Obwohl ich mir sicher bin, dass es im Bücherregal meiner Kindheit stand, habe ich Mio, mein Mio bis heute nie gelesen und das obwohl es mit seiner märchengleichen Atmosphäre perfekt zu meiner damaligen und heutigen Vorliebe für die Gebrüder Grimm und Tausendundeine Nacht gepasst hätte. Ist aber nicht weiter schlimm, denn das Buch ist zeitlos, sowohl in Hinblick auf seine Entstehungszeit (1954!) als auch auf das Lesealter. Neben dem Märchenzauber hat mich die melancholische Stimmung berührt, so sehr dass ich das Hörbuch beinahe unterbrechen musste. Im Zusammenhang damit finde ich die Rahmung der Geschichte interessant und wie ambivalent sie bleibt. Ist Bosse wirklich zu Mio geworden oder sitzt er noch immer träumend in Stockholm, ist ihm gar etwas Schlimmes zugestoßen? In Sachen Kritik sei gesagt, dass ich mir ein paar (mehr) Frauen in Mios Leben gewünscht habe und gern erfahren hätte, wieso Ritter Kato eigentlich so böse ist bzw. Wie er zu seinem steinernen Herz gekommen ist. Ansonsten war das sicherlich nicht das letzte Kinderbuch aus Lindgrens Feder, das ich als Erwachsene nachholen werde.

CONS:

1) it was so mystical and far-fetched that I kept expecting it to turn into a book like [b:I Am the Cheese|48974|I Am the Cheese|Robert Cormier|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1170356988l/48974._SY75_.jpg|958210] or [b:Fight Club|36236124|Fight Club|Chuck Palahniuk|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1558216416l/36236124._SY75_.jpg|68729] where the ending shows that the main character isn't what (or isn't where) they think they are. When it turned out that the kid really did go to Farawayland and really was a prince, etc. etc. it just felt like a missed opportunity and made the story seem a lot more silly and pointless. So a kid gets a lot of really great things and his sucky life is now a great life, and the point of the book is, I guess, to highlight how great his life is.

I was sure it would turn out to be his imagination (or something similar) because almost everything he encounters at the beginning mirrors his old life in some way - the horse given to him reminds him of a horse in his past life that he didn't own but wanted to, yet the new horse is even better; his dad is a king when, in his past life, his foster mom called his dad a bum; his new best friend Pompoo reminds him of his past life's best friend Ben except that his new best friend is even better; the kids he meets and plays with remind him of his past life's neighborhood kids except those kids were mean to him and excluded him and the new life's neighborhood kids are super nice. Etc etc etc. There's more but basically everything is a fairy-tale and ten times better than his old life. It really sounded like the entire book was a set-up for a kid who's so unhappy with his life that he starts fantasizing and slipping away into delusions to avoid reality and that it's going to end with him in an insane asylum or something.

It didn't end that way, but it would have been more interesting if it had. I would have given it five stars because that would have been really interesting, but she didn't take it that direction (probably because it's a literal kid's book lol).

2) Because this book was written in the 50's, it's got some dated, sexist ideas of what boys and girls are like. At the beginning, there's the old stereotype about how boys are loud and messy and dirty, and girls are quiet and neat and helpful, and the foster parents are bitter and angry that they've been stuck with such a fun-loving BOY of all things!!1! and there's never a realization that they could have been stuck with a fun-loving girl too, because it's assumed that girls aren't that way. Girls are quiet and meek and mild and no trouble at all because they don't have fun and get dirty and run around. This is what the beginning of the book starts off with, and uses that to explain why his foster parents don't like him and begrudge his entire existence.

I'd like to point out that I grew up with a lot of sisters and because my parents were hippies, we didn't grow up with many toys, we just grew up outside and were allowed to do pretty much whatever we wanted. So we ran around, got dirty, ripped our clothes, spent time outside, learned how to start fires, leave no trace, build a lean-to, go backpacking, etc. and I've never been told I can't do something because I'm a girl. There are lots of things that girls and boys are and lots of things they aren't simply because of their individual personalities, their likes and dislikes. There's nothing that makes a girl inherently more daring than a boy, there's nothing that makes a boy more bashful than a girl, there's no DNA that determines your personality, and that's where the book rubbed me the wrong way.

However, that's a very minor thing, and it doesn't come up very often, so it's not a big deal, it's just one of the few things I didn't enjoy about the book.

PROS:

1) It's super short, so it's easy to get through and doesn't feel like a waste of time. It's a fun little adventure and would be enjoyable for young kids. I'm a little bit too old for it, but it's still enjoyable.

2) He's a very open person, and he processes his emotions in a very healthy way that you don't see very often in modern books because emotions have become a bit taboo in the last fifty years. I do see books tryna turn that around and go back to being open and welcoming of every emotion, but it's still refreshing to read something from the 50's embracing the idea that someone could get discouraged and need a good cry, or someone could be angry at something that isn't okay.

The hero gets discouraged super easily, and wants to give up pretty much every single page, when he is faced with the task of defeating the villain of the story. I really enjoyed the book's message, and the honest portrayal of what it would be like to have to do something like this, at any age (but especially at the young age that Mio is supposed to be). It's a good message for kids, that heroes often feel like giving up and they can't succeed without the help of those around them. It's not bad to cry, it's not bad to want to quit, it's not bad to need help.

3) The book has a really healthy, really fun friendship between two boys that you don't usually see in books. For some reason girls' friendships with each other are a lot more common (at least in my experience), and it was nice to see some representation in the boy department.

SUMMARY:

Short, sweet story with some interesting elements. If the story had been a bit more complex I would have rated it four stars. I may reread it later and appreciate it more, and then I'll come back and bump it up, but for now, it was a good story with a good message and some cute characters, but other than that it wasn't anything very new. Would definitely recommend for kids ages 8-12 who want a quick, fun adventure.

Vanhanajan fantasiasatu täynnä kodikkuutta ja turvallista kielellistä toistamista. Ei järin säväyttävä ensikertaa tarinaa lukevalle aikuiselle, mutta tykkäsin kun päähenkilö sai olla herkkä ja urhea. Ehkä ripaus lapsekkuutta olisi tehnyt terää Miolle.

(read for school)

Notes while reading Mio min mio

- set in Shlm so clearly a set place
- Den oändliga historian
- Rose garden = repetition
- Clearly the main character is a narrator
- Like the “I’m telling it years in the future and it’s already happened”
- I’m 100% waiting for the scary twist
- Au where he died and this is the after life or something
- Alldrakäraste syster
- Prophecies