Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.87 AVERAGE
3.87 AVERAGE
2009 bookcrossing thoughts: I vaguely remember having read this a lot of years ago, but when I read it this time, the story really wasn´t that familiar to me at all. I do like reading children´s books now and then. I really enjoyed it. OK, being 101 years old it is a little bit of a product of it´s time - such as the bit about girls having to be soft and weak so that babies will like them!!! But it is really nice escapism to this almost idyllic childhood world where there aren´t really bad people and kids can go running about on their own, having little adventures and talking to strangers.
In the background there is a little nod to real life. At the beginning they move to the countryside from their London home. Father doesn´t come with them and their mother won´t tell them what has happened. The fact is, daddy dear has been locked up in prison. Obviously a horrible mistake, so it all ends well in the end, but still, it is a note that not everything in life is fair or perfect.
In the background there is a little nod to real life. At the beginning they move to the countryside from their London home. Father doesn´t come with them and their mother won´t tell them what has happened. The fact is, daddy dear has been locked up in prison. Obviously a horrible mistake, so it all ends well in the end, but still, it is a note that not everything in life is fair or perfect.
I'd not read this book as a child (and am rather surprised that I'd not been exposed to it then, as many other classic children's books were among my favorites), so I finally determined to pick this story up and give it a read. I rather enjoyed the adventures and excitements of the lives of Bobbie, Peter, and Phil, and their Mom. I think that had I found this book as a child myself, it would've ranked in my top 5 favorite stories. It was a very cosy, charming read.
I only kept reading to be done with it. Quite cute. I might have liked it as a child but now it was a little bit annoying and too goody good with fake sunshine vibes.
A childhood favorite! Although as an adult, I recognize the implausibility of many of the story lines, it was still a fun and sweet read.
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
Really delightful story. I love the way the author talks to the reader directly from time-to-time. Very enjoyable.
I never read this, or any Nesbit, when I was a kid. But the great thing about books is that they’re happy to wait for you (assuming they’re in print or haven’t been burnt by conservatives). Thankfully, The Railway Children was patiently waiting for me.* And it was lovely, though, like so much children's literature, there’s an aching sadness at the novel's core.
The titular children are the siblings: Bobbie (Roberta), Peter and Phyllis. When we first meet them they’re living a happy middle-class life with Mother and Father in London. Then, one night, some men come along and take Father away. No explanation is given. Next thing the kids know, they’re in the country with Mother in a house called The Three Chimneys located next to the railway. Mother, who states they’re now poor, locks herself in a room to write stories. The siblings cannot go to school and explore their surrounding environment, including the railway. Shenanigans unfurl from there, including helping lost Russian exiles, sending coded messages to kindly old gentlemen, coming to the aid of a teenager who has broken his leg in the rail tunnel, and, of course, flagging down a train with torn red petticoats before it's derailed by fallen rocks.
The aching sadness is two-fold. It’s the hole left by Father (I did chuckle, though, when it’s revealed why he’s vanished — I thought I’d entered an episode of The Sandbaggers) and the depression suffered by Mother. The sale of the odd story does see Mother momentarily break free of her gloom, but it remains ever-present. Nesbitt’s treatment of depression, though, is gentle and compassionate. I loved how Bobbie does everything she can to mitigate her mother’s pain.
But what shines through are the siblings. They are simply lovely, and spending time with them is a joy. The fact that Nesbitt is more than happy to put them all in perilous danger is just part of the fun. (I just hope that most kids of the early 20th Century knew better than to stand in front of a moving train).
I should probably now read Nesbit’s ghost stories.
*No, I’ve never seen the films of TV series.
The titular children are the siblings: Bobbie (Roberta), Peter and Phyllis. When we first meet them they’re living a happy middle-class life with Mother and Father in London. Then, one night, some men come along and take Father away. No explanation is given. Next thing the kids know, they’re in the country with Mother in a house called The Three Chimneys located next to the railway. Mother, who states they’re now poor, locks herself in a room to write stories. The siblings cannot go to school and explore their surrounding environment, including the railway. Shenanigans unfurl from there, including helping lost Russian exiles, sending coded messages to kindly old gentlemen, coming to the aid of a teenager who has broken his leg in the rail tunnel, and, of course, flagging down a train with torn red petticoats before it's derailed by fallen rocks.
The aching sadness is two-fold. It’s the hole left by Father (I did chuckle, though, when it’s revealed why he’s vanished — I thought I’d entered an episode of The Sandbaggers) and the depression suffered by Mother. The sale of the odd story does see Mother momentarily break free of her gloom, but it remains ever-present. Nesbitt’s treatment of depression, though, is gentle and compassionate. I loved how Bobbie does everything she can to mitigate her mother’s pain.
But what shines through are the siblings. They are simply lovely, and spending time with them is a joy. The fact that Nesbitt is more than happy to put them all in perilous danger is just part of the fun. (I just hope that most kids of the early 20th Century knew better than to stand in front of a moving train).
I should probably now read Nesbit’s ghost stories.
*No, I’ve never seen the films of TV series.
Really this is an instance where the film was better than the book :)
This was a re-read from childhood as we are discussing children's literature at next week's book club meeting. I couldn't find my own copy (I suspect it's at my parents' place in a box in the loft) so I was happy to find this BBC full cast audio production which is basically the play on tape.
Incidentally, I took my son to see the play a couple of years ago at King's Cross station, and he enjoyed it, too, though he struggled to understand why the father was away all that time and got so few mentions.
Well, I'd agree with that. As an adult it wasn't easy to swallow that the children were having such a jolly good time in their new 'hood while their father was being detained somewhere... I'd like to think that they'd be a bit more concerned than occasionally mentioning him to the mum. The string of convenient but implausible events (old man on the train..... didn't they teach the children back then not to talk to strangers? Haha!) plus the sexism in deeds and dialogue were equally annoying, but I think we all know to take this with a pinch of salt given that it was written well over a hundred years ago. But despite my gripes, I enjoyed revisiting Bobby, Peter and Phil, and next time I speak to my father, I'll ask him to look for my tattered old copy to pass it on to my children. It's a classic!
Incidentally, I took my son to see the play a couple of years ago at King's Cross station, and he enjoyed it, too, though he struggled to understand why the father was away all that time and got so few mentions.
Well, I'd agree with that. As an adult it wasn't easy to swallow that the children were having such a jolly good time in their new 'hood while their father was being detained somewhere... I'd like to think that they'd be a bit more concerned than occasionally mentioning him to the mum. The string of convenient but implausible events (old man on the train..... didn't they teach the children back then not to talk to strangers? Haha!) plus the sexism in deeds and dialogue were equally annoying, but I think we all know to take this with a pinch of salt given that it was written well over a hundred years ago. But despite my gripes, I enjoyed revisiting Bobby, Peter and Phil, and next time I speak to my father, I'll ask him to look for my tattered old copy to pass it on to my children. It's a classic!