Advertisement

Swallows and Amazons Forever: How Adults and Children Engage in Reading a Classic Text

  • Fiona Maine
  • Alison Waller
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

This qualitative case study explores the nature of reading engagement, taking a reader response approach to analysing and discussing the experiences and perspectives of real readers. The paper reports a collaborative research project in which a group of five primary-age children and a group of five adults of different ages were asked to read and respond to Arthur Ransome’s Swallows and Amazons. Rather than offering separate models of reading for children and adults, the study focuses on common responses and practices across time and generations. Transcripts of group discussions and individual interviews along with written memories and accounts are examined to generate themes that illuminate the processes of engagement used in reading, or rereading, the novel. Whilst some of these responses demonstrate an active pleasure in reading, there is also evidence that most readers encountered difficulties with Ransome’s text. It is suggested that engagement with a text like Swallows and Amazons relies on three dimensions reflecting a situated reading event: reader identity, immersion, and resilience.

Keywords

Reader response Swallows and Amazons Generational text Engagement Primary education Comprehension 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are very grateful to the adult and child readers who took part in this project for giving up their time and sharing their thinking with us.

References

  1. Anderson, Richard C., & Pearson, P. David. (1984). A Schema-Theoretic View of Basic Processes in Reading Comprehension. In David Pearson (Ed.), The Handbook of Reading Research (pp. 255–291). London: Longman.Google Scholar
  2. Appleyard, J.A. (1990). Becoming a Reader: The Experience of Fiction from Childhood to Adulthood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bearne, Eve. (2003). Ways of Knowing; Ways of Showing—Towards an Integrated Theory of Text. In Morag Styles & Eve Bearne (Eds.), Art, Narrative and Childhood (pp. ix–xxvii). Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, Andrew (Ed.). (1995). Readers & Reading. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  5. Benton, Michael. (2004). Reader-Response Criticism. In Peter Hunt (Ed.), International Companion Encyclopedia of Children’s Literature (pp. 68–85). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Chambers, Aidan. (1985). Booktalk: Occasional Writing on Literature and Children. London: Bodley Head.Google Scholar
  7. Chambers, Aidan. (1993). Tell Me: Children, Reading and Talk. Stroud: Thimble Press.Google Scholar
  8. Culler, Jonathan. (1975). Structuralist Poetics: Structuralism, Linguistics, and the Study of Literature. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eco, Umberto. (1979). The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fry, Donald. (1985). Children Talk About Books: Seeing Themselves as Readers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fish, Stanley. (1980). Is There a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Greene, Sheila, & Hill, Michael. (2005). Researching Children’s Experience: Methods and Methodological Issues. In Sheila Greene & Diane Hogan (Eds.), Researching Children’s Experience: Approaches and Methods (pp. 1–21). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Harding, D.W. (1962). Psychological Processes in the Reading of Fiction. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2(2), 133–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hearne, Betsy, & Trites, Roberta Seelinger (Eds.). (2009). A Narrative Compass: Stories that Guide Women’s Lives. Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hunt, Peter. (2006). Ransome, Arthur. In Jack Zipes (Ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Children’s Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Accessed October 29, 2010, from http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t204.e2678.
  16. Iser, Wolfgang. (1978). The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  17. Jones, Katharine. (2006). Getting Rid of Children’s Literature. The Lion and the Unicorn, 30(3), 287–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Keene, Ellin, & Zimmerman, Susan. (1997). Mosaic of Thought: Teaching Comprehension in a Reader’s Workshop. Portsmouth: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  19. Kress, Gunther. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lewis, Margaret, & Tregenza, Jo. (2007). Beyond Simple Comprehension, English 4–11, 30(Summer), 11–16.Google Scholar
  21. McDowell, Myles. (1973). Fiction for Children and Adults: Some Essential Differences. Children’s Literature in Education., 4(1), 50–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meek, Margaret. (2000). Afterword: Transitional Transformations. In Eve Bearne & Victor Watson (Eds.), Where Texts and Children Meet (pp. 198–212). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching Children to Read: an Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instructions. Reports of the Subgroups. Accessed July 10, 2011, from http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/publications/subgroups.htm.
  24. Natov, Roni. (2003). The Poetics of Childhood. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Nikolajeva, Maria. (2010). Literacy, Competence and Meaning-Making: A Human Sciences Approach. Cambridge Journal of Education, 40(2), 145–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oakhill, Jane, & Garnham, Alan. (1988). Becoming a Skilled Reader. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.Google Scholar
  27. Palinscar, Annemarie, & Brown, Ann. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pardo, Laura. (2004). What Every Teacher Needs to Know About Comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(3), 272–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pressley, Michael. (2000). What Should Comprehension Instruction be the Instruction of? In Michael Kamil, Peter Mosenthal, P.David Pearson, & Rebecca Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. III, pp. 545–561). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  30. Pearce, Lynne. (1997). Feminism and the Politics of Reading. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  31. Protherough, Robert. (1983). Developing a Response to Fiction. Milton Keynes: Open University.Google Scholar
  32. Ransome, Arthur. (1930). Swallows and Amazons. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
  33. Ransome, Arthur. (1931). Swallowdale. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
  34. Ransome, Arthur. (1932). Peter Duck. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
  35. Rogoff, Barbara. (1990). Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Rosenblatt, Louise. (1978). The Reader, the Text, the Poem: The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Snow, Catherine, & Sweet, Anne. (2003). Reading for Comprehension. In Anne Sweet & Catherine Snow (Eds.), Rethinking Reading Comprehension (pp. 1–11). London: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  38. Spufford, Francis. (2002). The Child That Books Built. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  39. Thacker, Deborah. (2000). Disdain or Ignorance? Literary Theory and the Absence of Children’s Literature. The Lion and the Unicorn, 24(1), 1–17.Google Scholar
  40. Thomas, Nicholas. (1987). Narrative as Practice? Accessible Adventure in Swallows and Amazons. Anthropology Today, 3(5), 8–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tucker, Nicholas. (1995). Arthur Ransome and the Problems of Literary Assessment. Children’s Literature in Education, 26(2), 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Twist, Liz, Schagen, Ian, & Hodgson, Claire. (2007). Readers and Reading: The PIRLS 2006 National Report for England. Slough: NFER.Google Scholar
  43. Watson, Victor. (2000). Children’s Literature is Dead: Long Live Children’s Reading. In Eve Bearne & Victor Watson (Eds.), Where Texts and Children Meet (pp. 1–7). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Wells, Gordon. (1999). Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Socio-Cultural Practice and Theory of Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationBath Spa UniversityNewton Park, BathUK
  2. 2.National Centre for Research in Children’s LiteratureUniversity of RoehamptonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options