This paper explores the unique approach to childhood and children’s literature developed by the research and teaching of the Graduate Centre for International Research in Childhood: Literature, Culture, Media (CIRCL). CIRCL follows in its work the arguments of UK critical theorist Jacqueline Rose in her seminal 1984 book The case of Peter Pan or the impossibility of children’s fiction. Rose’s work has been widely and routinely referenced in Children’s Literature studies particularly, but CIRCL interprets her arguments as having quite different implications than those usually assumed. Rose is generally attributed with having pointed out that “childhood” is not one homogenous category, but that childhood is divided by gender, race, and ethnic, political and religious (and so on) identities. But for CIRCL this is only a first step in Rose’s arguments and certainly one not unique to her work anyway: the perception of various cultural and historical childhoods is widely held. Instead, my paper explores how Rose’s arguments are centrally about how “childhood” itself cannot be maintained in the face of division, a division, moreover, which operates inevitably at every level, and which derives from Rose’s interpretation of psychoanalysis as formulated by Sigmund Freud, which Rose derives in turn from her readings of the interpretations of Freud by French analyst Jacques Lacan and French critical theorist Jacques Derrida. Finally, my paper argues how Rose’s position is about any “identity,” including gender and that this allies her work closely to that of the famous gender theorist Judith Butler, whose arguments are often (mis)understood in the same ways as those of Rose.

中文翻译：

---

性别，童年与儿童文学

本文探讨了国际童年研究中心：文学，文化，媒体（CIRCL）的研究和教学所开发的童年和儿童文学的独特方法。CIRCL在其工作中沿用了英国批评理论家杰奎琳·罗斯（Jacqueline Rose）在1984年开创性的著作《彼得·潘案》或《儿童小说的不可能》中的论点。罗斯的著作在儿童文学研究中得到了广泛和常规的引用，但是CIRCL认为她的论点与通常所认为的有着截然不同的含义。罗斯通常指出，“童年”不是一个同质的类别，而是根据性别，种族，种族，政治和宗教（等等）身份来划分童年。但是对于CIRCL而言，这只是Rose争论的第一步，而且肯定不是她的工作所独有的：人们对各种文化和历史童年的看法已广为接受。取而代之的是，我的论文探索了罗斯的论点如何集中在如何面对分裂的“童年”本身上，而分裂又不可避免地在各个层面上运作，而这种分裂源自于西格蒙德·弗洛伊德提出的罗斯对精神分析的解释。罗斯从法国分析家雅克·拉康（Jacques Lacan）和法国批判理论家雅克·德里达（Jacques Derrida）对弗洛伊德的解读中得到的反过来。最后，我的论文论证了罗斯的立场是关于任何“身份”的，包括性别，这与她的工作紧密结合，是著名的性别理论家朱迪思·巴特勒（Judith Butler）