Have a Carrot: Oedipal Theory and Symbolism in Margaret Wise Brown’s Runaway Bunny Trilogy

By Claudia Pearson

A valuable resource for parents, librarians, professors and students interested in picture books, combining historical fact from Margaret Wise Brown's life, interdisciplinary perspectives on childrens literature, and detailed analysis of the way the text and illustrations work together to convey multiple layers of meaning.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Look Again Press
• Release date: Aug 11, 2010
• ISBN: 9781452455006

Book preview

Have a Carrot:

Oedipal Theory and Symbolism in

Margaret Wise Brown’s Runaway Bunny Trilogy

Claudia H. Pearson

B.A., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1976

J.D., University of Alabama, 1980

M.A. Children’s Literature, Hollins University 2009

Have a Carrot:

Oedipal Theory and Symbolism in

Margaret Wise Brown’s Runaway Bunny Trilogy

Claudia H. Pearson

Published by Look Again Press, LLC. at Smashwords

ISBN 978-1-4524-5500-6

Copyright 2010 Look Again Press, LLC

www.LookAgainPress.com

All rights reserved.

This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each person. If you are reading this ebook and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am grateful to my thesis director and professor, Lisa Rowe Fraustino for her assistance and guidance in developing this thesis. She pushed me beyond my comfort zone. I am also indebted to J.D. Stahl, my second reader, whose insights were invaluable in completing this paper.

Description: A valuable resource for parents, librarians, professors and students interested in picture books, the combination of historical fact from Margaret Wise Brown's life, interdisciplinary perspectives on children's literature, and detailed analysis of the way the text and illustrations work together to convey multiple layers of meaning offers a useful framework for students preparing papers in the fields of children's literature, psychology, and pop culture, and new insights into the ways picture books communicate with children.

What Others Are Saying About Have A Carrot

Absolutely fascinating. Ran for my copies of the bunny books" and pored over them as I read it. Whether one accepts Freud's version of the world or not, one thing's for sure - no one who reads this book will ever look at Goodnight Moon in the same old way again."

--- Simone Kaplan, Children’s Book Editor.

I am very engaged by the robust inquiring eye Pearson brings to the illustrations ... It is a testimonial to the ongoing significance of these books and a reminder that risk is a huge component of literacy, even or perhaps especially in childhood.

--- Margaret Mackey, Professor at the School of Library and Information Studies, at the University of Alberta.

Extremely well written and intelligently argued ... The pictorial art is analyzed in fascinating detail.

--- J.D. Stahl, Professor, Hollins University

Brilliant on many levels, very well researched!

--- Anne Marie Turner, MFA, Vermont College.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

HAVE A CARROT

The Runaway Bunny

Goodnight Moon

My World

Conclusion

NOTES

WORKS CITED

HAVE A CARROT

OEDIPAL THEORY AND SYMBOLISM IN

MARGARET WISE BROWN’S RUNAWAY BUNNY TRILOGY

The Runaway Bunny and Goodnight Moon have been popular for more than half a century, and although the third text in this trilogy, My World, is not as well known, the three texts are clearly connected. The publisher describes My World as a companion to Goodnight Moon that allows readers to revisit that beloved world of a little bunny and his family, and Brown and Hurd referred to these books privately as their classic series (Marcus 229). But to my knowledge, no one has ever treated them as a trilogy, and no one has ever previously pointed out the pervasive use of Freudian symbolism or the Oedipal structure of these books.

Admittedly, the use of symbolic objects and images in picture books permits application of Freudian theory to such texts and their presence does not necessarily mean the author intended to incorporate Freudian content in the story. Almost any image in a picture book or nursery rhyme can be interpreted as a Freudian symbol. In fact, Freud himself asserted that symbolic relations are not something peculiar to dreamers or to the dream-work through which they come to expression, but have been employed by myths and fairy tales to convey meanings beyond the imaginative stories in which they are found (Lectures 205).

Whether the Freudian content in Brown’s books was intentional or an unconscious incorporation of symbolism as part of the creative process is not really the issue, however. Perhaps it was originally nothing more than the artists at work, allowing their own subconscious to shape their creations, but to suggest that Brown incorporated these elements without being consciously aware of their psychological import and symbolic content ignores Brown’s wit, intelligence and familiarity with both literary symbols and psychological theory, and her reputation as an experimenter with psychology in her picture books for young children.

While some may object to the idea that Brown may have intentionally incorporated sexual references and images in her work,¹ perhaps the most controversial aspect of these books is not the sexual tenor of the texts and images, but rather the way in which they operate to reinforce patriarchal social constructs, gendered parental roles, and misanthropic theories regarding women. Oddly enough, I encountered more resistance to the idea that symbolism of this nature would be incorporated into books for the very young, than surprise at the anti-feminist perspective Brown’s trilogy promotes.

It is in the very nature of picture books to use symbolic imagery. Picture books are designed to convey meaning to an illiterate audience, and picture book creators therefore must consciously select what to depict. They hope to convey meaning that goes beyond mere dictionary definitions of the words and names of the objects and actions depicted. As Ellen Handler Spitz points out, the combination of images and text in picture books helps children spans the gap between these symbolic forms at the very point in a child’s development when such bridges are being constructed; it is the collaborative function offered by word and image together which provides an extraordinary evocation of, and direct pipeline to, the inner fantasy life of children (Picturing 434).

While a child’s lack of experience and familiarity not only with words and other literary and visual symbols but with generic expectations and narrative conventions may limit his understanding of a narrative, it is this lack of preconceived expectations which allows a child to respond to stories in imaginative ways that adults have learned to ignore because they assume they already know what the stories mean or how they are constructed (Stahl, 9 Oct). Children are not bound by learned preconceptions and instead are free to construct personal meaning from their own emotional responses to the sounds of the words and the images on the page.

Forcing the writer and illustrator to use sounds and symbols to communicate abstract thoughts and feelings, while simultaneously concealing the connection between the symbols used and the feelings evoked from the conscious perception of the reader, picture books operate in much the same way as Freud’s dream-work in psychiatric analysis (Lectures 149). While the use of symbolic objects and images in picture books permits application of Freudian theory to such texts, this does not necessarily mean the author intended to incorporate Freudian content in the story. As J.D. Stahl correctly pointed out when he first read my thesis, It is in the very nature of Freudian symbolism that it cannot be effectively contradicted or denied (like the existence of God), though it can be interpreted in many different ways. (7 Oct). 

As Stahl pointed out, almost any image in a picture book or nursery rhyme can be interpreted as a Freudian symbol because Freudian analysis is itself founded on an understanding of the symbolic meanings of images reflected not only in our dreams, but in our stories, folklore, songs, and rhymes In fact, Freud himself asserted that symbols have always been employed by myths and fairy tales to convey meanings beyond the mere imaginative stories in which they are found (Lectures 205).

Certainly I would not be the first to suggest that picture books for young children can convey deep meaning in spite of the target audience’s literary innocence. A quick perusal of Bettelheim’s, Bottigheimer’s, Luethi’s and Zipes’ works on fairy and folk tales also indicates the degree to which psychological symbolism has been relied on to construct meaning from texts which are characterized as children’s literature. Luethi even goes so far as to suggest that the connection between psychology and fantasy literature strengthens us in the belief that we are dealing with a particular form of literature, one which concerns man directly (21-22).

Nor would I be the first to criticize Brown’s work as somehow reflecting negatively on the mother: child relationship. Other literary critics have mentioned that Brown’s bunny stories make them feel uncomfortable. Cynthia Voigt admits that she felt "a kind of chill when I read the mother bunny's promise, ‘I will be the wind