Book Review: “A Barrel of Laughs, A Vale of Tears” by Jules Feiffer (1995)

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Rating: 5 out of 5.

Buy this book on Amazon
Buy it on CD (yup, CD!)
(paid links)

It’s always a joy for me to discover a “new” author who writes in a delightfully fresh way. Jules Feiffer is 100% that for me, and although I’ve read just this single submission, he’s become an instant favorite for me and the kids.

I’d never heard of Jules Feiffer before finding this book at my favorite thrift store, and I almost wasn’t going to buy it for that very reason. After all, the book’s nearly 30 years old, and if I’ve never heard of the title or the author, then it must have been a flop…right? Well, whether the world deemed it a flop or not, I couldn’t care less: this book was incredible, humorous, and thought-provoking, and it’s immediately become one of my top reads of the year.

I’m so glad I listened to my gut when I found this one. I was about to pass it by because of the unprofessional lettering on the front cover, but as I flipped through the pages, I noticed Feiffer’s large illustrations sketched in black throughout the book. Deeply reminiscent of the drawing styles of Quentin Blake and Shel Silverstein, I figured this book might have the same quirky, childish feel of Shel Silverstein or, say, Roald Dahl. My instincts were right, because that’s exactly what this book is, an epic fairy-tale adventure with language that flows as easily and humorously as Roald Dahl’s own and which captivated my chuckling children from beginning to end.

The story follows Prince Roger, an incredibly happy fellow who has “a strange effect on people”: he makes them laugh. He doesn’t do it by telling jokes or making funny faces, but by merely existing. People can’t help themselves; it’s like an aura he exudes. Even if he approaches folks from a great distance, they start smiling, and the closer he gets, the more they chuckle and chortle, laugh and guffaw. It’s really quite disruptive to the kingdom of his father, King Whatchamacallit, and so the King orders that the J. Wellington Wizard send young Roger on a quest. He doesn’t quite tell Prince Roger what the quest will be, but he sends him out anyways to explore the world equipped only with a satchel of magic dust that turns him into anything but himself, thereby cancelling out the effect he has on people, at least temporarily.

Throughout his quest, Prince Roger meets a number of people, including Large Lucille and Lady Sadie, and he visits many strange but important places. He spends several years in the Forever Forest, for example, before heading into the Dastardly Divide, the Valley of Vengeance, the Mountain of Malice, and the Vale of Tears. Each step of the way, Prince Roger becomes less joyful, but also less self-possessed. The sadness he begins to feel is a sadness borne out of recognizing (finally) of the plights of others. The hunger and pain he experiences is that which normal people feel. The guilt and shame he faces are the result of knowing how poorly he’s treated others.

In the end, Prince Roger follows through with what he figures must be his quest, and through it all, he learns a great deal about kindness, selflessness, and love. I wouldn’t call it a book designed to teach these things exclusively, but the moral lessons are hard to miss, even when they’re couched in this strange and humorous fairytale world.

Perhaps my favorite portions of the book are when Feiffer speaks directly to the reader, especially when speaking about the hunter we meet on the first page. Take this lengthier passage from Chapter 5 for example:

A note to the reader: This is my book. I am it’s author. I came up with a title I’m proud of because it sounds like poetry, which is good, and it isn’t, which is better. I made up the story and all the characters—including Jack, who calls himself Tom—and that, I must admit, really frustrates me.

The neat thing about being a writer is that you know everything that’s going to happen before it happens. In real life, you can’t be sure of what’s going to happen five minutes from now, but in your own book you’re allowed to be in charge in a way that real life doesn’t permit. And that’s why people like me decide to be writers instead of, say, President. Because not even the President knows what a writer knows, which is what’s going to happen next.

But this Jack who calls himself Tom comes along and, first, he won’t get out of the book when he’s supposed to and, next, he meets Roger and becomes his best friend. Yes, that’s what happens next. I know, because I planned it that way. Not for this Jack to become Roger’s best friend, but another hunter who I would have called Jack, and he would have been Jack if this fool hadn’t come out of the woods first. Infuriating! (32-33)

I also love how, in Chapter 15, Feiffer references three other books in which Tom had tried to live. He names Charlotte’s Web and James and the Giant Peach (which assures me he’s definitely styling himself at least somewhat after Dahl!), but he also references The Phantom Tollbooth. Now that’s a book I’d read before—a book I didn’t love but appreciated for its very intentional world-building based on the rules of grammar—but I hadn’t realized that Jules Feiffer was himself its long-ago illustrator! Of this book, he writes:

[Tom] tried a book called The Phantom Tollbooth, but the story was so smart it gave him a headache and the pictures were so loosely drawn that he thought that even he could do better. So he left. (101-102)

Two other humorously poignant lines from the book that I want to save were these:

In a lifetime of learning nothing from experience, the one thing I have learned is that if you do unto others as you would have others do unto you, they don’t. (117)

Sometimes you’re so funny I want to hug and kiss you—and sometimes you’re so sweet I want to hug and kiss you—and sometimes you’re so sad I want to hug and kiss you—and sometimes you’re so maddening I want to kick you. (176)

After finishing this book for our nighttime reading, I asked both of my kids what they thought. They both loved it, of course, but my son (12) said that he still prefers Roald Dahl. My daughter (11) couldn’t remember Dahl well enough (2022 was our Dahl year, so it’s been a while), though she thinks Feiffer might be funnier. It’s a toss-up for sure, so it doesn’t really matter if he’s slightly better or slightly worse—he’s great. I highly recommend this book.

©2023 E.T.