Think critically! It’s such an easy thing to say and yet so hard to truly do. Reading The Case against Peter Pan, I was plunged into idea of thinking critically in terms of children’s literature. The idea of packaging a story that came out of a fetish book, seems absolutely insane. Yet, on a daily basis children are being marketed adult content with “child like” themes. As a society, children’s books are promoted by schools, retails chains, libraries, etc, without being critically analyzed to see if their promoting other agendas. Peter Pan has reached iconic status, and is passed from generation to generation. Its troubled past becoming a myth of sorts, It’s disturbing to unknowingly marvel at such a story when it’s brought to life again time after time in books, and to never question it’s origin. It isn’t enough to try and figure out what children’s literature is, without knowing where it came from, and why it exists. In Charles Dickens “Hard Times” children were made to be filled with facts, empty vessels for knowledge being taught to them by adults. This method didn’t work for any of the children in “Hard Times” that later became unfulfilled adults. The analysis of the case of Peter Pan made it apparent that children are still viewed as empty vessels, only facts have been replaced with adult versions of “child like” fantasy.
Monthly Archives: September 2014
Two Implied Readers
After reading the document “How To Read Children’s Literature” I never thought about the implied reader being the children and the adult. I have always thought children’s literature was mainly focused on children being the only audience it was intended for. After being introduced to an adult as another implied reader, they have a larger knowledge base than the implied child reader. When I first read the poem I tried to read it in the perspective of a child and it worked out in two cases where the reader requires a “body of knowledge of literature and life”, called repertoire that adults had more of than children did. The first thing was how a cat and an owl cannot be seen together as partners. Such a relationship would be seen in a fiction story or a fantasy, but reading further int the document I remembered how different animals can be close despite knowing such a relationship would not occur. The second thing was the words runcible and bong-tree, and I never heard of these words and assumed they were made up words. I thought they were words a child would be curious about and ask someone older to tell them what the words meant. Obviously, I decided to look up these words after I finished the poem.
Response to Kiddie Lit
In Beverly Lyon Clark’s book, Kiddie Lit, she mentions on page 5 that women “grind children under [their] heels. She also quotes Margaret Fuller who said, “Now there is no woman, only an overgrown child.” With this quote, it explains why women “grind children under [their] heels”. This is because women can’t be acknowledged as an adult until they have not only grown up, but has lost any part of them that would make them seem immature, lacking confidence, irresponsible, and so on. However, if that is the case, then those are the attributes in which we apply to children. Women try so hard not to be associated with children, but in reality, it’s just those attributes in which women do not want to be associated with. However, I believe that it’s not just women who are viewed as a child if they so much as act a little immature and play jokes. I feel that men who are always joking around or saying unintelligent things can also be viewed as a child by other men who have gained respect and by other women who feel that they are mature or have also gained respect. This is seen by interactions around us everyday. With my friends, because I like to play around and joke with them, I am viewed as a child who is immature. But I also view them as childish too because they play around with me as well even though they are older than me. I also feel that though we may play around, when it is time to be serious about things, we can be and we can respect each other as we should.
Thus, I do not believe that just because someone likes to play around or likes to talk in slang or act like children sometimes, that they cannot be overall, mature or respectable. It isn’t simply that not being a child makes you an adult. There is more to that and I feel that if we stop associating terms like “child” or “childish” with things like irresponsibility, naivety, or stupidity, then being called a child wouldn’t be such a bad thing. In fact, that isn’t even what really makes a child if you simply think better of them. Therefore, if we begin to think better of children, give them some respect, acknowledge their opinions and don’t laugh off their questions as they are trying to learn, then women and men wouldn’t need to set aside their playfulness and wouldn’t be afraid to act more like a person with a bright personality, than just as a model figure in society in order to gain a title of respect that they shouldn’t even need to earn.
The case of Peter Pan
Before reading this essay I always think that Peter Pan is a story aimed at children of a young age, however looking closely at the story once again after reading this case have made me realize that Peter Pan is not a story meant for children at all. I did a little bit more research on the author of Peter Pan to gain a better understanding of what was the intended reason for the story Peter Pan. I notice that most of the story written by the author involves children in the story, just like Peter Pan it seems to tell a story that show us the reader that the story was intended to show a deeper feeling the author have towards children. Just as stated on page 58 “Peter Pan has never, in any easy way, been a book for children at all”. I agree with this point that Peter Pan was never meant to be a children book, but was toned down to fit a more innocent role for children to understand. I think that the deeper meaning in Peter Pan is to show the ill side of this children’s classic; to show how the author is in a way a lover of young boys and how he uses the story to write down a fantasy of his. Some books that was never meant to be targeted towards children as seen can be toned down for a younger audience to enjoy, this mean that different age group will see something different in the genre of children lit.
Presentation Assignments
If you are in a November date, you must present on the history paper. This information has been sent as an email and is also pasted in the schedule of assignments.
Best,
AC
History Paper
Nov 3:
___Jaime Chang__________
___Donald Ng___________________
___Jaclyn Torres___________________
___Vanessa Vasquez___________________
___Dominique White___________________
___Christopher Wong___________________
___Oriana Asano___________________
Nov 5
__Maggie Wu____________
__Jasmine Lee___________
__Sherry Zeng___________
__Artem Kovalchuk____________________
__William Lee____________________
__Jackson Marienfeld____________________
CHOOSE A BOOK PROJECT
Dec 3rd
___James Mohan___________________
___Raymond Urrutia___________________
___Charles Parietti___________________
___Jason Perez___________________
___Serena Sooklall___________________
___Annalea Shallcross___________________
Dec 11
Presentation Day
______Kimberly Ayala_____
______Joshua Ross________
______Chiffon Cummings________________
______Mason Chen________________
______Natasia Chancy________________
______Corey Bauer________________
Dec 15
______Christopher Digrazia________________
______Nicole Dillo________________
______Laura Frost________________
______Stephanie Hughes________________
______Kristen Jimenez________________
______Oishi Gomes________________
Response to “Kiddie Lit”, Peter Pan, and Little People.
When we were first asked the question “what do children read?” immediately an image of a toddler reading a touch and feel book came to mind. I admit before reading and discussing any of the articles we read in class I strictly associated the term “children’s literature” with pictures book aimed at ages 2-5. However I was pleasantly surprised after reading “Kiddie Lit” to realize how incorrect that assumption was. I had fallen into the category of people who placed the word child with things small and colorful, not seeing these readers as my peers or equals. Maybe it was my years of working in Barnes and Noble, but many of the novels discussed through the article, such as Where The Wild Things Are, or Little Women, are literary works I have very rarely heard associated with children but instead labelled as “young adult reads.” Which posed the question of who is considered a child? In hopes of coming to a clearer answer to this pondering question I set out to read the New Yorker article entitled Little People. Very quickly I was reminded that our definition of a child has changed rapidly throughout history making it extremely difficult to define the term.
After reading the articles discussed above I have gained no clearer knowledge of who we should define as a child, and who we should not however it is a question I am excited to explore over the course of the semester. Although I have become slightly more confused by definitions than I was before reading any of these articles they have opened my eyes to many things I would never even think to imagine. Frankly hearing that Peter Pan is intended towards a more adult audience and breaking down the concept of the story through the eyes of an adult was completely mind blowing and very enjoyable.
Reflection and Child Appropriateness through Peter Pan, the Black Plague and the Teletubbies.
Although this week’s texts were a bit too scholarly for my taste, they each had their own valid point of which I took to better understanding the concept of what is children’s literature. Kiddie Lit let me think about this concept of what is considered “childish,” and roused my understanding of our use of it, and other comparable words (kiddie, child, boy, girl), as a derogatory context within our language. The Little People essay reminded me that our view of what a child is, in the context of what we now-a-days, within the American culture, socially consider a child, has not always been the case; due in part to both the changing times and the multitude of diverse cultures. The Case against Peter Pan essay (in its first couple of sentences alone) gave me a major epiphany; that not all children’s literature is specifically aimed at stimulating children, and that sometimes adults get much more out of these stories then a child ever could. This epiphany I had was then backed up by the How to Read Children’s Literature text; mainly in its explanation of what an “implied reader” was and its explanation on how a text is meant to grab a specific type of reader. It also reminded me that everyone gets something different then everyone else when reading a genre as specific as children’s literature.
This cadre of confusion brought upon by these four texts has me rethinking not only what is children’s literature, but what is child appropriate in general. However, I know that this institution of child appropriateness is run by adults and is both subject to, and victim to, adult allusions. How many people know that the story of Peter Pan was originally a story within a story about an older man and his connection with a boy who is not his son (not implying anything, but acknowledging its “iffy-ness”)? More importantly, if more people did know about its origin, would that change Peter Pan’s widely accepted child centric draw on a socially acceptable level? There’s also the famous nursery rhyme “Ring around the Rosie,” whose rhymes have been believed to allude to the symptoms of the Black Plague, which is definitely not a child appropriate subject. However, this nursery rhyme is still sung by adults to children and children themselves, all over the world, and very few people have ever not heard of or know it. There’s also the famous incident over the purple Teletubby and this dumb idea that the character represented the gay community. No child, of whom the Teletubbies was specifically made for, would ever distinguish this allusion, let alone care (even if it was true).
The Pleasures of Children’s Literature
The excerpt from Perry Nodelman and Mevis Reimer’s text focuses on the relationship children actually have with children’s literature. In addition, it also explores how adults interaction with children’s literature differs from that of children and what causes these differences. One of the main differences comes from the literary “repertoire” that adults have versus the one children have. Adults tend to have a greater understanding of both language and its use.Furthermore adults can apply their past knowledge and experience towards the literature. This causes adults to have a different understanding and view of the literature. Adults would would be able to draw more from a children’s text because they have the capacity to. Children do not or rather cannot see more in a children’s text because their literary “repertoire” is limited. In this sense, Nodelman and Reimer point out that it is actually to difficult to decide what kind of children’s literature should and should not be read to/by children. In addition adults are the ones who inevitably decide what is considered “appropriate” literature for children. They do so based on their own hypothetical guess’s of what children would like in literature. Nodelman and Reimer state this is not effective since the adults are making guess’s and cannot really know what the child might like in literature without actually being exposed to it. A child’s lack of knowledge allows him/her read any children’s literature and end up enjoying it. I think Nodelman and Reimer make an excellent point: adults should not decide what is considered “good” children’s literature for children. They themselves are no longer children and cannot interpret it the same way a child does. What adults may consider inappropriate is therefore irrelevant since a child may not even know that what they are reading can be viewed in that context.
Little People: Thoughts
The article offers a somewhat informal timeline of the notion of “childhood”, which will help our class to better understand the modern definition of childhood and what children’s literature is truly about. Childhood did not always hold the same meaning as we know it today, there was a time where childhood was virtually nonexistent. The author reviews pieces of literature called the Yale series, which is a compilation of research and essays written by social scientist to examine how to notion of “childhood” came to be and its evolution through the years.
The first glimpse we get into the past is the Middle ages to the sixteenth century. This was a time where the average age to be married was quite young (preteens), and little to no consent was needed by parents for their children to be married; unless you were a daughter of nobel blood. It is logical to assume that when these “children” were wed, they would be off to start their own household. However, depending on what part of Europe you were from and your or your family’s profession, it was forbidden for households to be split up. Even before marriage, boys and girls were sent away for an average of five years to learn trades or mannerisms from higher classes. Children were basically seen and treated like adults.
In the eighteenth century, there was a boom in bastard children who were either murdered, abandoned, or left in special hospitals. Most of the children left in these special hospitals died for various reasons including poor sanitary practices, neglect, and even experimentation as we discussed in class. Later on in the nineteenth century in France, it was possible for a bastard child to seek child support from their fathers, so long as he was not married. This was the start of the realization that children ought to be cared for.
Relating this to the early twentieth century, many children worked in factories and sweat shops to help support their families, some were even as young as seven! according to the Yale series, children felt a sense of pride and independence in the work that they did. after child labor laws were set into practice, it was an extreme polar change for children. Whereas once they were able to support themselves and their families, they were now required to go to school, which did not really give them much freedom to experience “childhood” and play anyway. From then on innocence was instilled on children and the idea of “appropriateness” was brought into play.
Post Class Thoughts
We just got a taste of discussion in today, but hopefully on Wednesday, we can finally plunge into that discussion.
—
To that end, please keep in mind the two questions I posed in class:
1) What do children read? (posed on the screen before class)
2) What would it really mean to think of childish as not a denigrating term? [along with that: is embracing childishness as not denigrating -perhaps even a generative quality- what Beverly Lyon Clark actually trying to do?
–Also all the links at least up September 24th, should be working now. If you ever encounter a link that goes bad on me, you should be able to google the title and author and find a pdf.