Through the looking-glass: Alice and Child Studies Multiple

Abstract

This is NOT an article about Alice in Wonderland. It is about the figure of Alice-the-child and an exploration of the contemporary theoretical research field of Child Studies. What if, I ask, Lewis Carroll’s Alice had been one of the sources drawn upon when forming child research theories? The idea is to explore how the fictive child character Alice in Wonderland enacts key theoretical concepts in Child Studies. Out of this exploration grows the idea of Child Studies Multiple.

Babies’ engagements with everyday things : An ethnographic study of materiality, movement and participation

“…What this study contributes to is not a unified or finished social and cultural approach to babies; rather, it calls for multiplying the category of children (Sparrman 2020). This is an intriguing aspect of the study because it means staying with the uncertainty of how babies become social participants.…”

Material as actor in the enactment of social norms: Engaging with a sociomaterial perspective in childhood studies to avoid the ‘traps of closure’

“…Attempting to avoid reduction, Sparrman et al (2016) look to STS to discuss what they term ‘child culture multiple’ to open the field of childhood studies instead of striving for coherence. Sparrman continues this work, suggesting ‘to recruit multiplicity as a core concept in Child Studies’ (Sparrman, 2020, p. 22). In line with potential multiplicity, Leonard (2020) claims that ANT will ‘enable space to be opened up for new structures to emerge that may coexist, incorporate, or transform existing structures producing constantly changing versions of childhood and adulthood’(p. 826).…”

“…However, what this perspective enables is an open‐ended relational understanding of children's everyday lives. As suggested by Sparrman (2020) and Hanson et al (2016) we should avoid a priori ideas and reductionist and essentialised thinking. In exploring social norms as entangled in relations between human and non‐human actors and by focusing on how material entities are active in enacting social norms, we open our analysis for a more relational understanding of children and childhood and avoid the reductionist and essentialist ’traps of closure’.…”

“…The ontological status of either the makeup or the girls must not be taken for granted as ANT bears with it an anti‐essentialist ontology, and we need to continuously question the a priori. As Sparrman (2020) argues, multiplicity is an asset, and this perspective allows for a complex and dynamic understanding of social norms regarding tweens and makeup.…”

Children helping children? : Values and concerns in corporate charity

“…Social constructionism overall prevails in Child Studies, but there are exceptions where the notion of enactment is used (e.g. including but not limited to Eßer, 2017;Eßer et al, 2016;Lindgren et al, 2014;Samuelsson et al, 2015;Sparrman, 2014Sparrman, , 2015aSparrman, , 2020Sparrman & Sandin, 2012;Sparrman et al, 2016;Spyrou, 2019;Zotevska et al, 2021). "Social construction" refers to practices resulting in "durable realities" (Woolgar & Lezaun, 2015), whereas "enactment" emphasizes that these realities are precarious.…”