Author Archives: mw144717

by

The Resisting Monkey: “Curious George”

In June Cummins’ article, The Resisting Monkey: “Curious George,” Slave Captivity Narratives, and the Postcolonial Condition, many interesting comparisons between George (the monkey) and slaves and children are made. Cummins states that the children’s book Curious George is actually a story about slavery and slaves relationships to their masters. Cummins compares George to slaves and the Man in the Yellow Hat to the masters. She also goes one step further, and states that George also represents children and the Man in the Yellow Hat also represents parents.

When I was younger, I grew up watching Curious George and I never once associated George with anything but a monkey that was taken from his home and brought to the city, where he encountered many adventures and caused mischief. Cummins, however, argues that even the title of Curious George is a pattern that reinforces the notion that there is deeper meaning behind the book than meets the eye. Cummins states that curiosity is George’s most notable trait and that George’s curiosity is a result of his deep desire to escape from the city and return home. George’s acts of mischief and trickery are compared to the acts of trickster slaves who also used their “intelligence and cunning to outwit their masters.” I think Cummins, here, makes a great comparison of the similarities of George and slaves. She points out how both the actions of George and slaves are a result of their confinement and lack of freedom, and not an unexplainable need to just cause trouble.

George can also be seen a representation of children, because both are childish and possess great amounts of curiosity. Children can easily relate to the character of George because of their shared mischievous and presence of adult figures in their lives, who try to teach them something. Both George and children have an imbalance of power relationship. For George, humans represent the more dominant and superior presence in his life, while for children, their parents represent the authority figure to them. George is much like a rambunctious child who does not always obey the superior figure in their life, instead they need to be disciplined and taught to listen.

I believe that Cummins makes many valid points of comparison between Curious George to slaves and children. Despite this, I also believe that children such as three and four year olds, should enjoy their innocence and watch t.v or read books for the pleasure of doing so. Of course, being raised to learn the importance of being kind, or understanding, or any moral is valuable and necessary. However, to learn about slavery and how George is comparable to a slave and the Man in the Yellow Hat can be seen as a slave’s master, is more than I could have comprehended as a young child. I do agree though with her statement that adults can take this book as an opportunity to better inform their children about the issues concerning discipline and control.

by

A Coon Alphabet

When I first started reading A Coon Alphabet by E.W Kemble, the illustrations and spelling of the words were what first caught my attention.  A lot of the words spelled in the story are different from how we would spell them correctly.  I think that Kemble had the words misspelled on purpose in order to convey  some humor and wit to the audience reading the story. The way the words are mispelled and the illustrations make the story more entertaining and humorous for children.

Kemble’s illustrations provide the story with substance, because it makes it easier to picture what is happening in each letter. For example, the letter ‘D’ says “D is for Didimus what blew down a gun; now he and his sister ain’t havin’ much fun.” If there was not a picture depicting what was happening, we would not know what Kemble meant by “ain’t havin’ much fun.” However, because there is a picture it shows us that the gun exploded and that Didimus and his sister are extremely shocked and it looks like Didimus is flying up in the air from the impact. Most of the people in the story and the animals are drawn to resemble cartoons, which makes the story more fun and easier to understand for children.

I also noticed that almost all of the letters are the first letter in the people’s names. Kemble uses the letters to introduce the people he talks about. The story is humorous and full of wit, because it seems that all the characters start off doing something not that special, only to find themselves encountering a funny situation or accident. For example, “L is fo Lulu what was coasting so fine till she hit a board fence and got mixed wid de swine,” shows us that Lulu is minding her own business and riding her bike and then all of a sudden she runs into a fence and falls into some pigs.

Kemble’s combination of using funny cartoon drawings and misspelled words, make this story more fun for children and easier for them to understand, since they can have a visual in their mind of what is actually occurring.

by

Tom Sawyer’s Mischief

In Mark Twain’s novel The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, the story opens with Tom Sawyer’s Aunt Polly yelling his name “TOM!” over and over again. Aunt Polly threatens Tom “Well, I lay if I get hold of you I’ll-.” This opening to the story lets the audience know that Tom is a troublemaker and that Aunt Polly is the disciplinary figure in his life. However, I think that despite Aunt Polly’s threats, she does not feel happy about having to punish Tom. Tom’s aunt, I can tell is actually really fond of her nephew, for example she says “my old heart most breaks,” in reference to having to hit him. This quote shows the audience that Aunt Polly does not really want to hurt Tom at all, but has to in order to assert her authority and show Tom that he can not keep misbehaving. She even “broke into a gentle laugh” when she witnessed Tom trying to escape from her. This shows even further how much Aunt Polly seems to adore her nephew.

Since Aunt Polly seems to be softhearted in her treatment of Tom, it can explain why Tom has such a large degree of autonomy. Tom seems to not be too worried by the threats of his aunt. This is shown when despite getting discipled by Aunt Polly, Tom still resorts to more mischief soon enough. For example, he engages in a verbal banter of insults with another neighborhood boy and even starts wrestling with him. When Tom returns home and Aunt Polly notices his appearance, she punishes him by ordering him to whitewash the fence. Tom then convinces any boy that passes by his fence, to do the whitewashing for him, in turn leading him to not have to do any work at all. Tom does this by convincing the boys that whitewashing is something enjoyable. Tom is so convincing to the boys that they even end up giving Tom one of their belongings, in turn for him letting them whitewash his fence for him. Tom’s ability to convince other boys to do his work for him establishes him as a leader and mastermind. He has a knack for talking his way through his problems and finding ways to escape his punishment.

I found it very relatable when Aunt Polly was trying to discipline Tom, but admitting that it broke her heart to have to do so. For example, when my younger cousin was small, I had to scold her for doing something bad, but I felt bad for having to do so. Tom’s continuous misbehavior is probably encouraged by the fact that he is usually successful in his endeavors. When he is punished by his aunt, he still finds ways to escape her wrath and lie his way through. Even when he is caught in his lies, he still manages to find a way to escape his punishment, such as convincing others to do his work for him.

by

The Anti-Slavery Alphabet

While reading The Anti-Slavery Alphabet, I found myself both enjoying and dreading the next words. I enjoyed how this poem flowed smoothly, the words easily rhyming with one another, yet at the same time carrying a great amount of sadness and warning in them. In the beginning of the poem, the author comments on the age of the children, stating that “you are young, ’tis true, but there’s much that you can do”. From this quote, I could tell that the intention of the author was to encourage young children to help take up the stand against slavery.

By associating each letter of the alphabet with an important word, the author not only teaches young children the alphabet, but also of the importance that each word carries to slaves. For example, the author connects the letter ‘S’ to the word ‘Sugar’. Sugar is something that the slaves have had to toil hard to make, in order for people to put in their pies and tea. However, for something as simple as sugar, slaves have had to endure much hardships and pain, something that people who eat that sugar never think of. Despite the sadness that the poem carries behind each letter, there are also whispers of hope. For example, the letter ‘U’ is associated with ‘Upper Canada’, a place that slaves can find freedom and rest. The author includes this in order to show children that there is hope for slaves, in spite of the odds being against them.

I found this poem easy to read and more importantly it was a lesson I enjoyed learning. Many children would feel the same I would think. By teaching children about the harshness that is slavery, but also providing them with small glimpses of hope, the author is encouraging change and action. Targeting this work towards children is a great way to teach them about history and to show them that with action comes results. This poem effectively both informs children to the pain and suffering that slaves have gone through and teaches them how they can make a difference in this world.

by - 1 Comment

The Story Behind Peter Pan

When I was young, around 10 years of age or so, I remember watching commercials on t.v featuring Peter Pan. I never actually saw the movie or read the story, but I got the gist of it. It was about a young boy who could fly and never had to grow up. I thought that was a fantastic idea, what child didn’t want to stay young and carefree forever. I knew even then that Peter Pan was a story meant for young children. However, after reading “The Case of Peter Pan” I am very surprised to discover that Peter Pan was actually never a character intended for children. Instead, Peter Pan was a story written by a man (Barrie) who had a secret desire to “steal and possess”  young boys.  It was, instead, originally meant for young adults, because back then children could not even afford to buy the book or even understand it’s contents. I also learned that children’s books can be a form of “seduction”, not in a sexual or erotic way though. In the sense that these books entice and draw children into the story, I can see how children’s books might be considered a “seduction” of sorts.  The story of Peter Pan also had to go through many revisions in order to make it more appropriate for children. In the words of Rose “there is no child behind the category ‘children’s fiction’….” This quote shows us how adults have a different purpose for writing children’s books, purposes that children do not actually understand, because they are just taking the books for face value. The real reason that adults write children books is probably something that young children can’t grasp, and in the case of Peter Pan, the reason is darker and more “troubled” then children realize.