My 3 year old named the Wild Things - mom, dad, grandma, and grandpa! I was surprised at her astuteness (she's not preternatural - a normal happy toddler.) But I remembered reading that Sendak had based the illustrations/features on his family members. Toddlers think they want to rule over their families but find that kind of freedom terrifying. WTWTA is not about the adult "id", but toddler attachment - Winnicott's "holding environment" - that's my read.
"can children's literature be for children or for adults only"
"actually, is there such a thing as a child"
"how is the child constructed by the adult via kiddie lit"
so on and so on. I always took the stance "children are real" which is why I never pursued PhD in kiddie lit- despite considering it- most programs take the opposite stance- the child either isn't real or doesn't matter in any case.
My 3 year old named the Wild Things - mom, dad, grandma, and grandpa! I was surprised at her astuteness (she's not preternatural - a normal happy toddler.) But I remembered reading that Sendak had based the illustrations/features on his family members. Toddlers think they want to rule over their families but find that kind of freedom terrifying. WTWTA is not about the adult "id", but toddler attachment - Winnicott's "holding environment" - that's my read.
Thanks for this. I wonder, though, if that Id is layered by accumulations of memory, making it "about" both of these possibilities or forms of desire.
Other questions include -
"can children's literature be for children or for adults only"
"actually, is there such a thing as a child"
"how is the child constructed by the adult via kiddie lit"
so on and so on. I always took the stance "children are real" which is why I never pursued PhD in kiddie lit- despite considering it- most programs take the opposite stance- the child either isn't real or doesn't matter in any case.