One of the cool things about literary readings is that they can be applied to anything. All they do is filter a text's content through a sieve of the reader or viewer's choosing. When you do so, you can notice some interesting things, or use them to answer some interesting questions.
PEPPA PIG - CONSERVATIVE OR PROGESSIVE?
Let's find out...
If we apply a gendered reading to Peppa Pig, we see some interesting things.
Firstly, characters are defined by their marital and/or parental status. All bar are few characters are 'Mummy' and 'Daddy' or 'Grandma' and 'Grandpa'. These exceptions are Madame Gazelle, the teacher, Miss Rabbit, who seems to do practically every other job in Peppaland (not to be confused with the more Beatleseque Pepperland), and Doctors Brown-Bear and Hamster, the MD and Vet, respectively.
Now, Miss Rabbit doesn't have children. Interestingly, she's a twin; her sister has four children, and is very much a stay-at-home mum. One episode does tend to reinforce the (false) dichotomy that for a woman (or female rabbit), one must choose between being a parent or having several (simultaneous) careers. Despite Miss Rabbit's considerable abilities, she is still defined as a 'Miss'. Madame Gazelle doesn't have children either, which further naturalises this representation of women along highly conservative, patriarchal lines.
A small concession to this would be the fact that Mummy Pig does work; albeit from home, from within the context of being the primary care-giver; and although Daddy Pig very much a caring, hands-on (trotter-on?) Father, he heads off each morning to do 'very important work'. (He's an architect.)
So, in this sense, Peppa Pig is conservative, as it depicts a conventional nuclear family as dominant.
Furthermore, even though the show focuses on a girl, which is admirable, two of the most talented younger characters are male. George Pig may be a bit emotional at times and verbally might have missed a developmental milestone or two, but his artistic skills are top-notch, and he is a prodigious ice-skater, effectively mastering this challenging sport on first attempt. And the show's avowed 'clever-clogs' is Edmund Elephant, another male. The simplicity of Pedro Pony does not challenge this, as it is part of Pedro's gentle appeal. Everyone accepts Pedro as 'a bit special', although interestingly, if one looks closely, he tend to play more often with Peppa and her friends than many of the other boys. Rejected by the patriarchy? It's very possible...
So, what about the elders? Not good news here, either, I'm afraid. Despite the homely presence of Grandma Pig, it is Grandpa Pig who is knowledgeable about gardens, who has built his own train (a 'miniature locomotive', actually), and can repair everything from cuckoo clocks to computers.
And when one looks further afield, things are just as conventional. Grampe Rabbit is the explorer, light-house keeper, gym instructor and boat builder. Grandpa Dog is the sailor. The grandmothers seem scarcely to exist. Which is sad.
And so, a conservative picture appears in evermore stark focus when one applies a gendered reading to the text.
One can also see a conservative streak running through Peppa Pig by applying a Post-Colonial reading, too. Perhaps the most glaring affirmer of this is that in the entirety of Peppaland, there has been only one human being ever included in the animalia. The Queen. That's a pretty strong start for team conservative. [note: Father Christmas appears, but given he is a commercialised, fictionalised bastardisation of a Judeo-Christian appropriation of a pagan tradition, he does not count.]
If we look further afield, we see that Peppa often goes on international holiday. (Cough. Pointy end of Eurocentric hegemony. Cough.) She's been to France, Italy and Australia, most noticeably. In these countries, nationalist stereotypes abound, which reinforce the cultural constructs of those nations, and their broadly Eurocentric natures. However, when Peppa visits South America, all she does is encounter Pedro Pony in the jungle. This remarkable coincidence keeps the interlocutor safely Eurocentric; no native inhabitants are encountered.
So again, we chalk up a bit of evidence for Peppa Pig being conservative, rather than progressive.
Is there any evidence of progressive thinking?
Well, let's apply a marxist reading.
If we broadly approach Marxism as an examination of power distribution, then we see a considerable role of being playing by a well-established social order, familial structures, and broadly moral precepts. The rule of law is respected. Manners and traditional social conventions are very important. Few problems can't be sorted out with a minor revision of perception (eg 'I suppose it is a bit funny') and a good bit of ROFLing.
Straddling the boundaries of the gendered and marxist readings is the stature of Daddy Pig. He's fat, but still a sporting world champion (puddle jumping), a gifted drummer, a basketball coach and social footballer. He's not good at directions, and is incredibly inept when it comes to home repair, but still gets away with describing himself as 'a bit of an expert' in numerous fields, despite being no such thing. And despite the humour that ensues, his position is assured. Daddy Pig is a traditionally patriarchal presence in many ways. Conservative? Yep. Very nicely, so, it must be said, but conservative nevertheless.
But there are two interesting anomalies.
Firstly, without fuss or fanfare, Peppa Pig is - despite the Eurocentrism - decidedly multicultural. The animals live happily amongst each other, which is a far cry from the nationalistic xenophobia often trying to pass for conservatism these days.
And secondly, the animals are clearly vegetarian (though not vegan), which is rather progressive. Admittedly, it would be hard to explain meat-eating in such an anthropomorphised world. They recycle, though. A tacit acknowledgement of climate change? Hmmm.
So, I think we can safely affirm that Peppa Pig is inherently conservative.
But there's one more thing to consider:
There is a strong case to be made that the world of Peppa Pig is entirely atheistic. Religion does not feature in any way. There are no biblical references. None. Progressive? Decidedly so! However, to assume that theism and conservatism are welded together in the same way that atheism and progressive thought are often asserted to be is to fall victim to a very tired false dichotomy indeed. In the end, theism is neither progressive nor conservative; it simply a way of conceiving of existence. HOW is plays out, though; well, that's another kettle of (Goldie, the) fish, entirely.
And on that note, I shall jump in a muddy puddle, and fall about laughing.
Comments