Literary
works have not only used as a medium of entertainment, but can also be used as
a medium to convey ideologies or doctrines which are often implicitly inserted
into the story she told so unconsciously, the reader will gradually follow the
doctrine/understanding/ideas that are embedded in it. This is where the
criticism is needed.
According
to Frye, “One obvious function of
criticism is to mediate between the artist and his public” (in The Function Of
Criticism At The Present Time, p. 34) the unique thing is, delivered a
critique of a work or a policy, tradition, politics, etc. can be done via any
medium through including novels such as 'Five Children And It' by Edith Nesbit.
With magical being named
Psammead, sand-fairy that can grant any wishes that is spoken by people who
find it though each of those wishes can only be granted until sunset. And there
are also figures of five children humans who find Psammead near their house.
Based
on the brief description above, the novel Five Children And It is a fantasy
genre novel (Magical Realism)
“Fantasy is a fiction evoking wonder and containing a substantial and
irreducible element of the supernatural with which mortal characters in the
story or the readers become at least partially familiar terms.” (Manlove, 1975,
p. 1 in Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the
Fiction, p. 100)
because there are magically being and human beings whom interacts
with each other in the story. In addition, from its setting, this novel can
also be put into the category of 'low fantasy'
“In low fantasy, non-rational happenings occur in the rational world.”
(in Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the
Fiction, p. 102)
In addition, any of the content
of the story of this novel can be classified into fantasy for children that
their wishes, which are always granted by the Psammead always brought problems
that make children learned a valuable lesson. It is similar to Gamble and
Yeats:
“A fantasy story in which magic is used to educate the children to
think more carefully about what they wish for as wishes may well come true.”
(in Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the
Fiction, p. 102)
Interestingly, Edith Nesbit
interpreted evidence that the lesson or wisdom can only be obtained if we try
not to be tied to the concept of good and bad which is taught through a variety
of advice which used to stick to "they said...". If understanding in
each chapter of this novel is matched with a concept that is already known to
us on a daily basis, it seems to be quite difficult because here Nesbit precisely
conveys her message by inverting understanding / existing doctrine.
This method is similar to the
theory of deconstruction that is being stated in Miller's:
“Derrida, […] argues that we lead to think and express our thoughts in
terms of opposites. […] these dichotomies, […] contain one term that our
culture views as being superior and one term viewed as negative as inferior.
Sometimes the superior or positive term seems only subtly positive […], whereas
sometimes we know immediately which term is culturally preferable […]. But
always the hierarchy exists.” (in Deconstruction, p. 200)
Among childhood, the
understanding of good and bad or right and wrong come through imitate the
adults or the advice they get from their parents. Even so, they (the children)
just follow all doctrines, unconsciously, they are not becoming obedient because
they want to be obedient but because they have to obey.
An understanding of good / bad
and right / wrong that children primarily obtained from adults and the
environment is their “comfort zone” because they know it is inherited from
generation to generation so that it can assume that if it all obeyed, then
their lives will be safe and peaceful Giddens refers to this as
"ontological security" which is
“… a basic needs of individuals for a state of continuity and order in
events, including those not directly within the perceptual environment of the
individual. (in “State Personhood in
Ontological Security Theories of International Relations and Chinese
Nationalism: A Sceptical View”, p.
243 in Chinese Journal of International Politics Vol.2, p. 111)
In Five Children And It, the
children are always faced with problems which aims to give them a real
experience of the dichotomy of 'good-bad' as they bear the risk for any request
that they ask on the only magical being character in this novel.
Psammead, magical figure being
presented as the main axis of the story in this novel is a sand-fairy in charge
of granting any request made by children (Robert, Anthea, Cyril, Jane, Lamb)
who discovered it while their requests are often unreasonable and impossible to
be realized within a short time by humans.
This figure seems to be the
originator of the ontological security threatening causes for children because
if this figure does not appear, then the kids will continue to follow the
mindset of the 'good-bad' based on what they've heard from parents and the
environment only. In short, they will be taking the ideas about good and bad
for grantedness because they do not give it a try first. The understanding
obtained in such a way that finally makes children misjudge their own
environment.
Through Psammead, children
earlier (excluding Lamb) alternately, asking for their wishes ranging from the
reasonable wishes like wealth to unreasonable as having wings and growing up in
a single day. Some of the chapters in this novel, even imply a somewhat
political message and it seems a bit strange if delivered to children, such as a
gendered issue to determine the power and powerlessness.
Since the days of the Prophet
have been described and emphasized many times regarding the position between
men and women were women always were below men. This doctrine eventually
evolved in societies, passed on orally, and unwittingly, either adults or kids
end up feeling comfortable with the existing gendered patterns and living
trapped inside.
Nesbit interpreted the evidence
in trying to criticize these things in different ways. Not with had called for
feminist action, as what was done in Mohanty’s essay which eagerly declared
that women should not stay silent
“But first she would have to speak, start speaking, stop saying that
she has nothing to say! Stop learning in school that women are created to
listen, to believe, to make no discoveries.” (in Under Western Eyes: Feminist
Scholarship and Colonial Discourses, p.50)
He even criticized by insinuating men who supposedly have
greater power to slowly follow the flow.
Although there are some parts
that look underestimate / degrading to women as when the narrator says Anthea
aspires to be 'a good servant' (p. 28); When the narrator says "You can
always make girls believe things much easier than you can boys." (p. 30)
as saying that women are easier to believe something, more innocent, and easier
to and more easily manipulated than men; and decisions taken by Anthea on the
appointment of Robert as spokesman when they want to buy a horse (p. 56).
But it's all just for the
satirical notion that men have higher degrees/power than female if viewed the
fact that Anthea, who find the Psammead and she is also the first finally
decided on their 'contract' with Psammead. Women here act as a portal for all
magic that happens, men do not contribute anything, they just pretend to have a
role.
In addition, gender issues also
arise when there is time they are dealing with a problem or confusion, one of
them there are just referring to their father's advice by saying 'father say
...'. Although the children in this story experienced magical events, their
parents were both absent, but the kids were just remembering what was said of
her father, her mother is not at all involved.
Highly appears that the role of
fathers has successfully shifted the role of the mother supposed to be the
closest to the children But again, this is a satire that says “where is your
father when the entire of his family need him?” When the mother came home, discovered
the diamonds in her room, feeling the peculiarity that occurred while she was
not at home, and then because she feel unsafe situations, nimbly without
commanded by anyone she immediately secured her children at home and went to
the police station without her husband (the last chapter).
In the Portals of Power explained
that "the Nesbit's children's
stories usually contain at least an underlying political concern." (in
Portals of Power: Magical Agency and Transformation in Literary Fantasy, p. 71).
This also applies to the novel Five Children And It when the four children were
discussing servant’s habit after seeing Martha, the servant, would bring Lamb
to meet her relatives.
“Servants never dream anything but the things in the Dream-book like
snakes and oysters and going to a wedding-that means a funeral, and snakes are
a false female friend, and oysters are babies.” –Anthea (p. 41)
“Servants do like taking babies to see their relations, […]; I’ve
noticed it before-especially in their best things.” –Cyril (p. 42)
“Inspect they pretend they’re their own babies, and that they’re not
servants at all, but married to noble dukes of high degree, and they say the
babies are the little dukes and duchesses. –Jane (p. 42)
“She won’t enjoy herself most frightfully carrying our infant duke to
Rochester, […] not if she’s anything like me-She won’t” –Robert (p. 42)
Thoughts which they say is the comments/responses are
commonly made by adults to the servant who likes to invite children to their
employers when they meet up with family or relatives.
The way children perceive about
the servant seem to be opinions which stated dishonestly by themselves, they
just re-stating what have been taught among their surrounding environment, as
expressed by Manlove:
“We have to emphasize that hegemony is not singular; indeed that its
own internal structures are highly complex, and have continually to be renewed,
recreated and defended; and by the same token, that they can be continually
challenged and in certain respect modified.” (in Base And Superstructure In
Marxist Cultural Theory, p. 458)
Which is applied when the children were arrested on charges
of committing theft because they brings a lot of gold pieces from Psammead,
they met Martha, their servant, who ultimately defend the children so they do
not arrest by the police.
“If you’re quite done
a-browbeating of the innocent children, […] I’ll hire a private carriage and
we’ll drive home to their papa’s mansion. You’ll hear about this again young
man - I told you they hadn’t got any gold, when you were pretending to see it
in their poor helpless hands. It’s early in the day for a constable on duty not
to be able to trust his own eyes. As to the other one, the less said the
better; he keeps the Saracen’s Head, and he knows best what his liquor’s like.”
(p. 61)
This makes the assumption about the servant that they get
from the adults and their environment proved to be wrong. In fact, the maid is
not as bad as the description given by adults and/or their environment.
Issues
regarding the stereotype that "inherited" from generation to
generation as it happens to the class differences were also occurring amid race
issue as it happened when Robert unintentionally ask for the third wish:
“Anybody would want him, indeed! Only they don’t; Martha doesn’t, not
really, or she’d jolly well keep him with her. He’s a little nuisance, that’s
what he is. It’s too bad. I only wish everybody did want him with all their
hearts; we might get some peace in our lives.” (p. 71)
At the location where the Psammead usually appears as Martha
as let Lamb while they themselves do not want to bring him wherever they go.
Until this request dragging them into a big problem; Lamb was kidnapped by Lady
Chittenden and ended up with four brothers struggle to escape from the Gipsy
and bring him back home.
But
that appears here is precisely the Gipsy then constituted as the majority
(master) and children (white) became minority (slave) which experienced
pressure from the Gipsy as they would accuse of acting rude towards their
group.
“Oh Yes! […] and then fetch the police with a pack of lies about it
being your baby instead of ours! D’jever catch a weasel asleep?” (p. 82)
Even after sunset even the kids were still ignored by the
Gipsy; treated as if their presence is not at all expected. Only Amelia, who
still care about them even after the Psammead’s magic is gone, he still shows
his attention to them
“Let me give him a kiss, miss– I don’t know what made us go for to
behave so silly. Us gipsies don’t steal babies whatever they may tell you when
you’re naughty. We’ve enough of our own, mostly. But I’ve lost all mine.” (p.
87)
And the gap between them seems to disappear after Lamb
kissed Amelia (Gipsy woman) with dry lips, not wet as that of babies in
general.
Nesbit
ways that reverse the situation between whites and colored it as if to affirm
that racial difference is not important anymore. As in the following quote:
“In a society like ours, where most people take their race to be a
significant aspect of their identity, it comes as a shock to many to learn that
there is a fairly widespread concensus in the sciences of biology and
anthropology that the word “race”, at least as it used in most unscientific
discussions, refers to nothing that sciences should recognize as real.” (in
Race, p. 277)
Things
threaten ontological security of these children also appeared in Five Children
And It on page 90 that begins with their desire to write a letter to his
mother, but eventually the plan is arguably failed because of things that sounds
very silly. The four of them write letters but there is not one single letter
that is managed well written.
A
letter written by Anthea exposed to spills ink and there’s no time to re-write
or to fix it; Robert did not even know what to write, he finally just had to
draw a ship in the paper; Cyril was already finished writing the letter, but
somehow, the letter is lost when he was trying to trap slugs; Jane is the only
one who almost succeeded but failed also because she takes a long time to think
about the proper spelling for "Psammead" so it is not clear what she
really wanted to said through the letter.
Although
these ideas don't come as one of their wishes to Psammead, but their
ontological security would be threatened / annoyed by the absence of their
letter which managed to convey their feelings and stories about the Psammead.
The failure of these letters, implicitly states that children should not be
voicing their arguments/opinions/problems/stories/guts to outsiders, as if they
were silenced. Prohibited from written language, whereas orally, they know want
they wanted to say.
Instead
of they are not able to write, they could have written all their guts, but it seems
to be used to criticize the written culture and literate people, Nesbit switches
the things around so that readers are aware that written language/literate
culture is not everything because there's still an oral language as the former
of written language.
According to the cases which I
read in the Five Children And It (some I've mentioned and explain a little bit
above), almost all requests on Psammead children will end up with a severe,
mild, big and/or small problem. In addition, the Psammead’s position could
relate gratitude as a trigger for an explosion that could cause problems,
orality is also very involved to ontological security threat to children
because all of their requests to Psammead only be granted if it was stated by
using oral language.
Five
Children And It by Edith Nesbit was published in 1902 when the Victorian era had
just ended and entered the Edwardian era (1901). Through this novel, Nesbit
criticized the Edwardian era by creating a story that is contrary to the
traditions/practices/policies/norms/regulations on Edwardian era as evident gap
between the children of working-class group with a group of upper-class from
what they can and cannot read, the game should and should not be done by girls
and boys, regularity/subservience to older people, manners, until the location
which usually used for upper class’ residences during the Edwardian era.
Through orality that can grant
children, Psammead actually petrify children to be a robot, an automaton,
without personal autonomy of action, an it without subjectivity as follows:
“The ‘magical’ act whereby one may attempt to turn someone else into
stone, by ‘petrifying’ him; and, by extension, the act whereby one negates the other person’s autonomy, ignores
his feelings, regards him as a thing, kills the life in him.” (in The Divided
Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness, p. 46)
This is what is actually done by the Psammead. No matter
what is being experienced by the children, they must make a wish every day.
Initially this may be an opportunity that seems very nice, but after a long
time, it makes the children become like a cyborg who routinely did that not
because they really wanted to, but because it must be forced to.
References:
Appiah, K.A. (1990). “RACE” in Critical
Terms for Literary Study,. ed. Lentricchia, Frank and McLaughlin, Thomas. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Arnold, Matthew. (2004).“The Function of Criticism in Our
Present Time” in Critical Theory Since Plato, Wordsworth
Campbell, Lori M. (2010). Portals of Power: Magical Agency and Transformation in Literary Fantasy.
North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers.
Gamble, N. and Sally , Y. (2002). Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the
Fiction. London: Paul Chapman
Publishing.
Krolikowski, A. (2008). “State Personhood in Ontological
Security Theories of International Relations and Chinese Nationalism: A
Sceptical View” in Chinese Journal of
International Politics, Vol. 2, (pg. 109–133) downloaded from: http://cjip.oxfordjournals.org/
Laing, R. D. (1964). The
Divided Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness. London: Penguin
Books.
Miller, J. Hillis.1989. “A Deconstructive Critic at Work” in
Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness: A Case Study in Contemporary
Criticism ed. Murfin, Ross C. (1989). New York: St. Martin’s
Press
Mohanty, Chandra .T. Under
Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses. downloaded
from: jemym.no-ip.com/uwe.pdf
Nesbit, E. (1993). Five
Children and It. Wordsworth Classics
Thompson, P. (1922). THE
EDWARDIANS: The remaking of British society (2nd edition).
London: Routledge.
Williams, Raymond.(1994). “Base and Superstructure” in Contemporary Literary Criticism ed.
Con Davis, Robert and Schleifer, Ronald. New York and London: Longman Publishing
Group.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar