The Image of the Child in the Picture Books of Ezra Jack Keats

The Image of the Child in the Picture Books of Ezra Jack Keats "The great man is he who does not lose his child's heart." Mencius, The Book of Mencius This essay starts —unabashedly—at the point of confession: both in casual conversation and in my own ruminations and writings, I have been referring too casually to the image of the child that appears in Ezra Jack Keats' picture books as "archetypal." In an earlier article (Nikola-Lisa and Donaldson), I refer to the spontaneity and playfulness of Keats' characters as an indication of their archetypal nature. Certainly, such qualities are representative of the young child, and, in the parlance of popular psychology, it is easy to see how they have given way to the characterization "archetypal." However, as Lindley points out, it is precisely due to its common use that the term "archetype" has become "fuzzy" (56) . Consequently , the aim of this paper is twofold: on the one hand, I intend to explore the various ways in which the concept "archetype" —especially the "child archetype" —has been used in literary and psychological history, while, at the same time, applying the concept to the image of the child depicted in the picture books of Ezra Jack Keats. The Divine Child First to give modern significance to the concept "archetype" was Swiss psychiatrist C. G. Jung. In the aftermath of his break with Freud, Jung delineated his ideas regarding the transpersonal aspect of the unconscious. Jung found within this transpersonal dimension —known as the "collective unconscious" or "objective psyche" — "inborn modes of functioning" (Lindley 57) —the archetypes. Although ultimately irrepresentable, the archetypes function as a governing pattern manifesting themselves indirectly through images, ideas, or physical events (Lewis 52) . Jung' s most celebrated attempt to explicate the phenomenon of the "child archetype" surfaced in response to Kerenyi's work in classical mythology, specifically Kerenyi's discussion of the "primordial child." Jung saw in this archetype a symbol of wholeness. In particular, the child archetype, on the personal level, represented the transformative link between the individual's conscious and unconscious mind. At the same time, on the transpersonal level, it symbolized "the pre-conscious childhood aspect of the collective psyche" (80) . As a symbol of wholeness, it is a unifying symbol appearing with its own distinctive characteristics, as Young has so aptly summarized: 15 The [archetypal] child is often divinely inspired and in some cases literally radiates light or is shrouded in an aura of divinity. The child is sometimes seen as hopelessly fragile, surrounded by forces that threaten to consume or destroy it, yet the child in such a setting may miraculously surmount all the dark forces that oppose it, in some cases emerging as a hero figure. This child is sometimes portrayed as having a special affinity with nature, or of being attuned to a divine presence permeating nature. Finally, the child often functions as a herald bringing spiritual revelation, or as a healer capable of miraculously curing or saving the sick and the lost. (65) Applying these criteria to the work of Ezra Jack Keats, we are not struck at first with their relevance. Although Keats' many young characters portray an array of sensitivities that reflect similar qualities, if we adhere strictly to Jung's criteria, we can at best find only one example in Keats' work that approximates the "child archetype" characterization—Keats' retelling of the popular folk story John Henry. With obvious admiration, Keats sings the praises of this popular folk hero. The style is lyrical, the tone heroic, and the imagery reminiscent of Jung's description of the divine or archetypal child, the most distinctive feature being John Henry's invincible nature. However, what first signifies the child archetype in Keats' story is not John Henry's heroism, but rather his miraculous birth which sets the tone for the entire story: A hush settled over the hills, the sky swirled soundlessly round the moon. The river stopped murmuring, the wind stopped whispering, and the frogs and the owls and the crickets fell silent — all watching and waiting and listening. Then —the river roared! The wind whispered and whistled and sang. The frogs croaked, the owls hooted...