Evolution of the Concept of Childhood: Evidence from Children’s Literature Essay

Zohar Shavits discussion of the development of the construct of childhood takes into consideration the literary works that has been genuine for children. Shavits goal was to explain how the concept of childhood evolved as it is studyn along the lines of childrens literature. This essay will attempt to provide criticism regarding the behavior by which Shavit argued his case. Focus and attention will be towards the development of the argument. Furthermore, each section of Shavits article will be analyzed and critiqued in cost of how it contri scarceed to the strength of the authors argument. Shavit begins his article by discussing the beginnings of the concept of childhood. He depict how up until the seventeenth century, children lived in an adult world and were not considered as distinct from their adult counterparts. (Shavit, 318) In other words, the world had no concept of what a child was. Ein truth aspect of a childs lifespan was that of an adult as well. He cited various reasons for such including the fact that there was a high mortality rate among children and the poor survival of children during the time. Moreover, children did not rightfully enjoy a childhood as it is now defined for early in life, they were made to do things that adults do.Some marry at a very tender age while others are thrust into a working life. (Shavit, 318) Shavit then discussed how in the seventeenth century the unity between the lives of adults and children shifted to polarization. (Shavit, 319) He described how children began to develop their own way of life including the emergence of clothing and educational games. (Shavit, 319) Basically, at this time, a distinction between adults and children began to be established. The concept of childhood developed out of the polarization between the adults and the childs world. Shavit moved on to discussing the emergence of childrens literature specifically to meet the new-fangled educational needs of children as defined by the perceived need to mold children who were seen as delicate creatures. (Shavit, 320) Having established how childrens literature emerged, Shavit then discussed the phylogeny of the one of the most commonly analyzed childrens tales, Little Red Riding cover. He discussed how the story evolved just as the conception of childhood evolved as well. Shavits main argument and the thesis of his article is that the concept of childhood and its evolution through time shapes the literature that has been developed for children. Basically, as the concept of childhood is altered so is the literature for children. Shavits thesis is quite general. His summary lies along the general lines. (Shavit, 317) Furthermore, based on his thesis, one can see that the evolution and floor of both the concept of childhood and of childrens literature are necessary elements of his argument. As such, in order to prove his thesis, Shavit had to lay down the history of the concept of childhood and how childrens li terature emerged from the development of the concept. Shavits argument is well structured. He lay down the installation of his argument by providing historic insights in both the concept of childhood and of childrens literature. From this foundation, Shavit was able to show the relationship between childrens literature and the evolution of children in society. More importantly, this foundation was integral in his discussion of the primary source for readers are able to relate the concept of childhood in the text with the perception of childhood in society at the time the text was published. Shavits article moves on along a time line making it logical and sound. Shavit utilized an analysis of the text, Little Red Riding Hood to demonstrate how the concept of childhood evolved. More importantly, Shavit personad a comparison between two versions of the text to show that a difference in the conception of childhood existed between the two different time periods. Shavit compared Perraul ts version with that of The Brothers Grimm in order to illustrate how the concept of childhood influences the story.He quoted both versions to demonstrate how the two differed in particular parts of the story. For instance, Shavit quoted Perraults and The Brothers Grimms versions to show the difference between the two curiously in the part where the grandmothers love is expressed in the story. (Shavit, 330) Shavit did no divert from either text and ensured that both were properly quoted.Shavits use of the quotations was specifically for the purpose of showing the difference of the two versions in demonstrating family ties in the text. Other than for such purpose, Shavit failed to utilize the primary texts. Shavits arguments could have been strengthened by more use of the primary sources. Although he was able to extensively compare the two texts, he was not able to make readers appreciate the comparison since he insufficiently quoted the two versions.Shavit likewise compared the end ings of the two versions of the story. He noted that the difference in endings led to a change in the meaning and example of the story. (Shavit, 329) The moral of Perraults story was intended for the gentlemen since it emphasized the wolf. On the other hand, the Brothers Grimms version stresses Little Red Riding Hoods learning a lesson. (Shavit, 329) The difference in endings thus provides evidence that the two versions were intended for distinct audiences. Shavits discussion entailed the use of two versions of the Little Red Riding Hood to show how the concept of childhood evolved. However, as mentioned earlier, Shavit failed to utilize the texts adequately. Instead of quoting the texts, Shavit used his own perception and analysis to demonstrate the difference in the two versions. In other words, Shavits arguments lacked sufficient backing from primary sources. In his recount of the history of the concept of childhood, Shavit failed to cite sources for his descriptions. He mainly utilized his own descriptions and collar of history in his explanations. In his discussion of the two concepts of childhood that emerged in society, he failed to cite sources for it.His explanations were logical and easily understood. However, without enough evidence from sources, a fill in of doubt is seemingly cast over the authenticity and validity of his arguments. His arguments may be seen as subjective for he was unavailing to use historical sources. Shavits comparison of Perrault and The Brothers Grimms versions of Little Red Riding Hood were very extensive. He was able to cover several elements of the story including tone and ending. However, he was unable to justify most of his comparisons by quoting the texts. In general, Shavit was able to show how the concept of childhood evolved. He was able to demonstrate how a different concept of childhood emerged in Perraults and The Brothers Grimms versions. More importantly, he was able to show that at the two different times, children were thought of differently. In this light, Shavit was successful in proving his arguments but there is room for improvement. More historical sources will make Shavits arguments stronger and more sound. It will increase the validity of his statements.Works CitedShavit, Zohar. The Concept of Childhood and Childrens Folktales Test Case-Little Red Riding Hood. The Classic Fairy Tales. Ed. Maria Tatar. Norton, 1999. 317-332.