The Children's Prattle Analysis

1079 Words3 Pages

This also occurs in the tale, “The Children’s Prattle.” This tale does not explicitly show the social falling of an individual, but does show a different kind of lowering on the social ladder. By having the very poor boy, with the last name ending with ‘sen’ surpass the wealthy children lowers their standing simply by having another person atop them on the social ladder. The children do not turn out to live terrible lives similar to the ball, instead, the story says, “They had become decent and kind human beings” (Andersen 14). These children follow their in the footsteps of their parents, and live out their lives at similar social rankings, but now are below this initially very poor boy. The previous paragraphs proves that Andersen truly …show more content…

In the story “The Sweethearts,” Andersen says, “A top and a ball were lying in a drawer among a lot of other toys. One day the top said to the ball, ‘Shouldn’t we become engaged? After all, we are lying right next to each other in the drawer’” (Andersen1). This was a very common occurrence in history; people of the time married people in the same social class. Because the ball was laying right next to the top, it assumed they were of similar status. Despite the actual difference in classes, it clearly displays the commonality of marrying in the same class, therefore, maintaining another family of similar social class generation after generation. It also shows that although social mobility was possible and prevalent, it was not the most common happening. While the ball dropped in terms of social class and the top climbed, the rest of the toys in the story remain at exactly the same social standing throughout the story. Only two toys out of all the toys owned by the child are able to accomplish social mobility, which is a very small percentage. The small percentage is also the case in real life in the nineteenth century; it was much more common to stay in the same social class than it was to jump either up or …show more content…

The social mobility of the boy is shown in contrast to everyone else present in the story who remains at their same social class ranking. A quote in the story saying, “‘I am a chamber child,’ she declared, although she could just as easily have been a ‘cellar child’, for, after all, we can’t choose our parents,” explains the unlikeliness of social mobility (Andersen 3). It is clear from this quote that the social class of the parents was directly correlated to the social class of the children, and was not likely to change. The children in this tale all grow up to be decent and good people, likely in the same exact social situation they were as children. This gives value to the conversation the children have in the beginning of the tale, because the job of their parents sheds a very good light on what would become of most of the children discusses this. This passing of social class is also prevalent in this story when it discusses how the boy with the last name ending in ‘sen’ could never become anything (Andersen 7). Family names implied social standing, which was almost always passed down through

Open Document