Deeper than it should be? From the Mixed-up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler REVIEW

If you could run away from home, where would you go? Why would you choose to go there?

Claudia Kinkaid’s decision to run away to the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art (yes, you read that right) may appear to be the childish, possibly adventurous decision of a near-adolescent who is fed-up with the normality of life, but From the Mixed-up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler is more than simply a run-away tale. It explores the why beneath the why.

Before we delve into said-why, know that Claudia is a planner. A very good planner. For in order to survive 12-year-old-living in the Big Apple, she knows she needs financial backing. Thankfully, her younger brother Jamie might as well be a bank, bosting the grand sum of twenty-four dollars and forty-three cents (which in 1960’s New York, isn’t anything to sneer at), which he primary racked-up in playing games of war (aka, gambling) with one of his school bus buddies.

Claudia is the brains of the operation. Jamie is the money…and a lover of complications (when Claudia gives him a note with the runaway details, Jamie memories the info and tries to swallow the note to “destroy the evidence”).

The duo’s adventure is supposed to be straightforward: Instead of going to school, take a train to New York City and hide-out in the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art for an indeterminate amount of time in order to teach their parents a lesson. In Claudia’s mind, her parents suffer from the giving-of-responsibilities-to-the-oldest-child. Jamie couldn’t care less; he’s simply in it for the fun and “complications”.

What happens next could have easily, eaaaasily been nothing more than the kinda/sorta interesting capers and cringy going-ons of rebellious children, with a conclusion worthy of the dumpster. But…From the Mixed Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler didn’t win the 1968 Newbury Award for nothing.

All stories, at least all good ones, have a moment near the middle where something changes. The protagonist has a moment that reaches deep into his soul where something starts to change. It could be a dangerous encounter, or perhaps some life-shattering realization. But regardless of the specifics, something is different that the protagonist absolutely must deal with.

For Claudia Kincaid, this moment is entirely unexpected.

A simple sculpture, that of an angel, is placed on display in the Museum of their temporary abode. There’s nothing quite so special about this angel in comparison to the other artwork. Except that this angel speaks to Claudia in a way that the other museum fixtures simply do not. And when she discovers that the angel just might have been sculpted by Michelangelo himself, Claudia realizes that she cannot return home without knowing the truth for certain.

From there, the tale dredges the depths of human longing and desire with a subtlety and quietness that is simply not present in most modern children’s books. Sprinkle the bond of siblinghood and the creativity and inventiveness of childhood into the mix, and the thematic reverberations fill that echo in our minds long after the final page is turned. You know a book is memorable when the same feelings you had when you were ten also permeate through your soul in adulthood.

In the end, the journey is not about the adventure of running away, but how we change on the inside. The realization that changing, the good kind, requires determination, sacrifice, and some tough steps.

Deep stuff for a middle-grades story.

Content Warnings:

For most audience, no concerns.

For younger audiences, parents may want to be aware of the following:

• Jamie gambles (and cheats) at the card game “War”.
• Being in an art museum, unclothed pieces of art are briefly mentioned a few times (although not described in any sort of detail).
• Claudia and Jamie often bicker and fight (but it most must be noted, also share equal moments of sibling love and bonding, and good discussions/arguments).
• Naturally, since the plot revolves around running away, parents may want to discuss with their children why this is not a great choice, despite the satisfactory conclusion.