CCBC-Net Archives
Gender and Fish: a Novel
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Donna Barkman <barkman>
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:26:07 -0400
An astonishing portrayal of gender can be found in Fish: A Novel, by L. S. Matthews
(Delacorte, 2004). A child, Scout, along with both parents and a guide, is escaping from an unnamed war-torn country, taking along a mysterious, symbolic fish. Nowhere does Matthews identify the gender of Scout. I've spoken to many readers (and read reviewers) who swear that Scout is male (and has been identified as such in the text
- no!) and a few who swear that Scout is female (identified as such - no!). And only one who recognized that Scout's gender is left up to the perception of the reader. The character is brilliantly and convincingly androgynous (obviously) and puts paid to the idea that femininity and masculinity are social constructs. - and that, as readers, we bring our biases to a text to such an extent that we "read" what isn't there. This portrayal is an amazing achievement, little discussed so far as I know, unlike the heated debates about the undetermined racial identity of
"Lavaughn" in Virginia Euwer Wolff's books.
And while we're still addressing gender (for the last few minutes left), perhaps we can all take a look at picture books with animals, most of whom (whether protagonists or especially as supporting characters) are identified as male. There's been some improvement here in the last few years, but it is still common that unless an animal is actively laying eggs or nursing young, the default gender is male. This assumption of male as universal is limiting to the thinking of both girls and boys and, obviously, from the example of Scout above, to the assumptions of adults. My favorite study along those lines shows that when children are asked to draw "cavemen," most of them draw male figures, but when asked to draw "cave dwellers," they draw women, children, animals, and, yes, men, too. In order for us
(and children) to be able to read an "ungendered" text, and recognize it as that without assigning gender (or knowing that we are indeed assigning it), it is essential that females (animal or human) receive fair representation numerically, as well as unstereotypically - and not be subsumed in the language of the generalized "caveman" "he," "mankind," "guys," etc. that I find used by most teachers in my courses.
An important topic that I hope the CCBC-Net will return to in the future. Thank you!
Donna Barkman barkman at bestweb.net
Received on Sun 31 Jul 2005 09:26:07 AM CDT
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:26:07 -0400
An astonishing portrayal of gender can be found in Fish: A Novel, by L. S. Matthews
(Delacorte, 2004). A child, Scout, along with both parents and a guide, is escaping from an unnamed war-torn country, taking along a mysterious, symbolic fish. Nowhere does Matthews identify the gender of Scout. I've spoken to many readers (and read reviewers) who swear that Scout is male (and has been identified as such in the text
- no!) and a few who swear that Scout is female (identified as such - no!). And only one who recognized that Scout's gender is left up to the perception of the reader. The character is brilliantly and convincingly androgynous (obviously) and puts paid to the idea that femininity and masculinity are social constructs. - and that, as readers, we bring our biases to a text to such an extent that we "read" what isn't there. This portrayal is an amazing achievement, little discussed so far as I know, unlike the heated debates about the undetermined racial identity of
"Lavaughn" in Virginia Euwer Wolff's books.
And while we're still addressing gender (for the last few minutes left), perhaps we can all take a look at picture books with animals, most of whom (whether protagonists or especially as supporting characters) are identified as male. There's been some improvement here in the last few years, but it is still common that unless an animal is actively laying eggs or nursing young, the default gender is male. This assumption of male as universal is limiting to the thinking of both girls and boys and, obviously, from the example of Scout above, to the assumptions of adults. My favorite study along those lines shows that when children are asked to draw "cavemen," most of them draw male figures, but when asked to draw "cave dwellers," they draw women, children, animals, and, yes, men, too. In order for us
(and children) to be able to read an "ungendered" text, and recognize it as that without assigning gender (or knowing that we are indeed assigning it), it is essential that females (animal or human) receive fair representation numerically, as well as unstereotypically - and not be subsumed in the language of the generalized "caveman" "he," "mankind," "guys," etc. that I find used by most teachers in my courses.
An important topic that I hope the CCBC-Net will return to in the future. Thank you!
Donna Barkman barkman at bestweb.net
Received on Sun 31 Jul 2005 09:26:07 AM CDT
