Lulu is completely “a trouble maker who lays flat, gives a kick in the air, fusses about and squalls” when she cannot get anything in her way, an original character came out of Judith Viorst’s world of fantasy.
Lulu is completely “a trouble maker who lays flat, gives a kick in the air, fusses about and squalls” when she cannot get anything in her way, an original character came out of Judith Viorst’s world of fantasy. This “toruble-like” little girl’s adventures consist of three books in fact, in our publishing world we only have the translations of Lulu ve Brontozor (Lulu and the Brontosaurus) and Lulu Köpek Gezdiriyor (Lulu Walks the Dog), which are introduced to Turkish by Şiirsel Taş and Gökçe Ateş Aytuğ. Among many characteristics which makes these books worth mentioning, the most important one is the strong transformation it may enable on child readers. Translations of Lulu, takes the child reader to the point where they can develop empathy and express themselves in a good manner, become polite, understanding and respectful individuals by the effect of the book’s double-layered narration plane’s mirroring the child, heterodiegetic narrator’s taking part of polite children and the "realistic" transformation Lulu goes through.
The Contribution of Heterodiegetic Narrator to the Transformation
Manfred Hahn, who is known for his contributions to narratology describes the situation where the narrator’s positioning herself as “the author”, referring to herself in the text and uttering the recognition of the existence of a reader, as heterodiegetic (extratextual). (Jahn, 22) Lulu ve Brontozor (Lulu and the Brontosaurus) begins with these sentences: “Okay, alright! You don’t have to tell me! I know! I know that people and dinosaurs have never lived on Earth at the same time. (…) But since I am the person reading the story, I get to choose what I read,” (Turkish translation, p. 7) Lulu Köpek Gezdiriyor (Lulu Walks the Dog) starts the narration so “(…) Believe me, I am busy. I have to tell my story.” (Turkish translation, p. 7) Viorst drops a hint at the very beginning that the object in the hands of the reader is a “produced text” and this is a characteristic of metafiction. In this sense, the narrator of both texts sets an example to heterodiegetic narrators called as “authorised author” and fictionalised by the writer in the text in a manner that he builds a character.
The first point to lay emphasis on when taking stock of extratextual narrator’s contribution to the text is the two-layered mirror provided by the narrator to the reader. What reflects on the first layer of narrative’s mirror, who has chosen a “trouble maker” as a character, is the child reader itself. Indeed, here it is shown up to the child readers how they look outside when they do not try to express themselves by communicating but screaming. Here we may also refer to the fact that the heterodiegetic narrator treats Lulu a bit pitiless time to time. The narrator’s attitude against the protagonist is quite ironic despite his humorous language. Lulu’s giving “bossy” harsh orders to the dogs during her adventure to walk three dogs at the same time due to her overconfidence in herself is criticised by the narrator but not explicitly.
The narrator says, “While Lulu played the flute silently, Pretty listened to her and then pooped (I mean Pretty, not Lulu).” (111) and humiliates Lulu in the eyes of the readers by the explanation in brackets. Or explicitly says “I didn’t feel sorry for Lulu [when tied up to the tree] at all, how about you? Let me remind you, at the very first part I mentioned that she is not that much trouble maker since he met Mr. Bronto. And that she is not that much rude. But as you see she treated Fleischman very rude! Rude! Rude! And she showed ingratitude, too!” (119) This is the part where it is expressed explicitly that the narrator does not take a stand for her character but polite, fair and helpful children.
Narrator’s Praise for Kindness
At the second layer Lulu is mirrored through the supporting characters. Here the purpose is to develop empathy both in Lulu and the child reader as well. Supporting characters in both books are extremely graceful, understanding and bighearted; they bear the characteristics which Lulu lacks. Lulu travels to the forest in order to find her pet dinosaur in Lulu ve Brontozor (Lulu and the Brontosaurus). She really does encounter with a brontosaurus and becomes happy when she hears the brontosaurus say, “Having a pet is a very good act.” (60) and even she thinks that it will go with her. Judith Viorst’s twist here is a subtle wit. The brontosaurus says “I was not referring me to be your pet when i said that having a pet is a very good act. I wanted to say you may be a good pet human for me.” (66) This sentence opens the doors of the empathy world both to Lulu and the readers as well. No matter how hard the Brontosaurus tries to treat her good, to be tolerant, to keep her happy; Lulu “misses her home”. She gets to know by experiencing herself that it is impossible for anyone who is away from its own circle to be happy.
Here the transformative force of Mr. Bronto’s patience and grace shall be mentioned. The parent’s attitude, that they do every single order of Lulu in order to get rid of her “squalling” is criticised in the book. Because this only leads her to squall much stronger in the next turn when rejected. The brontosaurus can manage to stop Lulu’s crying without doing anything thanks to its patience and determination on uttering the word “no”. It even points to the easiness of communication by showing her courtesy: “The brontosaurus was speaking with such a lovely, kind, graceful and patient manner that Lulu stopped yelling and she also started speaking. After a short time, she was narrating with a soft voice, suavely.” (80) This pedagogically correct etiquette of brontosaurus can also be considered as a mirror to parents.
The supporting character, Fleischman, in the second book of Lulu series, Lulu Köpek Gezdiriyor (Lulu Walks the Dog) is also extremely meek and kind, a character completely opposite of Lulu. But the narrator does not eulogise Fleischman, there is not an emphasis on perfect child. Even the vice versa takes place at the end: Fleischman, the brave child who can communicate with dogs in German and can play the flute very well explains to Lulu why he is not perfect: “I am scared of the dark. I am also scared of crawly creatures like caterpillars and worms. I can speak German only with badger dogs. And French with poodles. When I try to talk with people in German or French they do not understand me. I play the flute because I tried to play violin, piano, clarinet, drums and gusli but I failed.” (135) Literary approach underlining the failures of “Perfect Fleischman” makes one to question the description of perfection and offers the child readers a chance of breathing a sigh of relief from adult stereotypes. The final of Lulu Köpek Gezdiriyor (Lulu Walks the Dog) has a transformative force just as the first book: Judith Viorst offers a perfectly realistic final instead of describing Lulu and Fleischman as two perfect friends who are done with the problems between them:
Were you looking for a happy ending? Then read Cinderella. This story does not come to a happy ending. Because Fleischman is still such an annoying character that Lulu cannot like. Lulu is such a curmudgeon that Fleischman cannot like at all. They respect each other. They trust each other. They work collaboratively and walk the dog together. If one of them needs something the other one would be there for him. But that’s for sure, they cannot be best friends unless they change completely. (141)
The ending of the story is quite humane since it does not advice to love every single person because clearly this is not possible. Texts advising the children to be good friends with everyone around them and puts them into a situation where they have to deprive themselves, and if they fail in loving everyone making them feel a twinge of guilt about it do not have any acceptable point in children’s literature. Lulu series is worthy to the extend it reminds that building social relations upon “respect, trust, collaboration and cooperation” is the key to a healthy communication.
Realism of Lulu’s Transformation
The most important characteristic enhancing the impressiveness of Lulu series is the realistic fictionalising of protagonist Lulu’s transformation in such a way that readers are persuaded. Lulu, a trouble maker, puts her desire to have a Brontosaurus as a pet aside at the end of the book, realises the reason why this is not possible, and even becomes friends with Mr. Bronto. Vociferous and peremptory Lulu goes and instead an understanding girl who “communicates by talking” comes. However, the transformation is not that much sharp: “Lulu got older as the time passes but she never became a perfect person. Still there are some incidents where she squalls -even it happens occasionally- and where she forgets to add ‘please’ to the end, she never uttered to anyone ‘you rascal fools’. She is not that much trouble maker as she used to be once.” (118) Lulu is still not a perfect child, she is only relatively a better child and this makes the transformation realistic because everyone knows that it is not possible for anyone to change at once or by a book. Yet this positive change is encouraging. At the end of Lulu Köpek Gezdiriyor (Lulu Walks the Dog) Lulu does not hate Fleischman anymore. She gets into dog walking job because she needs money, the occasion she spends this money is a space travel. That she wants Fleischman too, to join her is a great grace. But behind this extremely thoughtful attitude there is a hidden detail: Fleischman can join her as long as he accepts to be “the second” child who has been to space. Even though this thoughtful attitude of Lulu helps her to get better her social relations, her self-confidence that associates “being first” to herself only, remains over. Here again, since the child readers do not face a completely “changed” character, the transformation seems more realistic.
Another factor enhancing the books impressiveness and makes it realistic is the multi-dimensional forming of Judith Viorst’s character, Lulu. She is a trouble maker, peevish, hot-blooded but also, she is brave enough to go a forest where wild creatures live. On top of that, she bumps into those creatures and beats them. Lulu’s scratching the snake when it ties herself, her hitting to the tiger with a bag when threatened with death and finally stepping on bear’s feet when it threatens her with its paws are amusing memories and joyous moments to read but along with this here the emotion which would pass to the child reader is bravery. Lulu’s self-confident attitude is usually a bit annoying but it may also be a characteristic to be admired. All these dialogues with animals are instrumentals to affirm Lulu’s transformation in her return from the forest by giving presents to them reversely: honey to bear, a fancy scarf to miss tiger and a rug to snake.
Conclusion
The heterodiegetic narrator of the Lulu series does not only cheers the whole text’s language but also serves for other purposes. Very first of among many is to make child readers realise how peevishness and bullying seem outside by mirroring them. For a child reader who can distinguish the difference between beetle browed and dissatisfied Lulu illustration on the first page and the illustration showing Lulu with a warm smile on the last page of the book Lulu ve Brontozor (Lulu ad the Bronsauturus), there is no seat for knitting or showing bad temper again. Here the praise for grace shown by the narrator by means of supporting characters and her teaching of empathy to child not didactically but by the lower text play a huge role.
Another characteristic of the series which can foster the positive changes on child readers is the multi-dimensional characterisation of Lulu, who herself goes through a transformation and that this difference is persuasive for the readers. At the end of the book there is not a perfect child but a “less trouble-maker” one. Her not being best friends with Fleischman “whom she used to hate” but only two people who respect and collaborate with each other has a point. The text is characterised by reminding us that sometimes we can communicate in a healthy and positive manner with people whom we cannot love no matter how hard we try and sharing the clues for how to set up this communication instead of advising us to love every single person.
Bibliography
Jahn, Manfred. Anlatıbilim. İstanbul: Dergâh Yayınları, 2012.
Viorst, Judith. Lulu ve Brontozor. İstanbul: Hayykitap, 2012.
Viorst, Judith. Lulu Köpek Gezdiriyor. İstanbul: Hayykitap, 2012.