Didst thou ever see a white bear? cried my father, turning his head round to Trim, who stood at the back of his chair:——No, an' please your honor, replied the corporal.——But thou could'st discourse about one, Trim, said my father, in case of need?——How is it possible, brother, quoth my uncle Toby, if the corporal never saw one?——'Tis the fact I want, said my father—and the possibility of it, is as follows.
(Sterne, The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy V:xlii.
)

Thursday, March 17, 2011

For Credit: The History of Sandford and Merton

You can find the reading for Friday here.  Yes--it's a huge document.  You don't need to print it out; this once, I will smile with approbation on anyone who brings a laptop to class so they can refer to the whole document as we discuss it.

How is work represented differently in this novel than in the other children's literature and related texts that we've looked at this week?

Deadline: Friday (3/18), start of class.

2 comments:

Westyn said...

I feel as though this work is different from the other works we have read relating to children's literature for a couple of reasons. First, the author depicts, in the preface that he is going to connect all of the stories together by a single narration. Most collected works of stories I found during my research were completely different from one another, the only relation between them being that they were written by the same person. This I found very interesting because it makes reading these stories easier due to the fact that there is a specific line that tracks from one to the other, through the use of the narration.

One other thing I found different between this reading and other children's stories is the style of writing. The narrator describes that it is going to be elegant yet still simple enough for very young readers to understand. This seems to say that this reading will be acceptable for children of different ages because the simplicity of the writings is for young children but the language in which it is written can be for older children. This aspect is different because much of the 18th century children's literature was either for young children or older children, but rarely for both age groups.

theblackbear said...

One comment I might make actually is similar to the one issues by Westyn. While reading the material it became clear a disparity exists between the structure of how the text was composed and the actual effect produced. In the introduction, the author states he wishes to make available and enjoyable the content here to all children, regardless of age or level of language interpretation. This task in itself is bound for failure somewhat as I believe it to be nearly impossible to craft a single, coherent text accessible to children of all ages and levels of interpretation.

But in this text, the structure presented and the content available do not coincide so well. Upon review, the direction of the plot here is quite simple enough in order to follow and is understandable to a great degree. It is very easy to follow the pattern of events transpiring and to understand the goal or focus of the text without advancing too far beyond the beginning. However, a review of the structure in which the author presents the material is something of an issue to me, especially given consideration to the audience intended for the text. I do realize I am examining this story from the perspective of an individual in the 21st century, with all the benefits of diligent research and intense focus on how best to raise a child these days. However, I like to think the complex manner in which the author presents the material here would be problematic to children of a younger age and reading ability. Then again, I'm sure if the story simply was read to them, it would be much easier to comprehend and therefore to enjoy.