‘What could I say?’ A critical discourse analysis of the construction of race in children’s literature
Abstract
This article analyzes the construction of Whiteness in children’s literature that intentionally brings Whiteness to the surface. We wondered: do the authors re‐center Whiteness in their attempts to racialize White people? What literary strategies and linguistic techniques do the authors call on to present Whiteness and, subsequently, Blackness? Using a combination of critical analyses including intertextual and hermeneutical analyses as well as critical discourse analysis, we foreground the reconstructive and deconstructive aspects of White people talking about race. Our empirical analysis also relied on transactional theories of reading informed by cultural criticism and Whiteness studies. We focus on four themes that cut across the books in our findings: White talk, colorblind theories of race, historicizing racism, and the privileging effect. We demonstrate the ways in which the talk in texts between White characters sometimes recenters Whiteness and other times disrupts Whiteness as the center. We discuss our cooperative reflexivity as an inter‐racial research team conducting this inquiry.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In U.S. education, a commitment to color-blind racial ideology conflated acknowledging race with being racist, and the implication for educators has been that refusing to recognize race is to be morally superior.
“Wells' (2014) analysis of education policy and reform reflected that similar to law, a commitment to color-blind racial ideology in U.S. education conflated acknowledging race with being racist, and therefore the implications for educators have been to refuse to recognize race is to be morally superior (Rogers and Christian 2007).”
From Conceptualizing color-evasiveness: using dis/ability critical race theory to expand a color-blind racial ideology in education and society (2017) · cites this paper as Rogers and Christian 2007
Cites
White Women, Race Matters: The Social Construction of Whiteness
Frankenburg, R. (1993) · doi:10.4324/9780203973431 · Cited by 3,308 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Annamma, S. A., Jackson, D. D., & Morrison, D. (2017) · Race Ethnicity and Education · doi:10.1080/13613324.2016.1248837 · Cited by 738 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rogers, R., & Christian, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri–St. Louis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rogers, Rebecca
- ORCID
- Rogers, Rebecca
- Venue
- Race Ethnicity and Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-02-04
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-46
- ISSN
- 1361-3324 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-109X
- OpenAlex
- W2005310025
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 14.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Race Ethnicity and Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Critical Race Theory in Education
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Themes in Literature Analysis
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Cultural and political discourse analysis
- Keywords
- whiteness, children's literature, Blackness, colorblind racism, privilege, literary strategies, intertextuality, reflexivity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review