Children desire and adults knowledge in children`s literature as seen through the characterization of children and adults in Wilder`s Little House in the Big Woods.

IN CHILDREN’S LITERATURE AS SEEN THROUGH

THE CHARACTERIZATION OF CHILDREN AND ADULTS

IN WILDER’S

_{LITTLE HOUSE IN THE BIG WOODS}

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra

in English Letters

p

by

ANNA ELFIRA PRABANDARI ASSA Student Number: 064214096

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS

FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA 2013

i

CHILDREN DESIRE AND ADULTS KNOWLEDGE

IN CHILDREN’S LITERATURE AS SEEN THROUGH

THE CHARACTERIZATION OF CHILDREN AND ADULTS

IN WILDER’S

LITTLE HOUSE IN THE BIG WOODS

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra

in English Letters

p

by

ANNA ELFIRA PRABANDARI ASSA Student Number: 064214096

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS

FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY

YOGYAKARTA 2013

IN CHTI,DREN' S LITERATURE AS SEEN THROUGH

THE CHARACTERIZATION OF CHILDREN AND ADULTS

IN WILDER'S

UTTLE HOUSE IN THE BIG WOODS

by

ANNA ELFlRA PRABANDARI ASSA

Student Number: 064214096

July 9, 2013 Advisor

Approved by

~

~

Ni Luh

Putu~

S.S., M.Hum.

Paulus Sarwoto, S.S., M.A., Ph.D. July 9, 2013

Co-Advisor

.ta Dharma University Dean,

IN CHILDREN'S LITERATURE AS SEEN THROUGH

THE CHARACTERIZATION OF CHILDREN AND ADULTS

IN WILDER'S

LITTLE HOUSE IN THE BIG WOODS

by

ANNA ELFlRA PRABANDARI ASSA Student Number : 064214096

Defended before the Board of Examiners on 261uly 2013

and Declared Acceptable

•

BOARD OF EXAMINERS Name

Chain nan : Dr. FX.Siswadi M.A.

Secretary : Ora. A. B. Sri Mulyani. M. A., Ph. D. Member : Dra. A. B. Sri Mulyani, M. A., Ph. D. '4ember : Ni Luh Putu Rosiandani. S.S., M.Hum.

ember : Paulus Sarwoto, S.S., M.A., Ph.D.

~~

--Yogyakarta, 31 July 2013

Faculty ofLetters

Saya yang bertanda tangan di bawah ini, menyatakan dengan sesungguhnya

bahwa skripsi yang saya tulis ini tidak memuat karya atau bagian karya orang lain,

kecuali yang teLah disebutkan dalam kutipan dan daftar pustaka sebagaimana layaknya

karya ilmiah.

Y ogyakarta, 31 ] ul i 2013

Penulis,

. ~

Anna Elfira Prabandari Assa

v

“…because now is now.

It can never be a long time ago.”

vi

For

_{Simbah Kakung}

,

KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS

Yang bertanda tangan di bawah I Ill, _{saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata} Dharma:

Nama : Anna Elfira Prabandari Assa No. Mahasiswa : 064214096

Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan , saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan U niversitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:

CIDLDREN DESIRE AND ADULTS KNOWLEDGE IN CHILDREN'S LITERATURE AS SEEN THROUGH THE CHARACTERIZATION OF CHILDREN AND ADULTS

IN WILDER'S LITTLE HOUSE IN THE BIG WOODS

Beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan kepada Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan , mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya

ebagai penulis.

Demikian pemyataan ini say a buat dengan sebenarnya.

Di buat di: Yogyakarta Pad a tanggal: 31 luli 2013 Yang menyatakan,

eN

na E lfira Prabandari Assa

viii

I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to Tuhan, who always be a mystery in my life and always becomes the alpha and the omega. My next gratitude goes to Ni Luh Putu Rosiandani, S.S., M.Hum.. I thank her for her patience facing my ‘absurdity’. My thanks also go to Paulus Sarwoto, S.S., M.A., Ph.D. for the corrections for improving my writing.

I would like to thank the big family of Lembaga Bahasa Universitas Sanata Dharma. They have been my motivation to learn and to become a better person. I also thank Chrysogonus Siddha. He deserves ‘to be blamed’ since he has made me get involved ‘too far’ into children’s literature. I also thank Bu Enny Anggraini and Mbak

Henny Khair who have shared the same dreams about children and their literature. I also thank people in my life, who each of them has filled me with their wonderful paths; Danas, Vero, Dewi, Inkan, Rosa, Tyas, Nopek, Voni, Nomi, Sarce,

Mas Rory and Maria, Mas Muji, and Mas Mando. For Diksita Galuh, I owe her for those laughters and tears. I am so blessed to have her in my life. I sincerely thank Vincentius Gitiyarko for his prayers and assistance. I thank him whose presence always reminds me to have faith in this life.

The last but not least, my biggest gratitude goes to my family, to Mbak Niek and Om Cip who believe in me to do all things in my own way; to Simbah for her stories that always make me contemplate; to Katon and Falen whose laughters become the reason to finish this thesis. I specially thank Ibuk and Bapak for never losing their faith in me and also for their every-morning-day-blessings.

ix

TITLE PAGE ... i

APPROVAL PAGE ... ii

ACCEPTANCEPAGE ... iii

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN KEASLIAN……….. iv

MOTTOPAGE ... v

DEDICATIONPAGE ... vi

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI………... vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ... ix

ABSTRACT ... xi

ABSTRAK ... xii

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ... 1

A. Background of the Study ... 1

B. Problem Formulation ... 5

C. Objectives of the Study... 6

D. Definition of Terms ... 6

CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL REVIEW... 10

A. Review of Related Studies ... 10

B. Review of Related Theories ... 1. Theory of Character and Characterization ... 2. Theory of Children’s Literature... a. The Works of Children’s Literature……… b. Review of Children’s Literature Criticism……….. 3. Theory of Adult Knowledge and Children Desire... a. Background of the Theory………... b. Children Desire and Adult Knowledge………... 13 13 15 15 17 23 23 26 C. Theoretical Framework ... 34

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ... 36

A. Object of the Study ... 36

B. Approach of the Study ... 37

C. Method of the Study ... 40

CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS ... 41 A. The Depiction of the Characters of Children and Adults in the Novel.

1. The Characters of Children... a. Laura: The Little Half-Pint of Sweet Cider Half Drunk Up

b. Mary: The Unrumpled Girl……….

c. Little Pa, Little Grand Pa and His Brothers………….…… d. Peter, Alice, and Ella: The Cousins……….

41 41 42 51 56 58

x

2. The Characters of Adults...

a. Pa: The Perfect Father……….

b. Ma: The Perfect Mother………...

c. Laura’s Grand Pa and Pa’s Grand Pa………..

d. Aunt Eliza-Uncle Peter and Aunt Polly-Uncle Henry…….

e. Aunt Lotty and the Storekeeper………...

61 61 68 74 76 77 B. The Idea of Adults Knowledge and Children Desire in the Novel...

1. Children Desire: A View of the Innocent... a. Disobedience and its Consequence………...…..

b. Lack of Knowledge……….

2. Adult Knowledge: The Ultimate Guide...

a. Adult’s Possesion of Knowldege………

b. Adult’s Attempt to Educate Children………

79 80 80 86 94 94 101

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION ... 106

xi

Anna Elfira Prabandari Assa. Children Desire and Adults Knowledge in Children’s Literature as Seen through the Characterization in Wilder’s Little House in the Big Woods. Yogyakarta: English Letters Study Programme, Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University, 2013.

As a children’s literature, the compilation of books known as Little House

series are written based on memories of the author’s early childhood in the big woods in Wisconsin, where the author lived with her parents in the late 19th century. Little House in the Big Woods is the first book of the series andwas published in 1932. The book portrays the life condition at the time through the narration of Laura, the major character. Little House in the Big Woods depicts the adventures of a simple family with three children who lived in the big woods.

In this study, the writer analyzed the characterization of children and adults in the novel. Children and adults become the basic categories to see the characters in the analysis. In each of the category, a number of characters can be found. The writer analyzed the idea of children desire and adults knowledge that can be seen in the characterization of those characters. The discussion on those characters is focused on the major characters from each of the category. The main concept about children desire and adults knowledge is based on Nodelman’s theory.

This study applied Structuralism as an approach in the analysis. This approach enables the writer to examine the children’s literature values that are constructed in the characterization of the characters. The method used in this study is library research. The primary data of the research is the novel itself, Little House in Big Woods. The secondary data are books and articles from journals that provide theories on characterization and children’s literature criticism.

The analysis on the characterization of the children in the story resulted in some basic characters which they shared together. Children are depicted as small, playful, dependent, kind, curious, innocent, helpful, obedient, and competitive characters. The discussion of the adult characters and their characterization resulted in some points which are independent, big, comforting, ruling, and knowledgeable. The idea of children desire is shown by the children characters. There are two main points, i.e.

disobedient and children’s lack of knowledge revealed in the children characters. Meanwhile, adult characters show the idea of adults knowledge by their characteristic of knowledge possession, and their attempt of transferring the knowledge to the children.

xii

Anna Elfira Prabandari Assa. Children Desire and Adults Knowledge in Children’s Literature as Seen through the Characterization in Wilder’s Little House in the Big Woods. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2013.

Sebagai sebuah karya sastra anak, kumpulan buku yang dikenal dengan seri

Little House ditulis berdasarkan ingatan masa kecil pengarang. Buku-buku tersebut bercerita tentang sebuah tempat di Big Woods, Wisconsin, tempat pengarang tinggal bersama orang tuanya di akhir abad 19. Little House in the Big Woods adalah buku pertama dari seri tersebut dan diterbitkan pada tahun 1932. Buku ini menggambarkan petualangan sebuah keluarga sederhana yang mempunyai tiga anak dalam hutan yang besar.

Dalam skripsi ini, penulis menganalisa penokohan tokoh anak dan orang dewasa dalam novel tersebut. Anak dan orang dewasa menjadi kategori dasar untuk melihat tokoh dalam analisa ini. Dalam setiap kategori tersebut terdapat sejumlah tokoh. Penulis menganalisa gagasan hasrat anak dan pengetahuan orang dewasa yang dapat dilihat melalui penokohan para tokohnya. Pembahasan difokuskan pada tokoh utama dari masing-masing kategori. Konsep utama tentang pengetahuan dewasa dan hasrat anak didasarkan pada teori Nodelman yang membahas tentang hal itu.

Pendekatan Strukturalis adalah pendekatan yang diterapkan dalam analisa ini. Pendekatan ini memiliki kemampuan untuk mengamati nilai-nilai yang dibangun dalam penokohan dalam karya sastra anak. Metode yang digunakan dalam skripsi ini adalah penelitian kepustakaan. Data primer dari penelitian ini adalah novel Little House in the Big Woods. Data sekundernya adalah buku dan data dari jurnal yang menyediakan teori baik tentang teori tokoh dan penokohan dan tentang sastra anak.

Analisa terhadap penokohan anak dalam cerita sampai pada kesimpulan bahwa ada beberapa sifat dasar yang dimiliki tokoh anak dalam cerita. Anak-anak digambarkan sebagai tokoh yang kecil secara fisik, senang bernain, bergantung pada orang lain, baik hati, ingin tahu, naif, suka membantu orang lain, taat, patuh, dan suka bersaing dengan anak yang lain. Pembahasan tentang tokoh orang dewasa dan penokohannya yang menghasilkan beberapa poin yaitu mandiri, ukuran fisik yang besar, sumber kenyamanan, sumber aturan, dan berpengetahuan. Gagasan hasrat anak yang ditunjukkan oleh tokoh anak dibahas dalam dua poin utama yaitu ketidakpatuhan anak dan kurangnya pengetahuan pada anak. Pada bahasan yang lain, tokoh orang dewasa mencerminkan gagasan pengetahuan dewasa melalui karakteristik mereka yaitu kepemilikan atas pengetahuan, dan usaha mereka untuk meneruskan pengetahuan kepada anak-anak.

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter consists of four parts. They are the background of the study, problem formulation, objective of the study, and definition of terms.

a. Background of the Study

Children’s literature is rarely used as a material for study or discussion in English department in educational institution in Indonesia. Anggraini states, “In the English Department in universities or higher institutions in Indonesia, literary works taught to students are mostly those classified as adult literature” (2000:91). Malilang states that the celebration of childhood’s innocence had caused the lack attention to children’s literature (2012:1). Since the middle of 20th

Bobulová, Pokrivčáková, Preložníková, and Pribylová propose some characteristics of children’s literature. The major character in children’s literature is children, the story is easy to understand, and it uses children’s point of view. There are also moral lessons that are comprehensible (2003:10). There is a similar idea in the definition of children’s literature. Concerning with the characteristics of children’s literature, Lukens holds similar notion. She also makes a comparison between adult and children which results in conclusion that “children are different

century, however, literature for children has been considered worthy of critical value, along with the new surge of research in children’s literature around European and American schools (2012:1).

from adults in experience, but not in species, or to put it differently, in degree but not in kind” (1995:7). According to Lukens, children are different so is their literature. She further says, “Since their understanding is more limited, the expression of ideas must be simpler—both in language and in form” (1995:7). Unfortunately, Luken’s definition does not discuss more the reason why children are different and why they are constructed in such a way. Nodelman and Reimer also postulate an opinion about the definition of children’s literature. They put their idea in a simple way that the definition basically uses the field’s own name as the foundation. They say, ”As its name implies, children’s literature is a body of texts defined by its intended audience” (2003:79). Children’s literature, then, are literary works made for specific readers who are children.

Nodelman develops a theory about the construction of children’s literature and the explanation on the system beyond all the construction process. This theory is based on the notion that children are construction made by adult. He says, “Reading these texts as an adult places my attention exactly where I think it should be—on the constructed nature of the children involved in what we call children’s literature” (Nodelman, 2008:85). The theory of children as a constructed object that is discussed here is brought up into more specific idea as a concept of children that can be seen in children’s literature. The question of what kind of concept about children depicted in the work is discussed by using a certain theory that is assumed for having a capacity to answer the question.

According to Nodelman, there is a certain hypothesis about children. He says that the definition of children is defined by adults. This condition creates a possibility that the definition making will be based on adult’s need. Nodelman elaborates some ideas about children, specifically about the finding of definition about children.

Thus, adult interpretation of children's behavior, whether in literature or in psychology, are always contaminated by previously established adult assumptions about childhood. Those assumptions emerge from the discourse about children developed over centuries in order to support the programs of various philosophical and political systems (1992:30).

The background understanding about the relation of adults and children in society brings an effect of the definition of children in some concepts such as psychology and children’s literature. The definition of children is said as an idea that was made and developed by some philosophical or political system to support their existence. Therefore the definition was made for certain purpose rather than the true meaning of the subject itself.

Talking about the notion above, it is interesting to investigate a literary work which is considered as children literature and in what way the notion is reflected in the literary work. This study discusses a novel belonging to Little House Series which is believed as the stories that “continue to entertain readers in the twenty-first century” (Sickles, 2008:12). The Little House series is known as Laura Years which is based on the memories of the author’s early childhood in the big woods in Wisconsin, until her family moved to the West in the late 19th century. The first book of the series is Little House in the Big Woods which was published in 1932. The main theme of the story is how a family lived in the pioneer era. It is about the difficulties

they face and how they can overcome those difficulties with the unity and warmth of the family. The story is presented through the narrative sound of Laura that takes the reader into a world of the story by the view of a child.

Laura Ingalls is portrayed to live in a pioneer family. Her family moves to the West to find another land to live. Sickles commented on the story, “The Ingalls family is happy and good natured, and although they experience many dangers and hardships, they never give up hope” (2008:14). The family life is depicted on the hard work that seems to be the basic rule of the characters’ life. In spite of the hard work, fun is often made in the midst of it. Laura lives in such a happy life. She gets everything that children need to live happily. Her parents provide her and her two sisters with much attention and protection. Love and caring also furnish the family life. According to Sickles, this portrait of happy children in happy family undoubtedly makes “her books continue to delight children around the world” (2008:12).

Nodelman says that a book for children potentially contains the power constellation, which specifically is the power behind the construction of children in the work. This adult involvement resulted on children‘s literature in the way “it offers children both what adults think children will like and what adults want them to need, but it does so always in order to satisfy adults’ needs in regard to children.” (2008:242). Regarding the notion, it is interesting to find out whether this view can be seen in Wilder’s novel, though the children in the novel feel “safe inside the solid log walls” (Wilder, 1932:3), and whether it is possible to say that there is a great

controller who moves silently and is unseen in their home, though they “were cosy and comfortable in their little house…”? (Wilder, 1932:44).

To find the answers, this study observes the characterization of the characters in the novel, and the focus is put on the way children and adults are characterized. In order to see this particular way, the writer applies Nodelman’s theory of children desire and adults knowledge in children’s literature. Little House in the Big Woods is chosen by its position as an important work of children’s literature. The study focuses on the element of characterization to discuss the pattern of relation of children and adults. It is also conducted to find a deeper explanation on the identification of the book as the significant work of children’s literature. Nodelman’s idea on children desire and adults knowledge in children’s literature is used to support the study in discussing the topic.

b. Problem Formulation

There are two problems formulated in this study. The two problems are as follows.

1. How are the characters of children and adults depicted in Wilder’s Little House in the Big Woods?

2. How does the characterization of children and adults show the idea of children desire and adults knowledge in the novel?

c. Objective of the Study

Concerning the problem formulation that has been stated previously, the first objective of this study is to find out how children and adults are characterized in

Little House in the Big Woods. The second objective is to find out how the characterization of children and adults in Little House in the Big Woods shows children desire and adults knowledge children’s literature.

d. Definitions of Terms

This part presents the definitions of several terms used in this study. The presentation of the definitions is intended to avoid misinterpretation of the intended meaning of the terms.

1. Child (pl. Children)

The definition of children in this study is taken from the fields of development psychology in relation to Nodleman’s notion of children and childhood in texts of children literature. Nodelman bases his notion of children and childhood in texts of children’s literature on child psychology. According to Nodelman, the definition of children is based on two main categories. The first one is the children’s book and books of child psychology, and the second category is the personal version of any adults based on their childhood memories.

“The parallel ‘classical texts’of childhood fall into two categories. First there are written descriptions of children of earlier times, not just the ‘classic’ children's books but also the classic texts of child psychology—Piaget, Vygotsky, Kohlberg. Second, there are our personal versions of our own childhoods: what we identify as childhood memories” (Nodelman, 1992:33).

He also states the idea of childhood is “equally stable in the works of child psychologists, writers of children's fiction, and children's literature specialists.” (1992:31). According to Nodelman, the fields quoted above share the same idea about childhood. Description or definition of children can be seen in texts such as the text of children’s literature and child psychology. As such, this study applies the concept of childhood from this psychology point of view.

In psychology, child is a person included in childhood age. Childhood means period between infancy and adolescence. Childhood is divided into two parts; early childhood and middle childhood. Early childhood is age period 3 to 6 years and middle childhood 6 to 11 years. In this study, the term of child refers to a person that is included to childhood, who is in the ages between infancy and adolescence, who is in the range age from 3 to 11 years (Papalia, 2004:12). In this study the word child and children refer to the characters in the novel who have such characteristis above.

2. Adult (pl. Adults)

American Psychological Association (APA) Dictionary of Psychology provides two definitions of adult; 1) A person who has reached adulthood. 2) a person who has reached the legal age of maturity. Although it may vary across jurisdictions, an individual 18 years of age is typically considered an adult.

Papalia in Human Development says that adulthood is a period of human development after adolescence. Adulthood is divided into young adulthood (20 to 40

years), middle adulthood (40 to 65 years), and late adulthood (65 years and over) (2003:13). In this study the word adult refers to the characters in the novel who represent the characteristics above.

3. Children Desire

The definition of children desire is based on Nodelman’s idea that it refers to the opposition of childlike to adult knowledge. According to Nodelman, “in being represented as the opposite of adult knowledge, childlike or animal wisdom can only be understood as a lack, a deficiency—a state of bliss defined by what is absent from it” (2008:44). Nodelman also states that children desire in children’s literature is what the work mainly concerns with. It is about what the character of children want without any wise consideration about it. The texts deal centrally with questions of desire, as well as with questions of knowledge: what children or other childlike beings want and whether or not it is wise to want it (2008:79). In this study the term children desire refer to what the children characters in the novel want.

4. Adults Knowledge

Based on Nodelman’s notion, adult knowledge is defined as the knowledge that belong to adults characters in the story. It is defined as the knowledge of adults which is higher, wiser, and more careful than one belonging to children, and also the base of controling of adults toward children.

...you (children) will continue to try to act on your desires because you will always have less knowledge than the adults around you. Therefore, you (children) must accept your dependence on wiser and more careful adults and their right to control your environment and manipulate your thinking for your own good (2008:35).

In this study adults knowledge refers to the adult characters’ knowledge which is higher, wiser, and more careful than that of the children characters. It also refers to the adult characters’ control toward children characters in Wilder’s Little House in the Big Woods.

5. Children’s Literature

Nodelman and Reimer state, ”As its name implies, children’s literature is a body of texts defined by its intended audience” (2003:79). Children’s literature, then, is literary work made for specific readers who are children or literature for children.

10

CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL REVIEW

This chapter consists of four parts. The first part is some review of related studies. The second part presents some review of related theories, and the last part is the theoretical framework.

A. Review of Related Studies

Little House in the Big Woods is one of the Little House books written by Laura Ingalls Wilder. First time published in 1932, it is the first book of the series. Little House series are translated into many languages and sold over 60 million copies. As best-seller books, there are many discussions about what happens in Little House series. The book has been an object of discussions with some themes.

Lukens categorizes Little House series as classics children's literature. Lukens states, “Classics are books that have worn well, attracting readers from one generation to the next” (1995:28). Books which are included in Classics are those that are always used and read by the readers across generations. Lukens’ opinion concerning the meaning of Classics as exciting work for two or three generations puts Little House series in a certain position in American children's literature.

Fellman also supports the opinion that the Little House series have an important role in American culture. In her deep research and various studies, she examines the influence of Little House series and its author in the culture, as well as in American

literature. Fellman’s various studies cover from how characters are depicted in the novel to a research on what political effect that the novel brings. Fellman states, “From the 1940s to the present day, there is scarcely a bibliography or a guide to children's literature that does not include the Little House series as a noteworthy addition to even the smallest school or public library” (2008:124). This denotes that Little House series have influenced American children's literature.

Fellman says that the Little House series are always in the list because the Little House series is also included in the criteria of good children’s literature from time to time. In the 1920s, children's stories for boys are usually about adventure stories and the theme of home and school stories are for girls and “the Little House books met all these criteria” (2008:123). In 1960, Fellman found that the Little House series met the criteria of children’s literature proposed by May Hill Arbuthnot on a good children’s literature, which “strengthen a child for the difficult tasks involved in growing up” (2008:126). Fellman says, “Arbuthnot and those she influenced consistently cite Wilder's books as meeting all these needs for children” (2008:126). Since it suits to the grand standard of children’s literature, Little House series gains an important position at certain place.

The above statements support the notion that Little House series are children’s literature (literature for children). Little House series are books that are mostly read by American children and in some ways have become major work of children’s literature in the field of English children’s literature.

Concerning with children’s literature, Sarumpaet conducts a study on Indonesian children’s literature. Her study is about how parents treat children. Here she puts forward the relation of adults and children in children literature. Sarumpaet (2010:108) gives a type of guidance in using postcolonial point of view in doing research on children’s literature. The essay, entitled Sastra Anak: Penjajah dan Taklukannya, uses postcolonial approach in discussing two children’s short stories as the focus of the study. Sarumpaet in the beginning of her essay is questioning children’s position in their literature. She states, “children’s literature is a literary work that is consumed by children and under concerning and created by adult” (2010:100).

Citing John Locke, Sarumpaet states, “… the mind of children is the same to a blank paper known as Tabula Rasa, it is ready to be written on” (2010:106). According to Locke, children are raw materials that require a process to be useful (Locke cited in Sarumpaet, 2010:109). In other words, children are considered as unprocessed material.

The concept of children stated by Locke influences how adults see children until nowadays. Sarumpaet states that adults often see children as an object. Sarumpaet also explains the point about the position of adult. This can be seen in Sarumpaet’s study on Margantoro’s Si Blirik, which tells about a duck that escaped from its house and tried to follow a goose. In the trip the duck found that living outside the house is dangerous. The duck saw a lot of miserable things. As the story is nearing to its end, the duck felt a strong regret and missed its mother. Sarumpaet

comments, “this is an example of narrative format of House-Outside-House that describes the child as the protagonist who really wants to leave the house and at the end comes back to the house and the family’s secure because he has learned from his ‘inanity’” (2010:108). The story shows the massive power of family and the concept of home. The idea is that children will be safe when they are at home with the family. The story constructs a concept of children as persons that are attached to their family.

This study is intended to analyze the aspect of relation between the characters in the story. Therefore this study shares a similarity with the one that is conducted by Sarumpaet. Sarumpaet’s study focuses on the position of adults and children in children’s literature. This study will not discuss the external aspect, such as the influence of the story to the readers, or the effect of certain social and historical background toward the story. The writer assumes that this study will provide another kind of explanation of the identification of the book as an important work of children’s literature.

B.Review of Related Theories

1. Theory of Character and Characterization

Abrams provides two definitions of character. Firstly, character refers to type of person. This denotes the personality traits of the person. Secondly, character is addressed to “the person presented in a dramatic or narrative work, which are interpreted by the reader as being endowed with moral and dispositional qualities that are expressed in what they say, dialogue, and what they do, the action” (1981:22).

Roger Henkle classifies characters into major and minor characters. Major character is the main character in the literary work and becomes the readers’ focus of attention.

Major character has a fullest attention for the readers. They will have opinions that he or she will represent their wish and thought, and may becomes the major figure that build their expectation and desire, which in modification shift or established their values (1977:92).

Meanwhile, minor character is character with limited function, so that they deserve less attention from the readers (1977:95).

Character is different to characterization. Holman and Harmon say that characterization is the creation of imagery persons so that they exist for the readers as alive (1986:81). Therefore, characterization is a way the author creates the character. Characterization is a way used by the author to present the reader with the characters he create.

According to Murphy, there are some ways in which the readers can understand the characters. The first way is through personal descriptions; readers can understand the characters through how they are described in their appearance in details such as clothes, color of skin or their hair, etc. The second method is through how the character as seen by the others; the author describe the character by the opinion of other characters around. The third is by speech; what the character says can tell the readers about the character. By knowing the character’s past life, the reader also can examine the characteristics of the character. Another method is by conversation of other; similar to the second method, the reader can understand the characters by what people say about them. Reactions of the character towards various situations in the

stories also can be a method in analyzing the characteristics of the characters. The author also gives direct comment to the character; this can be used to examine the characteristics of the character. Thoughts also become a way to know about the character; here the author directly shows the reader what is in the character’s mind. The last method is by mannerism; in this method, the author shows the characteristics of the character by looking at his or her behaviors, habits, or idiosyncrasies (1992:161-173).

2. Theory of Children's Literature

a. The Works of Children’s Literature

The journey of children’s literature started in Latin in the 7th century with the school text Benerable Bede, and then continued with William Caxton with Aesop, children’s fable in 1484. In the end of 15th century, there was an invention of hornbooks (a small wooden paddle on which a lesson sheet of paper was pasted and then covered by a thin, clear covering made from boiled animal horn) (Anggraini, 2000:93). The text for children in hornbook contained numerals, alphabets, and Lord’s prayer. Orbis Sensualium Pictus (the Visible World, 1659) by Comenius was the first picture book for children whose each chapter deals with different subject to give children general idea about outside world. John Newberry, in 1744, successfully produced A Little Pretty Pocket-Book. It was book for amusing children with the

illustration as an integral part of the text, bound in bright colored papers (Bridgwater, 1960:1081).

In discussing the definition of children’s literature, Hunt says, “‘children’s literature’ is a term used to describe both a set of text and an academic discipline— and it is often regarded as an oxymoron” (2011:42). He explains it as the two terms seeming to be incompatible because ‘children’ commonly connotes ‘immaturity’, and ‘literature’ commonly connotes sophistication in text and reading (2011:42).

Defining children’s literature cannot be separated from the concept of children that changes with time place, gender, and perceiver. It makes the text of children’s literature unstable (2011:43). It also raises distinction between historical children’s literature and contemporary children’s literature. The first is addressed to “books that were for children” and the last refers to “books that address or relate to recognizable current childhoods” (2011:43).

The body of text also becomes one of the ways to define literature for children. Hunt cites Milles MacDowell’s most-reprinted definition.

Children’s books are generally shorter; they tend to favor an active rather than passive treatment, with dialogue and incident rather than description and introspection; child protagonist are the rule; convention are much used; the story develops within a clear-cut moral schematization which much adult fiction ignores; children’s books tend to be optimistic rather than depressive; language is child-oriented; plots are of a distinctive order (MacDowell (1973) cited in Hunt, 2011:45).

Citing O’ Malley, Hunt states that the meaningful distinction between adult and children’s literature is located in the marketing strategies as done by Newberry in the eighteenth century when he divided market sellers for books. It may happen because

there is no clear dividing line in the Middle Ages between adult’s and children literature (Cunningham cited in Hunt, 2011:45).

Hunt also writes about the essential power within children’s literature. According to Hunt, the current Western concept of children that connotes immaturity inexperience, lack of responsibility, and dependence, has arisen something that another critic called “hidden adult” in almost all text for children. It is in the sense that children’s fiction sets up a world in which the adults come first (author, maker, giver) and the child comes after (reader, product, receiver) (Rose cited in Hunt, 2011:43). Thacker and Webb states, “[C]hildren’s literature knowingly engages with the idea of … relationship between author and reader” (Thacker and Web (2002) cited in Hunt, 2011: 46). Since then, the definition of children’s literature is based on rather more textual elements. Chambers in his seminar paper adopts Iser’s concept of implied reader as a defining feature (Hunt, 2011:45).

Nodelman and Reimer also provide the definition of children’s literature and stated, ”As its name implies, children’s literature is a body of texts defined by its intended audience” (2003:79). Children’s literature, then, is literary work made for specific readers who are children.

b. Review of Children’s Literature Criticism

Historically, children‘s literature as a specific field at its first development had a close relation to the idea of pedagogy. The goal of this literary work then, is for the

sake of children’s education. The function of literature in the field is as a tool, with its high potential power, for children education specifically for the process of choosing a good book for children’s reading.

Children’s literature, Ewers argued, was from the very beginning related to pedagogics. Children’s literature emerged on a larger scale because at some time in the seventeenth century society began to recognize that childhood was a special period in people’s lives and that children had their own special needs. … It has gone hand in hand with pedagogical views; literature was means, and a very powerful one, for educating children. Therefore, children’s literature has also been studied with this view in mind—that is, the suitability of books for children’s reading (Nikolajeva, 1995:xi).

The statement above denotes that an effort to approach children’s literature using the literary theories has not brought a real result. This idea can be seen in Nikolajeva’s statement about the attempt of critics in the field. She says that Ewers encourages scholars of children’s literature to contemplate yet another viewpoint that children’s literature has quite ignored, that is, children’s literature as literature. Ewers, as quoted by Nikolajeva, states that this approach had not yet achieved any tangible results (Nikolajeva, 1995:x).

A significant point in the discussion of children’s literature is the growing of the organization with a great concern to the field. Organizations such as Children's Literature Association in 1971 and the foundation of such journals as Children's Literature, Children's Literature in Education, The Children's Literature Association Quarterly, The Lion and the Unicorn, and Signal that mostly developed during the 1970s made marked change in the quality of the literary criticism of children's literature in North America and England (Zipes, 1990:7). The marked change is about

the tendency of works children’s literature. The work before 1972 is influenced by a different method with the works after the era.

… whereas the majority of the academic books on children's literature written before 1972 tended to be bland literary histories that celebrated the good nature and intentions of children's literature with positivist methods and a paternalizing ideology to match, the more recent studies have probed the ulterior motives of children's literature and explored its socio-political and psychological ramifications (Zipes, 1990:7).

There is one method of approaching children’s literature that properly develops. It is the reader’s response method that is according to Meek is based from the class room activity, as he said that most of the evidence for children’s progress in reading and interpretation of literary texts comes from classrooms where teachers observe and appraise children’s interactions with books as they read them (Meek, 2004:9). The main concern of this method is reader’s constitution of textual meaning. The use of this method also shows that there is very little well-based research that focuses on the children’s reading in its relation to their education.

By foregrounding the readers’ constitution of textual meaning, reading-response theory has become the most frequently quoted theoretical position in relation to books for children. What it also makes clear is the lack of any fully grounded research on the nature of the development of these competences over the total period of children’s schooling (Meek, 2004:9).

There is also another significant approach which comes from social linguistic point of view. The approach puts most of its attention on the idea of educating the young reader to learn more about the construction and the composition of their reading. This idea is the reaction toward the possibility that the young reader might be influenced ideologically and unconsciously by what they read. This method is not

only about the response of the reader, moreover it prepares the reader in responding the reading.

In contrast to the notion of ‘response’, critics who derive their insights from social linguistics stress the power of authors to make young readers ‘surrender to the flow of the discourse’; that is, to become ‘lost in a book’. Sociolinguists are concerned that, having learned to read, young people should be taught to discern the author’s ‘chosen registers, so as to discover how a text is composed or constructed. Then, the claim is, readers will understand, from their responses to the text, ‘who is doing what to whom’, and thus become ‘critically’ literate (Meek, 2004:9).

Most of those approaches according to Rudd have weakness in the attempt to be the perfect approach for children’s literature. The weakness can be seen in their methodological aspect. Rudd also makes critical opinion on the systematic way used in seeing children’s literature. The systematic way is criticized for its narrowness.

Many traditional approaches seem to me to be seriously inadequate, and for a number of reasons.…many simply lack any methodological grounding, being prone to both whimsy and subjective judgement…even where more systematic investigations are undertaken, they are frequently too narrow…(Lesnik-Oberstein, 2004:4).

These traditional approaches with their weakness can be said as a reason for the searching for the most appropriate approach to be used in discussing children’s literature. The attempt to find a better and suitable approach is developed continually. John Stephens as cited from Lesnik-Oberstein’s view on the possible relation of modern literary and critical theory with children’s literature, says about the attempt of seeing children’s literature with the paradigm of cultural theories. Stephens states that in the course of the nineteen-nineties, there has been a steady trickle of notable books which attempt to place children’s literature within the context of those modern

literary and cultural theories which post-date the various reader response criticisms, or within a particular facet of that newer body of theory (Lesnik-Oberstein, 2004:3). Moreover, McGillis puts this possible attempt of approaching by explaining the theories that have been applied in seeing children’s literature.

Roderick McGillis, in 1998, writes that all these theoretical approaches may be, and have been, used by critics of children’s literature. Recent criticism has forthrightly applied the work of structuralists, deconstruction, feminism, Marxism, Freud, Jung, and so on to children’s books’ (Lesnik-Oberstein, 2004:3).

A type of this recent approach can be seen in the analysis or reviews that are conducted by Nodelman. In his analysis, Nodelman believes that children’s literature is based on the society’s need or specifically the control of the adult and therefore it is a constructed idea. Nodelman said, “It would not be surprising if that were true, simply because the field of children’s literature—its production and consumption—is so overwhelmingly occupied by adults” (2008:207). The same opinion can be seen in Rudd’s idea that is focused on the idea that children are the result of some discourses. According to Rudd, there are two main concepts of children. First is the idea of children with its natural essential meaning and the idea of children as the product of adult discourse.

This will involve steering a course between, on the one hand, notions that there is an underlying ‘essential’ child whose nature and needs we can know and, on the other, the notion that the child is nothing but the product of adult discourse (as some social constructionists argue) (Rudd, 2004:29).

Rose’s study shows another point of criticism on children’s literature which deal with the idea of children as the object of the system in making children’s

literature. The study analyzes the extent of manipulation of children as the reader of the course. As stated by Zipes, Jacqueline Rose's superb study of The Case of Peter Pan (1984) reveals the extent of the manipulation of the child as reader (1990:16). Rose concludes the idea of children’s literature as institution and the role of adult as the constructor. Children’s literature becomes an instrument for the children’s life process of socialization.

Rose comes to the same conclusion as they do: children's literature is basically an institution in which the various genres are construed by adults to manage the socialization of the child without offering the child the means through which he or she can question society and language as they are (1990:19). The analysis that is done by Rose brings the discussion to a wider topic. Children’s literature becomes the means for the manipulation and the molding process. The aim of this manipulation is the children’s reproduction of any values that are constructed in what they read.

It was through literature that the child was to be molded and manipulated so that he or she would reproduce the structures of thinking and behaving that the writer represented in fiction and nonfiction designated for young readers. The overt didactic purpose of children's literature was predominant up through the end of the nineteenth century, even in works of fantasy (1990:19).

Rose says that it is the adult writers who designed all representation that could be found in children’s literature. This idea arise others studies that aim for what has been said as exploitation. Zipes says that from this point on, numerous writers of children's literature consciously write works that concentrated on the problem of exploitation of the child and the notion of childhood (1990:19).

3. Theory of Children Desire and Adults Knowledge

a. Background of the Theory

The idea of adults knowledge and children desire are some points taken from Nodelman’s study on children’s literature. Children’s literature according to Nodelman is a wide discussion that includes many elements that are related to each other based on their concern on the production of children’s discourse. Therefore his opinion and discussion on this subject is mostly about the extent net and how those elements deal with each other by their own positions in the net.

Over the years I have often engaged in discourse about children’s literature with those who write, edit, publish, review, select, sell, buy, teach, study, research, critique, and otherwise involve themselves with children’s books... all of these people have taken positions about the generic characteristics of children’s literature, some less consciously than others; and my own views have developed as a position taken in relationship to all those others—a position in the field of children’s literature, especially in the field of children’s literature criticism (1992: 133).

In seeing all these elements and the wide net, Nodelman puts his position as the part related to the net with his own concern which is the revealing of the nature and potential of the field of children’s literature. Nodelman’s position relates to and intersects with all the others in ways that can reveal much about the nature and potential of his own views and much about the fields of children’s literature and children’s literature criticism in general (1992:134).

Nodelman believes that some of those elements such as critics and reviewers have a big role in shaping children’s literature. They are able to affect the production

of children’s literature texts. The writer or the producer or children literature are related to the critics and reviewer in making their literature work.

Critics and reviewers not only have the job of trying to make sense of children’s books, but also, and just as centrally, their opinions and choices tend to shape what texts have power and how those texts might be read; thus, what texts critics and reviewers consume and how they consume them profoundly affect the nature of what producers choose to produce (1992:134). In relating Nodelman’s opinion on the children’s literature as a field of literary work and literary criticism with his own analysis on a children’s literature we can see the use of his idea about the influence of adults in shaping the text. The idea is about the role of adults who are included in those elements in the net of children’s literature criticism. This idea can be seen in his analysis of six texts of children’s literature.

Nodelman’s own motive of the six text analysis is his assumption of finding a general scheme or internal pattern that is shared by most of texts of children’s literature.

..to read each of them carefully, and to think hard about the specifics of what I was reading before I presumed to leap to any conclusions about how the texts did or did not seem similar to each other or represent the field as a whole (2008:91).

Nodelman says that texts have a power to influence the reader, as he said that whether their producers are aware of it or not, texts always operate in various deliberate and non deliberate ways to give readers ideas about themselves and their needs and desires (2008:90). The mechanism of the operation of the power can be seen in the texts itself. More over in his analysis Nodelman constructs a scheme that shows the way a text provides a room for the influence of its producer or adult. The

construction can be seen in a pattern that Nodelman found in his analysis of the six texts.

His analysis is focused on the internal part of the texts. The analysis on the six texts is done on his assumption that there is a possibility to see the relation that exists on the majority of children’s literature works.

There are, however, a range of strategies I am aware of and can name here. It seems important to do so, for they underpin the argument I want to make: that the characteristics I found in the six texts I’ve considered might be shared by enough other texts to be identified as the identifying markers of children’s literature—what makes it a distinct literary genre (2008:83).

These qualities are found by examining the internal elements in the six texts. These qualities are points where we can see the connection between Nodelman’s analysis of the six texts and his idea of adults’ role in children’s literature production previously explained.

Nodelman’s conclusion of the six texts analysis is that the idea that fictional texts written by adults for children and young people are similar to each other to be immediately recognizable as having been intended for their specific audiences—as children’s or young adults’ literature (2008:81). Those literary works are made with a similar feature that they share each other. The main factor for the work to be made in such way is the fact that they have intended audiences i.e. children.

In the study, Nodelman finds similar features that are generally shared by the six analyzed texts. The findings refer to the internal structure of the texts such as style, point of view and focalization, and the relationships of events to each other (the plot). Those elements are made for a space where the influence of the elements in the

net of children’s literature producers can take its place. Those features are the point to understand the influence of those who have an important position in the making of children’s literature.

In seeing the relation of adults and children in children’s literature, this review of the notions find out that there are many paradigms for the analysis. In order to achieve a proper view on the relation as the focus of this study, a chosen paradigm is required to be able to provide an explanation about the subject in some important parts of its aspects. The chosen theory should able to see the relation from any side, either adults’ side or children’s side. The explanation below is about the theory that will be used as a base of this study. In analyzing the characterization of adults and children and also explaining the relation between characters of adults and children in children’s literature, this study applies Nodelman’s idea on the position of characters of children and adults in children’s literature.

b. Children Desire and Adults Knowledge

Nodelman puts a great focus on the identification and the construction of children’s literature in his book. The book contains an analysis on the variety of children’s literature. An analysis is done on six chosen texts which, according to Nodelman, are sharing features that can be seen as the general representation of children’s literature. The analysis is done in the first chapter of the book. Those works are; Maria Edgeworth’s The Purple Jar, Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Hugh Lofting’s 1920 novel Dr. Dolittle, Beverly Cleary’s Henry

Huggins, Ezra Jack Keats’s 1962 picture book The Snowy Day, Virginia Hamilton’s 1993 novel Plain City (2008:1). The six texts are variation of texts with the difference of publishing time and other aspects among them and also known as texts of children’s literature.

This diverse group of texts was published in two different countries over a period spanning almost two centuries…But despite their many differences, all six texts do have one thing in common: most people would identify them as children’s literature (2008:2).

Led by the inner construction of the texts and their seen features as particular kind of literary work, Nodelman believes that more values can be explored in those texts. He says that there is something about the texts themselves, some feeling or quality, that not only tells him that each of them is children’s literature but that also makes them seem somehow similar to each other (2008:7). The assumption in his analysis is mostly about the role of a kind of power behind the process of constructing children’s literature. This assumption is based on the idea of children’s literature. According to Nodelman the literary work is produced by a creator that must make judgements about what to produce based not on what they believe will appeal to children, but rather on what they believe adult consumers believe they know will appeal to children (or perhaps, what should appeal to them, or what they need to be taught) (2008:5). Adults’ control in the production system of the literary work can be traced by looking at the internal form of the work itself.

As commonly recognized, the creators of children’s literature are adults. The creation of children’s literature is done under some purposes. This is based on the

idea that children should be made easier for adult to handle. In order to accomplish the purpose, adults put their attention on values that they need to apply to children. Nodelman says that adults do not only demand to control children, they also want the children to accept or even to need the controlling of adults.

By and large, we encourage in children those values and behaviors that make children easier for us to handle: more passive, more docile, more obedient and thus, more in need of our guidance and more willing to accept the need for it (Nodelman, 1992:30).

These characteristic and values of children’s literature of having the adults as an important part can be seen in the construction of the works themselves as the work of literature. When inserted their purposes, adults develop a certain power of controlling by their position as the creators. This potential power will enable adults to manage and to make a children’s literature become a medium for their purposes. This is the way the value can be passed through the children’s literature.

The character of children is described as the opposite of adults. Their simple mind led by desire and ignorance in handling anything in life is considered as their natural characters. On the other hand, it can be seen that the characters of adults in children’s literature are described as the source of knowledge. They are the side on which children will learn that their desire should be changed into other behavior that will prevent them from the bad and problematic situation.

... [T]he state of being in uncertainty, of not knowing a world that keeps changing and not understanding a self that keeps changing, is the opposite of what adulthood is that it is the essence of what it means to be a child... (2008:40).

Children’s desire is the condition of their uncertainty, their demand of objects that according to themselves could be a source of happiness or possible values that will please them. This desire put them into a different category to other characters in the children’s literature, which are the characters of adults. We can see that each of these characters complement other characterization. By observing adults character with their knowledge, some points will be gained to identify the characterization of children characters with their desire.

The idea of adults’ position and role in children’s literature can be discussed by using Nodelman’s concept that is known as the idea of adult knowledge. The explanation of this idea can be seen in the conclusion made by Nodelman in his analysis on various numbers of children’s literary works. One of the conclusions is about the position of adults in the children’s literature as the character with the source of knowledge. Nodelman says that the position of the texts tends to confirm the idea that it is adult knowledge that reveals the inadequacies of childhood desires (2008:80). The identification of this knowledge can be seen in the text of children’s literature. The knowledge is the opposite of other values such as childlike or animal wisdom values that can be seen in the work of children’s literature.

Quite simply, adult knowledge is knowledge, and in being represented as the opposite of adult knowledge, childlike or animal wisdom can only be understood as a lack, a deficiency—a state of bliss defined by what is absent from it (2008:44).

In the construction of children’s literature it can be found that the position of adults has a better knowledge than the children. The knowledge is the basic

knowledge about any aspects in life. Nodelman says, “it seems, adults like children to know less than they do (or, perhaps more accurately, like to be able to believe that children know less than they do?) and reward them for being so or seeming to be so” (2008:27). This idea puts the position of adult in children’s literature as a centre of character with the best knowledge in the work of literature . The position of adults can be seen in many aspects of the construction such as the narration, plot, theme, or the characterization of the characters.

In children’s literature, adults are known for their knowledge which is positioned as the most important thing in their existence. Meanwhile, children are constructed as having a desire. The desire is designed as the source of any acts that will be done by the character of children in children’s literature. These characters are unaware of their desire because they are described as innocent and dependent on the adults in order to gain a better understanding of the surrounding or their life. Nodelman says, “children are innocent enough not to know the danger in what they desire and need to learn it” (2008:80). Their character is described as having the simplicity of thinking and know very little of their surrounding. This value, according to Nodelman, is one of the significant points in the characteristic of children in children’s literature.

To think as one imagines a child thinks, to be simple, to know less—all this means is that one is less conscious of the brute horror of the bare truth, despicable and unbearable reality itself (2008:44).

The other finding in the analysis is Nodelman’s idea that adult knowledge and children desire are constructed in a narration. Based on his analysis on the six texts,

he says that mostly the narration of those texts is made by the pattern of the contact between adults knowledge and children desire. The desire of children leads them to act in certain way that is considered as having a lack of knowledge. The children, then, will be led into a situation that mostly are problematic and come as a result of their lack of anticipation skill; the skill that belongs to adults and which their desire is unable to provide. At this point the adults knowledge will play role as the source of solution. The characters of children as set in the narration will find that at the end, the best thing for them is to believe in the knowledge that comes from adults.

First, childhood is defined by its ignorance and consequent willingness to act on desire, and it therefore ends when the development of adult forms of knowledge dissipates foolish desire. But second, childhood’s ignorance and willingness to act on desire are ongoing and survive specific bits of adult knowledge learned and specific desires undermined (2008:35).

The meeting point or contrast of the desire and knowledge is a significant point where the relation of adults and children can be drawn. The relation of adults and children characters in children’s literature can be explained in the way the characterization of adults is set with their knowledge and children with their desire.

The relation of adults and children characters in children’s literature is possible to be discussed in focusing on characteristic of each character. It is also found that each type of the characters influence one and another by their characteristic. It means that by looking at the characteristic of children, the role of adults character that constructs the characterization can be defined and vice versa. These two elements are related in a mutual connection of defining each other. Moreover, Nodelman explains that children in children’s literature are constructed based on their existence and

position toward the adults. In order to survive, children must have the knowledge that they can learn from adults, although they will always be influenced by their desire which is the opposite of the adults’ knowledge and tend to bring them into a trouble.

The most obvious one is that giving in to your desires gets you into trouble, and you should try to know as much as adults do in order to protect yourself from danger. A less obvious one is that you are doomed as a child to keep on being childlike, which means that you will continue to try to act on your desires because you will always have less knowledge than the adults around you (2008:35).

In analyzing Maria Edgeworth’s The Purple Jar, Nodelman shows that the character of children, Rosamond ignores the true nature and follows her desire to posses the jar. This condition showed the character of children as the one who easily followed her own desire. When the desire brings a conflict or a problem, the knowledge that children character gained from the adult character will help her to recognize the bad consequences of her desire.

‘‘The Purple Jar’’ hinges on Rosamond’s desire for the jar and her discovery of the implications of getting what she wants. Because her desire for the jar is based on her ignorance about its true nature, the plot hinges equally on her lack of knowledge and her gaining of it. The knowledge she gains then reveals the bad consequences of acting on the original desire (2008:33).

The narration in children’s literature will put the children characters in a situation where they act based on their desire that may lead them in a difficult situation, while the characters adults will be set as a the one that will provide the better thing for children, the solution for the problem, that is also known as the knowledge.

All in all, it can be said that in the relation pattern of adults knowledge and children desire is the truth that adults knowledge is the main thing, the source of solution, and the only guide children are required to survive. Nodelman puts the explanation about this in his analysis of the two of six texts, the story of Maria Edgeworth’s The Purple Jar, Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. He depicts the moment when the children characters are put in the situation that determine them to accept the adult knowledge and to end their desire.

Alice’s one moment of certain knowledge about the Wonderland creatures is the assertion that ends her stay in this utopian land: “You’re nothing but a pack of cards!’(109). The certainty of this assertion of the way things really are is the exact equivalent of Rosamond’s mother’s certainty that her daughter’s purple jar is nothing but a perfectly ordinary clear one. The point at which the two children accept the certainty of the assertion—adopt the knowledge commonly accepted by most adults as true—is the point at which their fantasy worlds of desire must and do end (2008:40).

The change will become a part of the characterization of children and adults in the story. As Rosamond’s mother is characterized as an adult who provides a wise and better explanation about the jar that bring problem to her daughter, then Rosamond is characterized as a child who has no option but following her mother’s oppinion. She must end her children desire to follow and accept her mother certainty or adults knowledge.

C.Theoretical Framework

The theories stated in this chapter are used to analyze Little House in the Big Woods. The theory of children’s literature provides an explanation on the special aspects that the children’s literature have. The two theories, the theory of characters and the theory of characterization, give fundamental help in analyzing the character in the story. The theory of adults knowledge and children desire in children’s literature are used to see how the characterization of the characters in the story is constructed in certain way. The review of children’s literature criticism is used to give explanation about the development of children’s literature criticism in which Nodelman’s theory belongs to.

The theory of children’s literature that is used in this thesis is the theory from Rebecca J. Lukens which presents definition and description about the literature for children. The theory of characters and characterization are applied in studying the character in Little House in the Big Woods. The focuses of this study are the character of children and the character of adults in the story. The theory that is used is the theory of characterization by M. J. Murphy. This theory defines characters through the character’s personal description, how character as seen by others, the speech and past life of character, conversation of others, the character’s reaction, the author’s direct comment, also character’s thoughts and mannerism. This theory provides a lot of help in analyzing the characters in the story.

This study uses Nodelman’s theory of children desire and adult knowledge and in children’s literature as the main background of the analysis. A deep review is

done on the theory to examine the ability of this concept to be applied on the work of children’s literature. The writer tried to find how children desire and adults knowledge is seen in Little House in The Big Woods, as the work of children’s literature that is analyzed in this study. The analysis is explained theoretically by using Nodelman’s idea.

36

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY

This chapter consists of three parts. The first part is the object of the study. The second part is the approach of the study. The last part presents the method of the study.

A. Object of the Study

The object of this study is Little House in the Big Woods. This novel was written by Laura Ingalls Wilder and first published by Harpers and Brothers in spring of 1932. The revised edition was published in 1953 and illustrated by Garth Williams. Little House in the Big Woods consists of 238 pages which is divided into thirteen chapters. The book was written in the style of narrative description and was written based on Wilder’s own life experience.

Little House in the Big Woods is the first novel written by Wilder which is also recognized as Little House series. Little House series consists of some books. One of them is Little House on the Prairie whose the successful long-running television show continues to air in reruns (Sickles, 2008:16). The story is about the family’s life when they move to the West as pioneer family. At that time, many families moved to find a new land in the West.

Little House in the Big Woods tells the story about a child named Laura who lives with her family before they become pioneer family in America. The Ingalls family lives

in the big woods in Wisconsin. They are Pa, Ma, Mary, Laura, and the baby Carrie. They produce their own food and supplies such as butter, cheese, and sausage. They also do farming, gardening, hunting, and raising cattle. Laura and her sister, Marry, help Ma and Pa in fulfilling their needs. They help in cooking, making clothes, and also cleaning the house. Their little house becomes a comfortable place in the middle of big woods where they can see wolves, panthers, bears, and long winter. Laura lives safely in the little house; plays a doll together with Mary, listens to Pa’s fiddle and Ma’s knitting before she falls asleep at night. The life strugle of the family at the time such as the high amount of physical work, and the need to be adaptive with the surronding can be said as the main problem of this story. The characters try to solve this problem by showing how they deal with these problems as an individual and also as a family. These characters become the specific object of this study to analyze.

B. Approach of the Study

This study deals with the relation of adults and children that is reflected in the characterization of main characters in Wilder's Little House in the Big Woods. Little House in the Big Woods as the children's literature. This research is aimed to figure out children desire and adults knowledge in Wilder's Little House in the Big Woods. The characters in the story are characterized in some ways. The analysis on the characterization of the characters in the story can probably bring another topic about children desire and adult knowledge in children’s literature.

Little House in the Big Woods as a work of children’s literature is about how children see themselves and their lives. The theory on children desire and adults knowledge in children’s literature by Perry Nodelman is used as the main theory to support the focus of this analysis. The focus of this study is to discuss about a certain concept based on the characterization of children and adult in a literary work.

By using the paradigm of structuralism, a discussion that is based on the two main sides in the novel can be done. The two main ideas are adult and children. Peter Barry in his analysis on Structuralism states, “Concrete detail from the story are seen in the context of a larger structure, and the larger structure is then seen as an overall network of basic ‘dyadic pairs’ which have obvious symbolic, thematic, and archetypal resonance (like the contrast between art and life, male and female, town and country, telling and showing, etc.)” (1995:46). The concept of dyadic pairs brings an understanding about concrete details in a story are which mostly in a form of pair. This specific pair is put in its relation with the wider network of a literary work. The particular structure brings a discussion with the bigger scheme, as Barry says, “This is the typical structuralist process of moving from the particular to the general, placing the individual work within a wider structural context” (1995:46).

According to Guerin, structuralism “identifies structures, systems of relationships … , and show us the ways in which we think” (2005:369). Levi-Strauss, one of the critics in structuralism, offers the concept of binary oppositions. It is a paired opposites or abstractions that are embedded within the text (2005:372).

In this study, the writer examines one of intrinsic aspects in the novel which is characterization. The writer uses the concept of binary opposition that is provided by Nodelman. Perry Nodelman, a children’s literature critic, has conducted a research on children books by using several approaches. One of the used concepts is the concept of binary oppositions, which can be seen in his book, Pleasures of Children’s Literature

(2003). By that concept, Nodelman concludes his analysis that one of the significance ideas in children’s literature is the position and the relation between some opposition points in children’s literature. His analysis was done at several works of children’s literature, and the discussion on the binary oppositions resulted in some pairs such as adult-child, home-away, clothing-nakedness, and wisdom-ignorance.

The binary oppositions bring a further discussion about the subject self identification and the relation. The concept of binary oppositions works in the same way with the dyadic pair. This thought leads us to the discourse in a concept of structuralism especially the idea about the dyadic pair. Nodelman’s analysis has a capacity as the wider network and this analysis contained with the specific pair. The specific pair in this undergraduate thesis is two different groups of characters in the story, and Nodelman’s theory provides the network. In conclusion, structuralism is a suitable approach to be applied in this research.

the knowledge to the children. Adults’ attempt to educate children makes the children become less childlike. The character of adults in the story such as Pa and Ma use to provide their children with information, or teaching that basically comes from the knowledge that they have as adults.

110

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrams, M. H. A Glossary of Literary Terms, Seventh Edition. Massachusetts: Earl McPeek Inc., 1999.

Anggraini, Th. Enny. “Children’s Literature: Is it literature?” In In search of Meaning: A Selected Article on Languange and Literature. ed. Novita Dewi. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press, 2000.

Barry, Peter. The Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. New York: Manchester University Press, 1995.

Bobulová, Ivana, Silvia Pokrivčáková, Eva Preložníková, and Irena Pribylová. Children's and Juvenile Literature (Written in English). Nitre: Vydavatel'stvo Michala Vaska, Presov, 2003.

Bridgwater, William, ed. The Columbia Encyclopedia 2nd Edition. New York: Columbia University Press, 1960.

Fellman, Anita Clair. Little House, Long Shadow: Laura Ingalls Wilder’s Impact on American Culture. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2008.

Guerin, Wilfred L., et all. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature Fifth Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Henkle, Roger B. Reading the Novel: An Introduction to Techniques of Interpreting Fiction. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1977.

Holman, C. Hugh and William Harmon. A Handbook to Literature. New York: Macmillan Publishing House, 1986.

Hunt, Peter. Literature for Children: Contemporary Criticism. London: Routledge, 1992.

______. Introduction: the Expanding World of Children’s Literature Studies. 1999. Understanding Children’s Literature. ed. Peter Hunt. London: Routledge, pp. 1-14. ______. Children’s Literature. 2011. Keywords for Children’s Literature. ed. Philip Nel and Lissa Paul. New York: New York University Press, pp. 42-47.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

Lesnik-Oberstein, Karin. Introduction. Children’s Literature: New Approaches. 2004. Children’s Literature: New Approaches. ed. Karin Lesnik-Oberstein. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1-24.

Lerer, Seth. Children’s Literature: a Reader’s History, from Aesop to Harry Potter. London: The University of Chicago Press, 2008.

Malilang, Chrysogonus Siddha. Are We Innocent: A Post-Structural Critique on Indonesian School of Children’s Literature. Proceedings of the 7th Malayisa Conference on Languages, Literatures, and Culture. 2012.

Meek, Margaret. Introduction: Definitions, Themes, Changes, Attitudes. 2004. International Companion Encyclopedia of Children’s Literature, Second Edition, Vol. 1. ed. Peter Hunt. London: Routledge, pp. 1-12.

Murphy, M. J. Understanding Unseen: An Introduction to English Poetry and the English Novel to Overseas Students. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1972.

Nikolajeva, Maria. Introduction: Approaches to the History f Children’s Literature. 1995. Aspects and Issues in the history of Children’s Literature. ed. Maria Nikolajeva. London: Internatioal Research Society for Children’s Literature, pp. ix-xi.

Nodelman, Perry. “The Other: Orientalism, Colonialism, and Children’s Literature”. Children’s Literature Association Quarterly. Vol.17 No.1 (Spring 1992), pp. 29-35.

________. The Hidden Adult. Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008.

________ and Mavis Reimer. The Pleasures of Children's Literature, Third Edition. Massachusetts: Pearson Education, Inc., 2003.

Papalia, Diane E. Human Development, Ninth Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004

Rose, Jacqueline. The Case of Peter Pan or the Impossibility of Children’s Fiction. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 1984.

Rudd, David. Theorising and Theories: How does Children’s Literature Exist? 1999. Understanding Children’s Literature. ed. Peter Hunt. London: Routledge, pp. 15-29.

112

Sarumpaet, Riris K. Toha. Pedoman Penelitian Sastra Anak: Edisi Revisi. Jakarta: Obor. 2010

Sickles, Amy. Who Wrote That? Laura Ingalls Wilder. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2008

Thacker, D.C., And Jean Webb. Introducing Children’s Literature : From Romanticism to Postmodernism. London: Routledge,2002

VandenBos, Gary R., Ed. American Psychological Association Dictionary of Psychology. Washington DC: 2007)

Wilder, Laura Ingalls. Little House in the Big Woods. New York: Harper Trophy, 1971.

Wilson, Elizabeth Laraway. Books Children Love. Illinois: Good News Publishers. 1987.

Zipes, Jack. “Taking Political Stock: New Theoratical and Critical Approaches to Anglo American Children’s Literature in the 1980s”. The Lion and the Unicorn. Vol 14 No. 1 (June 1990), pp. 7-22.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

xi

Anna Elfira Prabandari Assa. Children Desire and Adults Knowledge in Children’s

Literature as Seen through the Characterization in Wilder’s Little House in the Big

Woods. Yogyakarta: English Letters Study Programme, Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University, 2013.

As a children’s literature, the compilation of books known as Little House

series are written based on memories of the author’s early childhood in the big woods

in Wisconsin, where the author lived with her parents in the late 19th century. Little

House in the Big Woods is the first book of the series andwas published in 1932. The book portrays the life condition at the time through the narration of Laura, the major

character. Little House in the Big Woods depicts the adventures of a simple family with

three children who lived in the big woods.

In this study, the writer analyzed the characterization of children and adults in the novel. Children and adults become the basic categories to see the characters in the analysis. In each of the category, a number of characters can be found. The writer analyzed the idea of children desire and adults knowledge that can be seen in the characterization of those characters. The discussion on those characters is focused on the major characters from each of the category. The main concept about children desire and adults knowledge is based on Nodelman’s theory.

This study applied Structuralism as an approach in the analysis. This approach enables the writer to examine the children’s literature values that are constructed in the characterization of the characters. The method used in this study is library research. The

primary data of the research is the novel itself, Little House in Big Woods. The

secondary data are books and articles from journals that provide theories on characterization and children’s literature criticism.

The analysis on the characterization of the children in the story resulted in some basic characters which they shared together. Children are depicted as small, playful, dependent, kind, curious, innocent, helpful, obedient, and competitive characters. The discussion of the adult characters and their characterization resulted in some points which are independent, big, comforting, ruling, and knowledgeable. The idea of

children desire is shown by the children characters. There are two main points, i.e.

disobedient and children’s lack of knowledge revealed in the children characters. Meanwhile, adult characters show the idea of adults knowledge by their characteristic of knowledge possession, and their attempt of transferring the knowledge to the children.

xii

ABSTRAK

Anna Elfira Prabandari Assa. Children Desire and Adults Knowledge in Children’s Literature as Seen through the Characterization in Wilder’s Little House in the Big Woods. Yogyakarta: Program Studi Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma, 2013.

Sebagai sebuah karya sastra anak, kumpulan buku yang dikenal dengan seri

Little House ditulis berdasarkan ingatan masa kecil pengarang. Buku-buku tersebut bercerita tentang sebuah tempat di Big Woods, Wisconsin, tempat pengarang tinggal

bersama orang tuanya di akhir abad 19. Little House in the Big Woods adalah buku

pertama dari seri tersebut dan diterbitkan pada tahun 1932. Buku ini menggambarkan petualangan sebuah keluarga sederhana yang mempunyai tiga anak dalam hutan yang besar.

Dalam skripsi ini, penulis menganalisa penokohan tokoh anak dan orang dewasa dalam novel tersebut. Anak dan orang dewasa menjadi kategori dasar untuk melihat tokoh dalam analisa ini. Dalam setiap kategori tersebut terdapat sejumlah tokoh. Penulis menganalisa gagasan hasrat anak dan pengetahuan orang dewasa yang dapat dilihat melalui penokohan para tokohnya. Pembahasan difokuskan pada tokoh utama dari masing-masing kategori. Konsep utama tentang pengetahuan dewasa dan hasrat anak didasarkan pada teori Nodelman yang membahas tentang hal itu.

Pendekatan Strukturalis adalah pendekatan yang diterapkan dalam analisa ini. Pendekatan ini memiliki kemampuan untuk mengamati nilai-nilai yang dibangun dalam penokohan dalam karya sastra anak. Metode yang digunakan dalam skripsi ini adalah

penelitian kepustakaan. Data primer dari penelitian ini adalah novel Little House in the

Big Woods. Data sekundernya adalah buku dan data dari jurnal yang menyediakan teori baik tentang teori tokoh dan penokohan dan tentang sastra anak.

Analisa terhadap penokohan anak dalam cerita sampai pada kesimpulan bahwa ada beberapa sifat dasar yang dimiliki tokoh anak dalam cerita. Anak-anak digambarkan sebagai tokoh yang kecil secara fisik, senang bernain, bergantung pada orang lain, baik hati, ingin tahu, naif, suka membantu orang lain, taat, patuh, dan suka bersaing dengan anak yang lain. Pembahasan tentang tokoh orang dewasa dan penokohannya yang menghasilkan beberapa poin yaitu mandiri, ukuran fisik yang besar, sumber kenyamanan, sumber aturan, dan berpengetahuan. Gagasan hasrat anak yang ditunjukkan oleh tokoh anak dibahas dalam dua poin utama yaitu ketidakpatuhan anak dan kurangnya pengetahuan pada anak. Pada bahasan yang lain, tokoh orang dewasa mencerminkan gagasan pengetahuan dewasa melalui karakteristik mereka yaitu kepemilikan atas pengetahuan, dan usaha mereka untuk meneruskan pengetahuan kepada anak-anak.

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI

PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI