Author Description

Kenneth Grahame's The Wind in the Willows (1908) is that rare book that sits on the line between children's and adult literature. Allusive and multilayered, Willows is not merely a book for two audiences, however. The reader can turn to it over and over again: as a child, as an adult, and as an informed and curious student of literature eager to examine the interactions among the book's structure, narrative, and meaning. In The Wind in the Willows: A Fragmented Arcadia, author Peter Hunt examines the masterpiece from numerous angles. Placing the book within its literary and historical context, Hunt first examines the England in which Grahame lived and wrote. From liberal socialism to the burgeoning railroads to the suffragette movement, every facet of English life was changing, and so, too, was children's literature. And in this context of a swiftly changing society, as well as changing viewpoints toward literary genres, Grahame's new book was met with a flock of confused reviewers. From Hunt's brief study of the critical reception of Willows, we can see from the outset that critics were unclear for whom the book was intended.. In his reading of Willows, Hunt uncovers the complexity of the work. The characters function differently from chapter to chapter; the symbolism means different things at different times, and basic structure bounces from one of closure to open-ended adult narrative. Even the anthropomorphism seems adjustable, both in its application in the story and in our interpretation of its meaning. In its most basic guise, Willows is composed of two narratives: Mole's and Toad's. And the contrast between these two stories could not be more apparent: Mole's journey is peaceful, local, and reflective, while the story of Toad is outgoing and nearly violent. Mole's introspective story is best suited for adult comprehension, while Toad's farcical tale plays well with children. Hunt is ever mindful of the enduring question: Is Willows a children's book, an adult's book - or is it possible to be both?