, , , , , , , ,

I just realized this morning when I sat down to work on my blog that my Thursday post never published!! I’m so sorry! We had a very busy weekend and I knew I had already written the post for Thursday. I almost always schedule them to post once they are finished, so I didn’t bother double checking when the end of the week got away from me.  That is what I get for not checking on my blog on posting days. My apologies everyone. Thursday’s post was over Mary Poppins, so here it is. I will make sure I am back on track this week.


2014-10-22 12.45.42The first thing I did when I pulled this book off the shelf was open it, shove my nose in, and breathe deep. I love the smell of these old editions. Maybe it’s a combination of the paper and binding materials, or perhaps just the fact that they’ve been sitting there marinating on the shelf for so many years. Once in a while they get picked up and allowed to breathe, but then back on they go. Waiting. Waiting for me to pick them up and smell them. It’s the little things you know…

I didn’t realize this till recently, but Mary Poppins the book series turns 80 this year. It was first published in 1934. The Disney movie version with the beautiful Julie Andrews was released in 1964. I became familiar with the movie version first. I loved it as a child. Andrews was beautiful, and what Van Dyke didn’t have in looks he made up in fun. I love the dancing, singing, and the periodic detours into the world of animation and Technicolor. Honestly, I didn’t think much about the fact it was a book first, until I spotted them on the shelf in the library. Yes them. There’s a whole series! Did you know?

I’ve only read the first one so far, and I must say it wasn’t anything like I had imagined. Yes, clearly they had pulled scenes from the book and put them in the movie. But, the Mary Poppins in the book didn’t seem anything like the Mary from the movie. For one thing, she wasn’t nearly as beautiful, in description or picture, as Julie Andrews (who is though). Also, the book Mary was vain, self-absorbed, and short-tempered. This is not how I remembered Mary in the movie. Movie Mary didn’t suffer any nonsense, and she could be curt, but not short-tempered and self-centered. However, after discussing this with a few of the ladies from my monthly book lunch group, I’ve been informed that I misremember. Julie’s version of Mary has these same qualities.

Memory is a fickle thing, I will have to re-watch it.