Search

In this article, the privilege accorded to language as the 'natural' way of human expression and communication is problematized. Drawing upon multiple post-colonial sources, the author suggests that this is yet another of the ways in which dominant Western ways of viewing the world are imposed upon diverse groups of people, including young children. Questions are asked about whose interests are best served when language is privileged over other modes of communication. Acquiring language is often perceived as a crucial tool in the growth of young children; however, the question is rarely asked, what is lost when language is gained. The article also provides examples from an ethnographic study done in India that suggests that children can engage in complex forms of communication that do not involve language. Finally, the article addresses the common assumption that using language mostly means using one language. Dominant Western discourses about language are almost overwhelmingly unilingual; however, most of the world's children use and live in multilingual environments. The excessive importance given to language as the 'natural' way of human expression represents the continued colonization of the field of early childhood education by dominant perspectives (Cannella, 1997). Said (1991) has used Foucault's work on the alliance between power and knowledge to explore life in colonized societies, and suggests that knowledge transforms power into a 'web-like force which is confirmed and articulated through the everyday exchanges ... which animate social life' (Gandhi, 1998, p. 74). I extend this argument to the lives of young children (who in many ways fit the definition of a colonized group) and demonstrate how, in the case of language, one form of representation (that of the privileged) has gained power and how that marginalizes and casts into shadow other ways of viewing and interacting with the world (Viruru & Cannella, 1998). As Dahlberg et al (1999) ask, why does so much of the early childhood world speak the same language? What other

It is estimated that more than 12 million children in India under the age of 14 engage in paid labor at least part time, due mostly to economic reasons. Dominant discourses about childhood however conceptualize childhood labor not only as unethical but as exploitation. This article explored will the tensions between Western notions of childhood (within which paid labor is considered taboo) and the realities of children's lives in India, arguing that childhood labor must be contextualized and understood not only as a colonial legacy but also as part of its socio-cultural context. The author argues that separating children from the world of work fosters a culture of childhood that emphasizes entitlement over participation and privileges the rights of the consumer over children's rights as citizens. The idea for this article came to me during my stay in India last summer. We were going somewhere in the car, and were stuck in one of the endless traffic jams that seem to characterize life in big cities in India. As we were waiting at one of the traffic lights, two children started to put on a mini roadshow, to entertain the crowd. The older child was probably seven years old, and the younger one seemed to be no more than three or four. The 'show' consisted of doing gymnastic exercises, such as somersaults and tumbles (on the pavement, not more than two feet away from a mass of traffic). These are not uncommon sights in India. Perhaps what made me notice this pair was that during the entire show, the younger child seemed no more than half awake. When I first noticed him, he was sitting on the pavement, leaning against a wall, and dozing. When it was time for the show to begin, he seemed to be able to do everything he needed to without fully waking up. His part was to climb on the back of the older child, and they in tandem performed various tricks, some of them involving a metal hoop, that looked as though it had been made out of some left over metal wires. As soon as the 'show' was over, I watched the younger child resume his place on the pavement, and go back to sleep. I don't think that I have as yet sorted out all the reactions that I had to this incident. It seems to speak of capabilities and limitations all at once, and as such illustrates, in a nutshell, the complexities that surround the issue of childhood labor. My particular focus in this article is on how discourses of childhood and work intersect in Indian contexts. I refer to both dominant worldwide discourses about what it means to be a child, and what it means to work, as well as to more 'indigenous' meanings. What kinds of realities are produced by those intersections (and I would argue that the scene I described above is one of them)? How does one respond to the idea that all childhood labor is necessarily evil and exploitative? At the outset, it is important to note that this is a topic upon which there are literally volumes and volumes of information. Many major international groups, such as the International Labor Organization (ILO), UNICEF, the World Bank and the Save the Children organization, are involved in creating policies and standards to address this issue. With the development of the field of childhood studies, and an increased interest not only in the social construction of childhood, but also in the various forms that it takes, there is a great deal of literature that addresses the issue of working children from nuanced and complex perspectives. Therefore my attempts in this article