First of all I thought Amy Poehler's show is adorable. Next, in her blog prompt, Amanda asks several questions, such as, "How have our depictions of girls changed? Stayed the same? Would have things been different if Gerty could have appeared on Amy Pholer's TV show? What would Gerty have said?" I have several answers. The girl, Anna in the video does yoga, so she likes to talk about balance, physically and emotionally. I think this is a little different from previous times, in that, adults tend to instruct little Gerty not to show her anger. When told by Emily Graham not to hate people, Gerty replies, "Why shouldn't I?... It's not wrong; I say it isn't!...and I do hate 'em; and I hate Nan Grant, and I always shall" (Cummins 148). Although Gerty says angrily that she will always hate certain people, she probably will not because she is just expressing her anger towards others who have wrongfully hurt her. In my opinion Gerty is right. Repressed anger causes depression; it is the exact definition of depression (anger turned inward). It does not show emotional balance to be happy and smiley all the time and never show a frown out of anger. However it does show balance to show one's anger when it comes or else one would eventually explode (figuratively). It is the same in Wide, Wide World. After being treated like a doormat in the shoppe where Ellen goes to buy her mother some merinos, "Ellen stood a moment stock still, just where he had left her, struggling with her feelings of mortification; she could not endure to let them be seen. Her face was on fire; her head was dizzy....she could not command back one or two rebel tears that forced their way" (Warner 61). Clearly Ellen is struggling to keep her tears of rage from coming out or from being seen by anyone. Warner describes Ellen's physical state when she is angry very well. Ellen is very angry because an adult, someone she respects thoroughly, has just walked all over her. However she still thinks it is wrong to stand up for herself even if it means showing her anger. It is very unbalanced to repress one's emotions as much as Ellen does. It was a common standard that little girls were always to be pleasant and never angry. Today we teach children to talk their feelings out and express them probably because of all the present psychological studies conducted on repressed anger. If Gerty could have been on Amy Poehler's today, she may have been seen as a leader due to the pure honesty she exhibits when she speaks of her anger. She would have told about the time a troop of ugly, heartless girls called her very father figure "Old Smutty". She "was furious. Her eyes glistened, she doubled her liffle fist, and without hesitation came down in battle upon the crowd" (146). Although I have to say it is wrong to fight when one is angry, inside I am actually applauding Gerty for standing up for her heart-- for the one person who has ever loved her. Still, it ended badly for Gerty and she ran away, so I would think she would have been better off not punching as many of them as she could before they overpowered her and tried to anihilate her.

Harriet Beecher Stowe

There are three very important theories that govern childhood literature: children are very loving creatures with a great capacity for joy, children are very susceptible, delicate creatures, and children's literature should be made to teach moral behavior. However, Harriet Beecher Stowe presents a very different form of children's literature which contradicts these common beliefs about children and childhood literature.

One assumption made about children and childhood is that that children have a great capacity for love and joy. The text contradicts this by portraying a very heartless race of people who do not even know what love is because they simply do not have heart. Slave trader, Haley is the perfect example of this. When a slave man is stripped of his wife, Haley says, "He'll get another thar. Lord thar's women enough everywhar" (Stowe 170). Although Haley probably does not have a wife because he is not capable of being human and loving human beings, he cannot seem to put himself in other people's shoes, such as black people. If he were to lose his wife completely as this particular slave has, he would be ruined.

Next children are seen as very receptive, delicate creatures who are like "blank slates" that can easliy be influenced. This is far from the truth in Stowe's literature because she addresses one of the harshest, heartless topics in human history: slavery. Slavery in Uncle Tom's Cabin is portrayed as such. In slavery human beings simply are not treated like living creatures. Therefore children who read Uncle Tom's Cabin would be horribly affected by such a story so much so that their poor little innocent eyes would be opened to the worst evils of this world. This would scar them badly. In the passage, slaves are treated like even less than a dog, but a mule or other animal used for labor who is whipped (which should not be done anyway). Haley treats slaves "like cattle" (173). Haley "brands one boy in his right hand" (179). Again treating other human beings as if they were not at all human beings.

Thirdly, children's literature was written to teach morality, which strongly contrasts with Stowe's morals in UTC. As Amanda stated in class, Stowe believes in slavery, which puts one human being below another in terms of equality. In slavery, human beings are not treated equally. Stowe constantly refers to black people as "creatures" which has the connotation of them being animals and not people. A heroine in the story says slaves are "poor creatures". Stowe sympathizes with slaves and believes they should be treated nicely, however she still believes that it is o.k. for one human being to own another one, which is a very bad moral to teach to a child, let alone anybody.

The role of parents in The Wide, Wide World has three functions: to enforce rules and to please, and protect their child. The Captain tells Mrs. Montgomery not to wake Ellen up because it would be bad for Mrs. Montgomery's health. The Captain tells her, "It would not do at all...it would not do at all; I cannot allow it" (72). Captain Montgomery is indirectly enforcing rules upon Ellen by telling Mrs. Montgomery not to wake Ellen up and grieve her leaving. He robs Ellen of getting to have a long goodbye with her mother. Next, the old man whose name we never know, plays a parental role in The Wide, Wide World to Ellen. He is very protective of her when he stands up for her in the shop and Ellen is shopping for merinos for her mother. This may have been highlighted because Ellen is losing her parent, so she will no longer have someone to protect her once her mother is dead and gone. Ellen even relates him to a father, "If you are a father, sir, you know better than I can tell you how grateful I am for your kind interference" (64). He has interfered with a shop worker who was treating Ellen like a child and treating her disrespectully. The nice man says, "I am an old man, and not good for much now, except to pleas young people" (64). Also, the author tells us about Mrs. Montgomery's efforts to please Ellen, "While Ellen was picking out her seal, which took not a little time, Mrs. Montgomery laid in a good supply of wafers of all sorts; and then went on further to furnish the desk with an ivory leaf-cutter, a paper-folder, a pounce-box, a ruler, and rubber, and sheets of drawing paper. She took a sad pleasure in adding everything she could think of that might be for Ellen's future use or advantage" (48). Clearly, Mrs. Montgomery is showering Ellen with gifts in order to please her and even to have Ellen remember her when she is gone. Once again the author may be conveying this desir e to please the child in order to emphasize that once the mother is gone Ellen will no longer have someone to nurture and please her.

In addition, the text helps us differentiate between the roles of father and mother by strongly contrasting the way they treat their child, Ellen. Earlier in the text the author states of Ellen's father, "Captain Montgomery was away, which was the case most of the time" (36). Ellen's father's treatment of his daughter borders on neglect since he is never there for her. The author is suggesting that the father is simply there to provide financially for his family and nothing else. In contrast, Mrs. Montgomery is with Ellen as much as possible, she nurtures Ellen to the fullest degree and finally, Mrs. Montgomery actually wants to be with Ellen as much as possible and this is why she buys all the items for Ellen from the shop. Because her mother is to be with Ellen allt he time, Mrs. Montgomery asks Ellen to "write every day, and all manner of things that concern you--just as particularly is if you were speaking to me" (35)
Ellen has no choice but to expect nothing from her father and everything from her mother because that is exactly how it is. Conveying how it is, the author tells us about Mr. and Mrs. Montgomery's argument over when to wake Ellen up and have her say her good byes. Mrs. Montgomery states, " 'It is time to wake Ellen!' but she had to repeat her efforts two or three times befor she succeeded in making herself heard... 'What is the matter?' said he, heavily, and not over well pleased at the interruption...'It is time to wake Ellen'....'No it isn't.' said he, relapsing; 'it isn't time yet this great while'...'Oh yes it is,' said Mrs. Montgomery" (73). Mrs. Montgomery has to fight just to get her husband to care about Ellen's feelings. Ellen needs proper time to say goodbye but he does not care whether she gets it or not.

Five theories on children and their literature

There are five main theories for analyzing children and childhood literature. First children are a figure "requiring and expressing the family's idealized capacity for love and joy" (Sanchez-Eppler xviii). Children have a great capacity for love and joy, especially in the family. Sanchez-Eppler who wrote introduction to Dependent States: The Child's Part in Nineteenth-Century American Culture, also says that children are a "'blank slate upon which parental authority must write" (xviii) so the second theory regarding children and children's literature is that children are seen as very receptive, delicate creatures. This is why so much literature for children was written to teach morality and obedience. MacLeod, who wrote "Children's Literature for a New Nation", states of childhood literature that, "The focus of the stories was extremely narrow. They were written to teach, and specifically to teach morality" (89). MacLeod also says that "Childhood was wholly preparation, entirely a moral training ground for adult life" (94). Thirdly, children's literature was very optimistic. MacLeod wrote that in childhood literature, "Optimism and a buoyant sense of national pride prevailed... the rhetoric of the period generally celebrated the progress, the prosperity, the democratic spirit, and the opportunity offered by American society" (88). Next moral behavior was considered to be very important. MacLeod states, "Obedience was the most fundamental virtue for a child to acquire: few stories close without at least one salute to its importance" (94). MacLeod also says, "Besides obedience, always the signal virtue, self-control, usefulness, charity, and a willingness to put others above one's own were the character triats most consistently recommended in the literature" (95). Another moral behavior that was applauded was selflessness. MacLeod says, "Selfishness was the greatest and most encompassing failing" (95) in childhood literature. Finally, "Age is inherently transitional" (Sanchez-Eppler xxv). Sanchez-Eppler states, "It is this very changeability that makes age such a useful addition to the terms of social understanding" (xxv).