Alice in Wonderland? Or, Through the Looking Glass?

[Giles]

@cjepson

Well, the Mad Hatter and the March Hare, from AAIW, do appear as Hatta and Haigha in TTLG.

Yes, you’re right – that’s easy to overlook!

[jayjay]

I forget because it’s been a LONG time since I read TTLG (I need to find the annotated version at the library)…it’s obvious that they were intended to be the same characters by Carroll, just from the names, but were they described as looking like the Hatter and the Hare in the text, or do we just get that from Tenniel’s illustrations?

[TWDuke]

@Leaper

The American McGee game already did this (it had, for example, the Jabberwock and Cheshire Cat coexisting). On the other hand, it made sense in their case, since their story took place after both books.

Burton is doing something similar.Alice returns to the rabbit hole as a 19-year-old and must end the Red Queen’s reign of terror. Of course the Queen of Heart’s reign of terror would make a lot more sense (as the Red Queen never threatened to behead anyone, nor did she live at the bottom of the freaking rabbit hole), but I guess that might be too similar.

@RealityChuck

That’s a part of it, but mostly it’s because audiences would wonder why they don’t show Tweedledum and Tweedledee, Humpty Dumpty, and, of course, the Jabberwock (who actually isn’t a character in the book – he’s just mentioned in a poem within the book and is no more a part of it than Father William in Alice).

Wonderland seems to have most of the favorite characters (e.g., the White Rabbit, the Mad Hatter, the Dormouse, the Caterpillar, Queen/King/Knave of Hearts, the Cheshire Cat, the Mock Turtle), but Alice basically wanders aimlessly from one weird episode to another. Looking Glass has a semblance of a plot, in which Alice has a definite objective and advances steadily toward it. So it’s not surprising that adaptations tend to combine them.

@Thudlow_Boink

…though they are often published together, so much so that it almost seems like a rip-off when you find an edition of one without the other.

I’m trying to think of another example where a work and its sequel are so often confused or put together.

The conclusion of Don Quixote was actually published separately, several years after the first part.

@Edward_The_Head

How long are these books? I’ve read both, but I’m thinking I might have gotten an abridged version. I don’t remember the books being all that long, nor quite frankly very interesting, and some of the things in the thread I don’t remember at all. I’m thinking that both together were 100-110 pages total.

That would of course depend on the type size and the number of illustrations included, among other things, but the first addition of Alice in Wonderland ran 122 pages. The edition I had as a kid was a fairly standard size paperback, but it included Through the Looking Glass, The Hunting of the Snark, and some front matter.

@jayjay

I forget because it’s been a LONG time since I read TTLG (I need to find the annotated version at the library)…it’s obvious that they were intended to be the same characters by Carroll, just from the names, but were they described as looking like the Hatter and the Hare in the text, or do we just get that from Tenniel’s illustrations?

Hatta and Haigha are not described in the text as looking like the Hatter and the Hare, and Alice does not seem to notice any resemblance. Of course, that would have ruined it. I remember being quite pleased with myself for recognizing them myself with no one to tell me.

[GuanoLad]

@jayjay

*This is apparently not true for the Burton film, or hopefully the American McGee adaptation when it starts casting.

Don’t hold your breath on any American McGee’s Alice movie any time soon. It’s been in development for nigh on ten years, and isn’t likely to advance much further in a hurry.

[Biffy_the_Elephant_Shrew]

@TWDuke

That would of course depend on the type size and the number of illustrations included, among other things, but the first addition of Alice in Wonderland ran 122 pages. The edition I had as a kid was a fairly standard size paperback, but it included Through the Looking Glass, The Hunting of the Snark, and some front matter.

My copies of Alice (5 1/4" x 8" paperback) and Looking Glass (standard 4" x 7" paperback), both with the Tenniel illustrations are 196 and 181 pages, respectively. But both are French translations. (“Prends garde au Jabberwock, mon fils!”)

[Leaper]

@jayjay

I forget because it’s been a LONG time since I read TTLG (I need to find the annotated version at the library)…it’s obvious that they were intended to be the same characters by Carroll, just from the names, but were they described as looking like the Hatter and the Hare in the text, or do we just get that from Tenniel’s illustrations?

To add to the answer below, Carroll and Tenniel seemed to work very closely together (to the point where an entire chapter was removed due at least partly, IMO, to Tenniel expressing dislike - and an inability to come up with an illustration - for it). So I can’t see Tenniel doing this on his own without Carroll’s approval. Altho’ whether Carroll meant it to be an “Easter egg” or if it was Tenniel’s idea, I have no clue.

Note to self: see if Annotated Alice says either way.

[Edward_The_Head]

Damn it, that just means I read the abridged version. I’ll have to go out and find another copy yet again. They really need to make it more apparent on the front cover that it’s not the full version. :mad: