[sorry, trying to re-send in plain text]

I took Philip Stead’s version of MT’s “Prince Oleomargarine” for a
test drive with an authentic child, my 10-yo son T(h)omas (who, like
Mark Dawidziak’s daughter Becky, was not in fact named for a character
in _Adventures of Tom Sawyer_).

I read it as a bedtime story over two nights and on the first night,
it was my wife, in fact, who fell asleep, not my son!

The book is attractive and since so many books are judged by their
cover, I hope it will sell out and benefit MTP + Hartford.

While my son enjoyed the Stead version, it did not seem very much like
MT, which made me want to read MT’s notes, which being only a few
pages, ought to have been published. (The copyright page states that
they are available at www.princeoleomargarine.com but they are not in
fact there.) I have since found MT’s original notes, which confirm my
suspicion that the Stead version goes beyond MT’s version in several
ways that do not improve the original, neither in content nor style.

The CBS news story this morning wanted to make something of the
illustrations featuring a black protagonist as being upsetting to MT
‘purists’, which it is not.

There is no point in spending a beautiful Sunday pulling apart some of
the unTwainian things that were introduced in the Stead version. Kevin
Mac Donnell’s review of Aug 21 is an excellent assessment that could
not be improved.

I hope to see John Bird’s version published one day, since it hews
more closely to MT’s text, which does not need anyone’s elaborations
to be able to stand on its own as a terrific fairy tale. I will read
John’s version to my son over the next few days and will let you know
his assessment! :)

Hope you have a great day,
Taylor