Talk:Little Lord Fauntleroy

Untitled

It was a commercial success for its author, set fashion trends and also set a precedent in copyright law.

what precedent?Pedant 01:02, 2004 Oct 27 (UTC)

good question--clarified in article; see Frances Hodgson Burnett for more Quill 07:36, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Also see Encyclopedia Brittanica Online 2009 which mentions the copyright precedent in passing Frances Hodgson Burnett." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2009. 18 Apr. 2009 <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/85631/Frances-Hodgson-Burnett Victorianezine (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC).

"Still popular"? I read Little Lord Fauntleroy when I was about nine— and was wise enough already to be repelled by its saccharine tone— but I'm quite sure few of you have! A book that was already so utterly faded and stale during the Eisenhower administration can scarcely be rivetting the depleted attention spans of today, no? The book is not popular but notorious, to be perfectly frank: everyone has heard about it. But none of you have read it!--Wetman (talk) 05:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

What a bizarrely personal response--why the assumptions and the over-the-top criticism? ("Utterly faded and stale" and all the !!!!!s) Actually, I have read it, as have my siblings. Sure, it's an old-fashioned story, with little of the more complex characterization of A Little Princess or The Secret Garden but still very sweet, with a worthwhile message--high expectations are a powerful motivator. Undoubtedly this is why the story continues to be adapted for film and TV. 64.132.218.4 (talk) 20:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

This book IS overly sentimental. But the facts that it is still in print AND that it has several film versions shows the basic Fauntleroy story still appeals to people. I have read the book both as a child and an adult. I personally liked it even tho the big crisis is solved through an incredible coincidence. The 1936 film starring the great 1930's child actor Freddie Bartholomew had an "A" list cast and producer...and is still good (except for needing a technical cleanup of pictures and sound).Victorianezine (talk) 01:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)victorianezine

The article on fashion has a reference cited but the note about "no references" is still there - the Encyclopedia Brittanica is also cited concerning the copyright issue. Why are so many editorial notes posted on this article? Victorianezine (talk) 01:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Positive influences from the book Little Lord Fauntleroy?

This book, which is still in print, is considered by some a minor classic, despite its slightly over sentimental tone and the incredible solution to the story's crisis.

I no longer have access to some of the articles online (in journals which now CHARGE for usage) on the positive effects of this novel (which was a major HIT in its time both as a book and as a play).

It is said this book (written by a British born woman now living in America) helped to bridge the gap between Britain and the US.

I don't have current sources, so my comments are put into "discussion". But the article seems to only dwell on the fashion influence of the book.

And what of all the petty negative references?

This article seems to mainly focus on the petty and the minor (such as the list of negative comments about this book) - and mostly overlooks the undertone of social justice the book conveys. Am hoping some English scholars can check this article.Lindisfarnelibrary (talk) 01:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Am hoping someone with access to more 19th century sources can add scholarly depth to this article about the minor classic "Little Lord Fauntleroy".Dnadazzles (talk) 23:29, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The originality of this work?

Am I the only one who has noted the close similarities of the plots between Little Lord Fauntleroy and Dickens’s A Christmas Carol? The Earl is Scrooge while Ceddie is the three spirits of Christmas rolled into one adorable tyke? I am certainly not accusing Ms. Burnett of plagiarism, but the similarities with the scenarios are stark enough to merit mention within the article. I have to believe there had been at least considerable influence. (There are several points of striking similarities by way of parallels.)

I also feel that the merit of the book is somewhat diminished by this factor as well. I could take, for example, the plot of Gone With the Wind and rehash it in a different time period with a different scenario while retaining its essence. If I did that as a writer, I wouldn’t consider myself all that creative or my hypothetical work all that meritorious regardless of its other virtues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.191.108.18 (talk) 15:40, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

LITTLE LORD FAUNTLEROY - and a REAL LIFE Earl who may have inspired this minor Classic!

The appeal of LLF still goes on...If you search the net, you will find many positive reviews...and even this article notes the many remakes of the story. Loving the fact that the RUSSIANS (of all people...) made a version of this novel!

This article lacks DEPTH...and a discusion of LLF's effects on society (other than "fashion") is needed...along with references...which I currently lack...

As I don't have VAST knowledge...am submitting this as a section in the Discussion. Perhaps a scholar of that era can adapt (or amend) my conclusions:

LLF - a wildly popular Victorian novel - would have been BELIEVABLE to many Victorians...because of real life Victorian Lord Anthony Ashley...7th Earl of Shaftesbury...who worked to end child labor (notably labor as coal miners...) and who did many other great works to help the Poor of Britain. After his long productive life working for the poor, he died fall 1885 (when this novel...as a serial in the popular youth mag "St. Nicholas" started appearing). Probably many late Victorian readers would recognize this Earl's example of a powerful man using his power to aid the poor...in young Cedric's kind actions towards the poor. They could easily believe that Cedric would grow up and become a fictional Earl of Shaftesbury who agitates in Parliament for the poor and who actively works to make their lives better.

Charles Dickens' novels concerning the oppressed poor were one earlier example of using literature to stand up for the weak and oppressed. Note that in Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" he has nasty pre-ghost Scrooge quote nasty real life Rev. Malthus...who wrote around 1797...that he wanted the excess human population reduced. Scrooge repeats this cruel phrase...and DICKENS slams this cruel thought back into Scrooge's face..as the "excess human population" becomes beloved Tiny Tim.

The theme of "excess population vs human WORTH" is repeated in "Little Lord Fauntleroy". It's hinted that "Dearest" mom to Cedric...is possibly born out of wedlock; certainly she had no real "background" (considered important in that era) as Captain Errol meets her at the home of a rich US home where "Dearest" is a paid companion verbally abused by her employer. No family of hers is EVER mentioned. (In that era, one might suffer permanent scorn if born out of wedlock--or even if born poor.)

Cedric's friends were all "low born". The snobbish Earl is vastly pleased with his handsome, strong-appearing and well-mannered American born grandson. He apparently is so pleased that he will "accept" Cedric's low-born friends. (Their worth is later established as they solve the plot crisis...) Thus, Cedric builds the first bridge between the powerful, selfish Earl and the poor and others which he has previously neglected or scorned. Other bridges are built...later the old, formerly wicked Earl...repents of his evil behavior. He starts to help others, and is pleased to do so. The old Earl tells his grandson Cedric that he will be a "better Earl than I was...".

Thus, the late Victorian first readers of LLF...would be pleased to see the poor young boy become the powerful and GOOD Lord...and future Earl. And...because of Lord Shaftesbury, they could BELIEVE this novel's premise.

'The strong should help the weak' is still an important tenet of our society. And "Little Lord Fauntleroy" ,despite its overly sweet language and incredible plot solution...pleases many (I believe) because it shows a poor boy of good character SWAY a powerful, selfish Earl...to become that strong man - like the real life 7th Earl of Shaftesbury - who will protect the weak. Thus, the Bible precept many Victorians learned "A little child shall lead them" was personified in young Cedric Errol...the Brooklyn boy from the US who becomes Little Lord Fauntleroy and later...the next Earl of Dorincourt. Lindisfarnelibrary (talk) 13:59, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Country United States?

This is an English author. Is there any reason, besides the book partially taking place in New York, for it to have the Country as United States and not England?