Defining the text

Zipes calls into question the validity of the concept of children's literature, questioning the actual level of consumption and participation in a given text by the target audience. He also opens up the boundaries of text to include other media including film, music, games and the web. As he points out, many young people (and for that matter people of any age) may read images other than traditional narrative.

That would appear to be self evident, especially as not everyone invests their time in books. Engagement in the world of meaning may occur through just about any medium, from computers to sport. The definition of "text" thus becomes so broad as to be all-encompassing. Everything from the clothes we choose to wear to the way we present our cities, gardens and workspaces, becomes a text to be interpreted. At one level this broad definition is helpful, as it gives an impression of the size of the challenge faced when attempting to determine the extent to which text impacts upon reading habits, taste, and moral and intellectual development.

I am reminded of Rousseau's carefully contrived version of educational development, in which the child is ideally allowed to develop and discover without direct intervention, but in a fashion so carefully guided and contrived as to shield the child from contamination by any undesirable stimuli. But, leaving aside entirely the question of what constitute desirable vs undesirable stimuli, what is truly the possibility of controlling the environment with which the child engages? If, as Paley suggests, children use narrative to test, affirm and expand their world view, actively bringing complex thinking skills to the task, to what extent is it possible to direct and control the stimuli with which children choose to engage, and how they will interpret those stimuli?

In addition to educational theory, the question seems to relate less to literary criticism than to psychology. The study of deprivation, cults and psychological warfare (for example) seems most likely to shed light on the potential impact of a controlled environment. I am reminded of Orwell's 1984, in which history is constantly reconstructed and every facet of life, including the dictionary, carefully controlled. But the process, while heavily defeating of the individual, seems less akin to successive approximation towards a desired goal and more akin to frantically stamping out one fire after another in an attempt to construct the desired society.

For the moment I will suppose that I am going to arbitrarily limit the scope of my focus to the traditional written book, aimed at a target audience of children / young adults. As Zipes states, it is impossible to accurately gauge who will read what, and what meanings s/he will create from them. As Paley notes in her observations of her own class, the conclusions drawn by the children are often a surprise to her, and each new text adds to and possibly shifts the meaning ascribed to texts already read. Therefore, when reading any given text, is it possible for me to do anything more than selectively (either consciously or unconsciously) engage with a construction of the world as it appears in the text, and to note any tensions between what is represented as real vs what is desired?