Skip to main content


<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "base.dtd">




<title>Children's literature</title></titleStmt>

<publicationStmt><distributor>BASE and Oxford Text Archive</distributor>


<availability><p>The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading, under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Centre for English Language Teacher Education, Warwick) and Paul Thompson

(Department of Applied Linguistics, Reading), with funding from BALEAP,

EURALEX, the British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. The

original recordings are held at the Universities of Warwick and Reading, and

at the Oxford Text Archive and may be consulted by bona fide researchers

upon written application to any of the holding bodies.

The BASE corpus is freely available to researchers who agree to the

following conditions:</p>

<p>1. The recordings and transcriptions should not be modified in any


<p>2. The recordings and transcriptions should be used for research purposes

only; they should not be reproduced in teaching materials</p>

<p>3. The recordings and transcriptions should not be reproduced in full for

a wider audience/readership, although researchers are free to quote short

passages of text (up to 200 running words from any given speech event)</p>

<p>4. The corpus developers should be informed of all presentations or

publications arising from analysis of the corpus</p><p>

Researchers should acknowledge their use of the corpus using the following

form of words:

The recordings and transcriptions used in this study come from the British

Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus, which was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Warwick) and Paul Thompson (Reading). Corpus development was assisted by

funding from the Universities of Warwick and Reading, BALEAP, EURALEX, the

British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. </p></availability>




<recording dur="13:26:24" n="11146">


<respStmt><name>BASE team</name>



<langUsage><language id="en">English</language>



<person id="nf0056" role="main speaker" n="n" sex="f"><p>nf0056, main speaker, non-student, female</p></person>

<personGrp id="ss" role="audience" size="m"><p>ss, audience, medium group </p></personGrp>

<personGrp id="sl" role="all" size="m"><p>sl, all, medium group</p></personGrp>

<personGrp role="speakers" size="3"><p>number of speakers: 3</p></personGrp>





<item n="speechevent">Lecture</item>

<item n="acaddept">English</item>

<item n="acaddiv">ah</item>

<item n="partlevel">UG2</item>

<item n="module">19th century fiction</item>




<u who="nf0056"> hello <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> good afternoon <pause dur="0.2"/> i know most of you but for those of you i don't know i'm <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> <pause dur="0.7"/> # and again some of you will know this some of you won't <pause dur="0.4"/> i don't necessarily know what we'll be doing today <pause dur="0.7"/> i don't lecture from a preset <pause dur="0.3"/> plan so it depends a little bit on you if you don't understand what i'm talking about you want me to repeat things or explain it <pause dur="0.5"/> please wave your hand don't worry if you think that <pause dur="0.3"/> nobody else may be sharing your concerns just go ahead <pause dur="0.5"/> # likewise if i'm going much too slowly and you think yeah yeah we know all of this <pause dur="0.2"/> just let me know again <pause dur="0.3"/> i'll stop once in a while and ask you <pause dur="0.3"/> there's no point my going on and on if you're all sitting there going either yes this is blindingly obvious or saying i haven't got a clue what she's talking about because this is for you i don't <pause dur="0.4"/> it's not for my personal <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> gratification to come and <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> talk here it's for something that <pause dur="0.4"/> you know you can use <pause dur="0.4"/> # i've given you quite a large handout it's just a couple of sections of

text i won't be going through all of them obviously besides just not having the time <pause dur="0.3"/> it's also pretty useless <pause dur="0.3"/> i'm just going to use them to focus on some ideas and talk through some ideas <pause dur="0.4"/> # and if we don't get through all of them then hopefully <pause dur="0.5"/> i can just point you ahead at what might be interesting and relevant about them <pause dur="0.9"/> okay <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> the lecture is called Nineteenth Century Fiction and the Dream of Childhood <pause dur="0.6"/> now # <pause dur="0.8"/> some people might think oh you know it's a marginal lecture it's going to be on something quite unimportant it's going to be <pause dur="0.4"/> on something to do with children and it's not very <pause dur="0.2"/> important there are not a lot of children in texts <pause dur="0.5"/> in fact this lecture is going to be about all kinds of issues which are absolutely crucial for thinking about any form of fiction <pause dur="0.4"/> including nineteenth century fiction <pause dur="1.1"/> so <pause dur="0.3"/> the things i'm going to talk about here may look like they're focused around the issue of childhood but they have to do with almost every aspect of thinking critically

about fictional texts <pause dur="0.6"/> so all those people who aren't here today because they thought this is not an important lecture are in very bad luck and <pause dur="0.2"/> you're in good luck <vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.5"/> # it's an a common misunderstanding you'll also find this theme re-emerging <pause dur="0.4"/> # in your third year courses for instance with Wordsworth Dickens and so on <pause dur="0.3"/> and we'll pick up on this so <pause dur="0.3"/> something about childhood why is this relevant <pause dur="0.4"/> the first issue i'm going to talk about is the idea that childhood like every other identity is an idea <pause dur="1.0"/> it is not <pause dur="0.2"/> despite what most critics say and they say very strange things about childhood <pause dur="0.3"/> it is not a biological <pause dur="0.3"/> or somehow some kind of genetic truth <pause dur="0.5"/> neither is there a kind of psychological truth about it <pause dur="0.3"/> no matter what many critics assume <pause dur="0.3"/> and what they say <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> it's the same case for those of you who are going to do be doing women's writing or if you think about gender there is not a truth <pause dur="0.2"/> about women <pause dur="0.6"/> or about femininity <pause dur="0.3"/> these are cultural ideas <pause dur="1.4"/> # it's significant that we don't talk in the

same way about masculinity <pause dur="0.7"/> as being a psychological or a biological or a genetic issue <pause dur="0.4"/> for instance # one famous geneticist <pause dur="0.2"/> that i know of who got very very irritated <pause dur="0.4"/> with the kind of simplistic assumptions some other people make about the role of science in determining identify <pause dur="0.4"/> once said well for instance we have one huge piece of information <pause dur="0.3"/> which is we know exactly <pause dur="0.3"/> # what has to do with the majority of people genetically becoming criminals <pause dur="0.6"/> and all the other geneticists he was talking about went <vocal desc="gasp" iterated="n"/> <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> what big piece of news is this what huge thing has been discovered <pause dur="0.3"/> <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> and in fact of course as you probably will already have guessed what he was talking about was the fact that most criminals are men <pause dur="0.8"/> and gender <pause dur="0.4"/> is genetically determined you either have <pause dur="0.3"/> an X and a Y chromosome or two Xs and that's what makes you a man or a woman <pause dur="0.3"/> biologically speaking <pause dur="0.4"/> # so in fact you know one could make that claim <pause dur="0.2"/> in fact of course it's something which is completely unprovable it has to do

with the ideas <pause dur="0.3"/> of politics in society about gender <pause dur="0.3"/> what are appropriate roles appropriate behaviours <pause dur="0.4"/> # why they're seen as appropriate roles and behaviours and the same thing is true of childhood <pause dur="0.8"/> so the reason this subject is so important <pause dur="0.5"/> is because instead of talking about texts as being kind of <pause dur="0.5"/> observational <pause dur="0.8"/> # systems looking at what is a child like <pause dur="0.8"/> and then saying <pause dur="0.2"/> does this text get it right or does this text get it wrong which is what most critics do have a look around and test this out for yourself you may find you disagree with me <pause dur="0.4"/> but in my experience i can only offer you that as a devil's advocate go and have a look <pause dur="0.4"/> most critics will say <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> yes it's exactly what children are like <pause dur="0.4"/> in this text the way the child is described spot on <pause dur="0.3"/> that's a real child <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="1.1"/> what is this real child in and interestingly another critic will say no that's not what children are like at all <pause dur="0.9"/> why <pause dur="0.3"/> because there are different ideas about childhood <pause dur="0.3"/> but it's also the problematic assumption

that fiction <pause dur="0.5"/> is about going around and saying <pause dur="0.2"/> <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> that's a truth <pause dur="0.5"/> that's what truth is really like <pause dur="0.4"/> this novel is about what women are really like and <pause dur="0.4"/> all other novels have got it wrong <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> or <pause dur="0.3"/> some other novels have got it wrong <pause dur="0.5"/> i mean it's like looking into this room and saying <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> that person over there is exactly what a woman is like <pause dur="0.5"/> and all you other women are just sort of you haven't got it quite right yet you know <pause dur="0.5"/> it's just that woman who is exactly what a woman is <trunc>li</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> i mean it would be an absolutely nonsensical <pause dur="0.4"/> claim <pause dur="0.8"/> particularly on top of that <pause dur="0.4"/> if they were talking about a piece of fiction which is made up <pause dur="0.2"/> anyway <pause dur="1.0"/> it's the same problem with looking at novels and saying that's what <pause dur="0.3"/> nineteenth century society was like <pause dur="0.6"/> no <pause dur="0.7"/> they're made up <pause dur="0.5"/> they don't have to be like nineteenth society at all <pause dur="0.2"/> in the first place <pause dur="0.5"/> and even if they are which nineteenth <trunc>s</trunc> century society are they like which <pause dur="0.2"/> aspect of the nineteenth century society <pause dur="2.4"/> lot of people for instance talk about

things like the woman being the angel in the house well most women in the nineteenth century weren't being angels in houses at all they were working down coal mines or on fields <pause dur="2.3"/> so when i get a whole load of essays by people on their finals saying <pause dur="0.7"/> <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> women in the nineteenth century were locked into their house and they were the angels in the house and that's because that's what nineteenth century society was like <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> well no <pause dur="0.3"/> <vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/> <pause dur="1.4"/> it's not the case <pause dur="0.5"/> these are ideas ideologies <pause dur="0.8"/> about <pause dur="0.7"/> political and social assumptions <pause dur="0.7"/> wishes desires fantasies <pause dur="0.4"/> make-believe <pause dur="0.3"/> about what identities are about <pause dur="0.8"/> and childhood is a particularly important one <pause dur="0.7"/> the way childhood is used <pause dur="0.7"/> the idea of childhood or ideas of childhood <pause dur="0.9"/> have to do <pause dur="0.4"/> with three issues which are crucial to fiction <pause dur="0.9"/> i'm going to come back to this again and again <pause dur="0.4"/> but they are memory <pause dur="1.4"/> which is crucial because every text is retrospective <pause dur="0.2"/> when you think about it they're all about things which have by definition happened <pause dur="0.4"/> in a past otherwise

the text wouldn't be finished and in front of you wouldn't have a beginning a middle and an ending <pause dur="1.0"/> so <pause dur="0.4"/> childhood is about the idea of memory or ideas of memory course we don't know how memory works there are only different concepts of memory but the idea of memory <pause dur="0.6"/> they are about <pause dur="0.2"/> the idea <pause dur="0.5"/> of language <pause dur="0.6"/> that is childhood has to do <pause dur="0.5"/> with ideas of language <pause dur="0.3"/> the idea of what it means to be written or to write <pause dur="0.5"/> and it has to do with the idea of consciousness <pause dur="1.4"/> what <pause dur="0.3"/> kind of view or image or idea what way <pause dur="0.2"/> does someone look at the world i'll come back to this 'cause these are very <pause dur="0.3"/> broad categories memory language consciousness <pause dur="0.5"/> and i'll i'll show you those in the text hopefully what i <pause dur="0.2"/> mean exactly by this <pause dur="1.3"/> and some idea of how texts are narrated has to do with memory <pause dur="0.6"/> # idea of languages how do you represent <pause dur="0.2"/> an idea <pause dur="0.9"/> consciousness and language and memory in texts <pause dur="0.4"/> and the idea of the consciousness is what kind of vision <pause dur="0.3"/> or perspective <pause dur="1.0"/> does the text <pause dur="0.5"/> locate <pause dur="0.4"/> to certain identities <pause dur="0.3"/> i

mean you might have come across an example of the latter for instance i don't know if you've ever seen or heard people talking about <pause dur="0.6"/> <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> oh <pause dur="0.2"/> when children look at art they have this pure vision <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.6"/> that's an idea for instance of vision and consciousness which is allocated at children <pause dur="0.4"/> not only do we have no evidence for this kind of idea whatsoever we've no evidence children go around going <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> wow great painting you know <pause dur="0.2"/> really love that absolutely fresh vision <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> <pause dur="0.3"/> we have no evidence for this whatsoever and even if it were the case is it case for <pause dur="0.4"/> all five year olds do all five year olds do this <pause dur="1.1"/> there are other cultures where ideas about childhood are entirely different they don't go around thinking that children have some sort of pure vision <pause dur="0.2"/> or innocence about them <pause dur="0.4"/> now you've got consciousness there and how you're going to define consciousness <pause dur="0.8"/> okay <pause dur="0.7"/> how am i doing so far am i going too fast or too slow <pause dur="0.5"/> do you see where i'm going shall i keep going or stop <pause dur="2.0"/> yes <pause dur="1.7"/> keep going <pause dur="1.4"/> you

okay <pause dur="1.1"/> yeah <pause dur="0.8"/> okay <pause dur="0.5"/> # i'll pick up the first page on your handout <pause dur="1.4"/> what i want to do with this and the next extract the first one is from Mrs Sherwood's book The Fairchild Family <pause dur="0.3"/> which was published in a whole range of volumes from eighteen-eighteen <pause dur="0.2"/> to eighteen-forty-seven and please please forget the titles and the dates 'cause they're absolutely no use to you <pause dur="0.3"/> whatsoever <vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.2"/> i've just put them on so if you want to go and look up the text you know where you might find them <pause dur="0.3"/> but you don't need to repeat dates and names they have no meaning <pause dur="0.3"/> at all <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> and i'm going to use the next extract to compare to that which is Catherine Sinclair's Holiday House from eighteen-thirty-nine as it says on the handout <pause dur="0.8"/> the reason i want to use these two texts is first of all to illustrate to you again <pause dur="0.8"/> how there are widely differing ideas <pause dur="0.2"/> of childhood <pause dur="1.1"/> for instance you may have heard politicians talk about the ideas of Victorian childhood and what it was like to be a child <pause dur="0.3"/> in the Victorian days a

lot of politicians nowadays seem to think that was a rather nice thing <pause dur="0.3"/> it's a good thing to be Victorian you know some good stiff beating and <pause dur="0.2"/> some strict schooling and some good discipline this is you know a lot of politicians are very happy with this idea nowadays <pause dur="0.5"/> but i want to actually illustrate here that in two texts which are more or less <trunc>con</trunc> contemporary <pause dur="0.8"/> more or less <pause dur="0.4"/> there are two <pause dur="0.2"/> radically different ideas about what childhood is about <pause dur="0.8"/> what it has to do with <pause dur="1.1"/> so we'll start with The Fairchild Family <pause dur="0.9"/> Fairchild Family <pause dur="1.3"/> shows up in comparison to the other handout i'll be looking at or the other section of the handout i'll be looking at in a moment <pause dur="0.8"/> two ideas of childhood here the one we're looking at is evangelical <pause dur="0.4"/> it has to do with a particular idea about religion <pause dur="0.2"/> and spiritual status <pause dur="0.5"/> where the child is posited <pause dur="0.2"/> as not innocent <pause dur="0.5"/> as fallen already <pause dur="0.8"/> so the child <pause dur="0.6"/> has to <pause dur="0.2"/> aspire <pause dur="0.2"/> to spiritual redemption it has to be saved <pause dur="1.6"/> okay so this is not a vision of a

child who is innocent <pause dur="0.5"/> this is an idea of childhood <pause dur="0.4"/> that it is fallen <pause dur="0.3"/> it is in the fallen state <pause dur="0.4"/> of man <pause dur="1.0"/> and it has to be redeemed <pause dur="1.4"/> so that's the first thing to look at the second issue it has to do with is class <pause dur="1.2"/> ideas of childhood but also gender for instance are mediated by ideas of class i mentioned before the example of saying <pause dur="0.3"/> in Victorian fiction women are <pause dur="0.3"/> angels in the house <pause dur="0.2"/> and then saying well no it depends entirely if you are thinking about <pause dur="0.3"/> any connection with the society <pause dur="0.2"/> depends on an ideal of a middle class <pause dur="0.4"/> woman or an upper middle class woman <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> who is in the text represented <pause dur="0.3"/> as an idea of purity <pause dur="0.3"/> and an idea of non-contamination with the world she has lily-white hands 'cause she doesn't work <pause dur="1.5"/>

she is pure <pause dur="0.2"/> because she is not contaminated by society <pause dur="1.3"/> that's why she is in a house that's where the term angel in the house comes from so <pause dur="0.3"/> again ideas in the text <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> which are not at all about some simple view of representing history or history's views or society's views <pause dur="1.1"/> well in this text The Fairchild Family and look at the that name <pause dur="0.2"/> fair child <pause dur="0.6"/> beautiful child <pause dur="0.5"/> # there's a family father and mother <pause dur="0.4"/> and the children have been arguing together <pause dur="1.0"/> if you look at the top of page fifty-six and here's fifty-six fifty-seven on the # <pause dur="0.4"/> photocopy there <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> the father says to his children <pause dur="0.2"/> <reading>have you not read how wicked Cain <pause dur="0.5"/> in his anger killed his brother Abel <pause dur="0.7"/> and do you not remember the verse in <pause dur="0.2"/> one John two-fifteen <pause dur="0.5"/> whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer <pause dur="0.3"/> and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life <pause dur="0.4"/> abiding in him</reading> <pause dur="2.0"/> his daughter Emily not surprisingly here <pause dur="0.2"/> says <reading>oh papa papa we will never be angry again</reading> <pause dur="1.3"/> and what does Mr Fairchild say <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>my dear Emily you must not

say that you will never be angry again <pause dur="0.2"/> but that you will pray to God in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ your great redeemer <pause dur="0.5"/> to send his Holy Spirit into your heart and to take away these wicked passions</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> so you see here <pause dur="0.2"/> the idea of the child as uncontrolled <pause dur="0.5"/> wickedness already present in its heart <pause dur="0.3"/> which it must banish out through looking to the redeemer the one who redeems <pause dur="0.5"/> Jesus who sacrificed his life in Christian doctrine <pause dur="0.3"/> to absolve the sin <pause dur="1.0"/> of people <pause dur="0.8"/> so this idea that the child <pause dur="1.0"/> is actually in a position of aspiring to banishing out <pause dur="0.2"/> wickedness which is already there <pause dur="2.2"/> so here <reading>my dear child</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> Lucy then says the other daughter <reading>when the <pause dur="0.2"/> Spirit of God is in me <pause dur="0.8"/> shall i never hate any more <pause dur="0.2"/> or be in wicked passions any more</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> if the Spirit of God isn't there it has to be obtained it has to be found <pause dur="0.8"/> <reading>my dear child answered Mr Fairchild the Lord Jesus Christ says by this shall all men know that ye are my disciples <pause dur="0.2"/> if you have love <pause dur="0.5"/> one <pause dur="0.2"/> towards another <pause dur="0.4"/> therefore if you

are followers <pause dur="0.3"/> of the Lord Jesus Christ <pause dur="0.3"/> and the Spirit of God is in you <pause dur="0.2"/> you will love everybody even those who hate you <pause dur="0.2"/> and use you ill <pause dur="0.9"/> then Mr Fairchild kissed his children and forgave them and they kissed each other <pause dur="0.5"/> and Mr Fairchild gave them leave to dine with him as usual</reading> <pause dur="1.2"/> and after dinner he says to his wife <reading>i will take the children this evening to Blackwood and show them something there which i hope they will remember as long as they live <pause dur="1.2"/> and i hope they will take warning from it and pray more earnestly for new hearts</reading> <pause dur="0.4"/> have to get new hearts <pause dur="0.2"/> <reading>that they may love each other with perfect and heavenly <pause dur="0.2"/> love</reading> <pause dur="1.0"/> so not again the idea of a childhood innocence that we find in other texts where the child is an innocent on earth <pause dur="0.4"/> but on the contrary an idea of a child who must aspire to heavenly love <pause dur="0.8"/> to the idea <pause dur="0.2"/> of a perfection which it does not yet have access to <pause dur="1.2"/> Blackwood well what is at Blackwood what are they going to do there <pause dur="1.2"/> right i will <pause dur="0.2"/> jump now to <pause dur="0.7"/> the bottom of

the next page fifty-seven 'cause off they go to Blackwood <pause dur="2.1"/> with the father <pause dur="0.3"/> the mother stays home <pause dur="2.2"/> and what do they see <pause dur="0.5"/> what are they going to do there at Blackwood <pause dur="2.0"/> well at the bottom page fifty-seven it says <reading>the garden was overgrown with grass and weeds the fruit trees wanted pruning <pause dur="0.5"/> and it could now hardly be seen where the walks had been</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> look at that idea of the natural world completely overrun <pause dur="0.4"/> the natural world here is not something which is good as a wilderness it means it represents the idea <pause dur="0.2"/> of an uncontrolled child a naturalness which is rampant <pause dur="0.3"/> which has obscured order and civilization <pause dur="0.4"/> which is not <pause dur="0.2"/> pruned back <pause dur="0.6"/> again just to notice that the text does not accord for instance with some modern ecological notions that nature is great when it's wild <pause dur="0.3"/> quite a different kind of ideology attached to this <pause dur="0.2"/> here nature has broken down <pause dur="0.3"/> a large brick house which has fallen to ruin the garden <pause dur="0.2"/> the area of cultivation <pause dur="0.2"/> is overgrown with grass and weeds if you

don't cultivate things <pause dur="0.3"/> if you don't look for this new heart you're going to be overgrown by grass and weeds <pause dur="0.5"/> the fruit trees wanted pruning <pause dur="0.5"/> they lacked pruning wanted needed pruning <pause dur="0.6"/> and it could hardly be seen where the walks had been <pause dur="1.2"/> look what happens next and you'll see the connections made here this is why description of course is always crucially important to novels <pause dur="0.2"/> description is never just about description i don't know if you're <pause dur="0.2"/> some of the people or some of you or if some of the people who think oh i'll skip that bit i'll just go on to what happens next <vocal desc="laugh" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/> but in fact the description is crucial it's never just a pretty picture <pause dur="0.3"/> it's always part of how the novel is constructing <pause dur="0.3"/> # its own ideology and its own ideas about <pause dur="0.2"/> all kinds of things which are going on <pause dur="0.2"/> so here as well <pause dur="0.7"/> <reading>one of the old chimneys had fallen down <pause dur="0.3"/> breaking through the roof of the house in one or two places</reading> in other words the roof <pause dur="0.2"/> the protection <pause dur="0.4"/> of the house has been breached <pause dur="0.9"/> because of the falling of the

chimneys the place is in such disrepair <pause dur="0.5"/> <reading>and the glass windows were broken near the place where the garden wall had fallen</reading> <pause dur="0.8"/> next page <pause dur="0.4"/> glass barriers walls have all been broken through breached <pause dur="1.6"/> <reading>just between that and the wood <pause dur="0.4"/> stood a gibbet <pause dur="1.1"/> on which the body of a man hung in chains <pause dur="1.3"/> it had not yet fallen to pieces though it had hung there <pause dur="0.4"/> for some years <pause dur="1.6"/> the body had on a blue coat a silk handkerchief round the neck with shoes and stockings and every other part of the dress <pause dur="0.3"/> still entire <pause dur="0.3"/> but the face of the corpse was so shocking that the children could not look upon it <pause dur="0.3"/> oh papa papa what is that <pause dur="0.4"/> cried the children <pause dur="0.6"/> that is a gibbet said Mr Fairchild <pause dur="0.3"/> and the man who hangs upon it is a murderer one who first hated and afterwards killed his brother <pause dur="1.5"/> when people are found guilty of stealing they are hanged upon a gallows and taken down as soon as they are dead <pause dur="0.3"/> but when a man has committed a murder <pause dur="0.3"/> he is hanged in iron chains upon a gibbet <pause dur="0.3"/> till his body falls to pieces that all

who pass by <pause dur="0.3"/> may take warning <pause dur="0.2"/> by the example</reading> <pause dur="1.2"/> so <pause dur="0.4"/> the people who pass by according to Mr Fairchild take warning from this example and he is bringing his children there to take warning <pause dur="0.3"/> from this example <pause dur="0.8"/> very different kind of reading of Christianity for instance <pause dur="0.3"/> than that which talks about the forgiveness and compassion of Jesus <pause dur="0.3"/> this is a reading <pause dur="0.3"/> which is pretty much <pause dur="0.3"/> on the side of scaring the daylights out of everyone who was thinking anything bad <pause dur="0.3"/> so here we're talking about that kind of image of childhood in such a pronounced way they have to get this very extreme example of this body hanging there in the wind <pause dur="0.5"/> and in fact if you look at page fifty-nine <pause dur="0.8"/> they're talking about the mother of <pause dur="0.5"/> the man who is hanging there <pause dur="0.6"/> and Mr Fairchild says <pause dur="0.4"/> # <reading>your mama and i</reading> this is # pop top page fifty-nine <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>used often to go</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> and that is to visit this lady <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>and should have gone oftener only we could not bear to see the manner in which she brought up <pause dur="0.2"/> her sons <pause dur="0.5"/> she never sent them to school

lest the master should correct them <pause dur="0.6"/> but hired a person to teach them reading and writing at home but this man was forbidden to punish them <pause dur="0.4"/> they were allowed to be with the servants in the stable and kitchen but the servants were ordered not to deny them anything <pause dur="0.3"/> so they used to call them names swear at them <pause dur="0.2"/> and even strike them</reading> <pause dur="0.4"/> in other words it's a lack of discipline a lack of pruning a lack of order a lack of constraint <pause dur="0.3"/> which allows these children to like the garden and the house <pause dur="0.5"/> be completely overrun and fall into disrepair <pause dur="0.5"/> this is childhood potentially as dangerous anarchy <pause dur="1.3"/> as the fallen state of mankind <pause dur="0.4"/> now look at the text <pause dur="0.2"/> in the next page Catherine Sinclair's Holiday House <pause dur="2.2"/> which does something i'm suggesting quite different and does so in two ways <pause dur="1.4"/> the chapter's called The Terrible Fire <pause dur="1.8"/> and here <pause dur="0.4"/> there is a notion of childhood <pause dur="0.2"/> which is a notion <pause dur="0.3"/> that children <pause dur="0.3"/> cannot be possessed of wicked intent <pause dur="0.4"/> they are innocent <pause dur="0.4"/> almost no matter what they do <pause dur="1.1"/> the notion

here of innocence <pause dur="0.2"/> is one of no evil intent <pause dur="1.0"/> whereas in as we just saw in The Fairchild Family there is a notion of a wicked intent which must be rigorously banished <pause dur="0.2"/> out <pause dur="2.1"/> here the <pause dur="0.2"/> situation is there's Lady Harriet and Uncle David who are raising the children who are orphans <pause dur="0.3"/> they are aristocrats they are not as in the other text <pause dur="0.4"/> a middle class or upper middle class family but here <pause dur="0.3"/> this is an aristocratic <pause dur="0.2"/> family Lady Harriet is their grandmother <pause dur="1.0"/> and the two children are Harry and Laura <pause dur="0.9"/> now i'm i'm also going to look at an extract with you later which i want you to <pause dur="0.2"/> notice this text for as well so keep in mind that it's going to have something to do with another text later on as well <pause dur="1.7"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> Betty the servant runs breathlessly into the room this is the first section <pause dur="0.4"/> first page <pause dur="0.5"/> <reading>saying that Mrs Crabtree</reading> who's the nurse look again at the name crab tree <pause dur="0.6"/> crabby <pause dur="0.5"/> something fruitful natural also <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>ought to come downstairs immediately as Lady Harriet <pause dur="0.3"/> this is the children's grandmother <pause dur="0.2"/> had

suddenly been taken very ill and till the doctor arrived nobody knew what to do so she must give her advice and assistance <pause dur="0.5"/> Harry and Laura felt excessively shocked to hear this alarming news <pause dur="0.2"/> and listened with grave attention while Mrs Crabtree <pause dur="0.3"/> told them how amazingly well they ought to behave in her absence when they were trusted alone in the nursery <pause dur="0.3"/> with no one to keep them in order <pause dur="0.2"/> or to see what they were doing <pause dur="0.2"/> especially now as their grandmama had been taken ill <pause dur="0.4"/> and would require to be kept quiet</reading> so <pause dur="0.3"/> on the one hand it looks like it's going to do something similar to The Fairchild Family so you know you've got to behave properly sit still in the nursery don't do anything naughty <pause dur="1.5"/> but what happens next <pause dur="0.5"/> <reading>Harry sat in his chair and might have been painted as the very picture of a good boy during nearly twenty minutes after Mrs Crabtree departed <pause dur="0.3"/> and Laura placed herself opposite to him trying to follow so excellent an example <pause dur="0.3"/> while they scarcely spoke above a whisper <pause dur="0.2"/> wondering

what could be the matter with their grandmama <pause dur="0.3"/> and wishing for once to see Mrs Crabtree again <pause dur="0.3"/> that they might hear how she was <pause dur="0.4"/> anyone who had observed Harry and Laura at that time would have wondered to see such <pause dur="0.3"/> two quiet excellent respectable children <pause dur="0.2"/> and wished that all little boys and girls were made upon the same pattern <pause dur="0.3"/> but presently they began to think that probably Lady Harriet was not so very ill <pause dur="0.2"/> and no more bells had rung during several minutes <pause dur="0.3"/> and Harry ventured to look about for some better amusement than sitting still</reading> <pause dur="0.7"/> two things are happening here i'd suggest <pause dur="0.2"/> the first one is we get a shift of narratorial stance <pause dur="0.5"/> where in the Fairchild Family we have a third person omniscient narrator who talks about the family mother father and children from the outside <pause dur="0.4"/> describing them <pause dur="1.0"/> and allocating to them this position of in the children innate wickedness and in the parents redeemed <pause dur="0.2"/> achieved goodness <pause dur="0.5"/> in this text <pause dur="0.3"/> the narrator starts to what is called by many

critics look through the eyes of the child <pause dur="0.7"/> what that means however is not that this narrator knows the truth about children <pause dur="0.3"/> which Mrs Sherwood the writer of The Fairchild Family didn't know <pause dur="0.3"/> it means that the text is starting to see a certain position of consciousness and innocence <pause dur="0.4"/> as valuable <pause dur="0.8"/>

rather you know no one wants to look through the child <pause dur="0.2"/> eyes in The <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> Fairchild <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> Family because they'd become really <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/> wicked you know <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> <pause dur="0.2"/> no one wants to look from that position of wickedness <pause dur="0.9"/> of unredeemedness <pause dur="0.5"/> but the idea of making the idea of childhood as an identity the repository for the desirable <pause dur="0.6"/> the pure the innocent the good <pause dur="0.4"/> means that the narrator who is an adult <pause dur="0.5"/> wants to be in the position of looking <pause dur="0.4"/> it also has to do with the idea of understanding children <pause dur="0.3"/> any of you come across this this idea that there's two different ways of dealing with for instance young criminals i'm sure you read about this in the newspaper <pause dur="0.4"/> on the one hand there's the idea that <pause dur="0.2"/> you know who are all these softies who

are being so nice to them who are saying <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> we need to understand them they had a hard youth <pause dur="0.3"/> they can't help it <pause dur="0.2"/> that they tear apart the housing estate <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.2"/> and then there's the other people aren't there who go <pause dur="0.3"/><shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> oh all these softies completely ridiculous you need to be strict with these kids there's no point in sitting down and giving them nice therapy and social workers <pause dur="0.2"/> you need to teach them what's good and bad what's right from wrong <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.2"/> have you come across this <pause dur="0.5"/> seen this in the newspapers this debate <pause dur="0.6"/> whichever side you're on <pause dur="0.2"/> yourself personally and that's up to you <pause dur="0.3"/> what i hope you can see is there's no right or wrong about those two positions intrinsically neither of them # can prove <pause dur="0.3"/> that their approach is necessarily more effective or not if we knew which one worked then you know you'd be applying it all the time <pause dur="0.5"/> the problem is it's based on two different ideas <pause dur="0.4"/> about society's requirement <pause dur="0.2"/> about how to deal with people <pause dur="0.3"/> about how people respond <pause dur="0.5"/> it's different ideas about

morality about ethics and these will always change <pause dur="0.7"/> they always change depending on what the society desires of its citizens <pause dur="1.0"/> there is no one position you can get to <pause dur="0.5"/> and of course it's also divided up because there are different views about men and women different views about people from different <pause dur="0.2"/> different ethnic backgrounds different views of people <pause dur="0.2"/> from different class backgrounds and so on and those <pause dur="0.2"/> categories and items shift as well <pause dur="0.7"/> so it's not something we'll end up you know in ten years we know all about it <pause dur="0.3"/> it will have changed again <pause dur="0.4"/> and that it will be different changes <pause dur="0.4"/> so the first one here <pause dur="0.2"/> is that the narrator starts to speak <pause dur="0.2"/> both in terms of explaining the children's motives <pause dur="0.6"/> not going on there they were just told if you kill your brother you're going to be killed too <pause dur="0.6"/> don't behave like that <pause dur="0.4"/> here <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>presently they began to think</reading> their thoughts are being represented their consciousness is being inhabited <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>that probably Lady Harriet was not so very ill <pause dur="0.5"/> and no more bells

had rung during several minutes <pause dur="1.0"/> and Harry ventured to look <pause dur="0.3"/> about for some better amusement</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> here the idea as well is the children are not being wicked they're looking for amusement <pause dur="1.0"/> they've simply <pause dur="0.3"/> they have no concentration span <pause dur="0.2"/> have you come across this as well <pause dur="0.4"/> another changing idea we find another ideology about childhood you may have come across <pause dur="0.3"/> the idea that with all this multimedia <pause dur="0.5"/> children have short attention spans <pause dur="1.4"/> that's very interesting you know they're not computer babies they're not born of computers but there's an idea that somehow the children become <pause dur="0.7"/> what the society associates with them <pause dur="0.9"/> the idea is that kids love video games they love Nintendo and if they love Nintendo video games they're fast so kids don't have any attention spans any more <pause dur="2.2"/> again we have no measurement of people's attention spans across the ages and anyway what would you be measuring <pause dur="1.3"/> they said this about television when television came they said this about radio when radio came and they'll say it

again you know now about the internet they're saying it again <pause dur="0.3"/> and in a moment we'll have WAP phones in three years and then they'll start to say that none of us think about what we see any more 'cause we're only on our WAP phones so <pause dur="0.3"/> you know <pause dur="0.2"/> these are different ideas about what the society finds desirable <pause dur="0.4"/> what it demands again <pause dur="0.3"/> of its citizens so here the notion in this text is <pause dur="0.2"/> that children want amusement <pause dur="0.4"/> and that they have short attention spans <pause dur="0.2"/> it's a couple of minutes they don't hear a bell and already they've forgotten <pause dur="0.4"/> their grandmother who they're shown in the previous passage to love dearly and to be very shocked at the idea that she's ill <pause dur="0.3"/> they've already forgotten about it probably not that ill i can't you know can't hold it in my mind that long <pause dur="1.4"/> and in this passage <pause dur="0.2"/> which i'll point you towards in a moment as well <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>at this moment Laura unluckily perceived on the table near where they sat a pair of Mrs Crabtree's best scissors <pause dur="0.5"/> which she had been positively

forbid to touch <pause dur="0.5"/> the long troublesome ringlets were as usual hanging over her eyes in a most teasing manner</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> look at how this is all represented from Laura's point of view <pause dur="0.4"/> Laura's a little girl <pause dur="0.6"/> <reading>the long troublesome <pause dur="0.2"/> ringlets</reading> troublesome to Laura <pause dur="0.4"/> this is her perspective of her long hair <pause dur="0.7"/> <reading>were as usual hanging over her eyes in a most teasing manner</reading> teasing to her <pause dur="0.3"/> the narrator is completely <pause dur="0.2"/> within <pause dur="0.3"/> Laura's perspective <pause dur="1.0"/> <reading>so she thought what a good opportunity this might be to shorten them a very little <pause dur="0.2"/> not above an inch or two <pause dur="0.3"/> and without considering a moment longer she slipped upon tiptoe with a frightened look round the table <pause dur="0.3"/> picked up the scissors in her hands <pause dur="0.2"/> then hastening towards a looking glass she began <pause dur="0.2"/> snipping off <pause dur="0.2"/> the ends of her hair <pause dur="0.7"/> Laura was much diverted</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> diverted again the notion of amusement diversion <pause dur="0.3"/> the idea that children want to be distracted or amused all the time <pause dur="0.6"/> you can see this can't you i mean maybe some of you have done this yourself if

you take a child or a baby on an outing it's considered <pause dur="0.4"/> desirable to bring along a whole load of games and toys in in case it starts making noise or getting bored <pause dur="0.2"/> now that whole idea's <pause dur="0.4"/> present in this text in a way it was not in The Fairchild Family you come along and see the man hanging on the gibbet <pause dur="0.2"/> 'cause you know <pause dur="0.6"/> you need to know how you ought to behave <pause dur="0.5"/> <reading>so she cut and cut on while the curls fell <pause dur="0.3"/> thicker and faster till at last the whole floor was covered with them and scarcely a hair left <pause dur="0.2"/> upon her head</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> also the idea here of a child not being able to mediate rationally <pause dur="0.2"/> she decides first she's going to cut off an inch or two but ends up chopping off all her hair <pause dur="0.9"/> <reading>Harry went into fits of laughing <pause dur="0.2"/> when he perceived what a ridiculous figure <pause dur="0.2"/> Laura had made of herself</reading> here we're back in the narrator <pause dur="0.4"/> ridiculous figure <pause dur="0.2"/> is Harry <pause dur="0.6"/> and the narrator as an adult now she looks ridiculous <pause dur="0.9"/> <reading>and he turned her round and round to see the havoc she had made <pause dur="0.4"/> saying you

should give all this hair to Mr Mills the upholsterer to stuff grandmama's armchair with at any rate Laura <pause dur="0.2"/> if Mrs Crabtree is ever so angry she can hardly pull you by the hair of the head again <pause dur="0.3"/> what a sound sleep you will have tonight with no <pause dur="0.2"/> hard curl-papers to torment you</reading> <pause dur="0.5"/> it's also an idea here of the girl being liberated by her long troublesome hair <pause dur="0.3"/> having been removed from her by herself <pause dur="0.3"/> she has cut herself free <pause dur="0.4"/> from the teasing hair <pause dur="0.2"/> and the <pause dur="0.2"/> hard curl-papers <pause dur="0.5"/> and Harry sympathizes with her in this plight <pause dur="0.3"/> okay <pause dur="0.3"/> # move on to a next section but the point here is i hope that i've illustrated <pause dur="0.3"/> two texts which might be thought <pause dur="0.3"/> are both being <pause dur="0.2"/> Victorian texts giving two quite <pause dur="0.2"/> different ideas about childhood <pause dur="0.2"/> using two quite different narrational <pause dur="0.4"/> # techniques <pause dur="0.3"/> to think about the desirability or not of that idea of consciousness <pause dur="0.3"/> that is attributed <pause dur="0.3"/> under this label here in these texts <pause dur="0.5"/> # and therefore also an idea of for instance gender which becomes engaged into <pause dur="0.3"/>

that notion of identity <pause dur="0.4"/> # and the idea of childhood as inherently sinful or inherently saved <pause dur="0.2"/> so two quite ideas which run on <pause dur="0.2"/> next to each other <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> throughout <pause dur="0.2"/> these texts <pause dur="2.4"/> the next one i want to <pause dur="0.2"/> actually look at with you <pause dur="0.3"/> incidentally it's called The Terrible Fire because Harry of course # almost burns the house down as Laura cuts all her hair off Harry goes away and starts playing with candles <pause dur="0.3"/> and nearly burns the house down <pause dur="0.2"/> and significantly they aren't punished for this because they confess honestly <pause dur="0.5"/> the only crime in this text for children is to lie <pause dur="0.3"/> and that's because innocence may not lie <pause dur="0.8"/> if innocence lies it's no longer innocence <pause dur="0.3"/> so they may not violate their own positions so <pause dur="0.3"/> # they're <trunc>no</trunc> not punished in the text because they tell the truth <pause dur="1.8"/> now again you might say oh well they're two children's literature texts they're very obscure no one ever looks at them and indeed they're not studied much not even by children's literature critics <pause dur="0.5"/> # but i want to

illustrate for you again why thinking about this category's is so important the next extract is from George Eliot's The Mill on the Floss <pause dur="6.5"/> the first reason i want to pick this up with you <pause dur="0.2"/> is to show again how ideas of identity <pause dur="0.6"/> are not also about looking at the real world and saying this is what children are like <pause dur="0.5"/> i don't know if you've come across this if you've <pause dur="0.2"/> looked or if any of you are looking in seminars at a text # <pause dur="0.3"/> or at The Mill on the Floss but even if you're not <pause dur="0.5"/> what you'll find is that a lot of critics go away and say <pause dur="0.5"/> this was George Eliot talking about her childhood this is what she was like as a girl this is what she remembers it being like this is exactly <pause dur="0.4"/> what poor Mary Ann Lewes was like when she was a little girl <pause dur="1.2"/> well i'm going to read the passage with you on page fifty-eight or fifty-seven sorry <pause dur="0.2"/> first page of this extract <pause dur="0.6"/> and you think again about the <pause dur="0.4"/> piece about Laura chopping off her hair <pause dur="0.6"/> and see <pause dur="0.2"/> whether you don't find them <pause dur="0.2"/> eerily <pause dur="0.4"/> familiar <pause dur="1.0"/> when

you read this <pause dur="1.5"/> <reading>Tom followed Maggie upstairs into her mother's room <pause dur="0.2"/> and saw her go at once to a drawer</reading> for those of you who don't know the novel Tom and Maggie brother and sister <pause dur="0.4"/> just like Harry and Laura <pause dur="0.7"/> <reading>and saw her go at once to a drawer <pause dur="0.3"/> from which she took out a large pair of scissors <pause dur="1.2"/> what are they for Maggie said Tom feeling his curiosity awakened</reading> look at another child who is curious <pause dur="0.4"/> amused diverted <pause dur="0.9"/> <reading>Maggie answered by seizing her front locks and cutting them straight across the middle of her forehead</reading> <pause dur="0.8"/> another little girl <pause dur="0.5"/> cutting off her hair with a big pair of scissors <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>oh my buttons Maggie you'll catch it exclaimed Tom <pause dur="0.2"/> you'd better not cut any more off <pause dur="0.6"/> snip went the great scissors again while Tom was speaking and he couldn't help feeling it was rather good fun</reading> again this idea of fun <pause dur="0.6"/> amusement <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>Maggie would look so queer</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> do you remember in the passage i've just read the notion about <pause dur="0.2"/> ridiculous Laura looking ridiculous well here Maggie looks <pause dur="0.4"/> queer <pause dur="0.4"/> <reading>here Tom cut it

behind for me said Maggie excited by her own daring and anxious to finish the deed</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> Maggie even more than Laura <pause dur="0.3"/> is excited by the cutting of her hair and wants to cut it all off in fact needs help from Tom <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>you'll catch it you know said Tom nodding his head in an <trunc>ad</trunc> admonitory manner and hesitating a little as he took the scissors <pause dur="0.4"/> never mind make haste said Maggie <pause dur="0.2"/> giving a little stamp with her foot <pause dur="0.2"/> her cheeks were quite flushed</reading> <pause dur="0.7"/> the notion of excitement <pause dur="0.4"/> of fun of being caught up <pause dur="0.3"/> in this liberatory move remove the big hair that the <pause dur="0.3"/> the girl has to cope with release yourself into <pause dur="0.2"/> a freedom from this <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>the black locks were so thick <pause dur="0.2"/> nothing could be more tempting to a lad <pause dur="0.4"/> who had already tasted the forbidden pleasure of cutting a pony's mane</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> forbidden pleasures the idea that the more you forbid something to a child the more attractive it becomes <pause dur="0.3"/> again not a psychological truth about childhood or adulthood necessarily although it may <pause dur="0.3"/> fit with some adults with some

children <pause dur="0.3"/> but more and again <pause dur="0.2"/> it's a spiritual idea a moral idea <pause dur="0.6"/> that you have here <pause dur="1.2"/> <reading>i speak to those</reading> says the narrator who now starts an <pause dur="0.2"/> speaking from an i position <pause dur="0.6"/> <reading>i speak to those who know the satisfaction of making a pair of shears meet through a duly resisting <pause dur="0.3"/> mass of hair <pause dur="0.4"/> one delicious grinding snip and then another and another and the hinder locks fell heavily on the floor <pause dur="0.3"/> and Maggie stood cropped in a jagged uneven manner <pause dur="0.2"/> but with a sense of clearness and freedom</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> here you're actually told it <pause dur="0.2"/> explicitly <pause dur="0.2"/> <reading>as if she had emerged from a wood <pause dur="0.3"/> into an open plain <pause dur="0.4"/> oh Maggie said Tom jumping around her and slapping his knees as he laughed oh my buttons what a queer thing you look <pause dur="0.3"/> look at yourself in the glass you look like the idiot we throw nutshells to at school</reading> <pause dur="1.1"/> now <pause dur="0.5"/> i don't know if <pause dur="0.5"/> you're as convinced as i am but i think this passage comes straight from Sinclair's <pause dur="0.5"/> passage on Laura <pause dur="0.5"/> the idea <pause dur="0.3"/> of the look at the next line <reading>Maggie felt an unexpected pang she had thought before<pause dur="0.2"/>hand chiefly of her own deliverance from her teasing hair and teasing remarks about it</reading> <pause dur="1.4"/> right <pause dur="2.0"/>

so i think not only <pause dur="0.7"/> do we achieve nothing of an understanding of what the text is doing <pause dur="0.6"/> by claiming that this is somehow just <pause dur="0.7"/> George Eliot or # again as her real name was <pause dur="0.3"/> # Mary Ann <pause dur="0.2"/> Lewes # claiming <pause dur="0.9"/> that somehow <pause dur="0.3"/> # this is <pause dur="0.2"/> you know her childhood her memory <pause dur="0.2"/> and all that childhood in texts is about is just saying <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> this is what it was really like i really remember it <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.5"/> so i'm not just trying to say oh yes but actually it comes from another text <pause dur="0.4"/> but also saying that recognizing <pause dur="0.2"/> that it comes from another text tells us <pause dur="0.3"/> much more clearly that childhood is an idea <pause dur="0.3"/> an idea you can change <pause dur="0.2"/> you can invest with certain meanings <pause dur="0.5"/> moral <pause dur="0.2"/> ethical <pause dur="0.2"/> political ideological meanings <pause dur="0.2"/> not some sort of truth <pause dur="0.4"/> about life <pause dur="0.4"/> truth how all five year old girls <pause dur="0.2"/> with long hair feel <pause dur="0.4"/> and i think the fact <pause dur="0.3"/> that in fact i don't know of any critic who's picked up <pause dur="0.2"/> because <trunc>m</trunc> so few people have read the

Sinclair which is not a text which is in <pause dur="0.4"/> # publication and it has not been for a very very long time it just happens to be my area of research children's literature <pause dur="0.4"/> and then when you run into that <pause dur="0.4"/> you see only these tons of critics who've written on Mill on the Floss going <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> oh it's it's Maggie it's Maggie is Mary Ann and it's George Eliot in her childhood <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> <pause dur="0.5"/> and who don't look at what the notion of gender in childhood is about here because they're so convinced that it's simply writing down your experience of life <pause dur="0.6"/> and therefore they don't look for the text <pause dur="0.4"/> which i think <pause dur="0.3"/> is very clearly <pause dur="0.6"/> # to my mind an antecedent for this <pause dur="1.5"/> the second page i've included for a different reason and this is the idea about the language and memory i was talking about <pause dur="0.4"/> and i'm going to look at another text in this light as well <pause dur="1.9"/> on page fifty-nine the narrator starts doing something different i've mentioned either a third person narrator <pause dur="1.0"/> like in The Fairchild Family just describing what's

going on and judging it <pause dur="0.6"/> i've mentioned the looking through the eyes of a child that happens <pause dur="0.4"/> in the Sinclair <pause dur="0.3"/> text <pause dur="1.4"/> and some of that happens here as well but i want to show you something else that happens as childhood becomes even more valued in this text <pause dur="0.3"/> than in The Holiday House in the Sinclair text <pause dur="0.5"/> and show you what the narrator does with the theory of memory <pause dur="0.6"/> and that it's a very very strange <pause dur="0.2"/> thing <pause dur="1.2"/> we've seen on this page fifty-seven that the narrator says i speak to those <pause dur="1.7"/> and she says narrator here or he i don't know if it's a he or a she here but i think it's defined as a she earlier on in the text <pause dur="0.5"/> i don't know <trunc>b</trunc> and by the way you know the narrator is not George Eliot anyway <pause dur="0.2"/> this is the narrator and not the author <pause dur="0.5"/> there's always a narrator in a text never the author <pause dur="1.2"/> <reading>i speak to those who know the satisfaction of making a pair of shears meet through a duly resisting mass of hair</reading> so the narrator is saying <pause dur="0.6"/> i <pause dur="0.6"/> know about this experience i think this was why so many

critics get confused and think it's just George Eliot talking about her own childhood 'cause they think that i is George Eliot and of course it's not <pause dur="0.5"/> # an author can make up any narrator they like there are plenty of male authors who invent female narrators <pause dur="0.3"/> there are female authors who use male narrators <pause dur="0.3"/> # there are people writing in twentieth century who make up <pause dur="0.3"/> historical novels about narrators living in the eighteenth century it's fiction it's all make-believe you can do exactly as you like <pause dur="0.2"/> and you can use all kinds of tricks <pause dur="0.2"/> and ideas with this idea of the narrator you can make them take different positions <pause dur="0.3"/> you can make them contradict themselves you can make them hold a whole lot of different views <pause dur="0.3"/> so <pause dur="0.7"/> it's never the author <pause dur="2.0"/> otherwise though the author could have just written my memories of my childhood <pause dur="0.6"/> by George Eliot <pause dur="0.8"/> wouldn't have needed to write a novel called The Mill on the Floss <pause dur="1.4"/> so here on page fifty-nine and i'll <pause dur="0.3"/> try and <pause dur="0.2"/> show you what's happening here okay

how are we how are we doing so far <pause dur="1.5"/> are you <pause dur="0.7"/> okay <pause dur="0.9"/> yeah <pause dur="1.5"/> are you confused by now or <pause dur="3.2"/> no <pause dur="2.5"/> you've some idea of <pause dur="0.5"/> why this is as any inkling of what this is relevant to overall thinking about fiction starting to get some <pause dur="0.8"/> idea <pause dur="2.0"/> yeah <pause dur="2.0"/> okay i'll go on stop me otherwise if it comes up again <pause dur="3.1"/> <reading>ah my child</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> this is the second line here <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>you will have real troubles to fret about <pause dur="0.2"/> by and by <pause dur="0.3"/> is the consolation we have almost all of us had administered to us in our childhood <pause dur="1.2"/> and have repeated to other children since we have been grown up</reading> <pause dur="1.0"/> but of course the narrator doesn't know this <pause dur="0.8"/> the narrator can't know if this is true for any reader <pause dur="0.4"/> who's reading the text it's a rhetorical device <pause dur="0.6"/> it's a rhetorical device to address <pause dur="0.8"/> the reader <pause dur="0.8"/> and the reader may have nothing to do <pause dur="0.2"/> with what this person says and it doesn't matter <pause dur="0.5"/> it's a rhetorical device <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> # this is very similar to a politician walking into a hall and saying <pause dur="0.2"/> <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> i know what you think <pause dur="1.3"/> but i'm going to tell you something new <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.6"/> now in fact the politician

doesn't have a clue what those people think <pause dur="1.1"/> he or she <pause dur="0.2"/> is playing on the notion playing on the rhetorical idea <pause dur="1.3"/> you have an idea in mind and i'm going to change it now whether or not this is true for the individual listeners on the hall # in the hall is really irrelevant <pause dur="1.0"/> it's a practice of rhetoric to set up <pause dur="0.8"/> one premise <pause dur="0.3"/> and then to say i'm going to challenge it <pause dur="0.5"/> you move <pause dur="0.2"/> backwards and forwards between those movements <pause dur="0.4"/> and if the people in the hall don't agree they'll simply walk out or they'll not vote for the politician <pause dur="0.7"/> that's democracy for you <pause dur="1.3"/> here the rhetoric is doing the same thing <pause dur="0.6"/> it is <pause dur="0.3"/> proposing <pause dur="0.5"/> an idea again about childhood <pause dur="1.0"/> as <pause dur="0.2"/> a past stage of life that everyone knows about of course again may not be true for the readers but this is what the text wants to work with <pause dur="0.6"/> and that it has to do with an idea of being <pause dur="0.3"/> brushed off <pause dur="0.5"/> not taken seriously <pause dur="0.3"/> not seen as having serious emotions <pause dur="0.3"/> and why does the text want to do that well that's what we're going to try and find

out <pause dur="1.7"/> <reading>this is a consolation we have almost all of us had administered to us in our childhood and have repeated to other children since we have been grown up <pause dur="0.7"/> we have all of us <pause dur="0.4"/> sobbed so piteously standing with tiny bare legs above our socks <pause dur="0.3"/> when we lost sight of our mother or nurse <pause dur="0.2"/> in some strange place</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> look at the nurse there <pause dur="0.3"/> that's a class issue as well <pause dur="0.3"/> mother or nurse <pause dur="0.6"/> <reading>but we can no longer recall the poignancy of that moment and weep over it <pause dur="0.4"/> as we do over the remembered sufferings of <trunc>f</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> of five or ten years ago</reading> <pause dur="1.3"/> now actually when you think about it this is a very very odd passage <pause dur="0.8"/> because the narrator is saying we can't remember this after she's just told you she remembers it <pause dur="2.6"/> this is the problem of language and memory <pause dur="0.8"/> every single <pause dur="0.2"/> text <pause dur="0.2"/> negotiates this problem <pause dur="0.3"/> and most particularly if it is a first person narration <pause dur="0.8"/> if you are talking in the i you'll see this with Pip in Great Expectations next year on your Dickens course <pause dur="0.4"/> you'll see this with Jane Eyre i'm

going to look at in a moment for those of you who are reading Jane Eyre or have read Jane Eyre <pause dur="0.6"/> # Villette Lucy Snow <pause dur="0.2"/> any i narrated novel has a problem <pause dur="0.7"/> the i <pause dur="0.5"/> so-called writing the novel course again it's not the author but the narrator is supposedly writing the novel <pause dur="1.1"/> is writing about themselves in the past it's therefore already a split <pause dur="0.2"/> self <pause dur="2.2"/> do you remember this you try thinking back to <pause dur="0.2"/> you know just as a theory again not 'cause it's a psychological truth but just so you can see the problem here <pause dur="0.4"/> if someone says to you are you exactly the same now as when you were four <pause dur="1.6"/> it already presupposes doesn't it that there are two kinds of you <pause dur="0.2"/> one who is four <pause dur="1.1"/> and one who is who you are now <pause dur="0.6"/> and it's asking you to draw links between those two <pause dur="1.3"/> and i <pause dur="0.3"/> i suppose a lot of you will give differing answers some of you might say yes yes i'm still exactly the same person <trunc>s</trunc> and some of you might say no i'm not like that <unclear>at all and</unclear> others might say i don't remember frankly <pause dur="0.5"/> don't

know you might like to test it for yourself <pause dur="0.3"/> but the idea that these are somehow <pause dur="0.2"/> ways of thinking we all share <pause dur="0.9"/> i think are clearly not the case but it's also not what the text is interested in the text isn't interested in proving <pause dur="0.5"/> this is how things work it's interested in raising questions about consciousness <pause dur="0.4"/> and language and memory <pause dur="1.0"/> so it creates a paradox <pause dur="0.4"/> the narrator who says you cannot remember this i cannot remember this but i've just told you what i cannot remember <pause dur="0.3"/> because of the problem of the i narration <pause dur="0.2"/> and we'll see this coming up every single i narrator text you look for it you'll see this problem <pause dur="0.7"/> <reading>every one of those key moments has left its trace and lives in us still <pause dur="0.5"/> but such traces have blent themselves irrecoverably with the firmer texture of our youth and manhood</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> now gets even more bizarre this is a female narrator talking about manhood <pause dur="0.6"/> often happens with gender incidentally <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>and so it comes that we can look on at the troubles of our children <pause dur="0.2"/> with a

smiling disbelief in the reality of their pain</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> look at that in one sentence <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>we look on with a smiling disbelief <pause dur="0.3"/> in the reality of their pain</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> this narrator has gone one step beyond <pause dur="0.8"/> the narrator of Laura and Harry <pause dur="0.8"/> she's not just sitting <pause dur="0.2"/> in the child's consciousness as it were taking the perspective she's created <pause dur="0.3"/> as the child's consciousness <pause dur="0.4"/> she's actually able to say i know it all <pause dur="1.1"/> i know it all <pause dur="0.2"/> i know what i'm like now i know what i was like then <pause dur="0.2"/> you don't know nobody else knows but i know and even then i say i don't know but i really do <pause dur="0.3"/> 'cause i've just said it <pause dur="0.5"/> so in one sentence she knows there is a real pain <pause dur="0.3"/> reality of their pain <pause dur="0.3"/> same time she says <pause dur="0.2"/> smiling disbelief <pause dur="1.7"/> <reading>is there anyone</reading> <pause dur="0.7"/> the narrator asks i mean this <pause dur="0.2"/> is really quite <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> # a very very strong example of the <pause dur="0.2"/> <reading>is there anyone who can recover the experience of his childhood <pause dur="0.5"/> not merely within memory of what he did and what happened to him <pause dur="0.2"/> of what he liked and disliked <pause dur="0.2"/> when he was in frock and

trousers <pause dur="0.2"/> but with an intimate penetration a revived consciousness <pause dur="0.8"/> of what he felt then <pause dur="0.3"/> when it was so long from one midsummer to the other</reading> <pause dur="0.8"/> this narrator is raising for you <pause dur="0.2"/> the problem of memory <pause dur="0.4"/> that is to say <pause dur="0.2"/> how adults create childhood <pause dur="0.9"/> what this narrator is illustrating <pause dur="0.5"/> asking you to notice <pause dur="0.8"/> is that she is saying this is what childhood is while at the same time saying none of us can remember it <pause dur="0.7"/> and yet that's what <pause dur="0.5"/> she's claiming we do all the time <pause dur="0.3"/> and it has to do with the way in all <pause dur="0.4"/> of Eliot's novels there is a strong interest in an idea of empathy <pause dur="1.0"/> there is a morality based on the idea of being able to try and feel <pause dur="1.3"/> what another person <pause dur="0.3"/> feels <pause dur="1.3"/> and on the other hand realizing that that is impossible <pause dur="1.0"/> it's a very particular kind of moral view <pause dur="0.4"/> which the novels rework in many ways including with this idea of the problem of childhood <pause dur="0.9"/> but it's also pointing out that childhood can only ever be remembered 'cause even with for instance children's books who writes children's books <pause dur="1.4"/>

adults isn't it <pause dur="0.6"/> they're all written by adults <pause dur="2.2"/> so the whole idea that adults can become children again is being questioned by this narrator and at the same time it's being said <pause dur="0.5"/> every adult creates a story about their own childhood <pause dur="0.4"/> recreates a concept of what childhood is <pause dur="1.1"/> but it's a problem <pause dur="1.3"/> # i'll give you a parallel see if this makes sense to you <pause dur="0.3"/> # it's the same idea the narrator's working on here is the problem of pain i don't know if anyone of you have been unfortunate enough to ever have suffered severe pain i hope not but i'm i'm <pause dur="0.3"/> afraid perhaps with some of you that may be the case <pause dur="0.5"/> there's a problem with remembering pain <pause dur="0.3"/> but it's also in a sense a salvation <pause dur="0.3"/> it's very difficult <pause dur="0.2"/> that if you remember pain to feel it again <pause dur="0.7"/> if you would every time <pause dur="0.6"/> you thought about pain you'd had in the past you would re-experience it <pause dur="0.5"/> that would be pretty terrible wouldn't it <pause dur="0.4"/> you'd never be able you <trunc>m</trunc> you might <pause dur="0.2"/> remember the pain you might say <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> ooh it was awful it was awful it felt like

my <pause dur="0.2"/> like my leg was being chopped off <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> or something <pause dur="0.2"/> but if you would really <trunc>f</trunc> really feel it every time <pause dur="0.3"/> that's what this passage is exploring <pause dur="0.4"/> the paradox of memory being just <pause dur="0.2"/> memory <pause dur="0.2"/> and on the other hand that's the only thing there is <pause dur="0.7"/> if you look back and say like i said before what were you like when you were four <pause dur="1.0"/> you'll probably have some sort of story about that unless you really are someone who says i don't remember and there are plenty of people who really don't <pause dur="0.3"/> but if you have some idea <pause dur="0.5"/> it only a memory <pause dur="0.3"/> you don't become four years old again <pause dur="0.7"/>

mm <pause dur="0.4"/> i don't know if <pause dur="0.2"/> people sitting here being four or with # <pause dur="1.0"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/> this is what this text is pondering <pause dur="0.6"/> this recreation <pause dur="0.2"/> so it creates a language about childhood which is not <pause dur="0.2"/> childhood <pause dur="1.3"/> it revives it but does not feel it again <pause dur="0.7"/> it describes it but it cannot be it <pause dur="0.6"/> and yet that's the only way it can <pause dur="0.2"/> be it <pause dur="0.5"/> that's the paradox <pause dur="2.2"/> it's also the interesting thing here again that <pause dur="0.3"/> Maggie what is meant to be a rhetorical passage also <pause dur="0.2"/> alerting us to the idea that Maggie <pause dur="0.6"/> is a particular child a particular kind of child of this sort <pause dur="0.5"/> has all those real pains <pause dur="0.8"/> at the same time <pause dur="0.2"/> it's argued <pause dur="0.4"/> that <pause dur="0.2"/> this is about a boy <pause dur="0.4"/> why is a boy used a he <pause dur="0.2"/> to talk about a girl <pause dur="0.7"/> another question <pause dur="1.3"/> <reading>what he felt when his <pause dur="0.2"/> school fellows shut him out of their game because he would pitch the ball wrong out of mere wilfulness <pause dur="0.2"/> or on a rainy day in the holidays</reading> and we get a whole list of ideas <pause dur="0.5"/> where <pause dur="0.2"/> this remembering remembering <pause dur="0.4"/> comes from what it is to remember <pause dur="0.2"/>

in fact it's another thing the novel <pause dur="0.3"/> meditates again and again and again the idea of remembering and memory again if any of you are working on this in seminars <pause dur="0.2"/> look at the start of The Mill on the Floss <pause dur="0.4"/> the whole narrative <pause dur="0.2"/> is a memory <pause dur="0.2"/> a remembering by the narrator <pause dur="0.8"/> notice that <pause dur="0.3"/> and you'll see that this passage again is all about what it means to tell your own life <pause dur="0.3"/> to recall to retell <pause dur="0.2"/> your life <pause dur="2.1"/> okay does that make sense do you see how this would come up not just in relation to childhood but <trunc>i</trunc> in relation to any narration <pause dur="0.3"/> which has to tell <pause dur="0.3"/> the story of <pause dur="0.3"/> the past <pause dur="0.6"/> so i'm using childhood as a specific example but you could use it for any narrator who looks back <pause dur="0.2"/> and tells <pause dur="0.4"/> this <pause dur="0.2"/> history of themselves <pause dur="0.3"/> or even the history of others by the way <pause dur="1.1"/> Jane Eyre's the next passage i've got to give you an example <pause dur="0.2"/> of here <pause dur="1.4"/> classic i narrator <pause dur="8.6"/> and i'll just point you to when i said before <pause dur="0.3"/> i think we've talked a bit now about memory but also the problem <pause dur="0.3"/> of language which comes into this <pause dur="1.6"/> i want

to think again about how <pause dur="0.2"/> can you find a language for something which doesn't have a language of its own how can you find a consciousness formulate a consciousness with something which does not express its own consciousness because childhood <pause dur="0.5"/> in these texts a bit like in the George Eliot is seen as something which cannot speak <pause dur="0.2"/> itself <pause dur="0.7"/> cannot say itself <pause dur="0.4"/> # i'll tell you what this is about this is about the notion of innocence <pause dur="0.3"/> if you say i am innocent are you still innocent <pause dur="0.6"/> i don't mean innocent in the terms of guilty or innocent in court where but i mean if you say to yourself <shift feature="voice" new="mimicking an other's voice"/> oh i'm such an innocent <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> <pause dur="1.0"/> it's all you can't even say it as a straight statement can you it's a contradiction in terms if you know about your own innocence <pause dur="0.3"/> you're knowledgeable <pause dur="0.3"/> you're no longer innocent <pause dur="0.7"/> it's a paradox <pause dur="0.8"/> # Blake for those of you who are working at all or have been working or will work on poetry of Blake when he does the Songs of Innocence and Experience <pause dur="0.2"/> this is exactly <pause dur="0.2"/>

what the poems do they illustrate that you cannot write innocence <pause dur="0.8"/> because <pause dur="0.2"/> a poem which goes i'm innocent <pause dur="0.3"/> is no longer innocent <pause dur="0.8"/> and the poetry meditates that problem all the time <pause dur="0.4"/> so the notion of how do you find the language which can talk about <trunc>th</trunc> the state of an innocent childhood a childhood which is postulated <pause dur="0.3"/> as having no language about itself <pause dur="2.0"/> if you have a a two year old who comes up to you and says <shift feature="pitch" new="high"/> i'm a child <pause dur="0.4"/> i am an innocent child <shift feature="pitch" new="normal"/> <pause dur="1.5"/> what would you think about that <pause dur="0.7"/> you might want to think about that <pause dur="1.2"/> okay page forty-seven this is the second page Jane has been <trunc>fi</trunc> famous scene some of you may know <pause dur="0.3"/> Jane has been sent off <pause dur="0.3"/> for having a tantrum to the red room <pause dur="0.4"/> and she's terrified of the red room because her uncle died there <pause dur="2.0"/> so she sits there <pause dur="0.7"/> because John her cousin has hit her <pause dur="2.0"/> and she says <pause dur="0.8"/> on page forty-seven half way down <pause dur="0.7"/> <reading>what a consternation of soul <pause dur="0.5"/> was mine that dreary afternoon</reading> <pause dur="1.0"/> see this is all past tense it has to be past tense because it's <pause dur="0.3"/> the adult Jane writing <pause dur="0.2"/>

her past <pause dur="0.7"/> <reading>how all of my brain was in tumult and <trunc>a</trunc> all my heart in insurrection <pause dur="1.1"/> yet in what darkness what dense ignorance <pause dur="0.2"/> was the mental battle fought <pause dur="1.0"/> i could not answer the ceaseless inward question <pause dur="0.2"/> why i thus suffered <pause dur="0.3"/> now <pause dur="0.5"/> at a distance of i will not say <pause dur="0.3"/> how many years <pause dur="0.4"/> i see it <pause dur="0.6"/> clearly</reading> <pause dur="1.7"/> so here we are <pause dur="0.4"/> the adult Jane commenting on her past self <pause dur="0.5"/> saying <pause dur="0.9"/> she kept asking herself why she suffered <pause dur="0.6"/> but she didn't know then what she knows now she didn't know then <pause dur="1.1"/> this is the paradox of the moving back and forth between the idea of <pause dur="0.4"/> the unself-conscious <pause dur="0.2"/> innocent child which is being constructed here the child who simply feels <pause dur="0.2"/> and this is an angry <pause dur="0.3"/> little girl being described here but it's still an anger which is unself-conscious <pause dur="0.9"/> and it moves to the adult Jane saying i know i felt that way then but i didn't know <pause dur="0.3"/> what the answers were but i know now what the answers were to what i felt then <pause dur="0.4"/> though i didn't know those were the question <pause dur="0.2"/> and the text does this all the time <pause dur="0.5"/>

mediating the question of <pause dur="0.3"/> what is truth <pause dur="0.4"/> what is experience <pause dur="0.3"/> what is memory what is identity <pause dur="0.3"/> how do you create a story of yourself <pause dur="0.8"/> and what are the conditions <pause dur="0.4"/> for that story <pause dur="0.6"/> and here in this sense <pause dur="0.6"/> <reading>i could not answer the ceaseless inward question why i thus suffered <pause dur="0.4"/> now at a distance of i will not say how many years <pause dur="0.3"/> i see it <pause dur="0.3"/> clearly</reading> <pause dur="1.1"/> the passage <pause dur="0.2"/> repeats this move this questioning <pause dur="0.9"/> <reading>i was in discord <pause dur="0.3"/> in Gateshead Hall</reading> it proceeds to give the answer which it couldn't give then <pause dur="0.4"/> so it looks back and it says well this was what was going on <pause dur="0.2"/> i didn't know it then but i know it now <pause dur="0.3"/> about my position then <pause dur="0.3"/> <reading>i was in discord at Gateshead Hall i was like nobody there <pause dur="1.1"/> i had nothing in common</reading> <pause dur="0.3"/> # sorry <reading>nothing in harmony with Mrs Reed or her children <pause dur="0.2"/> or her chosen vassalage <pause dur="0.4"/> if they did not love me in fact <pause dur="0.2"/> as little did i love them <pause dur="0.7"/> they were not bound to regard with affection a thing that could not sympathize with one <pause dur="0.2"/> amongst them</reading> <pause dur="0.2"/> this is not what the little Jane knows <pause dur="0.2"/> this is what the adult Jane

looking back and analysing her situation at that time <pause dur="0.3"/> comes back to <pause dur="0.3"/> and analyses <pause dur="0.3"/> at that point <pause dur="1.4"/> so that idea <pause dur="0.4"/> coming back <pause dur="0.2"/> creating your past self retelling it reformulating it <pause dur="0.2"/> giving it a language it didn't have at the time <pause dur="0.3"/> giving it a consciousness and a self-consciousness <pause dur="0.2"/> it did not have <pause dur="0.3"/> at the time <pause dur="0.9"/> that's another theme there perhaps <pause dur="0.3"/> to think about that problem <pause dur="0.5"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> language <pause dur="1.0"/> i see we're running slightly out of time so i'll just point you towards what <pause dur="0.2"/> # the last two bits on the handout do <pause dur="1.8"/> # the one is a passage from Anne Bronte's The Tenant of Wildfell Hall i think an extremely interesting text which isn't studied enough but that's my personal view <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> i just put in this passage just to point you towards it <pause dur="0.4"/> # first of all what <pause dur="0.2"/> # this passage does it's Mrs Graham <pause dur="0.2"/> a mother talking about her son <pause dur="0.8"/> with a man Mr Markham <pause dur="0.3"/> and they're talking about the raising of boys and girls <pause dur="0.8"/> and something very interesting is going on here because the text takes apart <pause dur="0.2"/> the organic

metaphor about childhood <pause dur="0.9"/> what we see is that in some texts again a childhood an idea of childhood is created <pause dur="0.3"/> which <pause dur="0.2"/> makes childhood like a plant <pause dur="0.5"/> it grows <pause dur="0.9"/> it's an organic metaphor it's a metaphor which is used even nowadays about childhood again the idea that the child is like a plant <pause dur="0.2"/> it grows it has developmental phases you can't stop them it just happens <pause dur="0.3"/> we have no evidence for any of this the whole idea about childhood in phases is an extremely muddled language and psychologists <pause dur="0.3"/> spend a lot of time arguing and discussing this <pause dur="0.3"/> but it's a metaphor <pause dur="0.4"/> for an idea of growth and childhood <pause dur="0.2"/> it's postulated as a time of growth again not an inevitable idea <pause dur="0.3"/> but one which <pause dur="0.3"/> we find in this text <pause dur="0.3"/> and what this # Mrs Graham does <pause dur="0.9"/> is show that this <trunc>org</trunc> organic metaphor <pause dur="0.6"/> first of all is a metaphor <pause dur="0.4"/> she takes it apart she does not accept it <pause dur="0.6"/> as an inevitable description of natural childhood <pause dur="0.2"/> and secondly <pause dur="0.3"/> she analyses it as a heavily gendered metaphor <pause dur="0.9"/> Mr Markham keeps saying you should expose

your little boy <pause dur="0.2"/> to all kinds of temptations like alcohol <pause dur="0.6"/> because that will make him strong that will make him know what he ought to resist <pause dur="0.9"/> and then # Mrs Graham says and should i do that with <pause dur="0.2"/> little girls as well if it had been a little girl should i do then and he said oh no no of course not you shouldn't give a little girl alcohol and <pause dur="0.2"/> cigarettes and whatever you no no no very bad idea and she says well why <pause dur="0.3"/> not a little girl and why a little boy <pause dur="0.6"/> does that mean little girls are so weak they can't resist and he ends up of course all the time getting more and more upset because everything he says she takes <pause dur="0.3"/> she analyses as being an extremely sexist position <pause dur="0.3"/> which basically says little girls <pause dur="0.2"/> must be kept away as little hothouse flowers <pause dur="0.2"/> but little boys must be rough and exposed to the elements and become strong men <pause dur="0.2"/> and she completely takes the position apart so you might want to look at that if you're interested in that kind of issue <pause dur="0.3"/> # i think it's a text which #

does that in a in a very unusual way <pause dur="0.4"/> and the last one <pause dur="0.7"/> comes from another children's book <pause dur="0.2"/> and i don't mind by the way what you call these texts children's books or adult texts <pause dur="0.4"/> # it doesn't really matter <pause dur="0.2"/> # they're just publishers' <pause dur="0.3"/> categories <pause dur="0.6"/> # and this one is from George MacDonald's At the Back of the North Wind and you might want to look here <pause dur="0.3"/> how at the end of this text when the little boy who's the hero of the story called Diamond who is the epitome <pause dur="0.4"/> of the pure innocent and spiritual child dies <pause dur="0.2"/> and this is a metaphor that happens in a great many texts <pause dur="0.2"/> the idea of the child being so pure that it must die to avoid contamination <pause dur="0.3"/> Oliver Twist is another example where <pause dur="0.3"/> # the friend of Oliver <pause dur="0.3"/> the little boy dies <pause dur="0.2"/> and the that death is a is a perfect spiritual moment <pause dur="0.5"/> so this idea <pause dur="0.2"/> here if you look at it is you will see that this little boy is so perfect that the narrator of this text <pause dur="0.3"/> goes a step beyond even the other narrators we've looked at <pause dur="0.3"/> and completely claims that <pause dur="0.3"/> only he and

this little boy are perfect are spiritually perfect he completely identifies <pause dur="0.2"/> with the perfect position of childhood <pause dur="0.2"/> he is the adult who has become a child again <pause dur="0.2"/> because childhood in this text is absolute perfection <pause dur="1.2"/> so i hope what i've <pause dur="0.6"/> talked about a little bit today <pause dur="0.3"/> of showing you both that childhood carries a whole load of ideological weights <pause dur="0.3"/> in terms of moral positions ethical positions <pause dur="0.3"/> # ideas about memory and consciousness and gender <pause dur="0.3"/> and that all of these issues are crucial to the reading <pause dur="0.3"/> of fiction <pause dur="0.2"/> in general thanks for your attention