Explain_How_Visual_Representations_of_Children_Are_Informed_by_Particular_Discourses_of_Childhood.

In my essay I will explain how visual representations of children are informed by particular discourses of childhood. In order to support this view I will be focusing on the social constructionist approach to what a child is and how they should be treated. This approach addresses the implications that social and cultural practices have on children and the way in which they are viewed by those around them. One of the most significant points as regards the social constructionist approach is that it encourages individuals to question whether things can be “objectively defined and measured” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.1, p.29). I will split my essay into three main parts. Firstly I will explain what is meant by “discourse”. I will then go on to discuss some of the different discourses of childhood and how these can be found in visual representations across time and place. Finally I will look at the coexistence of competing discourses using the aforementioned discourses as an example. Firstly I will explain what is meant by the term “discourse”. When explaining the social constructionist approach to childhood, one of the items that can be used to held understand it is the concept of a “discourse”. This is the term used to describe a wide range of connected ideas regarding childhood which are linked by “a particular ideology or view of the world” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.47). Through reading the materials for the course it can be seen that discourses are formed using a number of factors including social, historical and political issues within society. As a result of this each discourse is based upon a different understanding of society and works to its own expectations; has its own morals; and its own account of “how the world works” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.47). Although all discourses vary in their view of understanding and dealing with children, it is important to note that they regularly coexist with one another, which leads to contradicting view on how to deal with children, particularly if they are involved in criminal offences. I will now go on the discuss some of the different discourses of childhood that exist throughout society. The first discourse that I am going to discuss is the “Puritan” discourse. This particular discourse suggests that all children are wicked and sinful, and can mainly be seen throughout “European Christian cultures” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p. 62). Through reading the course materials it becomes apparent that this particular discourse has been adopted by Western European society for many centuries as Saint Augustine of Hippo (354-430 CE) held the view that a child “was a creature of will, a sinner even while in the womb” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.62). Although Puritans believe that all children are wicked and sinful, they are also of the opinion that children can be “enlightened through discipline and education” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.62). The Philosopher Thomas Hobbes was one individual who agreed with this way of thinking. He believed that it was “the parents’ responsibility” to ensure that their child did not display any “unruly and anarchistic” traits (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.63). It is said that if a child does not receive appropriate education and discipline they will become uncivilised and resort to savagery. This viewpoint is well depicted in the fictional book “Lord of the Flies”. This is a story about a group of school children who are stranded on an island without adult supervision. As a result of this the children “descend into savagery, losing all the attributes of civilisation”. This is a clear representation of the “Puritan” discourse that children are all wicked and sinful unless they have an adult to discipline them and teach them right from wrong. The second discourse that I am going to look at is the “Romantic” discourse, which believes that all children are innocent. Those who adopt this discourse believe that should a child undertake a wicked act, it is not because they are evil; it is because they are responding to a “mistreatment” or have not understood what they have been doing. This view of children being “innocent and wholesome” is readily depicted in the painting of Victorian artists and book illustrators (Woodhead and Montgomery 2003, Ch.1, p.21). In the majority of these paintings children are painted wearing White and undertaking activities such as playing with animals or flowers, all of which are universal symbols of innocence. It was the view of Philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau that all children were born innocent and should be allowed to develop at their own pace away from the responsibilities faced by adults. He believed that should children be subjected to “civilisation and oppressive adult authority”, they would become corrupted and good would turn into bad (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.66). Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that children should be allowed to be themselves and have access to education in order to allow them to develop and progress through their childhood. The final discourse that I am going to address is the “Tabula Rasa” discourse, which focuses on the fact that children are born neither good or evil, and are actually born as a “blank slate” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.64). This was the view of philosopher John Locke. He believed that children were born with potential and with the “right guidance and the right sort of experience”, could become responsible, rationale and self-controlled (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.64). This view is also represented in the book “Lord of the Flies” through the indication that had the school children had adult supervision and guidance they would not have resorted to “savagery” or had to “commit murder” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.63). Through reading the course materials it becomes clear that this discourse is still in effect today. This can be seen through the comments of Melanie Philips who suggested that when a child commits a violent criminal offence should not be blamed for their actions. She believed that the parents and local communities should be blamed for their “lack of a firm moral code” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.2, p.64). This supports the “Tabula Rasa” discourse through suggesting that children require to be provided with moral guidance and supervision in order to shape their childhood as opposed to them being born either evil or innocent. The final point that I am going to discuss is the coexistence of competing discourses using the aforementioned discourses as an example. The social constructionist approach to childhood allows individuals to form their own ideas of childhood and how children should be dealt with; however, it also allows children to be seen through two discourses rather than just one. The coexistence of competing discourses mainly comes into force when dealing with children who have committed criminal offences such as armed robbery or murder. The discourses that coexist in instances such as the above are “innocent and wholesome” and “wicked and sinful”. If a child commits a crime such as murder or armed robbery it is the view of those who adopt the “innocent and wholesome” discourse that the child did not understand the consequences of the act that they undertook and may have been subjected to maltreatment, therefore, they should be offered an alternative to a punishment, such as therapy. The alternative viewpoint to this is from those who have adopted the “wicked and sinful” discourse. In this case the child who has committed the serious crime should be punished for their actions as they are seen as being “inherently evil and amoral” (Woodhead & Montgomery 2003, Ch.1, p29). In conclusion, it is the view of the writer that visual representations of childhood are informed by the different discourses of childhood. From the information presented above it can be seen that there are three main discourses of childhood, all of which have contradicting views on how a child should be treated. As such when an individual is depicting a child in a painting or a book, they will automatically interpret their discourse of childhood into their work. Although discourses are a statement of how cultures and societies view children, it is also important to note that they are based upon the opinions, beliefs and knowledge of individuals. Therefore, when someone is creating a visual representation of a child, although they are informed by a particular discourse of childhood, they are also using their own opinions and knowledge as to what a child is and how they should be treated. REFERENCES Woodhead, M. and Montgomery, H. (eds) (2003) Understanding Childhood: an interdisciplinary approach, Chichester, John Wiley and Sons Ltd/The Open University.