I recently bought this book for my kids. Somehow I've never read it in forty years. What's the big deal? It's gotta be the most famous book I've never read.
Very surprised and sad to see so many dismissive comments of the book. It's a really popular one in France for a very good reason. It's so creative, poetic and touching that I doubt you can read it and stay indifferent.
If you've never read it, do yourself a favor and do so! It's quite short, and I hope you'll like it.
> Very surprised and sad to see so many dismissive comments of the book
I cannot see that many dismissive comments. Those I can see are things like dismissing it purely because its not recent, or because the commentor has not read it which really say more about the person being dismissive than anything else.
It is very popular (in translation) in the UK (and other Engli8sh speaking countries) too.
It has one of my favorite quotes of all time. For those who haven’t read it yet, if the quote below resonates with you, the rest of the book surely will too.
“Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add. But when there is nothing left to take away.”
I'm not sure how I feel about this quote. It seems to me like it only makes sense when talking about a tool or thing with scoped functionality that would be hindered by unnecessary accretions. In the state of "perfection" for something like this, there would be nothing left to add or remove. But even in this context, if it's unable to perform it's function due to insufficiency, perfection would be achieved by adding and not subtracting.
If one were to apply it to life in general, it seems even less fitting. Although we can never achieve perfection, I think most people would agree that a meaningful life is lived through growth and gain towards a particular ideal or goal. The more we grow, the closer we come to that unattainable perfection. Removing what's harmful or a hindrance is a part of this, but if all you do is take away and not add, you just end up with nothing.
Ultimately, I think it's lacking because while you can err both due to deficiency and excess, it only considers excess and denies deficiency. It serves more to assuage feelings of inadequacy in the face of unattainable perfection than to give an accurate representation of life. And even if you don't believe in perfection, this quote doesn't deny that it exists, it merely claims that it can be achieved solely by treating excess, while ignoring deficiency.
There's something both beautiful/enchanting and deeply tragic about the story.
If anyone's interested in an analysis of Saint-Exupéry's psychology via the symbolism of The Little Prince, the book "The Problem of the Puer Aeternus" by Marie-Louise von Franz [1] is absolutely fascinating.
As an American, we grow up almost entirely without this gem of children's literature. I'm so thankful that PBS aired this story when I was a small child. The imagery was so strong that it has forever stuck in my head. When I see other stories like "The Fountain" or Super Mario Galaxy, I immediately think of the Little Prince.
I've yet to revisit it as an adult, but I think maybe it's time?
It’s interesting how The Little Prince keeps resurfacing across generations. Even if someone doesn’t connect with every part of it, the themes loss, imagination, responsibility, friendship feel universal. It’s rare for something that short to stay relevant for so long.
15 comments
[ 20.1 ms ] story [ 535 ms ] threadIf you've never read it, do yourself a favor and do so! It's quite short, and I hope you'll like it.
I cannot see that many dismissive comments. Those I can see are things like dismissing it purely because its not recent, or because the commentor has not read it which really say more about the person being dismissive than anything else.
It is very popular (in translation) in the UK (and other Engli8sh speaking countries) too.
“Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add. But when there is nothing left to take away.”
It is relevant in so many contexts in life.
If one were to apply it to life in general, it seems even less fitting. Although we can never achieve perfection, I think most people would agree that a meaningful life is lived through growth and gain towards a particular ideal or goal. The more we grow, the closer we come to that unattainable perfection. Removing what's harmful or a hindrance is a part of this, but if all you do is take away and not add, you just end up with nothing.
Ultimately, I think it's lacking because while you can err both due to deficiency and excess, it only considers excess and denies deficiency. It serves more to assuage feelings of inadequacy in the face of unattainable perfection than to give an accurate representation of life. And even if you don't believe in perfection, this quote doesn't deny that it exists, it merely claims that it can be achieved solely by treating excess, while ignoring deficiency.
I'm sorry if this is all very pedantic.
Every time I do so, I learn something new.
- I scroll
Why do you scroll?
- To forget
To forget what?
- That I am boring and bored
Why are you boring and bored?
- Because I scroll!
If anyone's interested in an analysis of Saint-Exupéry's psychology via the symbolism of The Little Prince, the book "The Problem of the Puer Aeternus" by Marie-Louise von Franz [1] is absolutely fascinating.
[1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1404609.The_Problem_of_t...
I've yet to revisit it as an adult, but I think maybe it's time?