six girls in a tree
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by: [Bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal]On: 02 December 2014, At: 00:04Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Social SemioticsPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/csos20
Six girls in a treePamela May Nilan aa Department of Education , The University of Newcastle , Rankin Drive, Shortland, NSW, 2308Published online: 29 Apr 2009.
To cite this article: Pamela May Nilan (1992) Six girls in a tree, Social Semiotics, 2:1, 44-60, DOI: 10.1080/10350339209360347
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10350339209360347
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However,Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability forany purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views ofor endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Six Girls in a Tree
Pamela May Nilan
A group of Catholic schoolgirls are sitting together on a grassy bankabove the school oval. It is Tuesday and they are watching the boys playfootball while they eat lunch. On Wednesday lunchtime the girls do notstop at the bank. They cross a narrow stretch of territory between the twoschool ovals, where the boys are still playing football, to the boundary ofthe school grounds. When they feel they are not being watched, they climbup into a tall, ancient pine tree and eat lunch. On any school day the girlsmay do either or both of these lunchtime activities.
Fig 1. Kennedy Catholic Education Co-Educational Secondary School(specified section of school grounds)
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 44
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
This article looks at a Catholic Co-ed secondary school in a largecountry town in New South Wales. When girls in this school '"play"together at lunchtime or recess, their chosen activities and the spaces inwhich those activities take place are different to those of the boys.Adolescent girls and adolescent boys at co-educational secondary schoolsundertake different activities and make unequal use of areas in the schoolgrounds at lunchtimes (Girls' Education Strategy 1989, 6). Groups of girlfriends are most frequently to be found sitting, standing, or walking whilethey talk together. Such activities do not occupy much physical space, theyare easily transported to other locations and require no equipment. On theother hand groups of boys are most frequently engaged in playing physicalgames such as football and handball. These games require and take up a lotof space (Oldenhove 1989, 39). They depend upon a suitable surface andgames equipment. The occupation of most "public" school space bygroups of boys in co-ed secondary schools would seem to corresponddirectly with the way men "own" public space (Rosaldo 1974) in thestreets, parks and open areas beyond the school grounds.
This paper looks specifically at two stories told by a group of girlsabout "playing together" at school - what they do and where they do it.The point will be made that the activity of girls playing together in thenarratives is described as operating in spaces in the school grounds whichare effectively at the margins of the large areas occupied by the boys fortheir activities. While there is some evidence in the narratives that the girlsresent and resist the boys' privileged position in the school, their overtcriticism is reserved for the school authorities rather than for the boysthemselves. In general, however, the girls' narratives are not told within acritical framework. They were asked by the interviewer to talk about thebusiness of being friends with each other and the stories are indexical tothat social phenomenon. The stories do not move outside the group of girlfriends of which the narrators are a part. The stories emphasise the internallandscape of the girls' relations with each other. The three narratorsdescribe one another and other members of the group in terms which notonly endow individual girls with compelling qualities , but constitute thefriendship group as a central, powerful and endlessly fascinating force intheir school lives.
Although the discourse of gendered schooling constitutes the
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 45
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
subjectivity of individual girls in terms of passive femininity andresponsible self-control (Stanley 1986: Kenway and Willis 1990:Walkerdine 1990), it would seem that groups of girls frequently challengethis constitution of their individual subjectivity, generating rowdy,physically assertive behaviour most often in environments outside theclassroom ( Meyenn 1980; Thomas 1980; L. Davies 1983; Moran 1984;Nilan 1991a, b). Through the deconstructive investigation of twocollaboratively narrated stories I hope to show that the adolescent girls'friendship group challenges the patriarchal discourse of genderedschooling.
Helen, Anne and Veronica are three twelve year old schoolgirls. Thetranscripts which follow are taken from an interview which is one of aseries I conducted in 1989. The general topic for all the interviews withthese girls was that of friendship. In the analysis which follows I will belooking specifically at two narratives. The first describes sitting together ona grass bank, talking and watching the boys play football, and the secondinvolves climbing a tree in the school grounds to sit, talk and leap aroundon branches high above the ground.
My interpretation of the girls' talk about these two activities will beundertaken within a feminist poststructuralist framework of the kindsproposed by Weedon (1987), Davies (1989) and Walkerdine (1990). I willbe treating the girls' stories as texts for investigation and deconstruction.Such an investigation must necessarily take into account the extent towhich stories told about gender-specific "play" refer to the male/femalebinary opposition within which children's knowledge of the social world isconstituted. As Davies (1989) points out, knowledge of male and femalegender appropriate behaviour is not so much taught as interactivelyacquired.
Much of the adult world is not consciously taught to children, is not containedin the content of their talk, but is embedded in the language, in the discursivepractices and the social and narrative structures through which the child isconstituted as a person, as a child and as male and female (Davies 1989,4).
What I hope to convey is that these two narrative structures involvean acknowledgement of the constitution of girls' subjectivity within thedominant and intersecting discourses of femininity and schooling, yet the
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No.l, 1992 46
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
telling of the narratives, which assembles and re-assembles the girls'friendship group, articulates a counter-discourse to the masculinisthegemony within the school (McDonald 1981, 163; Gilbert and Taylor1991, 23). In this way, I will be treating the stories as "talking" culture(Moerman 1988), as articulating the subcultural understandings of thegirls' friendship group. By collaboratively relating stories in the interviewthey are "doing" being friends with each other, much as the activities theydescribe in their talk constitute "playing together" as another instance of"doing" gendered friendship (West and Zimmerman 1987).
Flirting and Football
(1) P: right - so there's six of you is there six(2) A yeh(3) P: yeah and how - when you say you play with - play
together what does that mean(4) A oh well we talk sit and talk and(5) H: [sit together in class(6) A climb trees (laughs)
(all laugh)(7) P: and you climb trees oh right that's something you do
isn't it(8) V: and flirt (laughs)(9) P: and flirt with boys(10) A: I don't no(11) H: yes you do (pointing at Veronica)(12) A you and Megan you do that I don't do that and neither
does Helen(13) P: oh right so do the boys sit with you at lunchtime or are
they just at a distance somewhere(14) A: no(15) V: no at a distance(16) P. and then(17) V: and we watch them play football(18) A: /don't(19) H: /don't(20) A: we do play(21) H: (to Veronica) I watch you watch them
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1. 1992 47
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
(22) A yes(all laugh)
(23) H: you and Polly yell out things remarks(24) V: [yes(25) A: yes mean things about me
In the transcript above my question (3) calls for an explanation of thephrase "play together". This question refers back to several statementsmade earlier in the interview.
V: I went up to Anne and I said who do you play with and
she said no-one
V: yeah and she didn't have anyone to play with really
A* and Carol Clough she used to as well but urn she doesn'tplay with us much anymore
I was curious about the phrase "playing together". I wanted to knowwhat kinds of activities were grouped under the idea of playing together,for in the girls' earlier talk, this "playing with" had seemed strongly linkedto the process of making and being friends.
However, instead of the action/games model of playing together,which I must admit was in my mind when I asked the question, Helen saysfirstly that they sit together in class (5). Anne's answer (6) expands therange of activities that constitute "playing together". To sitting she addstalking and climbing trees. I note that my own response (7) is enthusiastic.Here at last is an activity, "climbing trees", that matches my action/gamesmodel of "playing together". However Veronica heads the talk off inanother direction without acknowledging my affirmation- seeking tag "isn'tit". She says:
(8) V: and flirt
Veronica's utterance further expands the range of activities whichconstitute "playing together". Anne is quick to disassociate herself fromVeronica's claim that part of what they do when they "play together"
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 48
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
is "flirt" (presumably with boys). She says "I don't" and then, quickly,"no" (10). Helen points accusingly and mockingly at Veronica, "you do"(11). Anne expands quickly on Helen's accusation.(12) A: you and Megan you do that I don't do that and neither
does Helen
Anne thereby groups herself and Helen (two of the six friends) in themoral category of girls who don't flirt. The interviewees (includingVeronica herself) have worked to place Veronica in the moral category ofgirls who do flirt and Anne has grouped Megan (another of the six friends)in this same category with Veronica.
It emerges from the talk that follows this (13-15) that the boys arenot sitting with the girls. Veronica then adds another activity to the rangethat constitutes "playing together" as a group of friends. The collaborativenature of this new activity - watching the boys play football, is signalledby Veronica's use of "we" (17).
As before, Anne and Helen disassociate themselves from Veronica'sclaim. They immediately distance themselves from the activity which hasbeen added on to the list by Veronica. "/ don't" (18) and (19). Thesedisclaimers would seem to signal that watching the boys play football doesnot really qualify for inclusion in the range of collaborative activities thatsignify "playing together", as two of the group of six friends claim thatthey do not participate. Anne and Helen's disclaimers furthermore signal amoral differentiation from the position claimed by Veronica in relation toboys. Anne starts to explain; "we do play" (20), but is interrupted byHelen saying to Veronica, in a mocking tone; "I watch you watch them"(21). Jane is quick to agree "yes" (21), at which point they all laugheduproariously together. Helen's claim that she watches Veronica watchingthe boys is of some interest, as she is asserting her presence in the grouppositioned near the boys, but that her focus is on Veronica rather than onthe boys' game. The implication would seem to be that while Veronicawatches the boys play football, her behaviour provides more amusementfor Anne and Helen than anything else. Perhaps another activity has beenadded to the range within "playing together", that of amusing, and beingamused by, each other. Furthermore, judging by the way the three girlstease each other in the talk, teasing and ribbing each other would also seem
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 49
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
an integral part of "playing together".
Helen's accusation (23), seems to be yet another "tease" ofVeronica. She says "you and Polly yell out things" and in using the secondperson yet again, she continues the distancing of herself from Veronica'sclaimed interaction with the boys. Helen's utterance also adds yet anotheractivity to the chain of named activities which constitute "playing together".Whereas before there was sitting and watching, now there is yelling out(23). "Yelling out things" is a far less passive activity than sitting andwatching. Anne indicates that the things/remarks "yelled out" are "meanthings"about her (24). She would seem to be describing yet anotherinstance of the teasing interactions that characterize the girls' relationshipswith each other. These allusions to sliding allegiances within the groupindicate that there are affinity groups within the group of six girls and thatat least one demarcation issue may be that of relationships with boys.
In this interchange there is a narrative unfolding in the accumulationof detail and the embroidering upon what the previous speaker said. It ispossible to summarise the "story" as follows:
The group of six girls sit in class together. At lunchtime they sittogether on a bank overlooking the oval where the boys play football (inthe semiotics of the school grounds, the large oval is boys' space, the farsmaller bank above is girls' space). Veronica and Megan watch the boysplaying football. Helen (and probably Anne too) are more interested in theantics of Veronica than the boys' game. Veronica (and Megan) "flirt" andyell things/remarks out to the boys (about Anne?), thereby providingamusement for the group.
Sitting and watching on the bank above the oval is a common"playing together" pastime for the group of six friends. In the three girls'talk it is recalled as an activity characterised by teasing and making eachother laugh, and they are doing both in the telling of the story to theinterviewer. It is my assumption that such banter is characteristic of theway they "do" being friends with each other, and particularly of the waythey "play together". The key interaction expressed in the girls'collaborative narrative about how their group "plays together" is cohesionand community around certain activities. As they talked and disagreed
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 50
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
about the flirting, who watched the boys play football, and who watchedthe watcher, the three of them executed a number of inclusionary andexclusionary moves towards each other (Nilan 1991b). Just as importantas these moves, however, was the demonstration of "friendship"competence. Each demonstrated knowledge of teasing and how to tease,each speaker added to the unfolding narrative with pleasure andamusement. I believe this dynamic process in the talk is indicative of theculturally and historically specific set of understandings these girls shareabout what it is to be a girl-friend and what it is to have girl-friends. Their"story" about playing together articulates the meta-narrative of adolescentfemale friendship in the context of school.
In the next part of the paper, I will be discussing what appears to be,as I said before, a far more Amazonian activity within the range of "playingtogether" than watching the boys play football. To understand the semiosisof the school grounds, and therefore the significance of the tree(s) inrelation to the oval and the bank overlooking the oval, it will be necessaryto consult Fig. 1 - Kennedy Catholic Coeducational Secondary School(specified section of the school grounds).
Six Girls in a Tree
(26) P: so what are the trees what do you do in the trees(27) A well we climb them and everything and then we talk in
them(28) H: and eat(29) A and eat in them(30) P. are they those big pine trees on the outskirts of(31) A [yeah(32) P: the school they're terrific for climbing I know(33) A yeah there's this one(34) P: [great(35) A really good tree that we(36) H: [and Megan gives us all heart attacks doing this(37) A: [OH(38 V: oh yeah she went up about FIFTEEN METRES and(39) A and THEN SHE JUST HUNG BY THIS LITTLE BRANCH
about THIS big just swinging up and down
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 51
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
(Veronica and Helen laughing all through this)(40) H: and the branches THIS like THIS far apart and she goes
she goes(41) A and she steps across it like this(42) P: oh really(43) H: and I'm there and I'm going oh no this(44) A and Carol she's about that short
(Helen laughs)urn and - she did it as well oh and we just almost hada heart attack gee it was so funny
(45) P: so how many of you were up the tree at any one time(46) H: all of us(47) A [we were all - up the tree really(48) P: so how many of you about six(49) A six up the tree(50) P: six up the tree
It is clear from a rapid reading of the talk here that climbing up thetrees and sitting, talking and eating in them are still framed within range of"we-talk" concerned with "playing together", with "doing" friendship. Theextract commences with Anne and Helen listing the range of activitiesassociated with the trees, at my prompting, then Anne signals thecommencement of a story:
(35) A there's this one really good tree that we
She is interrupted by Helen commencing a different, althoughobviously related story.
(36) H: Megan gives us all heart attacks doing this
As Helen spoke she mimed a swinging, trapeze-artist stylemovement. Her words and action galvanised the other two girls. All threebecame very animated at this point, demonstrating actions, rocking to andfro with laughter and shouting. Anne's exclamation "OH" (37) wasaccompanied by her throwing herself back in her chair with her arms aboveher head, then leaning eagerly forward as Veronica began to speak. As thestory was told all three girls at different times were up on their feet and
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 52
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
demonstrating what Megan did:
(38) V: oh yeah she went up about FIFTEEN METRES and(39) A and THEN SHE JUST HUNG BY THIS LITTLE BRANCH
about THIS big just swinging up and down(Veronica and Helen laughing all through this)
(40) H: and the branches THIS like THIS far apart and she goesshe goes
(41) A and she steps across it like this
Veronica's words were accompanied by mime concerning the heightof the tree, Anne's by the action of hanging and estimating with herhands the width of the branch. When Anne finished, there was no pause.Helen added another detail to the unfolding narrative "and the branches".As she continued she spread her arms wide apart : "THIS like THISfar apart and she goes she goes" (40). The narrative is continued by Annewith appropriate actions to suit the words: "and she steps across it likethis" (41).
The physical animation which characterised the telling of this storyprobably indicates the physical excitement of activities in the tree. Risk anddanger are certainly implied. According to the girls, had Megan slipped shemight very well have fallen fifteen metres. However, despite the stress onthe heart-stopping impact of Megan's antics, the narrative does not positionMegan as silly, but athletic, amusing and strong. She is, in a sense, theheroine of this story, not only as a daring impromptu acrobat, but as asource of inspiration for a girl apparently less physically capable ofacrobatic feats.
(44) A and CAROL SHE'S about THAT short urn and - she didit as well oh and we just about had a heart attack gee it wasso funny
Anne indicated Carol's height at about a metre above the floor. Thepoint about Carol seems to be that, being short, she was not expected to beable to follow the example of Megan. However, she did and Anne's reportimplies that Carol's imitation of Megan's acrobatic leap (44) also thrilledand amused the girls up the tree, just as it is thrilling and amusing
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 53
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
Veronica, Anne and Helen in the current telling. Carol is described ashaving overcome what other girls regarded as a physical limitation - herheight. Anne's exaggerated indication of Carol's height at one metreemphasizes the magnitude of Carol's achievement in making the leap herfriends thought she could never make.
The narrative, taken as a whole, seems to be about "playingtogether" as collaborative daring enterprise. School rules do not permit theclimbing of trees. As can be seen in the diagram the girls would need topass the two ovals (boys' space) to reach the tree as the public streets aiestrictly out of bounds. The area around the large trees is technically out ofbounds too, although this is not strictly enforced. The tree is high (I haveseen it) and according to the interviewees, the branch which is swung uponis small. In the story all six of the girls are up the tree and witness Megan'sscary leap which "gives us all heart attacks" (36). This is followed byCarol's scary leap: "we just about had a heart attack" (44).
There are a number of ways in which the story is abouttransgression. The girls break school rules both by going to the area andclimbing the trees. They cross the boys' space to get to the "good" tree. As"girls" at secondary school gender specific expectations are held of them(Gilbert and Taylor 1991, 20), and at least one of these is that girls areunlikely to be found climbing trees. In this sense the six girls aretransgressing a "norm" of gendered schooling.
The following extract demonstrates their awareness of how theactivities in the tree contest both the discourse of femininity and thediscourse of the school. The narrative about the activity of playing togetherin the tree continues, but includes three anecdotes about teacher reactions totheir occupation of the tree which further demonstrate theiracknowledgement of dual transgression.
Not a Very Ladylike Thing to Do
(51) V: and you get camouflage when the teachers come past(52) A: I know we climb the tree almost as high as we can or just
jump down if we're near the bottom(53) P: right so you just pretend that you're not climbing the trees
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 54
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
(54) A yeah(55) P: and then when they've gone you just climb back up the
trees again(56) A 'cosan'(57) V: [some tell us(58) A yeah and I mean no-one told us(59) V: [and some don't?(60) P. yeah(61) H: we - the first one saw us and said it was all right as long
as we didn't leave rubbish around(62) P: right(63) A and then this - another one came along and she said
I wouldn't climb trees if I were you and then there wasthis-man
(64) H: oooh(65) A Brother Brother Frank he said - that's not a very
ladylike thing to do now get down(66) P: oh yes(67) V: and then he saw my - then he saw one of my - one of
my friend(s) climbing it and his two friends - and hegoes - and he just walked past with a smile and didn'tsay anything to them
(68) A [they were boys?(69) P: because they were boys(70) A mmm
In this extract, the talk has moved onto the topic of what happenswhen the teacher on duty comes past. Veronica says, "you get camouflagewhen the teachers come past" (51). Anne expands on this comment,making it into a group activity with her use of the first person plural "we":"I know we climb the trees as high as we can or just jump down if we'renear the bottom" (52). Both these utterances seem based on the assumptionthat the girls' occupation of the tree is a transgression and must bedisguised from teachers. Teachers, however, are reported as inconsistentin their attitudes to the enforcement of school rules (57 and 59).
Helen says the "first one saw us and said it was alright as long as wedidn't leave rubbish around:" (61). Anne continues: "another one came
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 55
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
along and she said I wouldn't climb trees if I were you" (63). In the storyso far they have described a teacher who gave tacit approval and one whodelivered a mild reproof. I assume that both of these teachers are femalebecause of the contrastive way Anne constructs her next utterance: "andthen there was this man" (63). She identifies the man: "Brother Frank hesaid that's not a very ladylike thing to do now get down" (65).
The story so far establishes the girls as justified in continuing toclimb trees because each teacher expresses a different viewpoint, implyingthat the school rules are unlikely to be strictly enforced. Both of the fírsttwo (female) teachers are reported as appealing to the girls' assumed senseof correct behaviour, although the first sounds unusually permissive. Thestatement attributed to Brother Frank, on the other hand, positions thegirls' occupation of the tree as directly contrary to the discourse offemininity.
that's not a very ladylike thing to do now get down (65)
His utterance is also reported as more authoritarian than those of thetwo previous teachers. First Veronica, then Anne expand upon thesignificance of Brother Frank's comment on their occupation of the tree.
(67) V: and then he saw my - then he saw one of my - one ofmy friend(s) climbing it and his two friends - and hegoes - and he just walked past with a smile and didn'tsay anything to them
(68) A [they were boys?
This short narrative of Veronica's contrasts Brother Frank'sreactions to girls' and boys' transgression of the school rule forbiddingtree-climbing. It would seem that Veronica and Anne are making acollaborative point about two informal "codes" of appropriate schoolbehaviour, one for girls and one for boys. There would seem to be twointerpretations of a single school rule, one for boys and one for girls. Thisis not a new phenomenon in schools.
Parents and students perceive that differential discipline occurs with punishmentbeing more 'heavy-handed* for boys and girls expected to be more 'lady-like*.(Girls' Education Strategy 1989,6).
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 56
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
The logic and sense of the narrative about Brother Frank restsentirely upon the knowledge of everyone present in the interview of theconstraining power of gender distinction (Threadgold 1990,23). The wordhe is reported to use: "ladylike" derives its meaning from a whole range ofcultural practices that constitute femininity and that are available to all ofus, as female gendered persons in the interview. "Ladylike" derives itsmeaning from the opposition masculine/feminine. In behaving like ladies,girls behave not like men. In behaving in a "not very ladylike" manner,they are behaving like men or boys because the meaning of "ladylike"defers to the male half of the binary opposition masculine/feminine.
In patriarchal discourse the nature and social role of women are defined inrelation to a norm which is male (Weedon 1987,2).
The narrative about Brother Frank then, operates as a critical readingof gender constraint in the school. Anne and Veronica are evoking thediscourse of feminism as a counter-discourse to that of femininity. Theiroccupation of the tree is reported as read by Brother Frank in terms oftransgression within the gendered discourse of schooling, but willpresumably be read by me as a feminist triumph over fear and gravity. Thegirls9 narrative invites me to join them in identifying the reactions ofBrother Frank as unfair, as constraining them from doing what they like todo and what another group of students (boys) is freely able to do (Weedon1987,5). In part, this invitation is indicated by the upward inflection at theend of Anne's comment:
(68) A [they were boys?
An interesting aspect of the story about "playing together" in the treeis that it does match the action/games model I had in mind at the start.However, it takes place in private, marginal space: the treetops. The groupof girls is invisible to the boys playing football and the teachers onplayground duty. There are several gender distinguishing practices in thecontext of this school which discourage girls from public physical activitiesat lunchtime. The first of these is the insistence on knee length pleatedskirts, skin-coloured tights and leather-soled black lace-up shoes as part ofthe girls' uniform. The girls are only allowed to wear track pants andrunning shoes on Friday (sports day). The girls'summer and winteruniforms, do not actually prevent running around and games, but the girls
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 57
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
seem to worry about falling over and showing their pants, and aboutdirtying or tearing their uniforms. In this way, school uniforms directlyimpinge upon the process of girls' bodily construction (Lesko 1988,123).
The second practice is the informal "rule" that the large playingspaces (see Fig. 1) "belong" to the boys. The ovals, the handball area andthe tennis courts are all dominated by boys at lunchtime. The girls tend todrift about in groups, talking. It is therefore interesting that the threeinterviewees elect to tell me a story about "athletic" feats that took place atlunchtime, in the concealed space at the top of a tall tree. The storyfunctions on a number of levels. Although they do not speak of it directly,the narrators acknowledge the way the discourse of femininity is articulatedwithin the discourse of gendered co-ed schooling. Their story relates anincident which contests the semi-official school rules concerning gender-appropriate behaviour. The setting in which the incident takes place, a talltree, with concealing branches, is also of significance as a site in which acounter-discourse to gendered co-ed schooling may be constructed. It isout of bounds, physical risks are taken to reach it and once there,concealed from the rest of the school population - "you get camouflagewhen the teachers come past" (51), events can take place which powerfullyconsolidate the girls' friendship group. The perilous leaps of Megan andCarol become a tale that can be told and retold, part of the mythology of thefriendship group which serves to affirm its solidarity and difference fromother groups.
In conclusion, the narratives discussed in this paper portray the girls'friendship group as engaged in a partial refusal of some of the constraintsof gendered co-ed schooling. Anne, Veronica and Helen are all "well-behaved" individual girls (Walkerdine 1990, 77), yet the group isportrayed as constituting something of a challenge to the intersectingdiscourses of school and femininity. In the interview and in the stories thegirls yell out, laugh a lot and tease each other, and in the story of the tree,the group transgresses not only a school rule but a 'norm' of femininebehaviour. Megan's and Carol's physical courage and strength arecelebrated in the story of the leaps in the tree. The teachers are defied inthat the narrators imply that their group continues to climb the tree. BrotherFrank's bias towards boys is identified.
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No.l, 1992 58
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
It is clear that in the interpretation I have undertaken in this paper, Ihave given my own reading of the stories as texts produced in socialinteraction. This reading is undoubtably a partial one, nevertheless Ibelieve that it illuminates the girls' readings of their own position as "girls"in the school. My interpretation also throws light upon the subculture ofthis group of girl friends. The group subculture inheres in a partial refusalof the discourses of school and femininity, directly manifested in yellingout, the climbing of tall trees and taking unsupervised physical risks.While as individuals, the girls do not seem to resist the gender constraintsof schooling, as a group they would appear to be engaged in constructingcounter-discursive subcultural practices in the marginal spaces left to themby the boys' play activities.
Department of EducationThe University of NewcastleRankin Drive ShortlandNSW 2308
References
Davies, B. 1989, Frogs and Snails and Feminist Tales. Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
Davies, L. 1983, 'Gender, resistance and power', in S. Walker and L.Barton (eds.)Gender, Class and Education, The Falmer Press, Lewes.
Gilbert, P and Taylor, S. 1991, Fashioning the Feminine, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
Kenway, J. and Willis, S. 1990, Hearts and Minds: Self-esteem and the Schooling ofGirls, The Falmer Press, Lewes.
Lesko, N. 1988, 'The curriculum of the body: lessons from a Catholic high school', inL. Roman, L.K. Christian-Smith and E. Ellsworth (eds) Becoming Feminine:The Politics of Popular Culture. The Falmer Press, Lewes.
MacDonald, M. 1981, 'Schooling and the reproduction of class and gender relations',in R. Dale et al (eds) Politics, Patriarchy and Practice, Falmer/Open UniversityPress, Lewes.
Meyenn, R. 1980, 'School girls' peer groups', in P. Woods (ed) Pupil Strategies:Explorations in the Sociology of the School, Croom Helm, London.
Moerman, M. 1988, Talking Culture, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadephia.
Moran, P. 1984, Female youth culture and attitudes to education: a focus on socialrelations in the school, ANZAAS Congress May 1984.
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 59
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014
Six Girls in a Tree Pamela May Nilan
Nilan, P. 1991a, 'Having fun and thinking deeply'. Working Papers on Language,Gender and Sexism, Vol. 1. No. 1. 88-104.
Nilan, P. 1991b, 'Exclusion, inclusion and moral ordering in two girls' friendshipgroups', Gender and Education, Vol. 3. No. 2. 163-182.
NSW Department of Education. 1989. Girls' Education Strategy.
Oldenhove, H. 1989, 'Girls, PE and sports', in G.C. Leder and S.N. Sampson (eds)Educating Girls, Allen and Unwin, Sydney.
Rosaldo, M.Z. 1974, 'Woman, culture and society: a theoretical overview', in M.Z.Rosaldo and L. Lamphere (eds) Woman, Culture and Society, StanfordUniversity Press, Stanford.
Stanley, J. 1986, 'Sex and the quiet schoolgirl', British Journal of Sociology ofEducation, Vol. 7. No. 3.
Thomas, C. 1980, 'Girls and counter-school culture', Melbourne Working Papers,Melbourne.
Threadgold, T. and Cranny-Francis, A. (eds). Feminine Masculine and Representation,Allen and Unwin, Sydney.
Walkerdine, V. 1990, Schoolgirl Fictions, Verso, London.
Weedon, C. 1987, Feminist Practice and Poststructuralist Theory, Blackwell, Oxford.
West, C. & Zimmerman, D.H. 1987, 'Doing gender', Gender & Society, Vol. 1. No.2. June 1987. 125 -151.
Social Semiotics, Vol.2, No. 1, 1992 60
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Bib
lioth
èque
s de
l'U
nive
rsité
de
Mon
tréa
l] a
t 00:
04 0
2 D
ecem
ber
2014