What this project is about

From 2001 to 2003 I was lucky enough to study part time for a Masters degree in children's literature with the University of Reading (UK). For my dissertation I was going to write about Philip Pullman and C S Lewis, but I became increasingly fascinated by what people wrote about Pullman. He was credited with an awful lot of power to impact children's lives - negatively! I found myself wondering if some of the critics realised that they appeared to be attributing more power to Pullman to influence child development than the Bible or other religious teachings.

At a similar time, I found myself reading Spufford's The child that books built. I was excited by the idea his title represented. But, the more I read, the more I felt the book was mis-titled. A much more appropriate title seemed like it might be something like The books the child built. The more Spufford talked about the ways in which he changed as a result of his reading, the more it seemed to me that he was describing the ways in which he targeted the books that interested him and the aspects of those books on which he chose to focus his attention. The child, it seemed, in Spufford's narrative, was an active shaper of his own destiny.

So now, ten years later, I've decided to revisit my fascination with children's literature and its perceived capacity to contribute to the adult the child reader becomes. I hope to read about children's literature, child development, censorship, bibliotherapy and anything else that seems like it might be fascinating and / or illuminating. But I'm no academic. So I will also be exploring my own memories and feelings and seeking the memories and attitudes of others.

So, does the book shape the reader? Or does the reader shape the book? Shall we find out?

Sunday, 22 September 2013

"The God delusion"

Dawkins, R. (2007). The God delusion / Richard Dawkins, Transworld publishers.




One of the surprising things about this study so far has been the number of times that I am given pause to reflect by works that I never thought of as being in any way related to my research questions. I start to feel a little like Francis Spufford as I discover that so much of my reading appears to connect to what is apparently a central question for me. And everything so far, including the original research ideas with which I naively set out on this journey, has so far not been the central question. I am nibbling at its outer edges and drawing myself, book by book, experience by experience, towards an unknown centre. Do we ever really choose a research question with objectivity? Or do we selfishly ask questions of ourselves and embark on a surprising and unexpected journey?

Dawkins, unsurprisingly, believes that the most important thing is to teach children how, not what to think. He states that “Faith can be very very dangerous, and deliberately to implant it into the vulnerable mind of an innocent child is a grievous wrong.” It therefore appears that for Dawkins, the child is not only an unfinished creature, but one that can be imprinted. Learning and identity do not necessarily continue to evolve, unfettered by the ideas encountered along the way, with each new thought assimilated and new directions and shapes emerging. Instead, the child is “vulnerable” to that with which adults choose to imprint it. Thus:

‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.' The adage is true as long as you don't really believe the words. But if your whole upbringing, and everything you have ever been told by parents, teachers and priests, has led you to believe, really believe, utterly and completely, that sinners burn in hell (or some other obnoxious article of doctrine such as that a woman is the property of her husband), it is entirely plausible that words could have a more long-lasting and damaging effect than deeds.


Power, then, belongs to that which is most reinforced, or that which converts word into belief. And that is the interesting question: how does this process occur? What combination of factors must be in play for the word to become the [perceived] reality? Saxby discusses stages of reader development, suggesting that guidance is required to bring the reader to a mature level of detachment and critical appraisal. Perhaps for Dawkins, who is a firm advocate for the preservation of the Bible as literature, the power lies, not so much in the words themselves, but in the development, or lack thereof, of critical thinking skills. The difficulty, of course, for both authors, is the implication that the “adult” is highly influential in the extent to which these skills can and are developed. And is it ever entirely possible to separate the “how” from the “what” of thinking?
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Your input is very welcome and appreciated. I will endeavour to publish all reasonable comments as soon as possible.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)