Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH

[Guest lvaughn]

I'm a longtime homeschooler who wrote a review of this book on Amazon, and would love to have some way of talking through some of the issues it brings up, but have found nowhere to do so. Courtney from here was kind enough to comment and suggest this forum as a good place for intelligent, engaged discussion.

 

Basically my review says that I see something no one else seems to mention (that this book is really about fascists). It's a great book to expose upper elementary to subtext and how to read books better and ultimately that the best books are usually more about what they do not say than what they say. That transition from reading books for plot to reading books for meaning takes years (as you all know). This book is a great first book in that transition.

 

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2JNNO3LZFNQ5C

 

The questions I am having trouble untangling are ones like what does it mean that out of perhaps 600 reviews I read before posting mine that just about everyone admired these fascist rats? The back of the book has these rats as heroes. Teachers assign the book and never notice? How can that be? And what does it mean? Are children latent fascists? How can we so easily watch an entire group hoard, plot, and steal and admire them?

 

I read the book for the first time at about 35, so I'm sure that had a lot to do with it. Had I been 11, I probably would have just skimmed over all that, and in my memory it would have become a book it never was, and I would have suggested it to my kids without rereading it, and they would have...

 

But I am particularly concerned about how many classrooms are using this book. Teachers seem to be using it as escapist animal fantasy with inventiveness and perseverance highlighted. I don't get it...

[mommymilkies]

I have to say that I LOVED your review. I have never personally read Mrs.Frisby, but I definitely will now, and I truly appreciate your view of it. :lurk5:

[Halcyon]

:bigear: I read your review and appreciated it. My son read the book last year, but I have yet to read it myself. It's up next in my reading list.

 

Glad you've joined us here.

[KirstenH]

Oh, it's you! :D I loved your review and read it aloud to my husband. I then went to Target and purchased the book so I could reread it. I remember hating that book as a child, for reasons I couldn't really put my finger on, and feeling weird about it because everyone else seemed to like it so much and it was assigned reading in class. All I remember clearly is that I didn't like the rats at all. I'm quite sure I didn't think of them as fascists, but from the way you wrote your review, I HAVE to reread this and give it some adult thought. I'm glad you're posting here!

[justamouse]

Oh it's you! Thank you so much for joining us, I loved your review! So much so that I've got The Rats up on the read aloud que.

 

How do they not see it? They have lost their moral imagination and can't see it anymore. It's been beaten out of them by the school of relativism. This is why homeschoolers are saving the world. ;-)

Edited March 25, 2012 by justamouse

[Ailaena]

First of all, please tell me you live near Denver as I would absolutely adore having a conversation irl with you.

 

The funny thing about books is that most people read solely for entertainment. They are not interested in a deeper message that may cause them to have to think about junk and stuff. When it comes to children's literature, I believe that many people just automatically assume that those books are written as imaginative spring boards as opposed to social commentary.

 

You said that, "That transition from reading books for plot to reading books for meaning takes years." Spot on, absolutely true. Now how does one learn reading for meaning? I think we would agree that it would be best to have someone guide a student through this process with the final goal being to allow the student to draw conclusions based on outside knowledge and contextual clues.

 

Now tell me where the typical student is going to receive this training. I didn't learn any "official" literature analysis until college, and even though I was a science major, I loved it so much I pursued it through numerous courses. In turn, I brought this love of analysis to my household, and much to my daughter's chagrin, I'm sure, there has been no book read that we have not analyzed to death from many angles. Even way back when she was in a B&M school we analyzed things like plot, character, motive and historical references.

 

But for a typical public-school teacher to do that is simply asking too much. If they have a grasp on analysis, it is likely tenuous, and if they love it, they are likely not allowed to talk about it. Last Friday there was a school group at the museum that had a packet to be filled out. I usually applaud when teachers do this, but when I read the questions, I was only annoyed. Here was an 8th grade teacher who still did not have his basic homophones down and who must have ignored the little squiggly line under his words that tells him they are spelled wrong. Let's ask him if he can even define a fascist.

 

In fact, experiment time! Let's ask anyone else if they even know what fascism is. No fair doing it here, we are a gaggle of autodidacts.:tongue_smilie:

 

And even those who desperately want to teach kids things are unable to stray from the curriculum and lessons that are already planned out for them. Add that to the dynamics of the general classroom that includes sick, tired, add, gifted, struggling, bored and hungry students and you have something like 3 kids paying attention to you at any given moment. Not really long enough to discuss possible character motive.

 

 

Regarding the book, specifically, it has been a while since I have read it, and I am probably mixing it up with the movie, but I remember writing a book report that lauded the rats for organizing themselves in such a way that they would be able to work towards overthrowing their oppressors. So I don't think you were the only one that had that idea. I remember them being angry at their lot in life, angry at having this high intelligence thrust upon them with no outlet for it, so they scheme revenge against the people who have inflicted misery upon them.

 

We admire them when they hoard, plot and steal because they are portrayed as the ones who suffered a wrong-doing, and whenever we suffer the same thing, we want to act accordingly. Is it an even deeper lesson in the book? Is it detrimental to one's life to live so focused on one thing that you do not stop to help, or even notice, those around you? Especially since they may end up helping you in return?

 

 

 

I have no idea if any of that made sense. I have not had a remotely intellectual conversation, or really any conversations at all, for the last 6 weeks and I look like: :willy_nilly:

:D

[Pink Fairy]

My dd and I are scouring the house for our copy of the book. Thanks for a fascinating review!

[Mrs Mungo]

Errr...Ayn Rand fans, maybe. But, fascists? I don't get the connection between extreme capitalism/opportunism and fascism? I agree that the book is about how technological societies start to lose their humanity, but I don't think you can slap a fascist label on the rats. ETA: Certainly Ayn Rand-style social Darwinism is a part of fascism, but it is not the whole thing.

 

Edited (again) to add: it is really late here, and I am doped up on allergy medicine. I hope that short blurb makes *some* sense!

Edited March 25, 2012 by Mrs Mungo

[nono]

Have you read The Rainbow Fish? That one might make your head explode too, but at least the reviews on amazon are mixed on that. Anyway, I appreciated your review enough to order a copy of the book. I have not ever read it.

 

Welcome!

[Mommyfaithe]

I gave ds 9 this book to read this week. He is LOVING it. I wonder what he thinks of the rats?!? Ok, now, I have to read it and discuss it with him....

 

I thought it was just a good book to hand over to him. It was one he chose at the library and I remember some crazy homeschool lady saying her kids loved it.....shoulda known it would be deeper than a puddle......

[GailV]

Errr...Ayn Rand fans, maybe. But, fascists? I don't get the connection between extreme capitalism/opportunism and fascism? I agree that the book is about how technological societies start to lose their humanity, but I don't think you can slap a fascist label on the rats. ETA: Certainly Ayn Rand-style social Darwinism is a part of fascism, but it is not the whole thing.

 

Edited (again) to add: it is really late here, and I am doped up on allergy medicine. I hope that short blurb makes *some* sense!

 

Makes sense to me.

 

One could argue that when they find the truck they are reverting to scavenging. Really, I think their argument that they couldn't find the heirs was quite plausible. I saw that scene this way: Author needs a somewhat plausible way for rats to obtain teensy-weensy tools. Author comes up with this scenario, which is pretty much a stretch (really? A toy tinkerer just happened to drop dead in the woods just where they needed it?) but within the parameters of the story (given that the entire premise is pretty farfetched) it's okay. I think you're reading way, way too much into the author's writing there. Which brings up the discussion of what we get out of stories -- what the author intended, or what we want to find given our own prejudices (that is, to someone with a hammer everything looks like a nail -- to someone with a fear of fascism, does everything look like proof thereof?).

 

The bit about Jonathon's family always bothered me. Also that Mrs. Frisby was portrayed as such a ninny. ETA: What bothered me was the sense I had that Jonathon was so ashamed of his family -- that his wife wasn't smart -- that he never admitted to the rats that they existed. It's been awhile sense I've read the book, but was it ever explicitly stated that the rats knew he had a family? I really can't remember. But I remember thinking it was HIS fault the rats didn't try to help the family, and shame on him. Was he just using Mrs. Frisby for rodent sex (unavailable with the female rats due to size difference), and didn't really care that much about her? (Perhaps my personal hammer I'm carrying is about men being scum, heh.) OTOH, I could sympathize with his loneliness as the only altered mouse in the group -- where was he to go for socialization/sex? So, I go off on a totally different tangent in regards to the Frisby family issue. Probably not one I'd discuss in depth with small children.

 

Much of the rest, I'm not sure I agree. Well, actually, I'm pretty sure I don't. Then again, I live with rats, literally, so I ponder their motivations on a daily basis, and often find myself thinking about the book and its contrasting portrayal of rats.

 

ETA: I have to go do something else that will last the rest of the day, but will be interested to see where this discussion heads.

Edited March 25, 2012 by GailV

[KirstenH]

Have you read The Rainbow Fish? That one might make your head explode too, but at least the reviews on amazon are mixed on that. Anyway, I appreciated your review enough to order a copy of the book. I have not ever read it.

 

Welcome!

 

Ooooh. I hate that book with a white-hot passion.

[Dmmetler]

If your DC are able to handle it, and you can find a copy (it's long out of print, but is sometimes available in used bookstores with a big sci-fi section) follow Mrs. Frisby with A Report from Group 17, which is O'Brian's more adult book that also focuses on genetics and the implications of genetic engineering. I think, based on that one, that he'd agree with your interpretation-that in modifying the genetics of the rats, in making them more human, the humans have given them, in many respects, the worst of humanity, not the best.

 

http://www.amazon.com/A-Report-From-Group-17/dp/B000FMILQS/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1332686149&sr=1-1

[Dmmetler]

Makes sense to me.

 

One could argue that when they find the truck they are reverting to scavenging. Really, I think their argument that they couldn't find the heirs was quite plausible. I saw that scene this way: Author needs a somewhat plausible way for rats to obtain teensy-weensy tools. Author comes up with this scenario, which is pretty much a stretch (really? A toy tinkerer just happened to drop dead in the woods just where they needed it?) but within the parameters of the story (given that the entire premise is pretty farfetched) it's okay. I think you're reading way, way too much into the author's writing there. Which brings up the discussion of what we get out of stories -- what the author intended, or what we want to find given our own prejudices (that is, to someone with a hammer everything looks like a nail -- to someone with a fear of fascism, does everything look like proof thereof?).

 

The bit about Jonathon's family always bothered me. Also that Mrs. Frisby was portrayed as such a ninny. ETA: What bothered me was the sense I had that Jonathon was so ashamed of his family -- that his wife wasn't smart -- that he never admitted to the rats that they existed. It's been awhile sense I've read the book, but was it ever explicitly stated that the rats knew he had a family? I really can't remember. But I remember thinking it was HIS fault the rats didn't try to help the family, and shame on him. Was he just using Mrs. Frisby for rodent sex (unavailable with the female rats due to size difference), and didn't really care that much about her? (Perhaps my personal hammer I'm carrying is about men being scum, heh.) OTOH, I could sympathize with his loneliness as the only altered mouse in the group -- where was he to go for socialization/sex? So, I go off on a totally different tangent in regards to the Frisby family issue. Probably not one I'd discuss in depth with small children.

 

Much of the rest, I'm not sure I agree. Well, actually, I'm pretty sure I don't. Then again, I live with rats, literally, so I ponder their motivations on a daily basis, and often find myself thinking about the book and its contrasting portrayal of rats.

 

ETA: I have to go do something else that will last the rest of the day, but will be interested to see where this discussion heads.

 

 

Except that one of the rats mentioned that Jonathon had left them when he'd met Mrs. Frisby, and talked about their meeting (I can't remember whether this is Nicodemus or Justin), so the rats, at least some of them, DID know Johnathon was married, and therefore, when he was killed, that he would have had a widow and very likely children. And I agree that not having the rats involved in the children's education, particularly since it's apparent that the genetic modifications are consistent in the young rats to the 2nd generation (and likely more-although the rats in the book seem to have a longer lifespan and longer latent period than non-modified rats), so Johathon's intelligent mouse children would ALSO need educational support.

 

 

((If you haven't read the sequels, you may want to stop now)))

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You do see some of this in the later books that Jane Conly wrote as well. My DD is reading RT, Margaret, and the Rats of Nimh right now. You can read it as "the rats saved the lost children"-but it's painfully obvious by the end of the book that the rats COULD have, had they been willing to let the children know they existed up front, or even, once Christopher was discovered, directed the kids back in the direction of the search parties and sent them home much, much earlier. Because they wanted to preserve their secret, they allowed the humans to believe that the children were dead, and used Margaret as a slave for months to do physical (and sometimes dangerous) tasks that they themselves couldn't do. Realistically, if two kids who had been lost in the woods, one of whom has autism, come out talking about talking animals after a couple of days, no one is likely to believe them, so it's not that the rats' secret was at risk at that point-it was much MORE so when the children came out after months, apparently in good shape physically, when there was no really likely way they could have survived without assistance. Nicodemus is very manipulative, not only of Margaret, but of poor Christopher, who truly just plain wanted to help the children.

[Word Nerd]

I loved the book as a kid but never had the impression the rats were perfect or without fault. I remember being suspicious of the rats at first and wondering if Mrs. Frisby should trust them.

 

However, I still think it's a stretch to call them fascists. I haven't found any evidence that the author considered them to be fascists or felt readers took the wrong idea of the rats away from the book (whereas, Ray Bradbury, for example, has said in several interviews that decrying censorship was not his primary point in Fahrenheit 451 but rather how television dumbs people down and destroys an interest in reading literature).

 

I did enjoy reading the OP's review and plan to reread the book soon with that perspective in mind.

[GailV]

Except that one of the rats mentioned that Jonathon had left them when he'd met Mrs. Frisby, and talked about their meeting (I can't remember whether this is Nicodemus or Justin), so the rats, at least some of them, DID know Johnathon was married, and therefore, when he was killed, that he would have had a widow and very likely children. And I agree that not having the rats involved in the children's education, particularly since it's apparent that the genetic modifications are consistent in the young rats to the 2nd generation (and likely more-although the rats in the book seem to have a longer lifespan and longer latent period than non-modified rats), so Johathon's intelligent mouse children would ALSO need educational support.

 

Yeah, I was later thinking something like that happened. But, still, the reader doesn't know how the relationship was portrayed by Jonathon to the rats. Would Mrs. Frisby, a non-altered rat, have considered it a "marriage" as we do, given that she perhaps didn't have the intellectual capacity to understand what it meant? (Do mice mate for life normally? No clue here.) Why was the focus on the MALE Frisby child as being so intelligent -- was his sister considered somehow less? (I really don't remember this, but I'm thinking she was a bit like Susan in the Narnia book -- not a strong character at all.)

 

Given that some rats knew there was a "wife" and children somewhere within mouse-travel-distance, how would the rats set about to find them? Should the rats have assumed it was their responsibility -- if mice actually mate for life and live in family groups for years at a time (which is the premise of the Frisby family sticking together), why didn't Mrs. Frisby's family-of-origin step up to take care of her? Or would they assume that Mrs. Frisby would then mate with another male mouse?

 

Jonathon's children were half-breeds, unlike the rat children. Should the rats have assumed his children should've inherited HIS intellectual capacity, or HERS. Which would be dominant?

 

If the author had decided that the entire set-up for the opening drama had terrible philosophical implications, what should she have used as the dramatic hook? After all, Mrs. Frisby's problems set up the entire narrative. If she had no problems, we would have no resolution.

 

Hmm, I'm realizing I'd like to do the feminist review of NIMH ;) Funny, I'd always thought that I'd be the type to do the animal rights review (humans screwed with these animals, now the animals are screwing with the humans).

 

 

 

 

 

 

You do see some of this in the later books that Jane Conly wrote as well. My DD is reading RT, Margaret, and the Rats of Nimh right now. You can read it as "the rats saved the lost children"-but it's painfully obvious by the end of the book that the rats COULD have, had they been willing to let the children know they existed up front, or even, once Christopher was discovered, directed the kids back in the direction of the search parties and sent them home much, much earlier. Because they wanted to preserve their secret, they allowed the humans to believe that the children were dead, and used Margaret as a slave for months to do physical (and sometimes dangerous) tasks that they themselves couldn't do. Realistically, if two kids who had been lost in the woods, one of whom has autism, come out talking about talking animals after a couple of days, no one is likely to believe them, so it's not that the rats' secret was at risk at that point-it was much MORE so when the children came out after months, apparently in good shape physically, when there was no really likely way they could have survived without assistance. Nicodemus is very manipulative, not only of Margaret, but of poor Christopher, who truly just plain wanted to help the children.

 

We've read all of them, but I think that one was the weirdest. The first 2 we've read more than once, but I didn't ever feel a need to re-visit that one. However, it doesn't strike me as any more bizarre than many classic fairy tales, which actually serve a function in a child's mental and emotional growth.

[Hen]

Have you read The Rainbow Fish? That one might make your head explode too, but at least the reviews on amazon are mixed on that. Anyway, I appreciated your review enough to order a copy of the book. I have not ever read it.

 

Welcome!

 

I hated "The Rainbow Fish" -although I liked the art work of the fish's scales...but I refused to read it to my kids after I looked through it. I always kind of felt abnormal for my reaction to it, glad to know I am not alone.

 

I read "The Rats of NIHM" when I was in 6th grade, it was a class assignment- we did not go deep into the book for themes or motives or symbolism. I do remember feeling a bit that the Rats themselves had set themselves up to be as "godlike" as the scientists they fled from because they were not going to help Mrs. Frisby at all- until they decided to because her husband had been a help to them. She was part of the humble populace until a connection made her able to get favors from the elite. So, while I was rooting for the Rats to get away and live their own peaceful lives, I thought they were a bit cruel in their own way, Mrs. Frisby just happened to luck out to get their help.

 

...ok, off to go read your review :auto:

[Shellydon]

OP - do you want to write up so more questions for literature? You did an excellent job!

[jen3kids]

When I read books, I often do so superficially and completely miss the underlying issues. I guess I'm shallow in that regard :tongue_smilie:

 

However, as I listened to Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH, I did ask many the questions - why didn't the rats help Mrs. Frisby earlier, why did they think it ok to take the tools from the truck, why did they just leave and not offer to help others....

 

Thanks for this post. I've discovered that I like things that make me think!!!