The challenging reading of pictures in Saramago's picturebooks


Ioanna Kaliakatsou
Aggeliki Giannikopoulou
Abstract
Postmodern picturebooks have gained increasing importance in the field of theory of children’s literature, because they «Provide the most accessible examples of postmodern eclecticism: the breaking of boundaries, the abandonment of linear chronology, the emphasis on the construction of texts, and the intermingling of parodying genres» (Pantaleo and Sipe 2008). Τhese picturebooks invite a more active reader. Mc Callum (1996) notes that metafictive narratives pose «questions about the relationships between the ways we interpret and represent both fiction and reality». Trites ( 1994) also identifies that the changes in picturebooks reflect «the sort of cultural fragmentation that seems to be the hallmark of the postindustrial age» As today's children live in a world characterized by fragmentation, decanonization and interactivity literacy educators focus on the ways in which literacy education will need to change in order to develop student’s «self-knowledge about reading» (Ryan& Anstey, 2003) and enrich reader’s capacity to decode the rapidly change, rich in symbols, visual culture. (Callow, 2008, Goldstone, 2001, Walsh, 2003, Serafini, 2004 O'Neil, 2011 ) Saramago’s picture books are a good example of work that disrupts expectations of the reader through the self-reflexive narrative structure of the visual text. While the verbal text tells rather a simple fairly story, the visual language in pictures evoke multiple levels of meaning, depending on how the reader (children or adult) chooses to interpret it. One common aspect of the illustrations in both books is the self referential qualities of the illustrations that reveal the process of memories restoration and perception. The illustrators of the books employ a range of metafictive devices that self consciously draws attention to the status of the memories as artifacts and systematically poses questions about the way we recall the past. In this paper we examine fifth graders’ responses to several metafictive devices in Saramago’s picturebooks. The books were read and discussed in depth over a two week time period, where the children participated in small groups and whole-class interactive read-aloud sessions. The fifth graders noticed many of the visual elements and took them into account for the (re)construction of the story, such as intertextuality, indeterminacy in illustrative text, disruptions of traditional time and space relationships, pastiche of illustrative styles, illustrative framing devices including a book embedded within another book, description of the creating process. The data concerning children’s reading of both books lead to the conclusion that ten-years-old children paid great attention to the illustration and did not confine their readings only to words. They have incorporated the visual text in the construction of the story, and proved that they can decipher many of the challenging visual puzzles of both books. The study concludes that using visual literacy in the classroom can help children to develop a “critical eye” and to negotiate our visually rich contemporary culture. Key-words: picturebooks, metafiction, childrens’ perception, memories
Article Details
  • Section
  • Articles
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Anstey, M. (2002). It’s not all Black and White. Postmodern Picture Books and New Literacies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, Vol. 45, No 6, 444-457.
Arizpe, E. & Styles, M.(2003) Children reading pictures: Interpreting visual texts. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Bachelard G.(1997), I epoptia tis stigmis [The intuition of the instant], trans. Papagiorgis Kostis, Athens: Kastaniotis
Barrentine , S. J. (1996) Engaging with reading through interactive read-alouds. The Reading Teacher, vol.50, no 1, 36-43.
Bergson, H. (1922) Creative Evolution. Trans. Arthur Mitchell, London: Macmillan and Co. Retrieved March 2015 from: https://archive.org/details/creativeevolutio00berguoft
Boym, S. (2001). The future of nostalgia. New York: Basic Books.
Boym, S.(2007) Nostalgia and its Discontents. The Hedgehog Review Vol.9 No2 7-17
Callow, J. (2008). Show me: Principles for Assessing Students’ Visual Literacy. The Reading Teacher, vol.61, no 8, 616-626.
Goldstone, B. P. (1998). Ordering the Chaos: Teaching Metafictive Characteristics of Children's Books.Journal of Children's Literature, v24 n2, 48-55.
Goldstone, B. P. (2001) Whaz up with our books? Changing Picture Book Codes and Teaching Implications. The Reading Teacher, Vol.55, No 4, 48-55.
Iser, W. (1978) The Act of Reading:A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore:Johns Hopkins UP.
Lukacs, G. (2004) I Theoria tou Mithistorimatos [The Theory of the Novel], Trans.Tselenti X., Athens: Politropon.
McCallum R. (1996). Metafictions and Experimental Work. Hunt P. (ed) International Companion Encyclopedia of Childrens Literature, (p.p. 397-409), New York: Routledge.
McGavran, J.Η. (1999). Literature and the Child: Romantic Continuations, Postmodern Contestations. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Moss, G.(1990). Metafiction and the Poetics of Children's Literature. Children's Literature Association Quarterly, Vol.15, No 2, 50-52.
Nikolajeva M.& Scott C.(2001) How Picturebooks Work NY: Garland
Pantaleo, S. (2004).Young Children Interpret the Metafictive in Anthony Browne’s Voices in the Park. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, vol. 4, no. 2, 211-233.
Pantaleo, S. & Sipe L. R.(2008). Postmodern Picturebooks: Play, Parody, and Self-Referentiality. New York: Routledge.
Ryan M. & Anstey M. (2003). Identity and Text: Developing Self-Conscious Readers. Australian Journal of Language and Literature, Vol.26, No 1, 9-22.
Saramago José (2006). To megalitero louloudi tou kosmou [The Biggest Flower in the World], Ill. Joᾱo Caetano,Trans. Ath. Psillia, Athens: Kastaniotis.
Saramago José (2008). Mikres anamnisis: autobiografia [Small Memories: Autobiography], Trans. Ath. Psillia, Athens: Kastaniotis.
Saramago José (2012). I siopi tou nerou [The Silence of the Water], Ill. Manuel Estrada,Trans. Ath. Psillia, Athens: Kastaniotis.
Serafini, F. (2004). Lessons in comprehension: Explicit instruction in the reading workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Serafini, F.(2005). Voices in the Park, Voices in the Classroom: Readers Responding to Postmodern Picture Books. Reading Research and Instruction, Vol.44, n.3 Retrieved online on March 2015 from:
http://www.google.gr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCMQFjAAahUKEwjGkqrj047GAhWBWRQKHdtTAGE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.frankserafini.com%2Fpublications%2Fserafini-voices.pdf&ei=Pyx9VYb3GIGzUdungYgG&usg=AFQjCNEkZS-A-QHuCe2BwhP7YQXF4xf09w&bvm=bv.95515949,d.d24&cad=rja
Sipe L. (2000). The construction of literary understanding by first and second graders in oral response to picture storybooks read-alouds. Reading Research Quarterly, Vol.35, No2, 252-275
Trites R. S. (1994) Manifold narratives. Metafiction and Ideology in Picturebooks. Children’s Literature in Education, Vol.25, 225-242
Walsh, M. (2003)Reading' pictures: What do they reveal? Young children's reading of visual texts. Reading: Literacy and Language, Vol 37 No3, 123-130.
Waugh, P. (1984). Metafiction: The Theory and Practice of Self-Conscious Fiction. New York: Methuen