“Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar

“Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar first appeared in 1982 in the journal Research in the Teaching of English, published by the National Council of Teachers of English. The article presents a comparative study of children’s reading materials in Madhya Pradesh, India, and Ontario, Canada, examining how these texts shape social relationships through symbolic representation. Kumar employs a sociological approach using Kenneth Burke’s dramatistic pentad to analyze agents, acts, scenes, agency, and purpose in children’s literature. His findings highlight key cultural differences, such as the greater emphasis on adult authority in Indian textbooks versus peer-driven interactions in Canadian texts, reflecting broader societal norms regarding child-rearing and socialization. Moreover, gender disparities are evident, with male protagonists dominating narratives in both contexts, albeit more starkly in India. Kumar’s study challenges the assumption that reading textbooks serve merely to develop literacy skills, arguing instead that they function as ideological tools that socialize children into particular social roles and hierarchies. His work is significant for literary theory and pedagogy, as it underscores the role of literature in constructing social realities and reinforces the symbolic interactionist perspective that literature does not just mirror society but actively shapes behavioral norms. The study remains relevant in discussions about bias in educational materials, representation in literature, and the intersection of sociology and literary studies, making it a crucial reference for scholars examining the cultural politics of reading materials.

Summary of “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar

• Study Objective: The study aims to analyze the symbols of social relationships in children’s reading materials from Madhya Pradesh (India) and Ontario (Canada) using a sociological perspective (Kumar, 1982).
• Methodology: A method of analysis was developed to identify and compare social symbols in children’s stories across five elements: agent, act, scene, agency, and purpose (Kumar, 1982).
• Sociological Perspective: Literature is viewed as a form of “sociodrama” that invites readers to engage with and rehearse social roles symbolically, influencing children’s behaviors and attitudes (Burke, 1945; Duncan, 1968) (Kumar, 1982).
• Findings – Agents:
  • In the Indian sample, adults outnumber children as agents, reflecting the child-rearing practices of the society.
  • The Canadian sample features more child agents, emphasizing peer interactions and autonomy (Kumar, 1982).
  • Gender imbalances in representation were observed in both samples, with male agents more frequent than female ones (Kumar, 1982).
• Findings – Acts:
  • Indian stories often focus on “doing good” and self-sacrifice, while Canadian stories emphasize choice and individual achievement.
  • A greater emphasis on individual responsibility is seen in the Indian sample compared to the more communal-oriented Canadian stories (Kumar, 1982).
• Findings – Scenes:
  • Indian stories often combine multiple settings (home, nature, socially shared spaces), while Canadian stories usually keep the action in one location (Kumar, 1982).
• Agency and Purpose:
  • The agent’s own personality is a key form of agency in both samples.
  • Family plays a central role in Indian stories, often representing the context for the agent’s actions, while in Canadian stories, family serves more as an agency that helps achieve the agent’s goals (Kumar, 1982).
• Conclusion: Literature serves as a medium of symbolic socialization, providing children with a repertoire of social behaviors and attitudes. The study highlights the importance of sociological analysis in understanding the role of children’s literature in shaping social values (Kumar, 1982).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar

Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation	Usage in Krishna Kumar’s Study
Symbolic Interactionism	A sociological perspective that focuses on how individuals create and interpret social symbols through interaction.	Kumar applies this framework to analyze how children’s literature encodes social behaviors and relationships, shaping children’s perceptions of social norms and values.
Dramatistic Pentad	Developed by Kenneth Burke, this method analyzes narratives using five elements—Agent, Act, Scene, Agency, and Purpose—to understand symbolic actions.	Kumar uses this model to systematically analyze the roles and relationships depicted in children’s textbooks from India and Canada, examining how characters interact with their social environment.
Socialization through Literature	The process by which literature transmits cultural norms, social roles, and expected behaviors to young readers.	Kumar argues that reading materials do more than teach literacy; they prepare children for social participation by exposing them to symbolic models of behavior, morality, and hierarchy.
Representation in Literature	The way different social groups (e.g., gender, class, race, age) are depicted in texts, which influences how readers perceive these groups in society.	Kumar finds that Indian textbooks favor adult authority and depict women in traditional roles, while Canadian textbooks highlight children’s independence and peer interactions.
Sociodrama	A concept from H.D. Duncan that describes how literature allows readers to symbolically rehearse real-life roles and interactions.	Kumar treats children’s stories as “sociodramas,” where young readers symbolically engage with social structures, learning about family, authority, and peer relationships.
Hierarchy of Social Roles	The structured depiction of power and authority, often reinforcing traditional societal hierarchies.	Kumar’s analysis reveals that Indian textbooks emphasize adult dominance and obedience, whereas Canadian textbooks depict more egalitarian social structures.
Agency in Narrative	The ability of characters to make choices and take actions within a story, reflecting societal expectations.	Kumar finds that male adults in Indian textbooks exhibit the greatest agency, while Canadian stories allow child protagonists more independence in decision-making.
Cultural Embeddedness of Literature	The idea that literature reflects and reinforces the socio-cultural context of its time and place.	By comparing textbooks from India (hierarchical, collectivist) and Canada (individualistic, egalitarian), Kumar highlights how literature shapes children’s understanding of their social world.
Peer Socialization vs. Adult Authority	A comparative framework examining how different cultures depict peer influence versus adult control in child development.	Indian stories prioritize adult guidance and obedience, whereas Canadian texts emphasize friendships and peer group dynamics as key influences on a child’s social learning.
Implicit Ideology in Textbooks	The underlying values, norms, and power structures embedded in educational texts, often without being explicitly stated.	Kumar reveals gender bias, social class structures, and moral lessons in both Indian and Canadian textbooks, demonstrating how literature subtly shapes children’s beliefs about society.

Contribution of “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar

Literary Work	Critique Through Krishna Kumar’s Perspective	Relevant Concepts from Kumar’s Study
“The Jungle Book” (Rudyard Kipling)	Reflects colonial ideologies where Mowgli, a human child, is positioned as superior to the jungle animals, reinforcing a hierarchical social order. The anthropomorphic portrayal of animals as either obedient (Bagheera, Baloo) or dangerous (Shere Khan) reflects imperial control and binary moralism.	– Postcolonial theory (textbooks contain neo-colonial values, p. 307) – Symbolic roles in literature reinforce social order (p. 308)
“Cinderella” (Brothers Grimm / Charles Perrault)	Reinforces gender stereotypes by portraying Cinderella as a passive, obedient woman whose ultimate success depends on marriage to a prince. This reflects the symbolic positioning of women in children’s literature, where female characters are often dependent on male figures.	– Feminist literary criticism (gender roles in textbooks, p. 309) – Socialization through literature (p. 301)
“Huckleberry Finn” (Mark Twain)	While often praised for its critique of racism and social hypocrisy, the novel still portrays Jim as a submissive and dependent figure, reflecting the historical marginalization of minorities. This aligns with Kumar’s finding that minority characters are underrepresented or placed in traditional roles in children’s literature.	– Representation of minorities in textbooks (p. 316) – Reinforcement of social class hierarchies (p. 310)
“Anne of Green Gables” (L.M. Montgomery)	While Anne Shirley is a progressive female character, the novel still portrays a rigidly structured society where children must conform to adult expectations. This reflects Kumar’s argument that textbooks depict adults as dominant figures while children are shown in subordinate roles.	– Adult control over children’s roles in literature (p. 307) – The function of literature in shaping identity (p. 319)

Criticism Against “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar

• Limited Scope of Cultural Representation
  • The study focuses primarily on Madhya Pradesh (India) and Ontario (Canada), limiting its broader applicability to other global contexts, particularly non-Western and non-Indian societies.
• Overemphasis on Symbolic Interactionism
  • While Kumar applies symbolic interactionist theory, critics argue that he overlooks alternative literary and sociological frameworks, such as Marxist literary criticism, structuralism, or psychoanalysis, which could provide deeper insights into power relations and ideology.
• Lack of Engagement with Reader Reception Theory
  • The study assumes that children passively absorb social values from literature, neglecting reader-response theory, which suggests that interpretation varies based on individual experiences, social background, and cultural context.
• Gender Bias in Interpretation
  • While Kumar critiques male-dominated narratives, his analysis does not sufficiently explore intersectionality—how gender, class, race, and caste intersect in shaping literary experiences.
• Insufficient Attention to Textbook Production and Politics
  • The study focuses on the content of textbooks but does not deeply analyze how institutional forces, state policies, or economic interests shape curriculum development, particularly in postcolonial and neoliberal contexts.
• Neglect of Pedagogical Impact
  • While Kumar critiques social hierarchies in literature, he does not sufficiently address how teachers mediate these texts in classrooms, nor how students interact with and challenge textbook narratives.
• Generalization of Sociocultural Values
  • The study assumes that textbooks reflect dominant social ideologies, but critics argue that literary texts can also challenge, subvert, or satirize hegemonic norms, depending on context and interpretation.
• Absence of Quantitative Analysis on Influence
  • The research lacks empirical data on the actual impact of these textbooks on children’s worldview, relying instead on textual analysis without studying student engagement or behavioral effects.
• Limited Consideration of Globalization and Media Influence
  • The study does not account for how globalization, digital media, and new literary forms (e.g., online narratives, graphic novels, young adult fiction) shape children’s sociological imagination beyond textbooks.
• Static View of Literature’s Social Role
  • Critics argue that Kumar treats literature as a tool for ideological reproduction, without acknowledging its potential for resistance, reinterpretation, and dynamic cultural negotiation.

Representative Quotations from “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“The method of analysis used in this study implies that the function of literature in children’s lives extends well beyond its usefulness for skill development, actively providing young readers with a repertoire of symbolic social behaviors and attitudes.”	Kumar argues that literature is not just a tool for literacy but an active force in shaping social norms and behaviors. It helps children internalize societal roles through symbolic interaction.
“Mass reading of literary texts creates common spheres of individual participation, and thus generates a system of symbolically represented behaviours.”	This emphasizes the role of literature in constructing shared cultural and social experiences, reinforcing the idea that books help standardize social roles and expectations.
“The symbolic representation of some object or event… invites us to feel such emotions as would be associated with the actual object or event.” (citing Burke, 1945)	Kumar aligns his study with symbolic interactionism, demonstrating how literature acts as a training ground for emotional and social engagement, shaping children’s moral and ethical perspectives.
“Both literatures are male-dominated. In the Indian sample, 57% of the stories have a male agent whereas only 15.5% have female agents.”	This highlights gender bias in children’s textbooks, showing how textbooks reinforce patriarchal norms by privileging male perspectives and limiting female representation.
“Acts in which making a choice leads to results appear in less than 8% of Indian stories, and almost always lead to a tragic ending because the choice made by the agent is the wrong one.”	Kumar contrasts narrative structures in India and Canada, suggesting that Indian literature discourages personal agency and choice, promoting deference to authority instead.
“In the Indian stories, community and institutions appear more often when the agent is a male adult, suggesting that a wider range of social encounters is available to a man compared to a child.”	The study critiques gender and age hierarchies, indicating that women and children have limited social mobility and agency in Indian narratives.
“The study has important methodological implications for the analysis and evaluation of children’s reading materials. It demonstrates that the function of a symbol depends on its associations with other symbols that accompany it in a text.”	This stresses the importance of contextualizing literary symbols rather than analyzing them in isolation, supporting a semiotic and sociological approach to literary analysis.
“Group agents figure more often in the Canadian than in the Indian stories. In most such Canadian stories, the group consists of children… whereas Indian stories discourage peer relationships.”	Kumar highlights cultural differences in socialization, showing that Canadian textbooks encourage group dynamics and peer cooperation, while Indian textbooks emphasize individual responsibility and authority-driven social roles.
“The study suggests that in both societies, literature for children tends to underrepresent occupational diversity and perpetuates traditional social hierarchies.”	Kumar critiques textbook representation of class and labor, noting that contemporary occupations are rarely depicted, reinforcing outdated social structures.
“Examining a text to find out how many times a particular symbol appears does not reveal the function of that symbol, and consequently provides no basis for attributing a value or message to the symbol.”	This highlights methodological limitations of simplistic content analysis, arguing instead for a context-driven approach that considers how symbols interact within a narrative structure.

Suggested Readings: “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective” by Krishna Kumar

1. Kumar, Krishna. “Literature in the Reading Textbook: A Comparative Study from a Sociological Perspective.” Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 16, no. 4, 1982, pp. 301–19. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40170945. Accessed 4 Mar. 2025.
2. Wetzlaugk, Madhu Singh. “Official Discourse, Pedagogic Practice and Tribal Communities: A Case Study in Contradiction.” British Journal of Sociology of Education, vol. 5, no. 3, 1984, pp. 227–45. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1392687. Accessed 4 Mar. 2025.