderthals. They're not perfect little angels – E. Nesbit was never stupid. But they do set a ludicrously high standard. Were kids really like that in the 19th century? Probably not. But my guess is they were closer to it.
Dora, the eldest (at 13 or 14?), comes off as a bit of a prig (though this is dealt with in a later chapter in such a way that it made me cry), desperately trying to maintain some moral high ground in a horde of siblings who think it would be absolutely smashing if there were still highwaymen on the heath – or, even better, if they could be highwaymen on the heath. Her objection is that it's "wrong" – as in illegal and people hang for such things, not so much as in the victims of the highwaymen didn't think it was quite so smashing. The again-innocent bloodthirstiness of the kids is remarkable, and just fun.
Oswald, the oldest boy at 12 and (you might guess, or you might not!) the narrator of the story, is very nearly as brave and honourable as he wants to appear, and very straightforward. It's rather lovely to see him reluctantly, realistically doing the right thing throughout the book, proceeding quietly and alone when practical – the older ones all do that, shouldering responsibility and striving to make things right when they go wrong. The fierce affection and loyalty among the siblings is, like their father's poverty and worries, never explicitly stated: it doesn't have to be. It is shown, not told.
The four younger children – Noel and Alice and H.O. and Dickie, ranging down to I believe six years old – are every one expected by their elder siblings to be just as sharp and responsible and willing and able to contribute as Oswald and Dora. Some allowances are made for their extreme youth, but for the most part they are equal partners in the treasure-seeking, receiving an equal share in any profits – though sometimes excused by protective siblings from punishments.
I don't remember E. Nesbit reducing me to tears in the past. This did. And, yes, I laughed out loud. I missed the magic element of some of the other books – but only at first. It didn't take long to realize that most of the magic of E. Nesbit's writing is actually in E. Nesbit's writing.
To that point: "No book is really worth reading at the age of ten which is not equally – and often far more – worth reading at the age of fifty and beyond." ~ C.S. Lewis. I look forward to reading E. Nesbit when I'm fifty, and beyond.
hxnnah_ku's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
reflective
fast-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
2.25