Ideological Theories in Children Literature

It's been a while, but today, I am so in the mood of sharing what I have just finished learning, a paper about Ideological Theories in Children Literature. Check it out!

INTRODUCTION

‘What? Ideology? But children’s books aren’t ideological – that would be propaganda, it would be sacrilegious, it would be brainwashing!’

                As we have said earlier in preface, literary works cannot be separated by ideologies brought by the authors and the social environment at that time. Those ideologies brought from the social environment influencing the literary works. Remember that men have great minds, so are the works that they could make. For example, we can see the literature in the era after colonization in Indonesia strongly told us about how the heroes could finally get independence from the colonialists. Another example is how the condition of social politic can also be used as the main idea of Green Day’s song, which is entitled American’s Idiot. Part of its lyric, as follows;

Don't want to be an American idiot.

One nation controlled by the media.

Information age of hysteria.

It's calling out to idiot America.

We can see clearly from the brief lyric of American Idiot’s song represents the social-politic environments at the time the song was created. It is because of the function of a literary work; to influence, to gain more knowledge of culture, religion, social-politic and economy knowledge in a certain nation. Literature should be freed by the ability to use any source as the influencers. Most of literary works’ intention is to educate as well as drive our viewpoints using the authors’ ideologies implicitly mentioned in their literary works. It can be as simply as having some motives to please the desire owned by the authors delivered through the characters they make in the story. As simple as the ideology of binary opposite theory by Claude Levi-Strauss, it is the good versus bad, ugly versus pretty and so on. Those ideologies will build up the viewpoints of the readers in the end.

So, we have 3 ideological theories worth reading here. The first one is the political unconscious by Fredric Jameson, orientalism by Edward Said, and performativity by Judith Butler. We will provide more profound explanation about each theory and the connection with children literature since our main discussion is how these ideological theories can affect to children literary works.

These conceptual maps help people navigate the complexity of their political universe and carry claims to social truth. For example, we can find a lot of Indonesian movies, like Garuda di Dadaku, Sayap Kecil Garuda, mentioned about the ideologies of Pancasila. It is because the authors want to liven up again the values contained in Pancasila within kids, so they can implement the values of it. But sometimes we can also find a literary work used to contradict ideologies believed by a lot of people. It can also cynically argue like the one we can see from Green Day’s song, American Idiot. Literary works can be as stretchy as that.

Children’s books are made of words, and they are created in specific historical, political, social and cultural contexts. When David McKee writes Tusk Tusk, a political fable on racial war, he is talking from the viewpoint of a second-half-of-the-twentieth-century-man with the heritage of post-war pacifism and awareness of racial conflicts. That is also the ideology which was easily found at the time the story was made. The ideology rooted from Charles Darwin’s theory about nature selection that humans were actually the final result of evolving-apes. That theory, whether it was accidentally or not has given such a great impact in classifying people through the social casts. That is the ideology influenced also with the social and politics’ background at that time. The ideology which says that the Whites are superior while the colored-ones are inferior. We can still experience the discrimination through “skin-tone” up until now, right? Can we even realize that the author conscious-or unconsciously implant the ideology of sensitive idea like racial conflict in children literary work? Did children even notice it?

1.       The Political Unconscious by Fredric Jameson

Fredric Jameson (born 14 April 1934) is an American literary critic and Marxist political theorist. He is best known for his analysis of contemporary cultural trends. He does so because theoretical texts are located within history, constrained by cultural, institutional, and social context, and so, like literary texts, can be “read” or interpreted.

A quick review of Jameson’s intentions: historicizing. The central theme and motivation behind The Political Unconscious is the desire to historicize narratives and to understand them within a Marxist framework of meaning. Texts come to us as already read, and interpretation weaves between previous interpretations. Interpretation is, essentially, allegorical. The goal of this study is to use the Marxist framework to understand the system behind interpretations.

Using Marxist framework to understand the system behind interpretations, we can finally say that some of Marvel heroes dressed with United States’ national flag is implicitly used to promote their identity or to show the superiority of Whites (in this case is American). That is the interpretation which is supported by a system behind it, that it can be political play. Just like an idiom; to kill two birds with one stone. The system behind it can be the government or some importance by people with prominent and highest position in the US. The interpretation that we can get from Captain America is the nationality pride and a strong man used to protect the country, so it is normal to have national flag all over his body. But it can be different thing if we connect it to the system behind it, which shows the binary opposite of superior versus inferior. The national flag can be such a sign of superiority owned (only) by American.

Exploration:

Robin Hood: it tells about a bunch of bandits which there were nearly a hundred of these outlaws, and their leader was a bold fellow called Robin Hood (Locksley). They were dressed in suits of green, and armed with bows and arrows; and sometimes they carried long wooden lances and broad-swords, which they knew how to handle well. Whenever they had taken anything, it was brought and laid at the feet of Robin Hood, whom they called their king. He then divided it fairly among them, giving to each man his just share.

Explanation: Each version of Robin Hood lends itself to an interpretation of the political message imbued in the story. The bandit who “steals from the rich and gives to the poor” can be viewed as a left-wing or progressive hero, while the same essential story, if it emphasized the bandit’s noble birth and his fight against unfair taxes, might express a conservative or right-wing perspective. Okay if the bandits are purely helping the poorer, but we will never know what the motive is behind. Whether they are actually looking for acceptance by being a bunch of bandits, yet they help the poorer too, or another motive can be taken into account, the bride of the King in another version of Robin Hood’s movie. Robin Hood fell in love with her, but she is with the Almighty King and is about to get married. We can also look at this viewpoint; the Hood’s bandits unconsciously are fed up with the unfair system ruled by the government at the time and also under the level of their consciousness, they think they should help the poorer.

2.       Edward Said and Orientalism

Edward Said (1 November 1935 – 25 September 2003) was a Palestinian American literary theorist and public intellectual who helped found the critical-theory field of post-colonialism. As a cultural critic, Said is best known for the 1978 book, Orientalism. In which he analyses the cultural representations that are the basis of Orientalism. Orientalism is a term he redefined to refer to the West's patronizing perceptions and depictions of Middle Eastern, Asian and North African societies—"the East/the Orients". He opposed that Orientalist scholarship was, and remains, inevitably tied to the imperialist societies that produced it. It makes much of the work naturally political, slavish to power, and thus intellectually suspect. According to him, Orientalism is based upon his knowledge of colonial literature, literary theory, and post-structuralism. Said argues a movie like Aladdin is part of a larger deeply-rooted attitude in the Western world towards the areas in the Orient: the so-called “Middle-East” and other regions surrounding it, including North Africa and India.

For Said, the term “Orientalism” stands for a mode of discourse, a system of knowledge that only creates the Orient without having any correspondence to reality. By creating the Orient as a contrasting image to the West throughout history, certain clichés and stereotypes of the oriental world and its people’s have extended into almost all realms of live. As “what is thought, said, or even done about the Orient follows certain distinct lines”, “Orientalism” imposes “limitations on thought and action” and thus creates a difference between reality and representation.

Orientalism is also a form of intellectual colonialism. It defines a group by what they are not, what they lack (European-ness). By defining a group in this way, you control it.  They can never be equal or better than the defining group because they lack what it is defines the other. They must always be inferior. They are not defined by what they are or do, but by what they are not.  Thus, what they are is also defined in the terms of the main group.

This is a very confronting idea, as it defines the very nature of adult and child, as well as the relationship between them. In an article entitled “The Other: Orientalism, Colonialism, and Children’s Literature”, Perry Nodelman does not just look at literary expression but on the whole nature of society’s definition of childhood and child-ness. As children’s literature is both an expression of childhood, and a mechanism for child development, it will reflect this Orientalist perception of childhood.

The colonization of childhood:

-Colonialism: Imperialism, control/authority over one culture/society by another. Implied superiority of colonial power and consequent inferiority of colonized

-Orientalism: The definition by Europeans of a cultural group (e.g. Arabs & Asians) as non-European and, therefore, inferior.

-Nodelman’s thesis: the language and assumptions in the discourse on child development and, therefore, children’s literature mirrors Said’s description of Orientalism.

Considerations:  

          

“Children are not the ones who write either the texts we identify as children’s literature or the criticisms of those texts.” (p.29)

“… our attempting to speak for and about children in these ways will always confirm their difference from, and presumably, inferiority to, ourselves as thinkers and speakers.” (p.29)

We define children as:

-          Innocent

-          Less developed

-          Unable to reason as deeply

-          Ideally passive and receptive to guidance

-          Intuitive rather than rational, creative rather than practical

-          Potentially able to reach our standards, but only on our terms

Our definition of children mirrors the definition of colonized races in so much colonial literature, even to the point of our anger at them when they refuse to follow our rules for their development.  The wrong is theirs, not ours for the path we have chosen.

Compare this list of definitions with the early definitions of Aboriginal people in Australia. We can consider also the mix of colonialism, racism and socio-economic paternalism that could be read into Madonna’s actions to adopt a Malawian boy, David Banda then it is followed by the hottest couple, Pitt and Jolie, throw in culture of celebrity “superiority”.

“… Child psychology and children's literature are primarily for the benefit of adults. … We write books for children to provide them with values and with images of themselves we approve of or feel comfortable with.” (p.30)

Childhood is a state of otherness that is inherently adult-centered – we encourage in children those values and behaviors that make children easier for us to handle. If a child steps outside those boundaries, we label them as deficient, abnormal, disobedient.

Childhood is dangerous for adults – “childlike irrationality, lawlessness or carelessness is attractively lax, a temptation to be less responsible, less mature, less adult.” (p. 31)

Therefore we must train it out of children for their, and our, good. We must not “go native”.

“We show children what we know about childhood in hopes that they will take our word for it and become like the fictional children we have invented – and, therefore, less threatening to us. … We provide young readers with a ‘realistic’ description of people and events that insist on the reality of one particular way of looking at the world and themselves – our way.” (p.32)

So, how does this interpret?

- Social consciousness, moral judgments, and growth of personal awareness in Aladdin?

Are these behavior changes the ones that adults would like, or realistic depictions of children’s behavior and attitudes?

Exploration:

Aladdin: Aladdin is a cartoon fantasy filled with exciting images and extraordinary events that has entertained children and adults alike. High speed magic-carpet rides, gold-filled caverns, genies, sorcerers and sword-bearing palace guards; even timeless notions of love, friendship, and the triumph of good over evil can be found in this film. However, something so seemingly innocent, not just to children who watch it now, but also those of us who grew up on it, can come to look offensive and somewhat contaminated when we take a moment to step back and analyze it in a critical manner. Aladdin, in the context given the term by Said, is Orientalist:

1. Orientalist in how the setting of the Orient is displayed;

Aladdin opens with a scene of a rider on a camel in a vast, barren dessert under a blazing hot sun. This opening scene is not only a stereotypical view of the Orient, but as the first main image it sets the tone for the type of Western attitude that the rest of the movie will take on. The lyrics of the opening song (and title of this paper) are 5indicative of this attitude; a thick, “Oriental” accented singer describes his homeland as “flat”, “immense”, and “intensely hot”. And also “It's barbaric, but hey, it's home!” This is a classic Western misconception of the Orient: that it is nothing but a large, hot, and desolate dessert with little diversity in the form of landscape or plant life. The reality is that there are many types of land in the region, such as the mountain ranges stretching throughout Lebanon, Syria, and Israel, throughout Turkey, Iraq and Iran, and those found along the east coast of Saudi Arabia and into Yemen. 

2. Orientalist in how it displays Oriental peoples and their behaviors;

Moving on, a look at the characters in Aladdin and their behavior is a great illustration of stereotypes found within the Orientalist mindset. Our first encounter is with the narrator of Aladdin, and he is quick to interrupt himself in order to barter with the audience over his wares. His accent is thick and exaggerated (voiced by Robin Williams) and he is abusive towards his camel. Just like his opening scene in the desert, he himself is a good representation of the generalizations that are to follow him. Of the second two characters (found on a large sandbank), one is described as being “pungent” and a thief, and both are animated to look somehow threatening or evil. The thief, who is quite stupid, informs us that had to “slit a few throats” just recently, and in the next few moments he expresses his religious sentiment when saying “by Allah!” This is a particularly offensive stereotype to Muslim Arabs/Orientals, in that it is associating a murderous villain with the Islamic faith, somehow implying that members of the faith are not of serious dedication to its principles. More examples of stereotypes in this realm include a wide variety of street entertainment, including a man on a bed of nails, a man walking across hot coals, a sword-swallower, a fire-eater and a snake-charmer. As far as women are concerned, there is no limit to the amount of beautiful harem-dwelling, scantily clad belly-dancing girls in contrast to the few “mother” type characters who are drawn as much uglier, more covered up, and often as cleaning. The only characters who do some good in the movie are the heroes or "good guys"; Aladdin, Jasmine, the Genie, and the Sultan, all have completely Americanized voices in contrast to almost all of the other 7 characters in the movie who have heavy “Middle-Eastern” accents.

3. Orientalist in its display of Oriental society and its power structures;

Looking at the characters and settings together and how they interact with each other we get a sense of the society that is being illustrated in Aladdin. We see right away that this is a society where there is a large class division, and where the citizens live in completely different world than those who rule over it; the Sultan's palace is exceedingly wealthy, while the surrounding ghettoes (such as Aladdin’s home) are examples of severe poverty, and these contrasting images give us the stereotype of an undemocratic and aristocratic state. In the ghettoes themselves, life seems to be a daily struggle to eat for Aladdin and his comrade Abu; with no money they steal their meals from the shopkeepers, and share their take with some of the local children who are just as impoverished as they are. From this, we can assume that the society in Aladdin as having a high degree of political power concentrated in the ruler's hands, leaving little doubt why the gap in living conditions exists. We can also see that the tactics used by the state in this society are very extreme; the guards of the royal palace use a number of cruel methods to get their existing law as invalid, stating that he could do so because after all, he is the sultan.

4. Orientalist in East vs. West

With a clear description of the land itself, the people who are living within it, and the structure that their interaction as a society starts to take, we can see the theme of Orientalism that is in the movie. In the most general of senses this takes form as a “showdown” so to speak, of East versus West, and is born (however unintentionally) from the creators’ placement of seemingly “good” Western traits and ideals in contrast with seemingly “bad” Eastern ones. Some of the instances of this contrast have been mentioned above; however they are still relevant to this point. For instance, the characters of Aladdin, Jasmine, the Genie and the Sultan, all have heavily Americanized accents and are inherently good characters, while all the evil characters (Jaffar, the Guards, Suitors) all have thick, heavy “Oriental” accents. Furthermore, at some points during the movie, and even by his request, Aladdin comes to be known as simply “Al”. In both examples the hero/heroes are made to be inherently Western to the viewer, in contrast with stereotypical Eastern representations of bad characters. Also previously mentioned is how the palace is the only setting that is cast in a favorable light, and that it is also magnificently wealthy, a correlation that is a clear Western opinion on what is to be valued in such an “Eastern” society.