• List Price: CDN$ 27.00
  • You Save: CDN$ 2.97 (11%)
FREE Shipping on orders over CDN$ 25.
Only 8 left in stock (more on the way).
Ships from and sold by Amazon.ca. Gift-wrap available.
Quantity:1
The Little Prince has been added to your Cart
+ CDN$ 6.49 shipping
Used: Acceptable | Details
Condition: Used: Acceptable
Comment: Ships from Texas; please allow 15-20 business days for delivery. Unbeatable customer service, and we usually ship the same or next day. Over one million satisfied customers!
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See all 3 images

The Little Prince Hardcover – Jun 1 2000

4.4 out of 5 stars 274 customer reviews

See all 55 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price
New from Used from
Kindle Edition
"Please retry"
Hardcover
"Please retry"
CDN$ 24.03
CDN$ 21.50 CDN$ 17.18

Unlimited FREE Two-Day Shipping for Six Months When You Try Amazon Student


Frequently Bought Together

  • The Little Prince
  • +
  • The Giving Tree
Total price: CDN$ 42.30
Buy the selected items together

No Kindle device required. Download one of the Free Kindle apps to start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, and computer.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

To get the free app, enter your e-mail address or mobile phone number.




Product Details

  • Hardcover: 96 pages
  • Publisher: HMH Books for Young Readers; Cloth edition (June 1 2000)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0152023984
  • ISBN-13: 978-0152023980
  • Product Dimensions: 17.8 x 1.6 x 22.2 cm
  • Shipping Weight: 408 g
  • Average Customer Review: 4.4 out of 5 stars 274 customer reviews
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #49,063 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  •  Would you like to update product info, give feedback on images, or tell us about a lower price?

Product Description

From Amazon

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry first published The Little Prince in 1943, only a year before his Lockheed P-38 vanished over the Mediterranean during a reconnaissance mission. More than a half century later, this fable of love and loneliness has lost none of its power. The narrator is a downed pilot in the Sahara Desert, frantically trying to repair his wrecked plane. His efforts are interrupted one day by the apparition of a little, well, prince, who asks him to draw a sheep. "In the face of an overpowering mystery, you don't dare disobey," the narrator recalls. "Absurd as it seemed, a thousand miles from all inhabited regions and in danger of death, I took a scrap of paper and a pen out of my pocket." And so begins their dialogue, which stretches the narrator's imagination in all sorts of surprising, childlike directions.

The Little Prince describes his journey from planet to planet, each tiny world populated by a single adult. It's a wonderfully inventive sequence, which evokes not only the great fairy tales but also such monuments of postmodern whimsy as Italo Calvino's Invisible Cities. And despite his tone of gentle bemusement, Saint-Exupéry pulls off some fine satiric touches, too. There's the king, for example, who commands the Little Prince to function as a one-man (or one-boy) judiciary:

I have good reason to believe that there is an old rat living somewhere on my planet. I hear him at night. You could judge that old rat. From time to time you will condemn him to death. That way his life will depend on your justice. But you'll pardon him each time for economy's sake. There's only one rat.
The author pokes similar fun at a businessman, a geographer, and a lamplighter, all of whom signify some futile aspect of adult existence. Yet his tale is ultimately a tender one--a heartfelt exposition of sadness and solitude, which never turns into Peter Pan-style treacle. Such delicacy of tone can present real headaches for a translator, and in her 1943 translation, Katherine Woods sometimes wandered off the mark, giving the text a slightly wooden or didactic accent. Happily, Richard Howard (who did a fine nip-and-tuck job on Stendhal's The Charterhouse of Parma in 1999) has streamlined and simplified to wonderful effect. The result is a new and improved version of an indestructible classic, which also restores the original artwork to full color. "Trying to be witty," we're told at one point, "leads to lying, more or less." But Saint-Exupéry's drawings offer a handy rebuttal: they're fresh, funny, and like the book itself, rigorously truthful. --James Marcus

From School Library Journal

YA-This new translation into "modern" English brings a classic tale into sharper focus for today's teens without sacrificing the beauty and simplicity of the author's writing, and the "restored" artwork has all the charm of the original drawings. What appears to be a simple tale of two lost souls-one, a pilot marooned in the desert next to his ditched plane; the other, a minuscule prince in self-imposed exile from an asteroid so small that he can watch the sunset 44 times a day-reveals itself as something far more complex. What appears to be a fairy tale for children opens like the petals of the Little Prince's flower into a fantasy that has lessons for all of us.
Molly Connally, Kings Park Library, Fairfax County, VA
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Product Description

Inside This Book

(Learn More)
First Sentence
ONCE WHEN I WAS six I saw a magnificent picture in a book about the jungle, called True Stories. Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Excerpt | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?

Customer Reviews

Top Customer Reviews

Format: Paperback
In 2000, the Richard Howard translation of The Little Prince was released to supercede the original of Katherine Woods from 1943. When a publisher comes to one to translate such a classic how does one ever turn them down and say the last translation was good enough! I guess one doesn't. Money and ego prevail.

But `good enough' is the debating point. Is it good enough? Howard writes in his preface "...it must be acknowledged that all translations date." Do they? Would one clean up and modernise the language of A.A. Milne in Winnie-the-Pooh? or of Kenneth Grahame in the Wind In The Willows? Of course not. Then Howard modernises Katherine Woods' rendition, "cry" with his "weep" during the departure from the fox. And he thinks this is more `modern?' What self-contradictory nonsense translators can write to justify themselves and their publishers.

I grew up on Katherine Woods' translation and prefer it over the Howard, but I must admit, when I look at my French copy, the Woods too has some elisions in translation. During the farewell from the fox, she translates: "It is the time you have wasted for your rose that makes your rose so important." Howard translates: "It's the time you spent on your rose that makes your rose so important." The French actually states: "C'est le temps que tu as perdu pour ta rose qui fait ta rose si importante." Literally this translates far more meaningfully and philosophically than either of the Woods or the Howard as "It is the time which you have lost for your rose which makes your rose so important." So that leaves me thinking both translations have their flaws. I am not sure why both of them would dilute the original like they have, for it has surely been diluted from what St.
Read more ›
5 of 5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
Although "The Little Prince" is one of my favorite books and I think everyone should go out (or stay in I suppose :)) and buy a copy, I too feel(see the other one star review below) that the new translation should not be that copy that you pick up. Do yourself a favor and track down a copy of the Katherine Woods version (which seems to have disappeared from stores since the new one came out). As an exaple, compare the line "if I had fifty-three minutes to spend as I liked, I should walk at my leisure toward a spring of fresh water" (Woods translation) to Howard's which goes: "[if I had fifty-three minutes...]I would walk towards a water fountain".
This translation (and this is characteristic of almost every passage in it)saps it of its wistful, bittersweet language, replacing it with sentences which are, frankly, boring as all get out. Howard's translation may or may not be closer to the original French wording, but it takes something I love very much and makes it stale and less magical than when I first read it. In my book, that reads: "Bad Translation".
5 of 5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
If you would like to experience the Little Prince as the brilliant book it is, DO NOT READ THIS TRANSLATION! The translator obviously missed the key points that make this book the treasure it is. The "Matters of Consequence" phrase is changed throughout the story, completely destroying one of the main themes. Also, more complicated words have been replaced with simple words. Instead of elephants being very cumbersome they now take up a lot of space. Ack! Again, I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS TRANSLATION! It is for silly grown ups who have forgotten what it is to be a child. Big words are okay, they help children learn. If we continue to over-simplify things, not only will we be robbing our children of a stronger education, we will have created a new form of literature that is boring for all. Long live the old version!!!
14 of 15 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
Please, people, do not waste your time on the Richard Howard translation. It is childish, simplified, and simply awful. I really think that Richard Howard took this phenomenal, amazing book and tried to make it as devoid of meaning as he could. The new translation is almost like how a five year old would tell it- small, small words and small, small ideas.
However- I had the Katharine Woods translation before I bought this one. Do not blame this new error on the author. The Katharine Woods translation is superb. Richard Howards- Not so much.
This review has nothing to do with the book, just its differing translations.
20 of 22 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
I almost bought the new translation for a friend who had never read the little prince!! Fortunately I read through it first. OUCH! It reads NOTHING like the original; the beauty and simplicity of the reading has been replaced by something that seems written for a first grade reader. (Maybe its more readable for first graders, but not for those who care about words...).
I actually went home and read my original to make sure I wasn't imagining the difference (maybe it wasn't as good as I remembered!)
Caveat Emptor!!
BFM
4 of 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse
Format: Hardcover
This is just a note to say beware of the new translation if you've previously read and enjoyed the Katherine Woods version. Mr. Howard makes the argument in his "translator's note" that the language has changed since the 1940's and that a new translation is needed. I couldn't disagree more. And I [do] speak with some experience on this subject: I read this title at school in the original French language for three different classes, as well as numerous times in English (the Woods version). Katherine Woods beautifully captured the feel of the French original. The new, Howard translation is in a more modern English which mostly succeeds at removing the poetry that previously existed and little else that I can find. It does not make the story any more clear or nuanced than it previously was, rather less so. I find the arguments for a new translation indefencible.
Three stars is not a review of the book, but of the translation. This title is beyond excellent, but you might do yourself a favor and find a used copy with the Woods translation (there are many copies out there). Enjoy!
2 of 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
Report abuse


Feedback