Is "The Water Babies" The Worst Text In The English Literature Canon?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Having been forced to read this as part of my Victorian Literature course (I've started to do my entire year's reading with only two weeks till my exams), I'm forced to conclude that Charles Kinglsey's "The Water Babies" is one of the worst texts ever written.

From its self-satisfied "This isn't real... BUT IT IS!!!" narrative, through to the irritatingly Douglas Adams style WACKY NAME ALERT characterisations. The main character has no redeeming traits, the "bad guys" have no reducing traits, and its accompanied by the classic violent racism that filches through so many Victorian novels (Negroes! They look like animals!).

So, yeah, is there a worst text in the "canon"? And can anyone even try to defend this? The film was shit as well.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:21 (twenty-two years ago)

possibly but I've only ever seen the godawful film version.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:24 (twenty-two years ago)

I saw that. I remember the Scottish lobster and the translating polar bear and the goofy seahorse. And the fact that the Water Babies looked like refugees from a Keane painting. Little twits.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I read this when I was about 9, and haven't been tempted to revisit it.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:44 (twenty-two years ago)

is dom trying to use ILXORS brane powah to pass his exams?

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:45 (twenty-two years ago)

have been tempted to read it to find out how much alasdair gray was kidding in claims of plagiarism re: this and Lanark. Not sure I'll ever actually get around to this, though.

― thom west (thom w), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:46 (twenty-two years ago)

is dom trying to use ILXORS brane powah to pass his exams?

No, I'm going to do badly enough as it is.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:48 (twenty-two years ago)

yes.

― isadora (isadora), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 19:49 (twenty-two years ago)

It's bloody awful.

― RickyT (RickyT), Tuesday, 20 May 2003 21:21 (twenty-two years ago)

I read it when I was small... isn't it really strange and has no coherent plot? I remember something about chimney sweeps, then people who lived beside a volcano, and then a long extended passage about a dog that lived in the sky, and precious little else.

what is it all about? chimney sweeps turn into magic beings who live in water and have strange allegorical adventures?

― DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:14 (twenty-two years ago)

"Here's a chimney sweep, except he isn't. P.S: God is really good"

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:23 (twenty-two years ago)

Based on all your descriptions, this book sounds fucking awesome. However, I am totally stoned right now.

― NA. (Nick A.), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:24 (twenty-two years ago)

When I was 5 I was a water baby in our ballet school's production. I had to wear a flesh coloured leotard with pinkish chiffon wings while this other girl got to be the lobster or crab or whatever and my arch ballet school rival, Kate, got to be Tom. For this reason alone I agree with Dom.

― Emma, Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:39 (twenty-two years ago)

read it here!

― MarkH (MarkH), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:41 (twenty-two years ago)

You're sore because you didn't get to put on a bushy beard and go on about Dr Who videos, Emma?

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:42 (twenty-two years ago)

curious logic here, I feel:

"His master was so delighted at his new customer that he knocked Tom down out of hand, and drank more beer that night than he usually did in two, in order to be sure of getting up in time next morning; for the more a man's head aches when he wakes, the more glad he is to turn out, and have a breath of fresh air. "

― MarkH (MarkH), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:43 (twenty-two years ago)

No Tim, you buffoon, I had the urge - all too common in 5 year old girls - to dress as a male Victorian chimney sweep. 23 years later, the urge has passed (just).

― Emma, Wednesday, 21 May 2003 11:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Damnit, and I wanted to be Mary Poppins in this years Crouch End Am Dram players play. Its back to Dick Van Dyke for me.

― Pete (Pete), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 12:13 (twenty-two years ago)

haha "muscular xtianity"

the water babies is included in the canon so as to stand in for (= exclude) a huge amount of "formative" literature (= the books better later writers read as children = a "children's classic" when actually what they were doing was writing the book they'd LIKED to have read as a child) => it comes across as super-stand-out odd bcz it's piling so much into itself (somewhat counter-orthodox politics&religion, nervous gothic-oid fantasy in response to the FLOOD of fairytale translations then entering the UK, or manifesting as part of the Gothic Revival — Grimm/Anderson/a new Perrault Translation/Ruskin's KING OF THE GOLDEN RIVER)

i haven't read it for years and can't to be honest recall much about it (except that i found it tremendously puzzling and unsatisfactory aged 10 or so) => i have a beautiful edwardian edition (in terrible much read condition) at home and will have a look at it shortly

standard lit crit history is complete rubbish on the presence within its own development of the now-forgotten books great writers (and indeed genre writers) read when small

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 12:19 (twenty-two years ago)

THE WATER BABIES IS NOT IN THE ENGLISH LITERATURE CANON

― N. (nickdastoor), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 22:49 (twenty-two years ago)

I read it when I was eight and I hated it and I looked at it the other day for the first time in 30 years and I still do.

This is always happening to me. I'll think about something for the first time in ages and ages and within a week or two a thread will appear on that exact subject. It's unnerving.

― estela, Wednesday, 21 May 2003 23:02 (twenty-two years ago)

When he is dirty my puppy looks like a chimney sweep.

― estela, Wednesday, 21 May 2003 23:08 (twenty-two years ago)

I just told my puppy he is a threadkiller and it made him very sad.
Luckily I have a big bag of chicken Schmackos in the kitchen which will quickly bid his sorrow farewell.

― estela, Wednesday, 21 May 2003 23:23 (twenty-two years ago)

Jessie Wilcox Smith's illustrations = CLASSIC

― rosemary (rosemary), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 23:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Molesworth nailed this, if I recall.

― Matt (Matt), Wednesday, 21 May 2003 23:43 (twenty-two years ago)

I like N's certainty as to what is and isn't in the canon. Do you have an official list, N?

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Thursday, 22 May 2003 11:15 (twenty-two years ago)

If we are getting canonical on our azz then votes galore for Mary Shelley's Frankenstein; it's like reading through glue! (or something)

― Alex in Rotherham (Alex in Doncaster), Thursday, 22 May 2003 11:37 (twenty-two years ago)

THE WATER BABIES IS NOT IN THE ENGLISH LITERATURE CANON

It's on an English Literature course. Thus, it's in the canon.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Thursday, 22 May 2003 11:38 (twenty-two years ago)

The iluustrations in mine are by WARWICK GOBLE

haha the dedication shd have made the entire world run a mile:

"TO
MY YOUNGEST SON
GRENVILLE ARTHUR
and
TO ALL OTHER GOOD LITTLE BOYS

Come read me my riddle, each good little man;
If you cannot read it, no grown up folk can. ~~DO YOU SEE! etc~~"

You can't understand good [xx] if you don't also study bad [xx], hence either the canon must contain rubbish OR not everything you study is on the canon OR yr course will not help you understand good [xx].

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 22 May 2003 11:58 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.