Tuesday, April 10, 2018

Review: Rabbit Hill by Robert Lawson || I’m Confused by Talking Bunnies

Rabbit Hill by Robert Lawson


Pages: 128
Genre: Middlegrade Fiction
Publication Date: September 1944
It has been a while since Folks lived in the Big House, and an even longer time has passed since there has been a garden at the House. All the animals of the Hill are very excited about the new Folks moving in, and they wonder how things are going to change. It's only a matter of time before the animals of the Hill find out just who is moving in, and they may be a little bit surprised when they do.

My quest to read all the Newbery winners continues with Rabbit Hill, the winner from 1945. The story primarily focuses on a family of rabbits, who are very excited that a family is moving into the abandoned house near their hill. All the small animals on the hill are starving because they rely on the garden at the house for food. The animals don’t know if the new Folks will be nice people who like animals or mean people who trap and kill animals.

This is a sweet, quiet story. The animals each have distinctive (and occasionally irritating) personalities. The main bunny, Little Georgie, is easy to root for. He’s brave, and cocky, and has a sense of humor. This is definitely a book that will make you smile.

“‘Seems there's new Folks coming.’
‘Yes, I know,’ cried Little Georgie eagerly. ‘I've just made a song about it. Wouldn't you like to hear it? It goes like—’
‘No, thanks,’ called Robin.” – Rabbit Hill

“‘I've made up a song about the new Folks,’ [Little Georgie] added eagerly. ‘Would you like to hear it?’
‘Don't think I would,’ answered Uncle Analdas.” – Rabbit Hill


Beneath the book’s cute exterior, there are strong themes of charity and being kind to others. (Well, not to dogs. I guess you can throw rocks at those. And not to chickens. Those are for deep frying. But the other animals treat each other kindly.)
I wonder how much patience children would have for this story. I guess it’s a classic, so kids must enjoy it, but it feels like it takes forever to get going. The animals spend pages and pages gossiping about the new neighbors. It’s funny to see animals acting like nosy humans, but it’s not the most interesting thing to read. It gets repetitive quickly.
Also, it’s kind of confusing. Am I the only one who’s confused by anthropomorphic animals?
I don’t usually like anthropomorphic animal stories because I’m not always sure what the author is trying to say with them. Am I supposed to read the animals as animals, or am I supposed to read the animals as cute stand-ins for humans?
The animals in this book are anthropomorphized in a weird way. On one hand, they’re very human. They live in a human-like society; they peddle conspiracy theories; the foxes don’t snack on their rabbit neighbors. On the other hand, they’re very animal-like. They eat chickens; the humans kill them with traps and poison; they’re torn apart by dogs; they’re inadvertently flattened by cars. I wasn’t sure if I was supposed to be thinking of these critters as humans or animals.
Right now, you’re probably like, “OMG. It’s a children’s book. Children enjoy reading about bunnies. The animals are just supposed to be entertaining.” You’re right, but the author is clearly trying to send a message with this book. I’m not sure if I should nod in agreement or roll my eyes.


Beware! Thar be spoilers ahead!

Okay, the book ends with the humans giving the animals free food and sticking a statue of Saint Francis in the garden. The animals are so impressed by this that they decide not to destroy the people’s garden. They’ll eat everyone else’s garden, but they’ll leave these people alone. I guess it’s like a retelling of that story of Saint Francis and the wolf.

“THERE IS ENOUGH FOR ALL.” – Rabbit Hill

If you read the story one way, the animal characters are stand-ins for poor/homeless people. The author is saying that the world would be a more peaceful place if we shared our extra resources instead of hoarding them for ourselves. We should help each other and not kill each other. I agree with that. This book was published in 1944, so its original readers had lived through The Great Depression and WWII. A lot of the child readers were probably familiar with rationing or not having enough to eat. The “Share your stuff and don’t kill everybody” lesson is a good one.
If I’m supposed to take this book literally, then that’s when the eye-rolling starts. I believe you should be kind to animals, but you can’t expect animals to be kind back. If you put out a pretty statue and some food, the animals will eat the food, and then they’ll eat your garden. Because they’re animals. Eating everything is what they do.
(Oh, this reminds me of a random tangent. I give my dog everything she needs to live in doggie luxury. That didn’t stop her from climbing up on the table and eating my cookies last Christmas. If she was a good Christian and follower of Saint Francis, she’d know that it’s very rude to steal cookies on Christmas.)



No More Spoilers. Carry On.

Compared to current children’s literature, I found this book slow. The beginning is repetitive scenes of animals gossiping, and the rest of the story is episodic. It doesn’t feel like it’s heading anywhere. There is the mystery of the new Folks, but that’s not much of a mystery. The new Folk’s personalities become obvious fairly quickly.
This isn’t one of my favorite Newbery winners. It’s cute, but I don’t think it’ll stick in my mind after I finish all the winners.


TL;DR: Some important themes. I think a lot of kids would get bored with the meandering plot.






24 comments:

  1. At first glance it looks and sounds like a cute story. Bunnies who are excited about new tenants and a new garden. Cute. But between the slow start and the repetitive scenes I’m surprised this one is such a classic (I guess it’s still widely read? I don’t really know.).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it’s still widely read? It was really easy to find a used copy of it, so if it’s still being published, someone must be reading it. I didn’t know it existed until I started reading the Newbery winners.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  2. Some times I wonder who are those people that give out awards like that. Maybe for it's time it was an amazing read but I also can't read books with animal POVs. Like little kids books, yes but a full read is hard. I usually have a hard time connecting with the main characters..for obvious reasons lol.

    This is a fantastic post! Well done! :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have a hard time connecting with animal characters, too. That’s probably an adult problem. I loved cartoon animals when I was a kid.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  3. I agree that today's kids would find this one slow. Technology has rendered our kids tech-savvy and info overloaded. The kids of the 1940s lived in different times. Although I think the themes are universal and that might make this book appealing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, I agree. Kids are kids, no matter when they lived. Some themes apply to everybody.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  4. I was looking at the newbery books on my goodreads shelf early today so I recognize this one. I love that you are making your way through these books. That is something that I had hoped to do as well, but I haven't had much luck so far. This one doesn't sound particularly exciting. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good luck getting through the Newbery winners! So far, I’ve read a few great ones and a lot of “meh” ones.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  5. I have seen the pacing issue with other older children's books too and the are they animals or people issue came up in Wind in the Willows. Despite that this does sound lovely. I've really enjoyed some of the older childrens books though I do wonder how they would read for modern children.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’ve noticed that a lot of the older Newbery winners are very, very slow. I guess things have changed a bit in the children’s book world.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  6. I used to love slow going stories when I was a kid :) kids have ALL the time that we don't have. Well, they might have less patience now though, because of all the technology that's available to them... so I don't know.

    And I'm also a little confused about the animals :D Wind in the Willows was similar for me - it was fine when it was just animals, but then people appeared. And they're the same size as the toad. And I just thought it was a world of animals. And I am confused :D but yes! It's probably us being too adult :DDD

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A human-sized toad would be completely terrifying. You wouldn’t want to walk out on your lawn and see that squatting there . . .

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  7. We had this book in the elementary school library where I worked for ten years, and I think it was only checked out once or twice. I don't know if it was actually read though. Lol. I read it, and I remember liking it but it was a long time ago. I don't mind talking animals too much, although I do question as well what we are supposed to think of them. I think that of everything though, like in all cartoons and such. Like Goofy and Pluto? Or like Minnie Mouse and Figaro? Anyway, great review. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m confused by cartoons too. Why are there people-animals and animal-animals?!

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  8. When I was a kid, I tended to assume Newbery awards would be snooze-fests. I think because I was at the tail-end of these preachy, slow-moving kids' books.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m glad I’m reading the winners in a random order because the older ones do seem slow and preachy. Poor old-time children. Their books were boring.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  9. I'm always confused when I read a super slow children's book. What middle grade kid has that kind of attention span?? I'm glad you at least kind of liked it, even if it wasn't a stand out. Thanks for sharing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. About half the book consists of animals running around, telling each other that new people are moving into the house. The story does get faster after that, but I don’t think I would have had the patience for this book as a kid.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  10. I adored this book! I think I read it in middle school (multiple times), and if there were any analogies in it, they went way over my head. :) I kind of want to reread it to see if I notice any of the lessons--besides the obvious be kind to animals--that you mention.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This... doesn't sound great honestly. I am not really a fan of anthropomorphic animals, especially coexisting with humans. Like- I read my daughter Berenstain Bears, but the bears like, ARE the humans. Anyway, it sounds like it would be WAY over kids' heads, if they even managed to pay attention. This does, however, remind me that I am STILL waiting for my copy of John Oliver's Marlon Bundo. Rude of Amazon, tbh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha, I need to get a copy of Marlon Bundo, too. John Oliver is the best.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete
  12. Sounds kind of cute...maybe. But slow books for kids is not a good thing. My kids have such small attention spans I can't see them sticking with something slow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It does have pictures, so maybe that would help with the slowness? The beginning just felt SO repetitive.

      Aj @ Read All The Things!

      Delete