The CBB :: View topic - Jo, the Robin, and 'little Eva'

through

[^/[^Print]\]

The CBB -> Formal Discussions

#1: Jo, the Robin, and 'little Eva' Author: Squirrel, Location: St-Andrews or Dunfermline

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:01 pm
—
One thing crossed my mind last night. In one of the earlier books Jo referred to 'that disgusting little Eva" (or something like that!) when talking about Uncle Tom's Cabin. Later on when I read it, it struck me that if she was put in another place, the young Robin could be another Eva.

So - Is Jo's dislike of Eva Jo-like, and how similar is the character of the young Robin to that of Eva?

My overview of what Jo disliked about Eva is:

Jo felt that she was a 'good' little girl, one who never got up to mischief. It was clear that she loved her father, and wanted to be kind to everyone - even the 'bad' girl slave Topsy. She then became ill and died, and everyone missed her. Though this might be a rather simplistic description.

#2: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:14 pm
—
I always took it as Jo disliking Eva for being too goody-goody.

Obviously Uncle Tom's Cabin is "special" because of Abolitionism, but in a lot of ways it's of the same sort of genre as Queechy, Wide Wide World, the Elsie books, etc, because of the moralistic/religious tone of it all. Throughout the series there are references to people - Jo, Madge, Len - not being over-keen on those sorts of books - so I'm not really surprised that Jo doesn't like Eva.

It's quite weird that EBD doesn't seem keen on that sort of literature given that she obviously is keen on Little Women which to some extent is also of that genre. Although I love Little Women but I find Uncle Tom's Cabin very hard going because of the way it's written.

Robin as a small child is very "good", but we're told numerous times that she's been "trained to instant obedience" (makes the poor kid sound like Barbara Woodhouse has been on to her!), rather than it being made to seem that she's just naturally saintly ... if that makes sense. Then there are a few occasions on which she's naughty - throwing water out of the window, and IIRC something to do with chalk. She's certainly not as saintly as Eva - or Beth March.

I suppose it's the difference between being good and being goody-goody/pi. Young Robin is a bit too angelic, but she doesn't really stay like that.

Hope that makes sense!

#3: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:36 pm
—
I have often wondered just how that training was done! It sounds very harsh to me.

#4: Author: Liss, Location: Richmond

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:17 pm
—
I think deep, sorrowful disappointment if she disobeyed, rather than anything else. Given how ill her mother was, it probably had a far greater effect on her than it would on another child. We can see later on the impact this sort of thing has on her - she's always so desperately sorry if she makes someone cross.

#5: Author: Lesley, Location: Allhallows, Kent

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:23 pm
—
So a massive guilt trip then? And it was continued by Madge because whenever Joey got into trouble for something then Robin would feel terrible.

#6: Author: KB, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:28 pm
—

Pat wrote:

I have often wondered just how that training was done! It sounds very harsh to me.

But don't forget that, in EBD's eyes at least, all European children are brought up that way. The only difference between Robin and, say Maria Marani, is that the Robin never received the sorts of restrictive and possibly tough punishments (at least I'm sure modern children would think of them as tough) that other, stronger European children would experience.

#7: Author: Tiffany, Location: Is this a duck I see behind me?

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:46 am
—

KB wrote:

But don't forget that, in EBD's eyes at least, all European children are brought up that way.

Is there any historical truth in that? Were child-raising methods very different in different countries?

#8: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 8:20 am
—
I sincerely doubt it. I think this 'instant obedience' thing is wish-fulfilment on EBD's part, how she thinks children ought ot be brought up, not as they are. Though what she would get out of a school series full of little robots, I can't imagine. Just think, how many pages are spent on naughty middles who are anything but instantly obedient.

If they all obeyed on the instant, there wouldn't be any books.

#9: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:32 am
—
I think in the Tyrol books it's one of the ways in which EBD shows the differences between Joey and Grizel, neither of whom are instantly obedient, and the Austrian girls. It's only later, with the Maynards, that it becomes the epitome of good parenting. And even the Maynards aren't all obedient all the time.

I'd like to know how she thought a normal small child could be 'trained to instant obedience'. Most children aren't 'wilfully disobedient'; they just have short attention spans, are naturally curious and easily distracted, get excited, and forget that they're not supposed to do something.

#10: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 12:38 pm
—
In my opinion, if you have a perfectly good, well-behaved, obedient two year old, you have a major problem waiting to happen. What some mothers called naughtiness was exploring the child's world.

#11: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:01 pm
—

Jennie wrote:

What some mothers called naughtiness was exploring the child's world.

Mike Maynard being a prime example.

#12: Author: Han, Location: Wondering what to do with herself

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:05 am
—
The thing that I still don't understand about Robin is that she remains remarkably unspoilt. So much emphasis is placed on the fact that she is constantly petted and completely unaccustomed to anyone speaking to her with anything other than kindness. Is instant obedience enough to ensure that she never feels any negative effects from it?

#13: Author: LizB, Location: Oxon, England

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:23 am
—
Perhaps she was initially intended to be an angelic-child-who-dies-young character, but then EBD found she couldn't kill her off.

#14: Author: Fiona Mc, Location: Bendigo, Australia

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 10:08 am
—

Han wrote:

The thing that I still don't understand about Robin is that she remains remarkably unspoilt. So much emphasis is placed on the fact that she is constantly petted and completely unaccustomed to anyone speaking to her with anything other than kindness. Is instant obedience enough to ensure that she never feels any negative effects from it?

May be Robin was good so she wouldn't be left again. First her Mother dies and then her Father turns her over to total strangers and goes to Russia and doesn't return for a few years. I wonder how much of her being good was due to sub conciously thinking, maybe my parents left because I was bad and if I'm bad with these people will they'll leave me too. Probably too much in that but it's a thought

#15: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:39 pm
—

Han wrote:

She is petted, but she also has clear limits. She's made to apologise when she's naughty, she isn't over-indulged with presents, she has a strict routine she has to keep to, eg early bed, and she knows that 'no' means 'no', not 'if you whine and beg long enough I'll give in'.

Besides, I think it's mostly Jo who does the petting. The adults don't seem to treat her very differently from the other young children.

The CBB -> Formal Discussions

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1