Author Archives: Stephanie Hughes

by

Why use an inanimate object as the narrator?

In class, while discussing Arna Bontempts and Langston, Hughes, The Paste Board Bandit (1935), Professor Curseen purposed this question: “Why would Hughes use an inanimate object as the narrator for this book”? I don’t believe we ever answered this in class,

Curious about this idea, I did some research. I found that whenever giving an inanimate object human qualities, that is personification. But I believe Hughes wanted more then just to personify the Paste Board Bandit, Tito. Hughes uses Tito as a way for children to visualize fantasy, and help think beyond what they are taught to be right and wrong when it comes to matters of race, and stereotypical friendships.

During my research, I came across the term “anthropomorphism”. Anthropomorphism means: the attribution of human characteristics of behavior to a god, animal or object. I found that anthropomorphism occurs in children’s literature a lot (think: Mickey Mouse, all of Toy Story, and Magic Carpet from Aladdin). Anthropomorphism makes the unfamiliar more familiar to children. It makes children more comfortable with the topic and makes a hard topic less threatening. Hughes uses a cut out character to help tell the story of an American child befriending a Mexican child. I believe this is done quite successfully in The Paste Board Bandit. 

 

 

by

Why Americans are Afraid of Dragons

“Stories of imagination tend to upset those without one.”
—  Terry Pratchett
             While reading “Why Americans are Afraid of Dragons”, by Ursula K. Le Guin, I was haunted by a quote I read by fantasy author Terry Pratchett. Imagination is something adults struggle with everyday. To have a wild and vivid imagination is childish; and anything childish is considered to be derogatory. Le Guin writes: “I believe that all the best faculties of a mature human being exist in the child, and that is these faculties are encouraged in youth they will act well and wisely in the adult, but if they are repressed and denied in the child they will stunt and crupple the adult personality” (Page 44). This intrigues me because she then goes on to claim that there is a gender segregation in imagination. Young boys are taught that imagination is not apart of “maleness”; while girls are allowed to run wild with their imagination. This truly saddens me because growing up around young children I have witnessed this first hand. Young boys are encouraged to abandon their imaginations at young ages, while girls are encouraged to live in a sort of fantasy world for pretty much their entire life. Society cripples imagination by putting a huge emphasis on children to grow up; and part of growing up is forsaking their creativity and imagination.
              Now, to change gears of thinking, I do agree with this aspect of Le Guin’s argument regarding gender restrictions, but to say that there is little imagination in the American people today is false. In fact, Americans are not afraid of dragons (Game of Thrones, anyone?) Imagination in the sense of fantasy and alternate universes may not be as popular in American culture but in no way is it not encouraged or loathed. I am curious as to what Le Guin would think of “Fifty Shades Of Grey”? Would sexual fantasy be considered a mindless indulgence to her? Does fantasy HAVE TO be a hobbit, a unicorn, or a dragon. Americans do not discourage imagination, they just would rather read about something that triggers their imagination and desires in other ways. Le Guin labels fantasy in a very narrow sense. To me, fantasy is anything that is not every day life. Fantasy could be getting an A on that paper, to  Christian Grey, to even vampires (Americans love vampires). Perhaps Le Guin hasn’t seen the American sales for “Harry Potter”, “The Hunger Games”, and “Twilight”. Log onto Tumblr, or any other blog site and see that imagination is in fact still very much alive. What needs to be fixed is American gender segregation; not American taste in what Americans prefer to read about.
by

Alice in Wonderland

Before reading Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland, I did some research on Lewis Carroll himself. I found that “Lewis Carroll” is a pen name for Charles Lutwidge Dodgson. Carroll chose a pen name because he valued his privacy. He was  a man with many interests, including religion, mathematics, photography, science, and children literature. It is said that he lit up around children, having an immense love for children’s stories. Alice in Wonderland was Carroll’s biggest success, and Alice herself is based off a real child that Carroll loved; his dearest child friend, Alice Pleasance Liddell. There is much debate over his relationship with young Alice, as well as his mental state while writing Alice in Wonderland. After researching Carroll further, my sources state that the well known rumour that Carroll had written Alice in Wonderland while under the influence of hallucinogenics is false.

It isn’t farfetched to assume that Carroll may have been on shrooms or LSD while writing Alice in Wonderland. Alice jumps from situation to situation quite bizarrely, and it is sometimes hard to keep up with the conversations she is having with the Wonderland animals. While reading Alice in Wonderland, I found myself thinking that this was nonsense. Alice would answer questions in a way that made no sense, things would happen randomly, and everything seemed to be unorganized and scrambled. But, also while reading, I found myself liking Alice’s character. She is creative, witty, and almost relatable in a strange way. I believe Alice could represent the inner nonsensical child in each of us, but she is not my favorite character.

My favorite character is the Cheshire cat. At first I was confused what a Cheshire was, so I looked it up and found it is defined by Mariam Webster as: Cheshire is a ceremonial county in North West England, in the United Kingdom. The western edge of the county forms part of England’s border with Wales. This concept of coming from another country could play into the whole idea if imperialism in Alice in Wonderland. The Cheshire cat has a huge grin on his face, and often poses philosophical questions to Alice. Carroll must have had a love for cats, because cats mentioned by Alice in the first chapter, as she has one herself, whom she loves. Cats represent mischievous charters in not literature.

 

by - 8 Comments

“Little Red Riding Hood” Perrault vs Grimm

In the test case of “Little red Riding Hood”, the author, Zohar Shavit, makes the claim that the concept of childhood as we know it today did not exist until the seventeenth century. Part of this reason was because prior to the seventeenth century there was no educational system in place for children, and no children’s literature was available. Also, the Middle Ages was a tough period where children’s mortality rates were very high. If a child did survive, they were not able to stay a child for long. Back then, children married and went to work very young, making it almost impossible to have a childhood. To demonstrate this, Shavit recalls the classic story of “Little Red Riding Hood”. “Little Red Riding Hood” is a story written for adults and children. Though the original author, Perrault, meant for the story to be told to children, the underlying message of “Little Red Riding Hood” is rather gruesome, and a message that only adults could understand. “Little Red Riding Hood”, in essence, is about a village girl who is taken advantage by a man. The story is underlined with an erotic meaning, as the author goes into detail about the girls beauty and innocence.

Shavit then does to analyze the Brothers Grimm version of “Little Red Riding Hood” that was published 100 years after the original version by Perrault. Shavit claims that the differences are because in 100 years a new emphasis on educating the child was put into place. The Brothers Grimm changed the tone of the story, changing it from satire to amusement; their ending was happy rather than sad/tragic. The Grimm version also was meant to be appropriate for children to read, which was not the case earlier in Parrault’s version. The Grimm version of “Little Red Riding Hood”, to my understanding, is similar to the “Disney” version of Perrault’s original story. As times change, the way we view children change. This is evident in the two evolutions of the same story.

 

by

First Post

After our class discussions, I noticed that I’ve been analyzing children’s literature and movies in a whole new light. I recently watched Disney’s Frozen with my roommate, and while she was laughing and loving it, I was asking questions such as “How would a child understand that?” and “Does that not sound like it has underlying sexual context?” In the Case Of Peter Pan, the reader gets a glimpse into what truly motivated the author the write Peter Pan. Though the authors perverse love for little boys is enough to make your skin crawl, is it really surprising? Almost all Disney movies have some level of perversion in it. Even today, while watching Frozen I noticed sexual puns! Typically children as associated with innocence, so why add sexual puns into stories meant for innocent children? Perhaps it is because children’s stories are not just meant for children. Who reads the children their bed time stories? Adults. Who watches these movies with the children? Adults. The perversion that is sometimes weeded into these Disney movies are not meant to corrupt the children, but to merely entertain the adults. Maybe the need to add perversion into something so innocent says more about our society than it does about children’s literature as a genre.