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).