Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.26 AVERAGE
4.26 AVERAGE
Un conte que pareix escrit per a infants però que obliga els adults a pensar i a gaudir-ne. Una joia de lectura (i relectura) indispensable. Saint-Exupéry devia ser més bon escriptor que pilot, perquè el pilot es va pedre, però l'obra de l'escriptor es conservarà durant segles.
Another book that I didn't finish. I liked a lot of descriptions of childhood but I didn't "get" what the author was going for or why this is such a classic.
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
My younger self’s version of this story, as I can vaguely recollect it, was that of a marooned pilot in a desert who listened to the tale of a young prince's journey from another planet. My second reading confirmed what I’d remembered of the story in greater detail and perhaps more interestingly, left me with a stronger impression than my first reading. I’d expected to love the The Little Prince, since I only had fond thoughts for the story as I could remember it, but was instead surprised to find myself grating with irritation from beginning to end. I wanted to love the story, really. It IS a classic work after all, and I would like to believe that I have okay taste ...
My qualm with the story mostly stemmed from the author’s tone, I think, which seemed to indicate that the point of view of children was better than grown-ups, who "are certainly very, very odd." I, on the other hand, believe that matters of consequence in the adult world are not as trivial as Antoine de Saint-Exupéry made them appear. I wonder if perhaps the author had been frustrated by the self-importance of adults and the subsequent misguidance that he received in life. To excuse his undeveloped skills in illustration, for example, he explains that this “[...] is not my fault. The grown-ups discouraged me in my painter’s career when I was six years old.” Even busy people have moments of respite, and although it is challenging, if we do not use those moments to develop ourselves in the ways we want to grow, it is no one else’s fault but our own. I don't know if a scapegoater of blame should be considered an exemplary narrator for children; this was written for kids, right? From both the shared interpretation of the narrator’s drawing of the sheep inside the box by the prince and the narrator’s desire to talk about "boa constrictors, primeval forests, and stars," it is clear that the narrator/author associates himself more closely with children than grown-ups. This, in itself is fine, but he reveals his condescension in the way he words how he would “bring [himself] down to [the grown up’s] level [...] to talk to him about bridge, and golf, and politics, and neckties.” This passing of judgement seemed close-minded -- a close-mindedness which he rebukes in his other stories such as that of the Turkish astronomer who no one listened to until he wore European clothes. This seems hypocritical; was this intentional? I could continue to nitpick the text, but I will stop here.
My favorite character in the story is the rose on the little prince’s asteroid. The rose was a terrific allegory for love and so anthropomorphically female that there were moments when she seemed more a girl than a flower. The prince would dote on her, be irritated by her, and eventually return to her. If I am to like this story, I would have to fixate on the prince-rose relationship -- a story of mutual longing and distance, a story of a traveller away from his love. I wish this had played a more significant role in the overall story; it was the book's only redeeming feature, imo.
My qualm with the story mostly stemmed from the author’s tone, I think, which seemed to indicate that the point of view of children was better than grown-ups, who "are certainly very, very odd." I, on the other hand, believe that matters of consequence in the adult world are not as trivial as Antoine de Saint-Exupéry made them appear. I wonder if perhaps the author had been frustrated by the self-importance of adults and the subsequent misguidance that he received in life. To excuse his undeveloped skills in illustration, for example, he explains that this “[...] is not my fault. The grown-ups discouraged me in my painter’s career when I was six years old.” Even busy people have moments of respite, and although it is challenging, if we do not use those moments to develop ourselves in the ways we want to grow, it is no one else’s fault but our own. I don't know if a scapegoater of blame should be considered an exemplary narrator for children; this was written for kids, right? From both the shared interpretation of the narrator’s drawing of the sheep inside the box by the prince and the narrator’s desire to talk about "boa constrictors, primeval forests, and stars," it is clear that the narrator/author associates himself more closely with children than grown-ups. This, in itself is fine, but he reveals his condescension in the way he words how he would “bring [himself] down to [the grown up’s] level [...] to talk to him about bridge, and golf, and politics, and neckties.” This passing of judgement seemed close-minded -- a close-mindedness which he rebukes in his other stories such as that of the Turkish astronomer who no one listened to until he wore European clothes. This seems hypocritical; was this intentional? I could continue to nitpick the text, but I will stop here.
My favorite character in the story is the rose on the little prince’s asteroid. The rose was a terrific allegory for love and so anthropomorphically female that there were moments when she seemed more a girl than a flower. The prince would dote on her, be irritated by her, and eventually return to her. If I am to like this story, I would have to fixate on the prince-rose relationship -- a story of mutual longing and distance, a story of a traveller away from his love. I wish this had played a more significant role in the overall story; it was the book's only redeeming feature, imo.
emotional
inspiring
lighthearted
sad
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
Whimsical and delightful at times, tiresome (despite being under 100 pages) at others. Certainly worth a read but likely overrated by most readers.
adventurous
lighthearted
reflective
relaxing
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I listened to the audio book on Spotify in Spanish and the version I listened to had music in the background. I think I would prefer to actually read the book instead of listening to it but I like the concepts it brings up. It’s an easy way for children to understand
inspiring
reflective
relaxing
fast-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
hopeful
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated