This is followed from my introduction. You might want to read that first. If you have already, read on!
Who are you? Is your name who you are? It’s true that it makes up part of your identity, and those that have been dehumanized are often stripped of their name first. Sometimes when people strive for anonymity, such as in The Perks of Being a Wallflower, they will use an assumed name. The narrator calls himself Charlie, but makes it clear that he is not revealing his real name because “you might figure out who I am, and I really don’t want you to do that. I will call people by different names or generic names because I don’t want you to find me.” (Chbosky, 2) He chooses to remain anonymous- he could be anybody.
Alice, after arriving in Wonderland feels that things aren’t quite right once she begins questioning who she is. “‘If I’m not the same, the next question is ‘Who in the world am I?’ Ah, that’s the great puzzle! And she began thinking over all the children she knew that were of the same age as herself, to see if she could have been changed for any of them. ‘I’m sure I’m not Ada…for her hair goes in such long ringlets and mine doesn’t…; and I’m sure I can’t be Mabel, for I know all sorts of things and she, oh she knows such a very little! Besides. she’s she, and I’m I, and- oh dear, how puzzling it all is!” (Carroll, 10) She sees other’s names as their identities: their physical appearance is what makes them who they are, as well as their intelligence. Her name would no longer suit her if she were to change in her appearance, personality, or intelligence. When she finds that she is unable to recite her lessons, she decides that “I must be Mabel after all, and I shall have to go and live in that poky little house, and have next to no toys to play with, and oh, ever so many lessons to learn! No, I’ve made up my mind about it: If I’m Mabel, I’ll stay down here!” (Carroll, 11) Part of the upsetting experience of being in Wonderland comes from the fact that she no longer feels like herself. She thinks of herself as other people, and is called several different things in Wonderland- such as “Mary Anne”- being the White Rabbit’s servant.
Cordelia from King Lear(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Anne also imagines being someone else, but it is a positive thing for her. She asks the Cuthberts to “please call me Cordelia?” (Montgomery, 24) and explains that “I would love to be called Cordelia. It’s such a perfectly elegant name…Please do call me Cordelia…Anne is such an unromantic name…I’m not ashamed of it…only I like Cordelia better. I’ve always imagined that my name was Cordelia.” (Montgomery, 24-25) Cordelia is an allusion to the character in King Lear, King Lear’s youngest daughter who is out of favour with her father when she cannot prove her love for him in an exaggerated way as her two sisters do. Nevertheless, she is accepted by the King of France for a bride, despite her disinheritance. “Fairest Cordelia, that art most rich being poor; Most choice forsaken, and most loved, despised, thee and thy virtues here I seize upon, Be it lawful I take up what’s cast away. Gods, gods! ‘Tis strange that from their cold’st neglect my love should kindle to inflamed respect- thy dowerless daughter, King, thrown to my chance, is queen of us, of ours and our fair France. Not all the dukes of waterish Burgundy can buy this unprized precious maid of me.— Bid them farewell, Cordelia, though unkind. Thou losest here, a better where to find.” (Shakespeare, Act 1, Scene 1, Lines 290-303) Cordelia is accepted even though she has no value. Anne wants the same thing; she wants to be accepted by Marilla and Matthew even though she is not a boy- she wants to be a “Cordelia” to Green Gables.
Names are chosen by parents when a child is born. In Bud Not Buddy, Bud remembers his mother telling him “Bud is your name and don’t you let anyone call you anything outside of that either…Especially don’t you ever let anyone call you Buddy…I would’ve added that dy onto the end of your name if I intended for it to be there. I knew what I was doing. Buddy is a dog’s name or a name that someone’s going to use on you if they’re being false-friendly. Your name is Bud, period.” (Curtis, 41) It may be that your name is given to you because it holds some meaning to the family, or maybe the name was the only one that could be agreed upon by the family.
Something that sent me into giggles at my brother’s “grandparents day” thing, aside from the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, was the fact that I had to wear this name tag they made for me. Couldn’t I just introduce myself? And I doubted I would be socializing with anybody there I didn’t know- I decided to keep it anyway, just in case my parents forgot my name after knowing it for twenty years.
However- what does it mean for you? The individual carrying the name? You often have some control over your name, you could ask to be called by a nickname, or your middle name (if you even have one) or go to court to get your name legally changed. This step, the taking control of the name is a move towards independence. The book Becoming Ruby is about this process. While drinking cream soda, the narrator notices that “the clear red drink…looks like a giant ruby. My name-Ruby. I slide the cold bottle down my hot face. Mom didn’t want me to be Ruby, Dad did; it was his grandmother’s name and he liked it. And since Gary’s middle name was given to honour some relation of hers, Mom could hardly argue. Nan Ruby Larkin had lousy rhythm, so I ended up Ruby Nan Larkin. But called Nan.” (Stinson, 26) Ruby not only has no control over her name but it is known that her mother has complete control. So, naturally when Ruby seeks to find her individuality she stands up and tells her mother firmly, “Nan is your little girl, so smart she could read before kindergarten. Nan is the little girl who never complained when you bought her ugly clothes. She drank Orange Crush and wanted to be a teacher because she knew it would make you happy. But it didn’t, and I can tell you now that nothing I ever do will. And… My name is Ruby. Ruby, Mother! Get it? My name is… Ruby.” (Stinson, 161) It is more than a name; it has become a personality of sorts. The first step towards independence for her is the shedding of Nan, (much like a snake sheds its skin) to reveal Ruby, an individual who knows herself.
Screenshot from The Magician (Edison Mfg. Co, 1900) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Names are also supposed to hold meaning. Baby name books are a huge thing for new parents. These books give off the idea that the name a child is given will define them. Baby names added with the meaning of those names given in baby books just put expectations on babies before they’re even born. I looked under my name for example, and it says “fair haired.” I’m anything but fair haired- and to have a “meaning” which is just focussed on physicality is really damaging. The belief that girls are supposed to be focussed on their appearance is introduced from the time they are born.Names have very gender-specific meanings, they can rely heavily on religious references, and as we grow; we may find that the name we were given doesn’t really suit us. Our names do not tell us who we are. Our names are a way of identifying us as a person, but they in no way shape our personality, our behaviour, our thought processes, or anything else. So why do we place so much value on the name of people? Why do these baby books even exist? Why did meaning for names have to be created? It’s problematic that names label people with personalities or physical attributes before they’ve even had a chance to grow or speak. Then again, can you imagine yourself with any other name? Maybe a name is magical, but it’s a bit of a problem when we’re not the magicians.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower Official Trailer #1 (2012)-Emma Watson Movie HD Prod. movieclipsTRAILERS Youtube. Youtube.4 June. 2012 Web. 14 June 2013http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5rh7O4IDc0
BOOKS:
Carroll, Lewis Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass. New York: Bantam Dell, 2006
Chbosky, Stephen. The Perks of Being a Wallflower. New York: MTV Pocket Books. 1999.
Curtis, Christopher Paul. Bud Not Buddy. New York: Yearling, 1999
Montgomery, L. M. Anne of Green Gables. [Toronto]: Seal, 1996.
Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of King Lear. Ed. Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2009. Print.
Hopefully, we all know this scene from the Wizard of Oz. The line is now famous: “Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!”. The title of this blog post comes from that quote in the Wizard of Oz movie, if you’ve never watched it.
In Children’s Literature, I’ve noticed that quite a lot of animals are present in either an anthropomorphic way, or as pets. I’ll be taking some information that I researched in Cultural Studies last year to present my new slogan: “Bunny rabbits and mice, oh my!”
Before we get onto books, let’s talk nursery rhymes. There are several nursery rhymes featuring mice as the main character. In “Hickory Dickory Dock” the mouse keeps running up and down the clock as it strikes on the hour. “Three Blind Mice” shows mice as victims; their tails are cut off by a farmer’s wife, and it is shocking. Nursery rhymes are introduced before books to children, it is interesting that the characters they are asked to sympathize with is a mouse, considering the way that they take on quite a different meaning to adults.
Adults view mice as intruders in their home and a nuisance. They may try several ways to get rid of mice in their home, including getting a cat to hunt the mice, and setting mousetraps to catch them. It is quite odd then, how mice are consistently featured in children’s books, as well as movies, and given human-like qualities.
Yes, this is Minnie and not Mickey, but I thought it best to use my own image. (This was taken when I was ten at Disney World) I just wanted to show how the characters have been used to promote the company and the reason the mouse has been used- Not as a real mouse but as symbol.
Mickey Mouse not only speaks, walks, and has feelings, he also has several friends and a family. Children are able to identify with him as they are exposed to him constantly on film, in pictures, and recognize him as a symbol for Disney-the happiest place on earth. So what happens? Why is it that this loveable mouse does not persuade people to love mice as they mature, but squeal over them? It’s simple. As people grow older, they learn to recognize the difference between fantasy and reality- they may identify with Mickey- but he is not a “real mouse”- he is only a creation from the Walt Disney Company used to promote the corporation.
In Madeline the main character has to be made unique to make her deserving of having her story told: she has been singled out of a group of twelve girls, they are dressed like her, go to school with her, and live with her. As it is nearly impossible to tell them apart by looking at them, the actions of Madeline have to be told and shown to make her the focus of the story. She is unlike the other characters in the book, and one thing which makes her stand out is that “she was not afraid of mice.” (Bemelmans, 15). She is made an individual from the other girls in the school, as she is the smallest, likes mice although the others do not, and faces the tiger in the zoo bravely when the others are scared.
The other girls are all in a separate corner as Madeline goes to touch the mouse. It helps to distinguish her as the main character, as she does not fear what the other girls do.
In A Little Princess Sara has to deal with a change of fortune. She loses not only her father, her money, and her status as the most popular girl in school, but she also loses her friends. The only friends that she is permitted after her change from a “princess” to a servant, is Becky, the other servant girl, and a mouse who lives in her attic. The mouse cannot talk, but Sara still has conversations with him. “I dare say it is rather hard to be a rat…Nobody likes you. People jump and run away and scream out, ‘Oh, a horrid rat!’ I shouldn’t like people to scream and jump and say, ‘Oh a horrid Sara!’ the moment they saw me.” (Burnett, 116-117). She cares for him, and makes sure that he has enough food. “As the days had gone on and, with the aid of scraps brought up from the kitchen, her curious friendship had developed, she had gradually forgotten that the timid creature she was becoming familiar with was a mere rat.” (Burnett, 120). Using the power of her imagination, Sara allows herself to emphasize with the rat and create a connection between them. She treats him as human, showing that even though her luck has fallen, she still behaves the way she did when she was rich. She can still have friends as a servant, even if they are different from her former friends. She humanizes the rat, naming him Melchisedec, and explaining to a student at the school that “He is a person….He gets hungry and frightened, just as we do; and he is married and has children. How do we know he doesn’t think things, just as we do? His eyes look as if he was a person. That was why I gave him a name” (Burnett, 121-122). This chapter explains a theme in the story: it’s what’s on the inside (her attitude and kindness,) that counts; not her money. She treats everyone as human, even if they are despised. Every creature has feelings and thoughts; just because they are not explicitly stated does not mean they are nonexistent.
Reepicheep greeting Prince Caspian.
The Chronicles of Narnia has many animals. The mice are one of the most important species. They are loyal to Narnia, and the mice try to do the best they can to help with the kingdom. Their size does not matter, it is their willingness to fight which helps them to defend Narnia. Reepicheep “wore a tiny little rapier at his side and twirled his long whiskers as if they were a moustache. ‘There are twelve of us, Sire,’ he said, with a dashing and graceful bow, ‘and I place all the resources of my people unreservedly at your Majesty’s disposal.’ Caspian… couldn’t help thinking that Reepicheep and all his people could very easily be put in a washing basket and carried home on one’s back.” (Prince Caspian, Lewis, 73). They believe in what they are fighting for, and are the most anxious to start battling. They are laughed at for how they perceive themselves as warriors even though they can hardly even be seen, and others find them amusing because they are so eager to fight. “‘Hurrah!; said a very shrill and small voice from somewhere at the Doctor’s feet. ‘Let them come! All I ask is that the King will put me and my people in the front.’ ‘What on earth?’ said Doctor Cornelius…Then after stooping down and peering carefully through his spectacles he broke into a laugh. ‘By the Lion,’ he swore, ‘it’s a mouse. Signior Mouse, I desire your better acquaintance. I am honoured by meeting so valiant a beast.'” (Prince Caspian, Lewis, 80). He is not what people expect when they think of a warrior, and so they are often surprised when they meet him and admire his enthusiasm for battle. The doctor responded to Reepicheep as if he were not serious. He was approached like a child, and he is often treated as one. ‘”Sire,’ said Reepicheep. ‘My life is ever at your command, but my honour is my own. Sire, I have among my people the only trumpeter in your Majesty’s army. I had thought, perhaps, we might have been sent with the challenge. Sire, my people are grieved. Perhaps if it were your pleasure that I should be a marshal of the lists, it would content them’ …’I’m afraid it would not do,’ said Peter very gravely. ‘Some humans are afraid of mice.'” (Prince Caspian, Lewis, 159). Peter tries to shelter and protect Reepicheep, much like parents try to keep their children safe. It is unsuccessful, and Reepicheep ignores Peter’s suggestion, deciding to do what is best for him. “‘Come back Reepicheep, you little ass!’ shouted Peter. ‘You’ll only be killed. This is no place for mice.’ But the ridiculous little creatures were dancing in and out among the feet of both armies, jabbing with their swords. Many a Telmarine warrior that day felt his foot suddenly pierced as if by a dozen skewers, hopped on one leg cursing the pain, and fell as often as not. If he fell, the mice finished him off; if he did not, someone else did.” (Prince Caspian, Lewis, 167) He managed to fight, and he was useful. He did a better job because of his size- people not being able to see him was an asset, they did not know he was going to attack their feet, and by being snuck up on, the Telemarines were shocked and unable to battle as they wanted to. In the Voyage of the Dawntreader, Eustace, Lucy and Edmund’s cousin, is rude, selfish, and spoiled. He detests Narnia, and he complains “That little brute has half killed me. I insist on it being kept under control. I could bring an action against you Caspian. I could order you to have it destroyed.” (The Voyage of the Dawntreader, Lewis, 28). He is spoiled, and tries to control the way that the animals and humans interact with each other. He treats Reepicheep as a child, because the concept of animals and humans being equal is foreign to him. He is forgiven when he is turned into an animal himself after guarding a dragon’s treasure chest. He is ignored and shunned by nearly everyone except Reepicheep.
Reepicheep and Eustace.
“Reepicheep was [Eustace’s] most constant comforter. The noble Mouse would creep away from the merry circle at the camp fire and sit down by the dragon’s head…There he would explain that what had happened to Eustace was a striking illustration of the turn of Fortune’s wheel, and that if he had Eustace at his own house in Narnia…he could show him more than a hundred examples of emperors, kings, dukes, knights, poets, lovers, astronomers, philosophers, and magicians, who had fallen from prosperity into the most distressing circumstances, and of whom many had recovered and lived happily ever afterwards. It did not, perhaps, seem so very comforting at the time, but it was kindly meant and Eustace never forgot it.” (The Voyage of the Dawntreader, Lewis, 81-82). Reepicheep tries his best to comfort Eustace, and tries to be his friend when no one else will. He declines being with the others because he knows Eustace needs him more. Mice are seen as strong even though they are small- and the paralell that children have with mice in this book is enough to empathize with them, even though they are not drawn in an anthropomorphic way.
If You Give a Mouse a Cookie is about a mouse who keeps asking for things. He definitely has some negative traits, as some humans do as well. He takes advantage of someone who tries to feed him, and has more outrageous demands which he is given. “When you give him the milk, he’ll probably ask you for a straw. When he’s finished, he’ll ask you for a napkin.” (Numeroff, 3-5). He is essentially an unwanted houseguest, much like how society views mice as a species. He is humanized through his clothes and facial expressions, and is instead changed into a humorous characterization of a visitor; not a typical mouse. He is liked because he seems human- even though he does what mice do, and takes food from the boy’s house. The way the story is written as a never ending list, also gives the impression that his demands could go on forever, so it is satisfying when it wraps up with “he’s going to want a cookie to go with it.” (Numeroff, 28). The tone of the story is exaggerated, which mirrors the depiction of the mouse. A mouse may have some human qualities, such as being able to feel hunger, but it can’t actually ask for food, or a drink, or clean a house. It makes mice in reality seem as less of a nuisance when compared to this story.
Putting the mouse in overalls humanizes him.
The Mitten is a story about several animals who climb into a mitten to keep warm. The mouse, being the smallest, comes in last. “Along came a meadow mouse, no bigger than an acorn. She wriggled into the one space left, and made herself comfortable.” (Brett, 21). She causes the bear to react, and again is put into the role of a nuisance. She is disruptive, whether she meant to be or not. This story is different as it exposes children to a more adult view of animals, while still being imaginative.
“The lesson taught by exposing children to mice through literature is that even small creatures deserve to be treated humanely. We learn that mice can be intelligent, outsmarting their opponents, and friendly, making friends with other mice, or humans. They are very caring for their family, and the bestiary says that “when their parents are old, they feed them with remarkable affection.” (bestiary.ca) Mice are able to care for their family, and they do all they can to provide for them.” (Previous essay) This being said, I think part of the reason why mice are so present in children’s literature and given human traits is due to the cult of the child. The cult of the child held the belief that children are an investment for the parents, and so they should identify with mice, follow their example of taking care of their family.
Rabbits and Hares are very popular animals in children’s stories. They are so heavy with symbolic meaning that they are used repeatedly in Children’s Literature, in several different ways.
Rabbits are often used in bedtime stories. They have a strong association with the moon, among other things. “Numerous folk tales tell…of old women revealed as witches when they are wounded in their animal shape.” (Windling). The little old lady whispering hush, could be threatening. Through looking at the rabbit symbolically, it is no longer a calm story, but a terrifying one. Bedtime can be seen as a scary process which children can relate to, and at the same time the rhyming and mentions of the objects and colours in the room can make Goodnight Moon comforting.
Tell me something happy before I go to sleep, is another bedtime story, this time with rabbits who interact with each other much more easily than the little old lady and the child rabbit. The little rabbit raises the issue of her anxiety in going to bed, and her brother has to calm her down. Her brother shows her happy things- and decides to show Willa the kitchen. “I see bread and honey and oats and milk and apples,” (Dunbar, 12) is her discovery when her brother opens the pantry door. Milk is given to newborns to drink, as they cannot eat. This may refer to the act of getting pregnant and hoping to conceive a child. The apple is a universal symbol of fertility, used in the Bible, and seen as forbidden. However rabbits are also connected with fertility; and the two rabbits; one male and one female represents the stages of the night. This bedtime story then, is an allegory for sex, not a simple bedtime story as first thought. “In Asian folklore, a rabbit is believed to become pregnant by looking at a full moon.” (Windling). This offers a rather grown up interpretation if read between the lines. ‘When the morning comes and wakes me up, will you still be here?’ asked Willa. ‘I’ll still be here,’ said Willoughby. ‘Good,’ said Willa. ‘That’s the happiest thing of all!’ ‘Good night, Willa.’ But Willa didn’t answer. She was sound asleep.” (Dunbar, 26). It is no longer about an insomniac bunny, but about sexual pleasure.
In Jan Brett’s tale, the rabbit is the second animal to find the mitten and climb into it. “A snowshoe rabbit came hopping by. He stopped for a moment to admire his winter coat. It was then that he saw the mitten, and he wiggled in, feet first. The mole didn’t think there was room for both of them, but when he saw the rabbit’s big kickers he moved over.” (Brett, 10) He is both vain, and lucky, which are widely accepted beliefs about rabbits. His feet stopped him from being sent away. The animals are therefore, acknowledging human beliefs about them as correct.
Bugs Bunny is another well known cartoon character. Unlike Mickey, he is not a symbol, he is an archetype of the trickster figure. He has several companions who he plays tricks on; Daffy Duck, Yosemite Sam, Marvin the Martian, and the most infamous: Elmer Fudd.
He is not bad or good. He just creates trouble in a way which is funny. Most of the time, the reactions of those he plays tricks on are out of proportion to what he has done. He exists to upset normal time and turn things on it’s head. It introduces comedic value because the two characters are so separate in their emotions, with Bugs being extremely calm, and Elmer furious.
The White Rabbit looking at his watch.
In Alice in Wonderland, the White Rabbit is introduced as the immediate conflict- the first character whom is Alice’s connection with Wonderland. “A rabbit crossing one’s path in the morning was an indication of trouble ahead.” (Windling). The white rabbit serves as a warning of what is in store for Alice- confusion, mistaken identity, frustration, and a reversal of what she knows. The rabbit is seen to Alice however, as “nothing so very remarkable in that; nor did Alice think it so very much out of the way to hear the Rabbit say to itself ‘Oh dear! Oh Dear! I shall be too late!’ (when she thought it over afterwards it occurred to her that she ought to have wondered at this, but at the time it seemed quite natural); but, when the Rabbit actually took a watch out of its waistcoat-pocket, and looked at it, and the hurried on, Alice started to her feet, for it flashed across her mind that she had never before seen a rabbit with either a waistcoat-pocket, or a watch to take out of it, and burning with curiosity, she ran across the field after it, and was just in time to see it pop down a large rabbit-hole under the hedge” (Carroll, 2). The notion of the rabbit owning human objects such as a watch, and a waistcoat startle Alice. When he notices her, he gets angry at her: “Very soon the Rabbit noticed Alice, as she went hunting about, and called out to her in an angry tone, ‘Why Mary Ann, what are you doing out here? Run home this moment, and fetch me a pair of gloves and a fan! Quick, now!’ And Alice was so much frightened that she ran off at once in the direction it pointed to, without trying to explain the mistake it had made. ‘He took me for his housemaid,’ she said to herself as she ran. ‘How surprised he’ll be when he finds out who I am! But I’d better take him his fan and gloves- that is, if I can find them.’ As she said this, she came upon a neat little house…She went in without knocking and hurried upstairs, in great fear lest she should meet the real Mary Ann, and be turned out of the house before she had found the fan and gloves. ‘How queer it seems,’ Alice said to herself, ‘to be going messages for a rabbit!” (Carroll, 24-25).
The White Rabbit doing his job at the trial
It strikes her as odd that he can order her about in Wonderland, and she does what he wants her to do. He is in a position in the court which gives him power, and he lives as a gentleman would in the normal world, with a house of his own and servants. He is very busy in the novel, and takes his job very seriously, often fretting about being late. “Near the King was the White Rabbit, with a trumpet in one hand, and a scroll of parchment in the other.” (Carroll, 89) He is one of the only characters that takes things seriously in the book, despite the chaos around him.
The March Hare, on the other hand, is a foil to the White Rabbit. As busy as the White Rabbit is, the March Hare is idle. He is known to be mad, and Alice decides to look for him when given a choice, as she thinks “the March Hare will be much the most interesting, and perhaps, as this is May, it won’t be raving mad-at least not so mad as it was in March.” (Carroll, 51). He also has to keep moving as the White Rabbit does, but not because he is important. He follows the Mad Hatter, who has been accused of “murdering the time…ever since that he won’t do a thing I ask! It’s always six-o-clock now.” (Carroll, 57) He is not important to the society in Wonderland. He is a foil to the White Rabbit, and does not appear to be an independent animal. He is trapped in his situation, and is unable to escape it. “It’s always tea-time, and we’ve no time to wash the things between whiles.” (Carroll, 57).
The March Hare is dark, compared to the White Rabbit. He also looks more rabbit-like than the White Rabbit-he looks the most normal in the real world, but out of place in Wonderland.
He relies on the Mad Hatter and the Dormouse, and fills his days with useless tea drinking. His only purpose in the story is to serve as a companion for the Mad Hatter, and confuse Alice by asking unanswerable riddles. “The hare is a timid beast” (bestiary.ca), which means that he is not very confident in himself. He relies on the Mad Hatter to tell him what to do, such as when he has to switch seats. He has no agency, unlike the White Rabbit, and is an outcast in Wonderland.
A word of caution. I am going to be talking about trauma. I will be analyzing children’s books and explaining how these stories can help children deal with trauma and others’ reactions to it. This post may offend some readers and/or contain ideas about sensitive subjects.If you have had trauma, you may want to go read something else.If you start to feel uncomfortable, please get off and go read something else.
Trauma is something that can happen to anybody. There is no age limit. Trauma can happen with veterans in war; it can happen to people who have been in natural disasters such as floods, fires, and earthquakes. Trauma can also happen to children. There have been books written for children to help them understand their traumas. Books about childhood traumas, such as child abuse, or bullying, or being in a strange place (such as Wonderland) can be a source of comfort to children. They realize that they are not alone through the use of these books. Authors, by writing about childhood traumas, acknowledge that trauma can happen to children- however the way the trauma is presented can offer an alternative view of childhood traumas.
Alice drinks the “Drink me” potion which makes her small enough to fit through the door into Wonderland.
In Alice in Wonderland Alice “must undergo severe emotional and physical stress before reaching maturity.” (Suchan.) She deals with being in an unfamiliar place, and “her abrupt changes in size [which] so confuse her that she constantly complains that she doesn’t know who she is from one moment to the next.” (Suchan). Even though this is “Wonderland” she is constantly questioning her identity, and arguing with the creatures in Wonderland who don’t act the way she expects them to. It throws her into confusion, and even though this is a dream she has made of her own, it is no less traumatizing. Alice tells her sister of her dream, and “the rattle of the teacups as the March Hare…shared their never-ending meal, and the shrill voice of the Queen ordering off her…guests to execution…the pig baby…sneezing on the Duchess’s knee, while plates and dishes crashed around it…the distant sob of the miserable Mock Turtle.” (Carroll, 103-104). It is frightening to Alice, but to her sister, it is a “change to a dull reality” (Carroll, 104). She dismisses Alice’s dream as an active imagination, and she thinks that Alice has “a simple loving heart of her childhood and….would feel ….simple sorrows and find pleasure in simple joys, remembering her own child-life, and the happy summer days.” (Carroll, 104) Through the entire book, Alice has had to deal with her rapidly changing body, confusion and trying to fit into a new world, and stand up for herself in Wonderland. She has undergone a nightmare- a trauma, and her sister can do no more than think of it as something of nostalgia and wonderful. Alice’s journey is one of terror to the child; and her sister ignores it as a trauma, thinking of it only as a Wonderland. The title of the story, as a “Wonderland” is only for adults. These are very real fears and challenges that Alice goes through and overcomes in her nightmare- giving hope that others can overcome them too- at least until the last two pages of the story, where it is minimized. Carroll does address trauma through the focal point of Alice, but he makes a mistake by switching the narrative to her sister- Once he does that, it is no longer a nightmare- it’s a “Wonderland” and it’s silly.
This is one of the most popular pictures of Anne. She spends most of her time daydreaming,making up stories, and imagining things to cope with her trauma.
In Anne of Green Gables, Anne encounters trauma. However, the trauma is mentioned as taking place before the book. “After the deaths of her parents… Anne (whom, as she says, “nobody wanted . . . even then”) was taken in by two miserly women, the first with a “drunken husband,” and, at age eight, made to look after their young children, including “three sets of twins.” At age ten, transferred to the local orphanage, she suffers not only “in spirit,” but is deprived of basic nutrition: on meeting Matthew, she is “scrawny,” with a face “small, white and thin.” The shrewd Marilla is able to distinguish these details within the fuller picture of Anne’s history: ‘What a starved, unloved life she had had—a life of drudgery and poverty and neglect’ (Green Gables 38-40). These horrors are seemingly righted by the fact of Anne’s incorporation into Green Gables and the larger community of Avonlea; she will no longer be neglected or abandoned. However, the unconventional behavior Anne reveals is indicative of her struggle to overcome the ramifications of the severe trauma she has suffered, of a childhood that, even by Marilla’s strict standards, has been acutely damaging.” (Slater.) This has so affected Anne, that she uses her imagination to escape from her reality. She retreats into books, and she also has imaginary friends. “Out of trauma—that of her parents’ absence and her guardian’s violence—is born Katie Maurice, this other who looks like Anne but is decidedly not Anne… Anne… is not whole; it is Katie… who is the “whole [O]ther,” the image in which Anne may find refuge from the wounds of fragmentation, and postpone her inevitable confrontation with her alienated representation. Katie is… an unattainable image made even more impossible by nature of its utter unreality. While a healthier Anne might have…strived toward unification with the image “Anne,” the image “Katie” is always already made impossible, and it cannot be reconciled with due to Anne’s acknowledgment of it as Other. There is no danger here of Anne’s experiencing further pain from alienation. If her image is Katie, is Othered, she need not endure the anguish of irreconciliation. Katie Maurice, of course, is not the only extension of Anne’s body that Anne others. Upon leaving Mrs. Thomas’s for Mrs. Hammond’s, she creates “a little girl named Violetta” out of the echo of her voice in a nearby valley: “We were great friends and I loved her almost as well as I loved Katie Maurice . . . [Violetta] echoed back every word you said, even if you didn’t talk a bit loud” (Green Gables 53). Violetta, here associated with Katie by Anne herself, is clearly the aural equivalent of her mirror disassociation. Violetta, like Katie, is Anne—Anne purposefully misrecognized. That this Othering should extend beyond the visual to the aural demonstrates the severity of Anne’s dissociation.” (Slater). So, Anne creates her imaginary friends, not just out of needing someone when she is lonely to talk to, but she created them to escape. They aren’t just friends, they are parts of her that she wishes she could access, and only accesses at appropriate times. Marilla does not understand the need to escape-Anne can not talk about her experiences; so she needs an outlet which Marilla finds unsatisfactory. Marilla does not understand the trauma that Anne has gone through and the severity of it. Trauma is a big part of Anne of Green Gables, it is a big part of Anne, and she overcomes it through the stability of Green Gables. Stability is needed when dealing with trauma. Children learn through this book that imagination can help to lessen the pain of trauma, but it is not a substitute for a stable life. In order for something to be traumatic, there needs to be fear. “Fear is a liminal space, a sense of being neither here nor there, and about desiring that stability.” (Humphreys, lecture). Children learn that things can get better; Anne’s life got better when with Matthew and Marilla- it was a long process and there were many difficulties, but through perseverance and determination she was able to emerge as “Anne of Green Gables”- she had an identity, not as a lost, traumatized child, but as a girl with a home and a strong sense of community. With stability, she lost her fear; and so, by the end of the book, she is able to identify herself, not as someone who is unwanted; but as someone who is (somewhat) cared about by people who really do mean well.
James- who had no agency with his aunts, is the one who ends up saving the peach from the sharks and his friends from drowning with the idea of getting birds to lift the peach. He is given a chance to express his ideas and take leadership.
In James and the Giant Peach James also undergoes trauma. Roald Dahl attempts to diffuse the trauma with the two aunts, Spiker and Sponge, by using humour to show their true nature as lazy, vain adults. While that does help, James does not see anything humorous because he does not have the ability to see through their threats. They are horrible to him, he fears them. However, “Gothic children’s literature is about replacing fear with understanding.” (Humphreys, lecture). James never understands the aunts; he does not have the access which the reader is given. He is beaten and overworked by the aunts, and so when he is given a package with magic, which is promised to make “marvelous things start happening… fabulous unbelievable things” and promises him that “you will never be miserable again” (Dahl, 14) James takes it. He loses them and they vanish into the ground, but he learns that he doesn’t need magic. In the peach, he is immediately welcomed by the creatures. He is frightened by them at first, but is reassured that “We wouldn’t dream of hurting you. You’re one of us now.” (Dahl, 35). He has been accepted unconditionally by creatures that he has just met. Even though he has been called names, and hated by his aunts; there are people who accept him for his individuality. “James and the Giant Peach transforms the horrible and the frightening into possibility and positivity.” (Humphreys, lecture). There is no reason to be afraid of the insects, they’re not going to treat him like his aunts do. So, the book transforms the insects (frightening) into beings which are helpful and beneficial to the community. James is, by the end of the book, a part of a community. The book helps to highlight that events can be scary, but they are not going to be scary forever. There is a shift from his identity as “you disgusting little beast!” (Dahl, 2) into “Your name is James.” (Dahl, 37). Through the change of his identity, children learn that it is the aunts that are scary (to James), and not the insects. How things appear to be at first, may not be like that in the end. Although the way that Aunt Spiker and Aunt Sponge treat James seems normal, this is not something that should be expected from every person or creature. Loneliness is not forever, trauma is not forever, and children can regain the identity that they’ve lost through trauma.
In Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, Harry Potter witnesses both of his parents being brutally murdered by Voldemort, (also known as “You-Know-Who”) as a baby, and is traumatized because of it. The way that all of the adults react is extremely inappropriate. McGonnagall asks Dumbledore, “How in the name of heaven did Harry survive?” (Rowling, 15) He survived not by his choice; he just survived by fate. There was no reason to be so enamoured at that. He was a child who survived a trauma, but he didn’t even realize he had. In the Wizard world, he’s treated as a star for undergoing his trauma, but in the real world he is treated like a nuisance by his aunt and uncle, for having undergone trauma. Without his trauma, his parents would not have died, and so he’s basically only living with his aunt and uncle because he had trauma. “Bad news…Mrs. Figg’s broken her leg. She can’t take him.” She jerked her head in Harry’s direction…The Dursleys often spoke about Harry like this, as though he wasn’t there-or rather, as though he was something very nasty…like a slug.” (Rowling, 21-22). He isn’t treated like a normal person. To be spoken about like a slug is demeaning, dehumanizing-as if there’s something perverse about him for having gone through what he has. Even people who mean well are conflicted. The Weasleys, who end up becoming Harry’s friends, see him first as the “famous Harry Potter”, instead of a person. The twins are the first to bring this to the attention of their mother: “Hey, Mum, guess what? Guess who we just met on the train?’….’You know that black-haired boy who was near us in the station? Know who he is?’ ‘Harry Potter!’….’The poor boy isn’t something you goggle at the zoo. Is he really, Fred? How do you know?’ ‘Asked him. Saw his scar. It’s really there- like lightning.’ ‘Poor dear-no wonder he was alone. I wondered. He was ever so polite when he asked how to get onto the platform.’ ‘Never mind that, do you think he remembers what You-Know-Who looks like?’ Their mother suddenly became very stern. ‘I forbid you to ask him, Fred. No, don’t you dare. As though he needs reminding of that on his first day at school.’ ” (Rowling, 73) At first, she is horrified at Fred and George’s reaction to Harry, saying that he isn’t a “zoo animal”, but then she asks how they know, as if she’s trying to get information. She then seems to change her mind, and tells them to forget it happened. She is hypocritical- wanting to know about Harry as a “celebrity” but still feeling sympathy for him. There is no ‘in between’. He isn’t treated like a normal person. This book may help children who have undergone trauma, to understand that sometimes, trauma can affect views that people have of them. It isn’t their fault. It just happens, and there’s nothing that can be done about it. “Harry Potter rolled over inside his blankets without waking up….He slept on, not knowing he was special, not knowing he was famous, not knowing he would be woken in a few hours’ time by Mrs. Dursley’s scream…nor that he would spend the next few weeks being prodded and pinched by his cousin Dudley…he couldn’t know that at this very moment, people meeting in secret all over the country were holding up their glasses and saying in hushed voices: ‘To Harry Potter-the boy who lived!'” (Rowling, 18). He has no control over how people treat him, whether they are in awe of him, or mean to him, he is helpless. The use of his scar which he received during his trauma can either make him a celebrity, like in the wizarding world and make him easily identifiable, or make him an outcast. I believe that the scar is a metaphor for trauma. “Under a tuft of jet-black hair over his forehead they could see a curiously-shaped cut, like a bolt of lightning. ‘Is that where-?’ whispered Professor McGonagall. ‘Yes’ said Dumbledore, ‘He’ll have that scar forever.’ ‘Couldn’t you do something about it, Dumbledore?’ ‘Even if I could, I wouldn’t. Scars can come in useful.’ ” (Rowling, 16-17) At first, the scar is not visible, seeing as it is hidden beneath Harry’s hair; however, it is still there, and the adults worry about it. McGonnagall wants Dumbledore to remove it (perhaps take away Harry’s trauma,) but Dumbledore says that it can be useful. Trauma can offer a new way of thinking about things, it can serve as a reminder of things that have been faced before; it is part of a person’s life once they have experienced trauma. They have dealt with trauma, and they need to recognize it, rather than pretend it never happened. “The only thing Harry liked about his… appearance was a very thin scar on his forehead which was shaped like a bolt of lightning. He had had it for as long as he could remember and the first question he could ever remember asking his Aunt Petunia was how he had got it. ‘In the car crash when your parents died,’ she had said. ‘And don’t ask questions.’ Don’t ask questions-that was the first rule for a quiet life with the Dursleys.” (Rowling, 20). Harry unconsciously also recognizes the need for the scar, but his Aunt would rather forget that it happened. “Once, Aunt Petunia… had taken a pair of kitchen scissors and cut his hair so short he was almost bald except for his fringe which she left ‘to hide that horrible scar.’ ” (Rowling, 23) Her reaction to the trauma is as if it were something that he could have gotten over. It’s irritating to her; it’s a deformity. He is dependent on the Dursleys for information about his past, he has a desire to understand what happened but he is denied that right. “He’d lived with the Dursleys…as long as he could remember, ever since his parents had died in that car crash. He couldn’t remember being in the car when his parents had died. Sometimes, when he strained his memory during long hours in his cupboard, he came up with a strange vision: a blinding flash of green light and a burning pain on his forehead. This, he supposed, was the crash, though he couldn’t imagine where all the green light came from. He couldn’t remember his parents at all. His aunt and uncle never spoke about them, and of course, he was forbidden to ask questions. There were no photographs of them in the house. When he had been younger, Harry had dreamed and dreamed of some unknown relative coming to take him away, but it had never happened; the Dursleys were his only family. Yet, sometimes he thought (or maybe hoped) that strangers in the street seemed to know him.” (Rowling, 27) Harry is dealing with memories of his trauma, but he doesn’t have the agency needed to explore them, and so, they remain repressed.
The Dursleys’ try to keep him from learning of his identity as a wizard, and ultimately reject the notion that he has had trauma, but Hagrid helps to give agency to Harry by contradicting the Dursley’s wishes, and treating him as someone who should learn the truth. “Uncle Vernon came skidding into the room. He was holding a rifle in his hands…. ‘Ah, shut up Dursley, yeh great prune,” said the giant; he reached over the back of the sofa, jerked the gun out of Uncle Vernon’s hands, bent it into a knot as easily as if it had been made of rubber, and threw it into a corner of the room.” (Rowling, 40). Hagrid takes the gun- a symbol of control, and literally bends it, making it inoperable. The statement here is that children shouldn’t be kept in the dark. They know when something has happened, and it’s best to tell them about it to help them heal.
Hagrid tells Harry about what has happened to his family. He does hesitate at first, but he is angry with the Dursleys for misleading Harry as well.”How could a car crash kill Lily and James Potter? It’s an outrage! A scandal! Harry Potter not knowin’ his own story when every kid in our world knows his name!… I had no idea how much yeh didn’t know…. I don’t know if I’m the right person to tell yeh-but someone’s gotta…It’s best yeh know as much as I can tell yeh” (Rowling, 44) He understands the importance of understanding, of allowing a child to know what happens when they witness a trauma- even if the others around Harry would rather pretend that he hasn’t. This clip shows that kids do know when something bad has happened, and they are aware of when something is wrong, so in order to lessen fears, it’s best to be honest with them and not minimize the experiences they have gone through. “Something very painful was going on in Harry’s mind. As Hagrid’s story came to a close, he saw again the blinding flash of green light, more clearly than he had ever remembered it before- and he remembered something else, for the first time in his life- a high, cold, cruel laugh.” (Rowling, 46). Through Hagrid’s story, Harry is able to remember more- it hurts him, but he understands why it is happening, and so his fears are not minimized by adults, but lessened by his newfound knowledge. Knowledge of trauma is a good thing, it isn’t good to repress memories or try to shield children from them. “Kids see consistently that horrible things happen, and can happen to them” (Humphreys, lecture). To deny that makes a child feel isolated, and as if there’s something wrong with them when in fact, it’s normal. It’s normal for a child to react that way; it’s normal to recover traumatic memories, and just because an adult says it didn’t happen doesn’t mean that the adult is right. “‘Everyone thinks I’m special…I’m famous and I can’t even remember what I’m famous for. I don’t know what happened…the night my parents died.’ Hagrid leant across the table. Behind the wild beard and eyebrows he wore a very kind smile. ‘Don’ you worry, Harry. You’ll learn fast enough. Everyone starts at the beginning…you’ll be just fine. Just be yourself. I know it’s hard. Yeh’ve been singled out, an’ that’s always hard. But yeh’ll have a great time at Hogwarts.'” (Rowling, 66) Hagrid is very reassuring to Harry. His trauma doesn’t make him who he is. It is part of his identity, but it isn’t what defines him as “Harry.”
Harry is an instant celebrity because of his trauma. When he meets Ron on the train, the first thing Ron talks about is Harry’s scar. Ron is more interested in his celebrity status than in who he is as a person.”‘Are you really Harry Potter?’ Ron blurted out. Harry nodded. ‘Oh-well, I thought it might be one of Fred and George’s jokes,’ said Ron. ‘And have you really got-you know…’ He pointed at Harry’s forehead. Harry pulled back his fringe to show the lightning scar. Ron stared. ‘So that’s where You-Know-Who-?’ ‘Yes,’ said Harry, ‘but I can’t remember it.’ ‘Nothing?’ said Ron eagerly. ‘…I remember a lot of green light, but nothing else.'” (Rowling, 74). Harry realizes for the first time that his nightmares and his “green flash” are connected to his trauma, and so he is able to now offer an explanation for something which he hadn’t been able to before. HE is able to make the distinction of his nightmares being connected to his trauma. Ron is very guarded when talking about Harry’s trauma- he has been raised to fear Voldemort- however Harry has no fear, he just sees it as a name. He is ignorant about the complete details of his trauma, and he can’t really connect his fear with the people yet. “‘Until Hagrid told me, I didn’t know anything about being a wizard, or about my parents or Voldemort-‘ Ron gasped. ‘What?’ said Harry. ‘You said You-Know-Who’s name!’ said Ron, sounding both shocked and impressed, ‘I’d thought you, of all people-‘ ‘I’m not trying to be brave or anything, saying the name,’ said Harry, ‘I just never knew you shouldn’t. See what I mean? I’ve got loads to learn.’ ” (Rowling, 75) Ron believes that Harry should be frightened of ‘You know Who’ but by giving a name to the person, the fear is lessened. “Harry…was starting to get a prickle of fear every time You-Know-Who was mentioned. He supposed this was all part of entering the magical world but, it had been a lot more comfortable saying ‘Voldemort’ without worrying.” (Rowling, 80). Harry realizes this, and realizes that everybody is scared of “You Know Who”. It is easier for him to be scared once he realizes that he has a right to be scared of Voldemort, and that it’s okay to be scared of Voldemort.
I think that Quidditch is a metaphor for trauma. Harry has to be taught about his trauma, just like he needs to be taught about the game of Quidditch, how it is played, what his role is, and what he can do to win. “‘This… is the Golden Snitch and it’s the most important ball of the lot. It’s very hard to catch because it’s so fast and difficult to see. It’s the Seeker’s job to catch it. You’ve got to weave in and out of the Chasers, Beaters, Bludgers and Quaffle to get it before the other team’s Seeker, because whichever Seeker catches the Snitch…nearly always win[s]’… Harry understood what he had to do…it was doing it that was going to be the problem… a few minutes later, [Wood] and Harry were up in the air, Wood throwing golf balls as hard as he could in every direction for Harry to catch. Harry didn’t miss a single one.” (Rowling, 125-126) Harry needs to pay close attention to his trauma, he needs to try to figure it out. Others can try to support him, or “keep him from falling off”, but he is the one who has the responsibility to deal with it. He is the one who has gone through the trauma, nobody else can do his job for him- but they can support him. Ultimately though, he is the one who can “win the game”.
In Harry’s very first Quidditch game shortly after he learns the rules of the game, he is very eager to prove himself and a bit nervous. He is unsure of what to expect, but he knows that he would be the most likely to be injured, and he almost is. “Harry’s broom span off course, Harry holding on for dear life…In all the confusion…the Golden Snitch had disappeared from sight again.” (Rowling, 138) Overcoming trauma can be very difficult, and a frightening experience for children. Often, dealing with trauma does feel like how Harry feels on his broom during the time when his broom is jinxed: “His broom gave a sudden, frightening lurch. For a split second, he thought he was going to fall. He gripped the broom tightly… He’d never felt anything like that. It happened again. It was as though the broom was trying to buck him off…Harry tried to turn back…he had half a mind to ask Wood to call time out- and then he realized that his broom was completely out of his control. He couldn’t turn it. He couldn’t direct it at all. It was zig-zagging through the air and every now and then making violent swishing movements which almost unseated him…No one seemed to have noticed that Harry’s broom was behaving strangely. It was carrying him slowly higher, away from the game, jerking and twitching as it went. ‘Dunno what Harry thinks he’s doing,’ Hagrid mumbled…’If I didn’t know any better, I’d say he’d lost control of his broom…but he can’t have.’…His broom had started to roll over and over, with him only just managing to hold on…Harry’s broom had given a wild jerk and Harry swung off it. He was now dangling from it, holding on with only one hand.” (Rowling, 139). He cannot control his broom, Hagrid is suspicious of this though, as he thinks that Harry is a good flyer. I believe this is a metaphor for the way in which adults think that children should be able to “bounce back” after seeing something horrific happen. However, Harry still manages to hold on to the broom, and does something that is “near impossible”. He manages to catch the Snitch even when his broom is out of control. “Up in the air, Harry was suddenly able to clamber back on to his broom….He hit the pitch…coughed, and something gold fell into his hand. ‘I’ve got the Snitch!’ he shouted, waving it above his head, and the game ended.” (Rowling, 140-141). He wins the game, and the fear of falling changes to happiness at winning the game- much like the fear of trauma turning into one of acceptance. Children realize that it may be hard, but that they should not give up if because something bad happens.”They were all so impressed with the way Harry had managed to stay on his bucking broomstick.” (Rowling, 143). Harry becomes a hero, and he is respected. His falling off the broom caused worry, but seeing how he was able to handle it made the rest of the school admire him because of the way he stayed on it. More important than almost falling off the broom was being able to stay on: It is important to recognize trauma, but equally, or maybe even more important is to be able to handle trauma. Children aren’t able to do that however, unless adults can determine that trauma has happened, or they are willing to recognize it and be supportive.
“Harry had taken one step…when a slithering sound made him freeze where he stood. A bush on the edge of the clearing quivered… Then, out of the shadows, a hooded figure came crawling across the ground like some stalking beast. Harry…stood transfixed. The cloaked figure reached the unicorn, it lowered its head over the wound in the animal’s side, and began to drink it’s blood…The hooded figure raised its head and looked right at Harry-unicorn blood was dribbling down its front. It got to its feet and came towards him-he couldn’t move for fear. Then a pain pierced his head like he’d never felt before, it was as though his scar was on fire-half blinded, he staggered backwards…The pain in Harry’s head was so bad he fell to his knees. It took a minute or two to pass. When he looked up, the figure had gone.” (Rowling, 187). Harry is frozen with fear. He is terrified of this creature; when he learns why, he is able to understand why he was afraid and unable to do anything. The continual message is that it is not something that can be controlled. To realize that trauma is just something that happens is the main objective for people who have gone through trauma: It is real, and scary, the world does not always fit into a perfect box, and for kids to see that is very nerve wracking, so stories such as this one is comforting. If Harry Potter, who is a wizard can eventually defeat his parents murderer, then why shouldn’t the trauma that the readers have be able to be overcome too? It would take time, but this book gives hope to those who have lost it.
Harry still goes to fight Voldemort, even when it seems as if he has lost the battle.
Despite having experienced trauma, Harry doesn’t let fear get in the way of what he has to do. He is very protective of his friends and his school, because it is where he is cared for, and he says to Ron and Hermione; “If Snape gets hold of the Stone Voldemort’s coming back!… There won’t be any Hogwarts…He’ll flatten it, or turn it into a school for the Dark Arts!…If I get caught before I can get to the Stone, well, I’ll have to go back to the Dursleys and wait for Voldemort to find me there. It’s only dying a bit later than I would have done, because I’m never going to the Dark Side! I’m going through that trapdoor tonight and nothing you two say is going to stop me! Voldemort killed my parents remember?” (Rowling, 196-197). He forgets about his own fears for the good of the wizarding world’s safety. This sends a positive message that trauma can be overcome- even though there is fear, he “was lucky once,” (Rowling 208) and he “might get lucky again.'” (Rowling, 208). Trauma shouldn’t stop a child from living. It shouldn’t stop them from doing what they want to, because it can be healed. Harry is able to fight Voldemort, and defeat him, find the Philosopher’s Stone, and save the school from Voldemort despite Harry’s previous fear of him in the Forest.
Through these books, children can realize that they are capable of being hurt, of witnessing or experiencing trauma. They realize that it is normal and that it doesn’t always have to be upsetting. They can have a voice, and regain the identity they have lost through their trauma. Trauma should never be kids stuff, but it does happen, and having authors recognize that in children’s books can help to break down the barrier of childhood/adulthood. However, the way that others around a traumatized child reacts- often unsure of what to do, can make the child and the adult feel uncomfortable, and create a distance when there doesn’t have to be one.
Carroll, Lewis Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass. New York: Bantam Dell, 2006
Dahl, Roald. James and the Giant Peach. New York: Puffin, 2007.
Montgomery, L. M. Anne of Green Gables. [Toronto]: Seal, 1996.
Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. London: Bloomsbury Pub., 1997.
WEBSITES
Slater, Katherine. “”The Other Was Whole”: Anne of Green Gables, Trauma and Mirroring.”The Lion and the Unicorn 34.2 (2010): 167-187. Project MUSE. Web. 25 Jul. 2012.
Suchan, James. “Alice’s Journey from Alien to Artist.” Children’s Literature7.1 (1978): 78-92. Project MUSE. Web. 25 Jul. 2012.
Harry Meets Ron and Hermione-Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. Prod. HarryPotterMovieClip Youtube. September 21, 2012. Web. March 2, 2013.
Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone the Forbidden Forest Prod. WorkshopOneUK Youtube May 13 2012 Web. July 25 2012 <www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N-_KmZmV20>
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (1/5) MOVIE CLIP -Harry’s Birthday (2001) HD Prod. movieclips Youtube May 26, 2011 Web. July 25 2012 < www.youtube.com/watch?v=50N2eB0JI80>
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (4/5) Movie CLIP-Catching the Snitch (2001)-HD Prod. movieclips Youtube May 26 2011 Web. July 25 2012 <www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3YR1-gJjWM>
Oliver Wood explaining Quidditch. Prod. grimgenesis Youtube May 10 2011 Web. July 25 2012. <www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vZL4eHdhRM&feature=related>
OTHER
Humphreys, Sara. Class Lecture. Children’s Literature. Trent University. Oshawa, Ontario. July, 23 2012. “James and the Giant Peach-Rewriting abjection.”
The concept of childhood, and binary thinking of childhood and adulthood has been questioned in books (subtly) throughout the past century. In Criticism and the Fictional Child, a paradox is raised about why the separation of children and adults still exists, and why it will continue to exist. “To children’s literature criticism, and many other areas concerned with children, children are more ‘children’ than they are ‘individuals.’ …Children’s literature repeatedly refutes this, claiming that ‘individuality’ is its priority above all else… This is precisely the claim which cannot be sustained and is undermined within the field itself…The ‘child’ is an ‘individual’ within the category of ‘childhood’.” (Lesnik-Oberstein, 166). Children are categorized as individuals in a group with children. They can be “individuals” among others of their own age, but with adults, they are not “individuals” but “children.” Children’s literature itself exists on the concept of having a category for children. Without children, there would be no need for children’s literature.
The cook, the Duchess, and Alice.
In Alice in Wonderland, Alice, as a child acts more mature than the adults around her. No one really pays much attention to Alice, or cares about her. In Chapter 4, when Alice meets the Duchess, the first thing that she notices is the room. “The door led right to the kitchen, which was full of smoke from one end to the other: the Duchess was sitting…in the middle, nursing a baby: the cook was leaning over the fire, stirring a large cauldron which seemed to be full of soup.” (Carroll, 44) She is exposed to chaos from the cook and the Duchess a few moments later. “the cook took to throwing the cauldron of soup off the fire, and at once set to work throwing everything in her reach at the Duchess and the baby-the fire-irons came first; then followed…sauce-pans, plates, and dishes. The Duchess took no notice of them even when they hit her.” (Carroll, 45-46) The behavior is sudden and abnormal to Alice, but the people in Wonderland have no reaction to it. It is odd that an adult would disrupt a room for no reason, and Alice is the one to act like an adult, “jumping up and down in an agony of terror. ‘Oh there goes his precious nose!’ as an unusually large saucepan flew close by it, and very nearly carried it off.” (Carroll, 46) The roles are reversed: Alice, who is supposed to be an innocent child, is caring about the baby; whereas the Duchess and the cook who are adults; are rash, and out of control. The normal in Wonderland is abnormal to Alice, it is normal for adults to throw things around the room in Wonderland; but in the real world it is a very childish thing to do. The Duchess and Alice both break down the cult of the child. The cult of the child, seeing the baby as “innocent” as Alice does, is odd in the kitchen; as the others take no notice of the baby. The cult of the child, normal in the home, is ridiculous in Wonderland because the behavior of the adults is so abnormal.
The Duchess calls her baby suddenly a “Pig!” A few moments later, he turns into one. Children will become what their parents believe they will become.
The Duchess helps to strengthen both the cult of the child and the Puritan view of childhood through her way of nursing her baby. “She began nursing her child…singing a sort of lullaby to it as she did so, and giving it a violent shake at the end of every line: Speak roughly to your little boy, and beat him when he sneezes: He only does it to annoy, Because he knows it teases. (in which the baby and the cook joined): Wow! Wow! Wow! Wow! While the Duchess sang the second verse of the song, she kept tossing the baby violently up and down, and the poor little thing howled so, that Alice could hardly hear the words: I speak severely to my boy, I beat him when he sneezes; for he can thoroughly enjoy the pepper when he pleases.” (Carroll, 46-47) There is humor in the way that the song is sung- The cook and the baby sing along after the Duchess sings, and the Duchess uses a gentle tone of voice, like a lullaby, even as she shakes her child and sings words which advocate Puritan ideals of “speaking severely.” She gives a reason for the shake which is nonsensical. Sneezing is a reaction which cannot be controlled- especially when pepper causes it. Through the use of the poem, and the description of the way it is recited; Carroll points out that it is the adults who decide how to treat a child, children have no control over how they are treated.
However, the breaking down of the barriers in the book contradicts with the reason the book was written. It was originally a story told on a boat for his friends three girls: “We like to think that [Carroll] invented the story to amuse the young girls, but more likely, he told the tale in order to keep them quiet, to stop them from squabbling, to hold their attention, or to interrupt a flow of irrelevant questions-or perhaps even to keep them from rocking the boat and annoying him.” (Cohen.) Carroll only wanted to keep them entertained enough so that they weren’t a nuisance. Although the book subtly advocates the breaking down of the barriers of adulthood and childhood, it only exists in “Wonderland” and not in the real world.
In Anne of Green Gables, the divide between the adult and the child is clear. Matthew is sympathetic to Anne from the moment he meets her; he doesn’t mind her talking, he likes her imagination, and he “was a kindred spirit” (Montgomery, 33) to Anne. However, it is disturbing how he thinks of her as “an interesting little thing,” and after meeting her, he had “much the same feeling that came over him when he had to kill a lamb, or calf or any other little innocent creature.” (Montgomery, 22) He does not see her as a person, but rather “an interesting little thing”-a child who amuses him. He feels bad that her feelings will get hurt, but he compares it to killing an animal. With this analogy, the idea of a child as an innocent creature is put forth. Matthew forgets that although she is a child, she is a person as well. The categorization of “adult” and “child” is not seen as an issue in the book as we see Matthew as an ally. The way he views Anne is inappropriate, but it is overshadowed by Marilla’s view of Anne.
Marilla constantly represses her feelings so that she is seen as an “adult” to Anne. She praises Anne when Anne is not around: “Matthew took a fancy to her. And I must say I like her myself… The house seems a different place already. She’s a real bright little thing.” (Montgomery, 63) She does not let Anne know that she likes her; and she surprises herself. Mrs. Lynde, is harsh to Anne, she speaks about her as if she weren’t there, calling her “terribly skinny and homely.” (Montgomery, 64) Anne defends herself, and after saying rude things about Mrs. Lynde’s appearance, says “I don’t care if I do hurt your feelings… I hope I hurt them. You hurt mine worse than they were ever hurt before…And I’ll never forgive you for it, never, never!” (Montgomery, 65) Marilla stands up for Anne after she sends Anne to her room. “You shouldn’t have twitted her about her looks, Rachel… I’m not trying to excuse her. She’s been very naughty and I’ll have to give her a talking to about it. But we must make allowances for her. She’s never been taught what is right. And you were too hard on her Rachel.” (Montgomery, 65-66). She does not let Anne see that she agrees with her. She thinks that Anne being “good” is more important than showing Anne that she cares about her. “You hadn’t any right to fly into such a fury and talk the way you did to her, Anne. I was ashamed of you-thoroughly ashamed of you. I wanted you to behave nicely to Mrs. Lynde, and instead of that you have disgraced me. I’m sure I don’t know why you should lose your temper like that just because Mrs. Lynde said you were redhaired and homely.” (Montgomery, 67). The narrator is able to tell us that Marilla knows how Anne feels. “She had been a very small child when she had heard one aunt say of her to another, “What a pity she is such a dark, homely little thing.” Marilla was every day of fifty before the sting had gone out of that memory.” (Montgomery, 67-68) Marilla does remember what it is like to be called names, and she understands why Anne responded the way she did to Mrs. Lynde. She does not want to condone it however, so she places distance between herself and Anne in order to focus on Anne’s behaviour. Marilla minimized Anne’s anger as she wished to enforce the idea of “childhood” and “adulthood” being separate. It is only though the narrator that the binary thinking collapses- through Marilla’s and Matthew’s actions and words, it is enforced.
Lucy, Edmund, Peter, and Susan leave the Wardrobe after having their adventures in Narnia.
In The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the four children, Lucy, Edmund, Susan, and Peter, are “sent to the house of an old Professor.” (Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe, Lewis, 9). He acts as the surrogate parent while they live with him during the war. It is the Professor who convinces the two older children that Lucy is telling the truth about Narnia. When the four of them come back from Narnia, he is “a very remarkable man, didn’t tell them to be silly or not to tell lies, but believed the whole story.” (Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe, Lewis, 170). He is the first adult in the books we have read, to treat them as people, and not as children. He allows them to come to their own conclusions, and he does not judge them. The housekeeper however, enforces the cult of the child which the character of the Professor was meant to break. She was “not fond of children and did not like to be interrupted when she was telling visitors all the things she knew. She had said…on the first morning… ‘And please remember you’re to keep out of the way whenever I’m taking a party over the house.'” (Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe, Lewis, 51) The housekeeper hardly appears in the story, and is not as important as the professor is, either in status, or in the lives of the others in the house. It is easier then for the reader to be on the side of the Professor.
C. S Lewis enforces the boundaries between the children and adults however with the introduction of The Magician’s Nephew. The book describes how Narnia was formed, and the main character Digory travelled to Narnia at the beginning of its creation. “Digory was the sort of person who wants to know everything, and when he grew up he became the famous Professor Kirke who comes into the other books.” (Magician’s Nephew, Lewis, 38). He is the one who creates the wardrobe, even though “he could not bear to chop up the tree simply chopped up for firewood, so he had part of the timber made into a wardrobe…he himself did not discover the magical properties of the wardrobe.” (Magician’s Nephew, Lewis, 171) The Professor, had he not been to Narnia before and created the wardrobe which led Lucy to Narnia; would not have believed the children, and because C.S Lewis felt the need to write a book to explain the Professor’s behaviour in the Lion the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the binary thinking of childhood and adulthood is still intact.
In James and the Giant Peach, Roald Dahl uses humour to challenge the power that adults have over children. He points out flaws that adults have; deconstructing them as human beings and not superhuman beings. Aunt Spiker and Aunt Sponge are cruel to James, but the fear that they would present if this was a serious book is taken away once their flaws are established. “They talked about themselves, each one saying how beautiful she thought she was. Aunt Sponge had a long handled mirror…she kept picking it up and gazing at her own hideous face. ‘ I look and smell,’ Aunt Sponge declared, ‘as lovely as a rose!….’But don’t forget,’ Aunt Spiker cried, ‘How much your tummy shows!’… Aunt Spiker said ‘My sweet you cannot win! Behold my gorgeous, curvy shape’…. ‘My dear old trout,’ Aunt Sponge cried out ‘You’re only bones and skin!’ ” (Dahl, 6-7) The aunts not only talk about how lovely they are; proving that they are vain, but they also put down the other. It is hard to take them seriously, as they act very immature themselves; so what power they did have when the narrator said they “beat poor James” (Dahl, 2) is gone.
They’re not to be taken seriously. What they say is not to be taken seriously. They lose their power because their view of themselves is not correct.
Even when it looks as if James is about to get into trouble, he doesn’t get into trouble. ” ‘Beat him!’ cried Aunt Sponge. ‘I certainly will!’ Aunt Spiker snapped… ‘I shall beat you later on in the day when I don’t feel so hot.’ ” (Dahl, 9) They only get James to fear them by using empty threats. They are too lazy to do anything. If James were to realize that the aunts are only fearful because he allows himself to fear them; their power would be gone. The aunts realize that they can make James fear them, because he is a child and supposedly doesn’t have the intelligence to really see what they are like. He can only see them as scary; he has to believe them because they are adults. If the binary thinking of childhood and adults were really broken down, their threats would not work on James; and he would question them just as the reader does.
At the beginning of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, Harry Potter’s story, told with the help of an omniscient narrator, actually presents the Dursleys first- and so the first glimpse we get- a negative glimpse of Harry, is from someone whose opinion might not be very important anyway: “The Dursleys knew that the Potters had a small son…but they had never even seen him. This boy was another good reason for keeping the Potters away; they didn’t want Dudley mixing with a child like that.” (Rowling, 7). They have opinions of Harry that we can dismiss instantly as false, because we know that the Dursleys’ judge first before even seeing him. They don’t even take the time to learn his name. “He was sure there were lots of people with a son called Harry. Come to think of it, he wasn’t even sure his nephew was called Harry. He’d never even seen the boy. It might have been Harvey. Or Harold.” (Rowling, 9). So, we have a depiction of adults as extremely separated from the child. They know nothing about Harry, they want nothing to do with Harry, and they make it their mission to pretend to be as distanced from him as possible. “‘Their son, he’d be about Dudley’s age now, wouldn’t he?’ ‘I suppose so,’ said Mrs. Dursley stiffly. ‘What’s his name again? Howard, isn’t it?’ ‘Harry. Nasty, common name if you ask me.’ ‘Oh yes…I quite agree.'” (Rowling, 11). So, Mrs. Dursley does know Harry’s name, even if she says it is “common.” It doesn’t make sense: They are “normal”, however, Petunia is irritated by the “common” name of Harry. There is a discrepancy: They wish to appear normal, however when their nephew is given a normal name, they are irritated by it. Harry is ignored by the Dursleys, and they pretend that he doesn’t exist, but they still keep him anyway. “Nearly ten years had passed since the Dursleys had woken up to find their nephew on the front step, but Privet Drive had hardly changed at all…..Only the photographs on the mantlepiece really showed how much time had passed…Dudley Dursley was no longer a baby, and now the photographs showed a large, blond boy…The room held no sign at all that another boy lived in the house too. Yet Harry Potter was still there.” (Rowling, 19). They make an effort to pretend that Harry doesn’t exist; but that doesn’t change the fact that he is there. They try to keep things as “normal” as possible, they resist change for ten years since the introduction of Harry into their lives- however, there is one thing that the Dursleys forget. In Harry Potter, we don’t value normalcy- we’re taught through the book that Harry is a wizard- he should be separated from the Dursleys, because he is part of a better, magical world. One where he is accepted and cared for. The negativity of the Dursleys is replaced by the positivity of Hogwarts and the Wizard World. It is a better place, one with friends and people who care about him. We only get these positive people in the Wizarding World however, and once back into the real world the gap between the child and the adult is apparent again. The binary thinking of adult and child is not broken, there’s a reversal: instead of the adult’s voices taking over, it’s the child’s- the adults don’t matter. We learn not to value them at all.
In this clip, Harry is a baby. It is different from the book- we are able to see the way the Wizard world views Harry first- and get a sense of his character as a child right away. We can feel sympathy for him the minute we see him. McGonnagall calls them “The worst sort of Muggles imaginable.” We don’t see the Dursleys, this is the first we ever hear of them in the movie, and the first view we have of them is not from what they think, but what someone else says of them. We don’t meet them until shortly after; and then we can judge for ourselves whether they are really “the worst sort” or if the perception of them is exaggerated. We get the shot of Harry in the cupboard for a split second; and realize that he has aged with the people. By getting a chance to see right away what is meant when Mr. Dursley says “like that” we realize that his perceptions are off. He isn’t condemning or disliking somebody who is mean or dangerous, just different. We see Harry’s world first- then go into the real world with the Dursleys. It isn’t about the adults not being paid attention to- it is about Harry understanding exactly that there is another world- a world where he is cared for. (We hear Dumbledore telling Hagrid not to cry). From the very beginning, it isn’t about the Dursleys pretending he doesn’t exist, it’s about Harry finding a place where he is comfortable.
Adults can not treat children as people without categorizing them unless there is a specific reason. It is expected that categorizing children as children, separated from adults is normal. When an author breaks those boundaries, there needs to be a reason as to why they do so. This defeats the purpose of breaking the binary thinking of adult and child, and strengthens the concept of childhood as a mystery to adults.
Carroll, Lewis Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass. New York: Bantam Dell, 2006
Cohen, Morton N. Introduction: Lewis Carroll and the Alice books. Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass. By Lewis Carroll. New York: Bantam Dell, 2006. vii-xxii.
Dahl, Roald. James and the Giant Peach. New York: Puffin, 2007.
Lesnik-Oberstein, Karin. Children’s Literature: Criticism and the Fictional Child. New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 1994.
Lewis, C.S. The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. Canada: Fontana Lions, 1980
Lewis C.S The Magician’s Nephew Canada: Fontana Lions, 1980
Montgomery, L. M. Anne of Green Gables. [Toronto]: Seal, 1996.
Rowling, J. K. Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. London: Bloomsbury Pub., 1997.
Education is an important part of Children’s Literature. How books are read and how they are taught influence a child’s understanding of themselves and the world. I will be looking at two Grade 5 reading lists from different decades, and commenting on two books that were chosen to teach the same subject. The books selected by schools says a lot about how adults view children, and what adults believe children are capable of understanding.
In grade 5, my mother read The Diary of Anne Frank to study the Holocaust. Even at her age, Anne understands what is happening to her family and the cause of the tension around her. She wrote about things all children could understand, such as frustration at being seen as immature by adults, and wondering about the body and sex. By allowing the book to be taught, the school allowed students to have access to themes which may have been upsetting, and also acknowledged the changes that were happening to them.
The picture on the left is a quote in the book “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee. Atticus and Miss. Maudie explain racism to Scout through the use of the mockingbird as a symbol for marginalized people. “Killing a mockingbird” is symbolic violence; attacking people who are innocent (mockingbirds) and denying them their voice, rights, freedom, etc. By taking a voice that is not her own, and trying to use a child’s voice
I believe that the author of Number the Stars may be “killing a mockingbird.”
In Grade 5 I read Number the Stars to study the Holocaust. The book is not written by a child, but focalized through the eyes of a child. This is a problem, as “The belief in the ability to ‘know’ the ‘real child’ requires a conviction that levels of empathy, sympathy, identification, perception, or communication exist between persons… Assumptions are made about adult’s ability to ‘see’ children.” (Lesnik-Oberstien, 166) The author could not create a realistic book about a child in the Holocaust because she was not a child in the Holocaust. She could try to construct one to the best of her ability, but she risks falling (and fell) into the trap of believing that children are sheltered and naive. The book briefly references the Holocaust, but does not elaborate on those references. The information about the Holocaust comes from what information the character’s parents are willing to share with her. Her own observations are only shared with her friend, furthering the belief that a child is not aware of adult tension. According to the rationale of the present school system, since Annemarie is ten, and students in grade five are also ten, that should allow for a connection with Annemarie. Annemarie has only a vague idea of what is happening. It is up to the reader to fill in the blanks. If this is the first encounter that a child has of the Holocaust, the information given is insufficient. The subject of the Holocaust is glossed over in favour of more “exciting parts”. All that is known about what would happen to her friend is that she would be “relocated”. It is an age-appropriate introduction to the Holocaust.
With The Diary of Anne Frank, there is no author who creates a child and attempts to write in their voice. Anne is a real and normal girl with real and normal feelings. By introducing this book in grade five, girls are prepared for changes before they happen. They learn about the Holocaust and about themselves: The emotional and physical changes happening are not scary. They happen to everyone. Through Number the Stars, the expectations of children are lowered: Children do not have the ability to understand that people can do bad things. By looking at ways to “protect” children, schools forget that children sometimes need knowledge more than protection. They need to know about horrifying times to realize that the world can be horrifying.
Children’s stories are often about children, and so, the characters in children’s books, just like their readers spend time in school. If the book does not take place in school, the theme of education can still be very strong.
Alice peers over the mushroom, and looks very small. The Caterpillar only looks bigger because he is on the mushroom. They are really both three inches high.
In The Adventures of Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll, Alice spends a lot of her time reciting her lessons (incorrectly) for the other creatures in Wonderland. She has a variety of “teachers”. The Caterpillar, the Cheshire Cat, The Duchess, and most of the other characters all take it upon themselves to try to educate Alice. She gives the Caterpillar authority by calling him “Sir” almost immediately, and he uses it to his advantage; asking her questions about who she is and asking her to recite a poem. When she wants to leave, he tells her to stay, and “Keep her temper.” (Carroll, 34). She obeys him. He only has authority because Alice has given it to him. The caterpillar would not have been able to do anything if she had refused his request. She gives authority to him because she does not realize that she is in charge of Wonderland. I believe that the Caterpillar is a mirror of adults and teachers: adults would not have the authority they have if children did not passively offer it to them.
You are Old Father William by Lewis Carroll, – a parody of Robert Southey’s “The Old Man’s Comforts and how he gained them.” (Both poems written out here.)
Carroll satirizes Victorian ideas of education. One method he challenges is the use of recitation to teach. The poems in the book are parodies of poems that Victorian children recited for their lessons. (Here is a list) By having Alice recite the poems wrong, Carroll shows that, for all the recitation that a student does, if they don’t understand what they are reciting (and just reciting it on command) school is useless. Children weren’t learning anything or retaining knowledge, they were just repeating what their teachers told them to.
He called her carrots to get a reaction- well he got one. I’d do that too if someone made fun of me and I had a slate handy.
In Anne of Green Gables, Anne has experiences with two teachers. Mr. Phillips publicly humiliates her, not for her work; but for “displaying such a temper and such a vindictive spirit” (Montgomery, 112), after she gets mad at Gilbert. The purpose of school is unclear. It is meant for those who want to learn, but at the same time, it is meant to show children that adults are the ones with power. Anne has no voice. Mr. Phillips feels that he has to control her. He forgets that his job is to teach the class, not deal with a child’s behaviour. He has “spasmodic fits of reform,” (Montgomery, 113). and is feared by the pupils. He prefers to keep control in the classroom, rather than teach. Miss. Stacy is (supposedly) different. She “was a bright, sympathetic young woman with the happy gift of winning and holding the affections of her pupils and bringing out the best that was in them mentally and morally.” (Montgomery, 190). She puts the students lessons first, gaining the favour of the students, but also losing the adults’ favour. Marilla complains about the boys’ climbing trees and her surprise at Miss. Stacy allowing it. Anne defends Miss. Stacy, explaining “But we wanted a crow’s nest for nature study, that was our field afternoon…And Miss. Stacy explains everything so beautifully. We have to write compositions on our field afternoons.” (Montgomery, 191). Miss. Stacy is admired by Anne, and teaches in a way that is exciting and memorable. The focus is on learning, but she also has times when she feels she needs authority over her class. “Miss. Stacy caught me reading ‘Ben Hur’ in school…when I should have been studying…I was simply wild to know how it turned out…so I spread the history open on my desk lid and then tucked ‘Ben Hur’ between the desk and my knee. It just looked as if I were studying… while all the while I was revelling in ‘Ben Hur’. I was so interested in it that I never noticed Miss. Stacy coming down the aisle until all at once I just looked up and there she was looking down at me, so reproachful… I can’t tell you how ashamed I felt… Miss. Stacy took ‘Ben Hur’ away, but she never said a word then. She kept me in at recess and talked to me. She said I had done very wrong in two respects. First, I was wasting the time I ought to have put on my studies; and secondly I was deceiving my teacher in trying to make it appear I was reading a history when it was a storybook instead. I had never realized…that what I was doing was deceitful…I cried bitterly and asked Miss. Stacy to forgive me … I’d never do such a thing again…She forgave me freely.” (Montgomery, 240-241). Anne respects Miss. Stacy so much that she feels bad for deceiving her, despite not knowing it was wrong. Miss. Stacy has authority over her classroom, not by using fear, but by making the class feel ashamed if they do something wrong. “I never read any book now unless… Miss. Stacy… thinks it is a proper book for a girl thirteen and three-quarters to read. Miss. Stacy made me promise that. She found me reading a book one day called, ‘The Lurid Mystery of the Haunted Hall.’… it was so creepy… But Miss. Stacy said it was a very silly, unwholesome book, and she asked me not to read any more of it or any like it. I didn’t mind promising not to read any more like it, but it was agonizing to give back that book… But my love for Miss. Stacy stood the test and I did.” (Montgomery, 241). The teacher feels that it is her duty to censor the books that Anne reads, calling them inappropriate for her age. Anne reads books which may be too mature for her, but they don’t harm her in any way. They allow her to be imaginative when she needs to be. It is vital to be able to have access to all books, and not restrict them. By telling Anne it was not proper for a thirteen year old to read such books, Miss. Stacy makes Anne think before she reads. Anne is forced to second-guess not only the books she reads, but her own morality. This is very much enforcing the binary thinking of adulthood and childhood. It also enforces the idea of all stories shaping us, and teaching lessons- which may or may not be good. Anne laments at the loss of the book, but admits that “It’s really wonderful…what you can do when you’re truly anxious to please a certain person.” (Montgomery, 242). Anne cares about what Miss. Stacy thinks of her, and is willing to do whatever Miss. Stacy says to please her.
I think that while Montgomery was creating the two teachers, she was trying to change the role of teachers and how they are viewed; Mr. Phillips is an authoritarian who keeps order in his classroom through the use of fear, and Miss. Stacy is supposed to represent a better, kinder teacher. However, I believe that Miss. Stacy is no better than Mr. Phillips. She does not use fear to control her students, but she has other methods which are just as damaging to a child: she plays on a child’s feeling of shame and guilt. Both of the teachers play on a child’s feelings to keep control. Miss. Stacy does teach, but she still demands authority in a very damaging way; Mr. Phillips is so concerned with a child’s behaviour that he doesn’t care if anybody learns anything with him as the teacher. They use fear, or guilt and shame to keep control. No teacher is better than the other. They both enforce the cult of the child by failing to recognize that a child’s feelings are real and can be hurt.
I don’t know if the boundaries made are a very good thing. By requiring students to see teachers as authority figures there is a lot of pressure put on them. They are so worried about being wrong, or saying something inappropriate, that the focus in school isn’t so much on the things that are taught; but on how to interact with teachers. Just like students have to give teachers a position of authority, teachers have to live up to it. School should be for learning, and being free to explore, not for telling a child when they’re right or wrong.
Even today, there is still a belief that teachers are always right, which is why I find this clip particularly funny.
In this clip, the substitute teacher knows less about school than the students do. He’s not a real teacher, and has to think quickly to fool the principal. He sings a song to pretend he’s teaching math. At the end, the girl corrects his answer; and wanting to be seen as the stereotypical teacher, he tries to tell her that she’s wrong. She tells him the answer again, and you can see the thought process going on in his head as he tries to find out the answer for himself. When he finds that he was wrong, he says “I was testing you.” It is clear that he did not know the answer, but he did not want to be seen on a lower level intellectually than the students, so he tries to make it seem as if he knew he was wrong and “testing” her. She was also confused, as she did not expect him to be wrong. She assumed that he knew what he was teaching.
This makes perfect sense… (note the sarcasm.)
In school, the main purpose is to learn. With an authority figure present, as seen in the case of the Caterpillar and Mr. Phillips, there is an automatic fear of being wrong. The purpose of learning is undermined because of the presence of an authority figure. People learn all the time: they learn from the books they read, the shows they watch, the things they are exposed to, they learn from their friends. They may be random facts; but it’s still learning. What is learned when not at school can be retained just as much (if not more) because there is no anxiety over how to behave, or how to interact with others.
“You are Old Father William” by Lewis Carroll (poetry) Prod. Spokenverse Youtube. October 23, 2008. Web. July 9 2012 [www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf6M7026qtQ]