The Evolution of Fairy Tale Motifs in A Little Princess and Matilda

Öz

Traditional western fairy tales have a significant impact on the perpetuation of patriarchal ideology throughout the ages. This study argues that two selected children's novels revolving around female protagonists, Frances Hodgson Burnett’s The Little Princess (1905) and Roald Dahl’s Matilda (1988), draw on the fairy tale framework. However, it also asserts that they use fairy tale elements in different ways, depending on the socio-cultural changes that have developed over the years. Therefore, the study discusses to what extent these novels continue or subvert the classical fairy tale tradition through the identification of character traits, motifs and plot. For this purpose, a feminist approach, particularly intersectional feminism, is employed to study the novels. The term “intersectionality,” coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) proposes the notion that gender roles, accompanied by many other factors such as race, sexuality and socio-economic status result in the subordination of women. The intersectional feminist approach to the selected novels reveals that character formation, motifs and the use of plot differ in children's novels, breaking the classical western fairy tale tradition because of the alteration in power dynamics in the British society in time, influencing the female protagonists’ social identities within an integrative perspective. In this context, this study intends to contribute to the literature by revealing the changes in approaches to gender issues and the evolution of fairy tale motifs over time through a comparative intersectional feminist reading of Burnett’s The Little Princess and Dahl’s Matilda.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Children’s Novels
• Fairy Tales
• Patriarchal Ideology
• A Little Princess
• Matilda.

Küçük Prenses ve Matilda Romanlarında Peri Masalı Motiflerinin Evrimi

Öz

Geleneksel batı masalları, çağlar boyunca ataerkil ideolojinin devam etmesinde önemli bir etkiye sahiptir. Bu çalışma, kadın başkahramanlar etrafında dönen iki seçilmiş çocuk romanı olan, Frances Hodgson Burnett’in Küçük Prenses (1905) ve Roald Dahl’ın Matilda (1988) adlı eserlerinin, peri masalı çerçevesinden yararlandığını savunmaktadır. Ancak, yıllar içinde gelişen sosyo-kültürel değişikliklere bağlı olarak masal öğelerini farklı şekillerde kullandıklarını da savunmaktadır. Bu nedenle, çalışma bu romanların karakter özellikleri, motifler ve olay örgüsünün belirlenmesi yoluyla klasik masal geleneğini ne ölçüde sürdürdüğünü veya bozduğunu tartışmaktadır. Bu amaçla, romanları incelemek için feminist bir yaklaşım, özellikle kesişimsel feminizm kullanılmıştır. Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) tarafından ortaya atılan “kesişimsellik” terimi; ırk, cinsellik ve sosyoekonomik statü gibi birçok başka faktörlerin beraberinde cinsiyet rollerinin kadınların ikincil konuma itilmesine yol açtığı fikrini ileri sürmektedir. Seçilen romanlara yönelik kesişimsel feminist yaklaşım; karakter oluşumunun, motiflerin ve olay örgüsünün kullanımının çocuk romanlarında farklılaştığını, İngiliz toplumundaki zaman içinde güç dinamiklerindeki değişim nedeniyle klasik batı masal geleneğini bozduğunu ve kadın kahramanların toplumsal kimliklerini bütünleştirici bir bakış açısıyla etkilediğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu bağlamda, bu çalışma, Burnett’in Küçük Prenses ve Dahl’ın Matilda romanlarının karşılaştırmalı bir kesişimsel feminist okuması aracılığıyla toplumsal cinsiyet meselelerine yönelik yaklaşımlardaki değişimleri ve zaman içinde masal motiflerinin evrimini ortaya koyarak literatüre katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çocuk Romanları
• Peri Masalları
• Ataerkil İdeoloji
• Küçük Prenses
• Matilda.

Kaynakça

1. Baker-Sperry, L., Grauerholz, L. (2003). The Pervasiveness and Persistence of the Feminine Beauty Ideal in Children’s Fairy Tales, Gender and Society, 17(5), 711-726.
2. Baysal, K. (2021). Rewriting Herstory through Nature: Dorris Lessing’s The Cleft, Jass Studies-The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 14(86), 171-180.
3. Beauvoir, S. D. (1997). The Second Sex, London: Vintage.
4. Bilge, S. (2013). Intersectionality Undone, Saving Intersectionality from Feminist Intersectionality Studies, Du Bois Review, 10(2), 405-424.
5. Bixler, P. (1984). Frances Hodgson Burnett, Boston: Twayne.
6. Bradford, C. et al. (2008). New World Orders in Contemporary Children’s Literature: Utopian Transformations, New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
7. Brown, J., St. Clair, N. (2002). Declarations of Independence: Empowered Girls in Young Adult Literature, 1990-2001, Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press.
8. Burnett, F. H. (1917). A Little Princess: Being the Whole Story of Sara Crewe Now Told for the First Time, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

9. Carastathis, A. (2014). The Concept of Intersectionality in Feminist Theory, Philosophy Compass, 9(5), 304-314. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12129
10. Çetiner, N. (2021). Dystopias of Reproductive Nightmare: The Ice People and The Children of Men, Söylem Filoloji Dergisi, 6(3), 645-657.
11. Chang, R. S., Culp, J. (2002). After Intersectionality. 71 UMKC L. REV. 485, Seattle University School of Law Digital Commons. https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/faculty/605
12. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Policies, University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1, 139-167.
13. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color, Stanford Law Review.
14. Crenshaw, K. (1993). Beyond Racism and Misogyny: Black Feminism and 2 Live Crew, Mari J. Matsuda, et al. (Eds.), Words That Wound: Critical Race Theory, Assaultive Speech and the First Amendment (111–132), Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
15. Crisp, T., Hiller, B. (2011). “Is This A Boy or A Girl?”: Rethinking Sex-Role Representation in Caldecott Medal-Winning Picturebooks, 1938-2011, Children’s Literature in Education, 42(3), 196-212.
16. Dahl, R. (1988). Matilda, London: Penguin Books.
17. Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as Buzzword: A Sociology of Science Perspective on What Makes a Feminist Theory Successful, Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67-85.
18. Gilbert, S. M., Gubar, S. (1979). The Madwoman in the Attic, New Haven: Yale University Press.
19. Gines, K. T. (2014). Race Women, Race Men and Early Expressions of Proto Intersectionality, 1830s-1930s, N. Goswami et al. (Ed.), in Why Race and Gender Still Matter, An Intersectional Approach (13-26), London: Routledge.
20. Gökçek, A. (2024). Trapped in between Duties and Desires: The Mill on the Floss, A. Lopez, et al. (Eds.), in Comparative Literature-Interdisciplinary Considerations (125-135), London: IntechOpen.
21. Gopaldas, A. (2013). Intersectionality 101, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 32, 90-94. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.12.
22. Gubar, M. (2009). Artful Dodgers: Reconceiving the Golden Age of Children’s Literature, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. Güven, S. (2024). A Comparative Analysis of Intersectional Feminist Identities in Caryl Churchill’s Vinegar Tom and Cloud Nine, Iğdır Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 36, 134-145. Doi: https://doi.org/10.54600/igdirsosbilder.1438539
24. Hamilton, M. C. et al. (2006). Gender Stereotyping and Under-Representation of Female Characters in 200 Popular Children’s Picture Books: A Twenty-First Century Update, Sex Roles, 55(11-12), 757-765.
25. Hollindale, P. (1992). Ideology, P. Hunt (Ed.), in Literature for Children: Contemporary Criticism (18-41), New York and London: Routledge.
26. Kimberley, R. (2011). Children’s Literature: A Very Short Introduction, New York: Oxford University Press.
27. Lieberman, M. K. (1987). Some Day My Prince Will Come: Female Acculturation Through The Fairy Tale, J. Zipes (Ed.), in Don’t Bet on the Prince: Contemporary Feminist Fairy Tales in North America and England (185-200), New York: Routledge.
28. Lindsey, L. L. (2011). Gender Roles: A Sociological Perspective, New York: Prentice Hall.
29. McCabe, J. et al. (2011). Gender in Twentieth-Century Children’s Books: Patterns of Disparity in Titles and Central Characters, Gender & Society, 25(2), 197-226.
30. McKenzie, A., Guittar, S. (2016). Children’s Literature and Gender, N. A. Naples (Ed.), The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Gender and Sexuality Studies, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
31. Mcknight, N. (2015). Dickens and Masculinity: The Necessity of the Nurturing Male, P. Mallett (Ed.), The Victorian Novel and Masculinity (51-66), London: Macmillan.
32. Monagan, S. L. (2010). Patriarchy: Perpetuating the Practice of Female Genital Mutilation, Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences, 2(1), 160-181.
33. Reimer, M. (2008). Making Princess, Re-making A Little Princess, R. McGillis (Ed.), in Voices of the Other: Children’s Literature and the Postcolonial Context (111-135), New York and London: Routledge.
34. Resler, J. E. (2007). Sarah’s Transformation: A Textual Analysis of Frances Hodgson Burnett’s Sara Crewe and A Little Princess, M.A. Thesis, Indiana University.
35. Rich, A. (1986). Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution, New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
36. Silindir, G. (2011). Challenging the Status Quo of Women in the Early Twentieth Century in the Works of Diana of Dobson’s and Trifles, Kilis 7 Aralık Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 75-81.
37. Steinmetz, K. (2020). “She Coined the Term ‘Intersectionality’ Over 30 Years Ago. Here’s What It Means to Her Today”. https://time.com/5786710/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality/
38. Thompson, A. (Director & Editor). (2016). The Marvellous World of Roald Dahl [BBC Documentary]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTnn5RLxEQo (Accessed: 20.06. 2024).
39. Trites, R. S. (1997). Waking Sleeping Beauty, Iowa City: Iowa Press.
40. Tyson, L. (2006). Critical Theory Today, USA: Routledge.
41. Uttley, C. M., Roberts, C. A. (2011). Gender Portrayal in Early Childhood Children’s Books, T. Jacobson (Ed.), in Perspectives on Gender in Early Childhood (111-127), St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
42. Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Intersectionality and Feminist Politics, European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13, 193-210.
43. Zipes, J. (1993). Introduction, J. Zipes (Ed.), in Don’t Bet on the Prince: Contemporary Feminist Fairy Tales in North America and England, New York: Scholar Press.
44. Zipes, J. et al. (2005). The Norton Anthology of Children’s Literature: The Traditions in English, New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company.