One theory that I have found myself agreeing with is when MacLeod said " national feeling required that books for American children should be home products". It is important for children to read books that take place in their own country. When children read books about America they are also learning about their culture and society. If a child was raised on other stories their based culture would be that of another country. Learning American culture is very important for these young minds. They need to grow up reading about and loving the country that they call home.
Secondly, children books used to be based solely on what parents want their children to think and how they wanted them to act in the future. "It will not be an issue here,' Jacqueline Rose writes in her study of Peter Pan, ' of what the child wants, but of what the adult desires- desires in the very act of construing the child as the object of its speech". Parents realized the control they had over children by creating stories that taught children how to act. This is a smart tactic that many of Americans learned and still to this day continue to use. Children need to learn from children books and create from the beginning reasoning behind the moral.
Continuing on with the persuasiveness of young children, Sanchez provides another point that I have to agree with. "Lockean conceptions of childhood as a 'blank slate' upon which parental authority must write, Romantic visions of the child as natural and as innocent as nature vied and mingled with each other" (Sanchez). When children are young, adults are able to create an impact on the way they think. Books and children literature are able to do this, especially when the parents pick out the certain books that their child will be able to read. This again is a smart tactic that was used then and now.
I feel that a reason for the change in children literature is the study of how it effects the next generation. Sanchez states that "this book treats children and childhood as part of cultural studies". Children are a culture of their own, they have their own language, signs, styles and they create them on their own to be distinguished. We still study children today and they way that they interact with each other and do the strange things that we witness. Children literature has changed because of the studies and research that have seen that what children read affects how the next generation will act. Childhood is all a part of science.
One point that I do disagree with is in MacLeod's article. She states that back in the day, "The focus of the stories was extremely narrow. They were written to teach and specifically to teach morality". Children need more than just a narrow boring story. They need to be able to imagine and let their mind wonder off in to new places. This type of imagination is what helps our society create bigger and better things for our community. The creativity helps children in different subjects and allows them to be expressive in whatever they may pursue.
I agree with most of what we have read and am amazed that I have never realized the control authors of children literature have over our future generations. It really surprises me and even though this may sound stupid I feel as though I am being let in on a little secret and I like it.
I really like the way that you organized your introductory paragraph because it gave a good outline of what you were going to explain. I also think one of the most incredible parts about children’s literature is that it was distinctly created as a product of its time for the purpose of creating future generations. Your first theory is similar to mine in that it was important for children and society as a whole to break away from Britain. I would have liked to incorporate this idea children reading books that take place in their own company. This quote by MacLeod, “national feeling required that books for American children should be home products,” essentially wraps up everything childhood literature was about.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed that you brought up the fact that children’s books should be a product of their own country. Various areas of the world differ in how they choose to raise children. I think that it is important that at an early age children begin to learn about their own culture and society.
ReplyDeleteI think the Lockean theory of “blank slate” was an interesting thing to tie into children’s literature. It helps tie together the rest of the theories about the purpose of these stories was to instill morals. I also really liked how you mention the culture of children, including their style, signs, etc. It was a very interesting thing to bring up, since it’s still something that is so important.
ReplyDeleteI liked how you disagreed with Macleod theory of how most children's literature is focused on morality. I agree with you that children's literature is much more than just morality. After analyzing different stories, authors reveal various motives to illustrate their ideals and views into their stories for others to interpret.
ReplyDelete