The Last Blog: The Luck of Roaring Camp and Sissy

Throughout this whole semester we have covered many different ideas about children’s literature. In the beginning we are told, “authors gave scant attention to settings of their narratives” (McLeod 90). Now in the reading “The Luck of Roaring Camp” by Bret Harte setting is very important. If we did not know that they were in California, would that have affected the name the men chose to give the child, “Thomas Luck” (Harte 535)? I think the author plays off of the setting to make the plot line make more sense. If they had been in Texas at this point in time, it would have been completely stupid to have Luck in the name. Since they are taking a hold of the idea of making it big, they show the amount of trust in luck that the people who went out in search of gold had. I think that we see how authors have decided to start to use the settings to play into what they really want to point out. At first they just wanted to make sure that the readers would get the point they wanted to make, but now they have decided that using the setting they can make the idea more meaningful.

We also talked about luck when it came to making it big. We are presented with the idea of the “American Dream” at this point in time and everyone is wanting to make it big. Many different people have many different ways or paths they thought would lead to greatness. For Roaring Camp they believed “that the baby had brought ‘the luck’ to Roaring Camp” (533). I think that we see luck portrayed as more common, but not necessarily people receiving benefits from it. People have a weird way of wanting to find that bit of luck. I mean a bunch of men found it in a kid for crying out loud. I think that people are looking for help when they figure out they cant make it on their own, and the author knows this is a general struggle so he plays off of that.

Changes in Reading Habits: Novel v. Short Story

When reading a short story, I find myself diving deeper into each word. I pay closer attention to the small details. When reading a novel we can trust that the author just means what he/she says. We do not think that there are multiple meanings behind a simple statement. When Susan Warner says “to make her mother’s tea was Ellen’s regular business,” (25) she literally means that Ellen made her mother tea. We do not have to add different meanings to all of the words in her writing. Warner has more than enough time to create her plot line. When reading novels I find myself skimming more often and just looking for the more important details. I find myself not worrying about hidden meanings. We place a certain trust in the author to tell us exactly what he/she means.

In a short story, with the lack of time to create a deep plot line, the author uses every single word to it’s greatest potential. I tend to read much more carefully and slowly to pick up every possibility for each word. I have learned to not trust the author to tell me exactly what he/she means. When Charlotte Perkins Gilman says, “I lie here on this great immovable bed—it is nailed down…” (509) we have to look deeper into the meaning of the text. After what we discussed in class, we know that she is either already dead or buried alive. When I take the context into mind I can make that statement mean that the character is in a coffin, and was just comparing it to a bed. I find myself looking for many different details as to what the author is trying to say. I find that I am confused more often by short stories just simply because I do not follow the depth that the author is taking every concept to. I think that when reading a short story that we have to make sure we do not just skim, but instead going ahead and looking at why the author chose each word, and the importance or secret meaning behind the word.

Authorship in Little Lord Fauntleroy

In Little Lord Fauntleroy by Frances Hodgson Burnett we see that the role of authorship can have a great deal of an impact that the author makes on people. I find it interesting, now knowing that the author is for sure a female, how little boys are supposed to act as portrayed through Ceddie. In the previous readings we see how little boys are to be independent, witty, and not the perfect little angel we see girls being portrayed to be. We see Ceddie as completely different from Tom Sawyer and Dick. Ceddie is “beautiful” (445), “wished to make every on as comfortable as he liked to be himself” (446), and “seems to be a very mature little fellow” (473). I think the fact that this is a female writer really shows how she was not pleased with the way little boys were portrayed. She completely turns everything that Mark Twain shows a little boy to be on its head. She proves the point that little boys can be sensitive, sweet, and good too.

I think that not knowing what the author’s gender is plays a little role on how we interpret the text we read. If we do not know the gender of the author we just take the text as is written and do not even stop to worry about the background behind why certain points are made. I know we mentioned in class that this story is to be used to help parents raise up the “perfect” son. This idea does not change when we find out the author is a girl. The main thing that changes is the point of view that it is coming from. I think it gives it a little more of an edge, and come to think of it, I could not see a man portraying a young boy this way. If you think about it, in most families, the dad lets the little boys run free and the mom is in charge of the boy behaving. Does that show through in Burnett’s writing? I think so.

Tom Sawyer: What it takes to be a little boy

In Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain, we see the little boy thriving in the country. In class we mentioned all different things that tie little boys to the country and how the country is their ideal place. We see the character of Tom as this smart little boy when it comes to people, but would we consider Tom the next Valedictorian of his class? I think not. We see Tom take the pansy his new love throws over the fence, take it and put it in his jacket “…next to his heart—or next his stomach, possibly, for he was not much posted in anatomy…” (419). I honestly get from this that he doesn’t have to necessarily have to be the brightest crayon in the box. I think that boys have more of a focus placed on them being tough little boys, not on being intellectual.

From that same selection we see Tom being the typical little boy that doesn’t want to be caught with emotions. When he picks up the flower, he “…stops within a foot or two of the flower, and then shaded his eyes with his hand and began to look down street as if he had discovered something of interest…disappeared round the corner.” (419). Why would Tom be so scared to just pick up a simple flower? I think that Twain is teaching little boys to not show emotion. He also is putting a major emphasis on being cool, which Tom was the epitome of. Tom was good at manipulating people, not being manipulated by a girl. I think that Twain, without knowing it, is telling boys to be the one’s in charge of the situation, and not let people know what they are feeling.

Ragged Dick: from rags to riches

In Ragged Dick we are first introduced to the classic American little boy. We have already learned what to expect from little girls in this time period through what we have already read. Now we are shown the many differences between little girls and little boys and the roles they play.

We see many lessons being taught in the story. We see Ragged Dick as little boy that is working for his own good. We see him as an independent, ambitious, and very sarcastic little boy. We get the idea that this is the way a little boy is supposed to act. When we see that Johnny doesn’t make as much money as Dick, we have the fact that, “That boy…ain’t got no ambition,” (351) brought to our attention. The reader then knows that ambition is an important thing for little boys to have to make sure they can support themselves. We also see that Dick is a very confident little boy in the fact that he will joke and be sarcastic with complete strangers. When Dick is talking to Mr. Whitney we see him being sarcastic about staying at the “Box Hotel” (361). Little boys are taught to be able to support themselves, have the work ethic to do a good job of this, and to be funny and sociable in a different way than little girls.

As for the fictionalized characters, I believe we see the switch from sole man powered jobs to more corporate jobs. We see that more thought and power is given to those in nice clothes. When Dick receives the gift of a change of clothes, we see men working the entrances of shops encouraging Dick and Frank to “walk in, young gentlemen” (373) and they are given more respect than Dick received when he was dressed in rags. I think that we are shown how more importance was slowly being given to the men who could afford a more luxurious life-style. Men used to be very down to earth, but now we see the difference between Dick and Frank that show the morphing of our society at the time.

Ragged Dick: from rags to riches

In Ragged Dick we are first introduced to the classic American little boy. We have already learned what to expect from little girls in this time period through what we have already read. Now we are shown the many differences between little girls and little boys and the roles they play.

We see many lessons being taught in the story. We see Ragged Dick as little boy that is working for his own good. We see him as an independent, ambitious, and very sarcastic little boy. We get the idea that this is the way a little boy is supposed to act. When we see that Johnny doesn’t make as much money as Dick, we have the fact that, “That boy…ain’t got no ambition,” (351) brought to our attention. The reader then knows that ambition is an important thing for little boys to have to make sure they can support themselves. We also see that Dick is a very confident little boy in the fact that he will joke and be sarcastic with complete strangers. When Dick is talking to Mr. Whitney we see him being sarcastic about staying at the “Box Hotel” (361). Little boys are taught to be able to support themselves, have the work ethic to do a good job of this, and to be funny and sociable in a different way than little girls.

As for the fictionalized characters, I believe we see the switch from sole man powered jobs to more corporate jobs. We see that more thought and power is given to those in nice clothes. When Dick receives the gift of a change of clothes, we see men working the entrances of shops encouraging Dick and Frank to “walk in, young gentlemen” (373) and they are given more respect than Dick received when he was dressed in rags. I think that we are shown how more importance was slowly being given to the men who could afford a more luxurious life-style. Men used to be very down to earth, but now we see the difference between Dick and Frank that show the morphing of our society at the time.

A Whisper in the Dark

Insanity and insane people in A Whisper in the Dark travels away from what we know so far about children’s literature. It is, as we said in class, a part of the gothic genre of literature, and by no means innocent in nature. This is the first time we see insanity in literature. Insanity is not an easy topic, so it makes this not an actual children’s literature example, but an example of children in literature. In A Whisper in the Dark we see Sybil battle the stress of being put in an insane asylum. At first we are unaware of where she is, since the story is written in first person. She eventually finds out that her uncle has put her there and claimed that she was insane. The problem is that whenever Sybil tries to defend herself, get out, or even just throws a tantrum she is just ignored thinking that she is crazy. When Sybil pleads to go see Madame we see, “my uncle did not answer me, but covered up his face with a despairing gesture, and hurried away from the room; the lawyer followed, muttering pitifully, ‘Poor thing! Poor thing!’” (236) Sybil is completely ignored because she is “insane.” Once Sybil is in the insane asylum the book completely changes pace, and gets the eerie “things aren’t what they seem” mood. We see Sybil start to turn mad. “Carpet worn like mine, the windows barred like mine” (237) we see Sybil as she has started to lose her mind, and she ahs begun pacing like the person above her does. With the story still in the first person, we do not fully believe Sybil but still feel the sense of hopelessness for her.

The mother daughter relationship we see in the previous novels is changed in Sybil and her mother. We do not see the normal relationship built on love, but a relationship that starts when Sybil’s mother has already gone insane. “My mother had been melancholy mad since that unhappy rumor of my father’s death; this affliction had been well concealed from me.” (240) If we were to put this kind of story around Ellen and her mother’s relationship, I do not think that anything could happen to her mother without Ellen not knowing. Sybil’s mother still helps get her child out of the trouble she is in by her “unerring instinct of a mother’s heart” (240). Her mother still loves her, but we find this out later since the story was written in first person. We have to rely on Sybil to tell us the whole truth throughout the whole story, even when she is mad. We eventually find out that we knew the truth all along, but this story was different to read since of the point of view it was written in.