Boyish girls and girlish boys in 20th century children's literature

Neither Titty nor Dorothea would have been seen as boyish or eccentric in any or the myriad girls' school stories produced in the early-mid 20 century, just as girls with their own skill sets..

I'd usually agree that fits in the feminine stereotype, but Titty does it in a different way to, say Dorothea. If they grew up to be writers, I'd imagine Titty would write like Stevenson, Defoe or Tolkien, Dorothea more like Austen. That plus the general adventurous nature of the activities she does, plus her being one of the younger ones, where there is more allowance for playfulness and imagination in both sexes.
She's not unfeminine as a character, and certainly isn't trying to escape from the constraints of being a girl. But if I had nothing else to go on I'd guess the character was male.

I guess similar reasons why I'd guess Roger is male - he enjoys all the adventurous activities the others do, and because he's younger has more playfulness and is protected more, without that being seen as feminine. So if I'm going to guess male for him, I can't see a good reason why I wouldnt treat Titty the same.

Its a minefield of stereotypes!

Obviously all these interests and activities are completely normal for girls... if you (and your parents) grew up reading Arthur Ransome.

When I read these books as a child, my impression was that, almost all of these characters just had personalities. I don't remember thinking Titty was unfeminine.

I think the Famous Five characters conform most strongly to gender stereotypes, (Including George whose character is defined in relation to a gender stereotype), which from memory makes them quite flat.*

*Haven't read most of these books for decades, so I might be being unfair.

I’m definitely not seeing it from your list!

@ErrolTheDragon She's all about adventure, exploration and tales of derring do and songs of Spanish ladies. Plus her practical scouting skills and imaginative play around that theme. With no other info I'd guess male. Change my mind?!

I’m baffled how you came to put Titty in your group 4.

@CuriousAlien haha - bring it on!
I nearly put Pippi in 3, and that functions as a 'no stereotype' box so I think thats where you would put her. However I didn't think that was honest to the rules I set as I would guess her as male. So into 4 she goes!

I deliberated on 1 or 2 for Heidi. Didn't want to be swayed by how 'girly' in appearance she is usually depicted. But she is so incredibly (sickeningly) good and sweet and caring - both in the alps and Frankfurt - I plumped for 1. Could be swayed to a 2 though. I'm not sure location changes that, she's certainly at one with the land in the alps, and bold and resilient to the challenges of life there in a way she isn't in Frankfurt but I'm not basing my judgement on that part of her character. (Bit like Chris Guthrie in Sunset Song, she's a 2 I reckon).

Also, how do you factor in cultural stereotypes within the story or from the reader? Heidi does not fit the stereotype when she moves culture to Frankfurt.

@cptnancyblackett I love what you've done but completely disagree with it! No time now so will come back later (maybe make my own?) but how does Pippi Longstocking fit any stereotype???? She is utterly, joyously, riotously,nonsensically free of any definition. I've only read her stories as an adult and could not predict a single thing she did.
I think at the very least you need a category 5: fits no stereotype.

Edited to account for my poor retention of numbers.

I can believe category 3 being most common.

It's decades since I've read Trixie Belden, but from memory I don't think I would class her as a "boyish" girl - just a girl who's clever and adventurous and doesn't feel confined by "girlish" stereotypes.

I've really enjoyed this thread, but I've been mildly irked by how to classify girlish girls and boyish boys. Fear not, I think I've come up with a system... 😆
.
Think of a character. Ignore restrictions placed on them by their time (e.g. what they wear, activities they are allowed to do). If you weren't told their sex, then based on their actions and character would you guess it correctly?

1. Yes. Character strongly fits stereotypes for their sex.
2. Yes. Character fits stereotypes for their sex, but more subtly than 1.
3. Could go either way. Doesn't obviously fit stereotypes for either sex.
4. No. Fits stereotypes for the opposite sex more than their own.

.
I've had a go at classifying some I've read in the last few years.

1. John Walker. Mr Fox. Badger. Toad. Julian. Anne. Asterix. Obelix. Pongo. Missis Pongo. Cruella DeVil. Heidi. Tigger. Roberta (Railway children). Peter (Railway children).
2. Susan Walker. Roger Walker. Dick Callum. Dorothea Callum. Ratty. Dick. Fergus Hamilton (Flying fergus).
3. Peggy Blackett. Matilda. Danny (champion of the world). Charlie Bucket. Sophie (BFG). George (Marvellous medicine). James (giant peach). Jim Hawkins (Treasure Island). Mole. Alice (in Wonderland). Harry Holdsworth (Harry's Mad). Jack (The Christmas Pig). Winnie the Pooh. Katie Morag. Cadpig. Phyllis (Railway children). Mildred Hubble.
4. Nancy Blackett. Titty Walker. George. Piglet. Pippi Longstocking.

.
Not sure I agree with where I've put some of them, but I was interested in how many I put in 3 - I suppose a lot of stories create the character of a 'generic child', there to react to whatever extraordinary situation they have been put into, rather than the story being driven by their character?

Thats amazing - DS has a few friends who use inhalers and loved finding this out about 'Roger'!

The Secret Garden.

I have Fifth Form at St Dominic's. It's got some great illustrations in my edition. I've not read it in an age, though. I have some other boys books like A Hit For Six, can't remember who the author is.

Jennings is about boys, but I'm not sure who the intended audience was. Probably just "children".

Then other boys' books are stuff like Biggles, which is very much about manly men (I do love Biggles though.) It's interesting how von Stalhein is rehabilitated from being an evil Nazi in later books, but he's still very much a man's man - and his saving grace is the mutual respect he and Biggles end up having for each other. Nothing there is about alternative ways of being male though.

Yes, son is offspring (and father is parent, and brother is sibling, etc). No way of knowing what sex the individual is.

My parents ran a boys’ prep school in the 60s/ 70s and there were a lot of old -fashioned ’boys’books’ in the library which I read. Talbot Baines Reed mentioned by @ErrolTheDragon was one of them. His best known book is The Fifth Form at St Dominic’s in which the reserved intellectual Oliver is wrongly accused of cheating in a scholarship exam. It’s actually quite good. There’s even, unusually for the time (1881), a sympathetically portrayed disabled boy who edits the school newspaper.

The problem with Bertie Wooster as a hero is that he's an idiot along with his undoubted good qualities.

I don't think he counts as "girlish" exactly, but I always think Bertie Wooster is a good hero for boys who don't relate to conventional masculinity. He's soft hearted, he's a people pleaser, he mostly wants a quiet life without his friends lugging him into ghastly scrapes, and he's constantly being pushed around by his aunts and girlfriends.

I think Wodehouse put a lot of himself into that. He was rather a meek man who was used to deferring to strong women.

Of course gay readers often interpret Bertie and Jeeves as being in a romantic relationship, but for me it reads more like a close male friendship, with maybe a hint of a father-son relationship (you don't get this with the Fry and Laurie portrayal, but in the books Jeeves is a fair bit older than Bertie.)

Meryon Fairbrass had a gentle caring side. But it was,of course because he wanted to be a doctor!

The Little Prince has come to mind.
But I can't think of any adult male characters in children's books who fill a nurturing role, attending to the little things, revealing the significance of mistaken-for-insignificant things - all that maternal / feminine ideal.
Maybe Jim in Huck Finn? The interplay there between gender and racialisation and enslavement is alot to unpick.
I'm still thinking about this, all through the day.

Oxenham (Abbey Girls) would be an author where I think the prevalence of 'strong boyish girls' is much less. Perhaps Jen Robins?

Jen’s ‘husband’ Jack Wilmot!

I also liked that while the Abbey books paid lip service to the importance of getting married, female friendships were always at the forefront in the books, and there was no suggestion that characters like Mary & Rachel were missing out or any the lesser for remaining single.

Having older brothers, and a father who ran the church second hand book stall, I read quite a few old ‘boys school’ books when I was growing up - Tom Brown’s schooldays and others of a similar ilk, I’ve fished the name Talbot Baines Reed from the depths of my mind. I can’t really remember the details - bullies were obviously Bad Lots.