Edible Clues in Anne Lindbergh's Three Lives to Live
Introduction
Food is as much a staple in the world of children’s literature as it is in real life. After all, "If food is fundamental to live and a substance upon which civilizations and cultures have built themselves, then food is also fundamental to the imagination and the imaginary arts."1 From the mad tea party in Wonderland to Edmund’s consumption of Turkish Delight to Charlie’s visit of Wonka’s Chocolate Factory, children’s literature is filled with memorable scenes involving food. Since "children’s literature scholarship [is] just beginning to grapple with food as an essential interpretive trope for children’s literature,"2 close reading of any text that has many memorable food scenes is essential to further the field.
Anne Lindbergh’s3 1992 middle-grade novel Three Lives to Live contains some of the most intricate uses of food to reflect the happenings of a novel. While Three Lives to Live is not a traditional mystery novel, there is a mystery throughout that is unravelled by the main character. Lindbergh plants numerous clues, several involving food, within the text. In many instances of food scenes in children’s literature, the food highlights the plot. For example, one can tell at the very moment that Edmund consumes the Turkish Delight that he is being seduced by the White Witch. In Lindbergh’s novel, however, the use of food highlights an identity struggle of which, until the final quarter of the book, the reader (along with the narrator) does not realize the extent. I argue that it is an unusually intricate and well-crafted use of food within a children’s novel, and worth an in-depth study, especially relating to food and personal identity as well as authorial craft.
In Three Lives to Live, the three main characters – two girls (Garet and Daisy) and an older woman (Gratkins) who acts as their grandmother – eventually realize that they are the same person: a girl named Margaret who, through the magic of a laundry chute, slid 50 years into the future twice: once as Garet at age two (from 1932 to 1982), and again as Daisy at age thirteen (from 1943 to 1993). Each time Margaret from fifty years ago has an encounter with the laundry chute, a double of her slides down and lands fifty years in the future, while the original Margaret remains to live and grow up in her own time, eventually becoming Gratkins (short for "Grandmother Atkins") to Garet and Daisy. Once she figures out what is going on, Gratkins gives a home to her two copies in the same house in which she grew up and also gives them their nicknames. "Garet" is short for Margaret and "Daisy" comes from "'marguerite, which means daisy in French.'"4 Gratkins has raised Garet as her granddaughter from toddler age, never telling Garet her origins until near the end of the book, while Daisy, arriving as a teenager, finds out much sooner in the book.
Three Lives to Live is a rather convoluted tale, difficult to fully comprehend upon a first read. Lindbergh employs many standard literary devices, such as foreshadowing and planting hints and clues in the text, but it is her use of food that highlights various deeper meanings relating to this triplication. The foreshadowing present in the food completely reveals the true identities of Daisy and Garet long before the truth comes out within the text itself. Carolyn Daniel states that, "Above all, food is never just something to eat: even when it is mundane and everyday it carries meaning. Food events are always significant, in reality as well as fiction." 5 This statement is particularly applicable to Three Lives to Live.
The mention of food in Three Lives to Live nearly always signals a major event in the text in three different ways. First, food scenes are always accompanied by important revelations, confrontations, and/or conversations. While this is nothing new in children’s literature, Lindbergh’s use of food is particularly masterful. Second, the description of how or what a character eats reflects their attitude towards a situation. This relates very strongly to the concept of food as personal identity. Third, the dish shepherd's pie in particular is symbolic on many different levels and signals when a significant event occurs. Shepherd’s pie relates to Gratkins and her role as a maternal figure for Daisy and Garet, despite being an older version of themselves.
Food Scenes
Daniel states that "The food event can . . . be seen to be a valuable literary device with many layers of meaning."6 Three Lives to Live is veritably crammed with examples of this, and the fact that the food does strongly relate to these three characters is highlighted by the fact that, we only ever see Garet, Daisy, and Gratkins eating together (there is only one, rather significant, exception when Garet goes back to the 1940s, which will be discussed later). There are many instances where the school cafeteria is mentioned in the text, but we never actually see Garet and Daisy eating around other people, which highlights the intimate nature of all mealtimes in the book. By keeping meals only between these three characters, Lindbergh keeps food as an indicator that something major is about to be revealed about their relationship. (See Appendix A for a complete list of all meals, their attendants, and a brief description.)
Many of the major conversations or confrontations between these three characters occur over meals, such as when Gratkins finally tells Daisy that they are the same person while eating ice cream sundaes:
"First Daisy put the cherry on the other plate. Then she scooped off the nuts and put them in a tidy little heap about an inch away from the cherry. She did the same thing for the whipped cream. After which she carefully extracted the banana and wiped it off with her napkin. All that was left on the first plate was the ice cream.
"She still had to separate the scoop of vanilla from the scoop of chocolate and scrape off the side of each scoop that had rubbed against the other scoop. . . .
". . . Daisy cut that half cherry into seven tiny pieces. And ate one. And chewed it for an eon." 7
This is one of the longest scenes in the entire book which describes Daisy separating food. Daisy surely already knows, on some unconscious level, what Gratkins is going to tell her. This suspicion manifests in her attitude toward food. Daisy wishes to separate herself from Grakins, but as she cannot, she separates her food instead. Garet observed earlier in the text that "Over the past weeks [Daisy] has become finickier than ever."8 As Daisy begins to realize that she is the same person as Gratkins, her desire to separate herself from Gratkins manifests in her food obsession. This supports Daniel’s assertion that "Girls . . . have ambivalent feelings about the body and role of the mother. For girls in particular the maternal figure may symbolize their own inevitable entrapment, passivity, and degradation."9 Gratkins is Daisy’s mother figure, but she is also Daisy herself and Daisy reacts strongly to this confusing situation by separating her food in an extreme way.
The fact that this food is ice cream, the only instance of a meal in the book where a sweet food is eaten, concurs with Daniel’s Freudian-influenced "belief that food, especially sweet, rich food, often metaphorically represents the body of the mother in popular culture and that the desire for such food includes a subconscious yearning for the restoration of the primal relationship with her."10 Gratkins takes the girls out for ice cream; Garet skips the meal because she is concerned about her weight, but still would like to share with Daisy when Daisy asks for an extra plate for her banana split. Daisy, however, has other plans for the extra plate. Garet "decided to give in if she asked. All, I’d skipped lunch. But it turned out that the extra plate was to keep things separate. And believe me, separating a banana split takes forever."11 Gratkins provides the ice cream. Garet denies herself the ice cream, but still wishes to split it with Daisy. Daisy not only does not share the ice cream with her sister/alternate self, but refuses to eat the sweet treat provided by her mother/alternate self until she has separated every part of the banana split from every other part. It is not until Daisy is eating the final part of the sundae, the cherry (split into "seven tiny pieces . . . and chewed . . . for an eon"12), that she asks Gratkins who she is, and it is not until Daisy finishes eating entirely that Gratkins finally tells her the truth, at least as far as Daisy is concerned. Garet, who did not eat any of the sundae, still remains in the dark about her true identity.
The meals where only two of the three Margarets are present show a very different dynamic than those shared by all three. There are only two occurrences, one with Garet and Daisy, one with Garet and Gratkins. Garet and Gratkins tend to have calmer interactions, while Garet and Daisy have more intense conversations. During the one meal where Garet and Daisy eat pizza (ordered, not made by Gratkins) without Gratkins, the two girls have a very heated argument that ends up getting physical. When Garet and Gratkins dine without Daisy, it occurs immediately after Garet has discovered that she too is a Margaret. Garet, unlike Daisy, has a much calmer reaction. Garet and Gratkins talk openly for the first time in the book as they enjoy a meal of "Sardines on soda crackers, followed by cold, canned chicken soup."13 This meal would obviously cause Daisy problems, but Daisy has, at this point, climbed back up the laundry chute in an attempt to return to where she thinks she belongs. After Gratkins and Garet clear the air between themselves, they realize that "there was still something missing. Or rather someone."14 Shortly after this meal is finished, Garet declares her intention to climb up the laundry chute herself and bring Daisy home. She comes to this conclusion after a meal shared with the woman who raised her, the food symbolizing "love, comfort, and safety . . . coded to create a familiar atmosphere, a 'homely' maternal environment."15 Thus strengthened by the meal and the knowledge of her true identity, Garet is able to go to the past.
This is followed by the only mono-Margaret-attended dining scene in the book: when Garet dines with her “real” family (including her brother Edwin) back in 1943. Garet is concerned that she has merged with 1943 Margaret when she climbed back up the laundry chute. This concern completely disappears when Garet realizes that she is not only not eating like Daisy, she is not eating like 1943 Margaret:
"I only made one mistake . . .with the way I ate the main dish, which was pork chops with peas and applesauce. Have you guessed what I did wrong? Here's a clue: I had prepared a scrumptious mouthful of sauce over meat with three peas on top.
. . .
"From then on, I did a Daisy. In case you don't remember, that means a nibble of pork, followed by a taste of applesauce, followed by one pea. I even wiped my fork on my napkin between the sauce and the pea. I should have known that Daisy brought her attitude with her from the past. She couldn't have gotten that weird overnight. Not unless she hit her head on the way down the laundry chute."16
Now Garet knows that Daisy is still herself, not a re-merged Margaret "Because if [Garet] hadn't merged with Margaret, Daisy hadn't either."17 This revelation comes during the only mealtime that one lone Margaret (in this case, Garet posing as the “original” Margaret in the past) attends.
The 1943 meal also is obviously a very elaborate meal, since Garet observes that "There were a lot of forks at my place, but they didn’t scare me: Gratkins may have sold most of our silverware, but she taught me all that nonsense about starting at the outside and working in."18 The world that Gratkins and Daisy grew up in was a very stereotypical traditional family for the 1940s in the United States, one that is alien to Garet, raised 50 years later by a single 'mom'. Garet realizes the difference, but also notes one, that the reason Gratkins did not provide that type of meal was because she sold part of her past to support Garet and, later, Daisy and two, Gratkins did give Garet the tools needed to manage in her own past.
Finally, when all three Margarets are reunited, they dine on soup and sandwiches, each in her own unique way. While Garet does describe Daisy separating her turkey sandwich, the rancour is gone from her description, and her comment to Daisy that "It all gets mixed up again in your stomach, you know," 19 is ignored by Daisy. The three female characters now know fully who they are, and can eat how they best see fit without being judged by each other.
First Daisy put the cherry on the other plate. Then she scooped off the nuts and put them in a tidy little heap about an inch away from the cherry. She did the same thing for the whipped cream. After which she carefully extracted the banana and wiped it off with her napkin. All that was left on the first plate was the ice cream.
Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 173.
Food and Identity
Food is often connected to identity, and this is particularly apparent in mother/daughter relationships. As the texts explored in Genny Ballard’s entry in Critical Approaches in Food in Children’s Literature show, "it is through their relationship to food and the mentorship of their mothers and elders that the young female characters become empowered"20; so too does it unfold in Three Lives to Live. The fact that the mother figure of the trio is actually the same person as the two daughter figures complicates the relationship for the characters, but the patterns followed are still the same as in any text where food is used to demonstrate mother-daughter relationships.
Up until Daisy slides down the laundry chute, Garet has "led a happy life. . . . Until Daisy turned up, the only bad thing that happened to me was the death of my parents when I was two, which hardly counts because I don’t remember."21 The only negative thing Garet remembers is a lie, as she finds out later that her mother, in fact, "'had a long happy life.'"22 Her relationship with Gratkins is otherwise healthy and happy, with Gratkins as a supportive, yet no-nonsense mother figure in Garet’s life. On the very first page, Garet states that her "troubles began . . . when I got my twin sister, Daisy."23 Had Daisy not slid into Garet and Gratkin’s lives, Garet may very well have lived the rest of her life never knowing that she and Gratkins were the same person. Daisy’s arrival sets in motion a chain of events that will completely shake Garet’s sense of identity. Daniel asserts that "An individual who eats badly and breaks cultural taboos undermines the integrity of the social structure."24 Daisy certainly undermines the social structure of the family dynamic between Garet and Gratkins, and this is reflected in her eating habits. While Daisy “eats like a horse, in spite of being skinny . . . nothing on her plate is allowed to touch anything else on her plate."25
Garet’s favorite toys are also evocative of food. Garet states that "I may be messy, but I don’t happen to collect things the way [Daisy] does. Only pigs. And I do happen to love my pigs."26 The collection started with a china piglet that eventually is revealed to have come out of the past with Garet, so it has belonged to Garet, Daisy, and Gratkins at various points in time. Daisy and Garet argue over who owns the pig (prior to the revelation that they are all the same person, but after Daisy knows she is Gratkins), and Daisy smashes it. Later, Daisy brings from 1943 not only the original piglet, but the china boar and sow, giving them to Garet "all facing the same direction."27 Garet’s toy collection could have been of any animal: cats, dolphins, dinosaurs. It is a pig, however, an animal raised for food and commonly eaten in American society, that Garet adores and sparks one of the most heated arguments between her and Daisy, and later is a peace offering from Daisy at the end of the book.
Food as it relates to the identity is present even in Garet’s very name. One issue caused by the appearance of Daisy is her lack of a birth certificate for school enrollment. Gratkin’s solution to this problem is to photocopy Garet’s birth certificate and claim that the girls were twins and given the same names at birth, but go by nicknames. When Gratkins tells the girls her plan, Garet recalls that she disliked the name Margaret because the kids at school "called [me] Margarine . . . That’s why I began to use Garet for short."28 Margarine is often known as a 'fake' or substitute for butter; therefore, using it for this particular food reference for the birth certificate forgery also provides a clue about Garet not being what she believes herself to be. We later find out that Gratkins pulled the same trick when originally enrolling Garet in school after Garet finds out that she is the same person as Daisy and Gratkins. Gratkins tells Garet, "'So I fixed my own birth certificate for you, changing 1930 to 1980.'"29 The birth certificate solution is a very clever idea from Gratkins and highlights the fact that all three people began as the same person, and Lindbergh highlights its importance with not just any food reference, but specifically a 'fake' food.
Food, more specifically, eating, also factors as a major character trait for Daisy. This is nothing new in children’s literature or even all literature as "Food as a metaphor for human behavior has long been part of commonsense lore."30 The descriptions of Daisy's eating are some of the funniest scenes in the book and occur on numerous occasions. Lindbergh sets up the importance of food via a character trait that works as double duty detail. Alexandria LaFaye defines a double duty detail as "Concrete, specific, unique details that develop more than one element of fiction at a time – such as developing plot and character or establishing setting and developing plot."31 At one point, Garet describes Daisy’s eating habits as such:
"If we have lima beans and corn, they have to be served in separate piles, and they have to stay that way. Even when they come as succotash, Daisy divides them up. Then she chews and swallows a mouthful of beans before she lets her fork so much as touch the corn."32
Garet describes Daisy eating various foods on many different occasions throughout the book, giving immense literary weight to this detail. LaFaye defines literary weight as "The 'weight' of a detail . . . determined by the amount of space it takes up in a narrative."33 With literary weight given to this character quirk of Daisy’s, Lindbergh is asking the reader to take a closer look and see what this style of eating tells us about Daisy.
This eating quirk gels with what we know about Daisy: that she is extremely neat and organized, even lining up her paperclips on her desk. Most importantly, this way of eating gives insight into Daisy's psychology. As the book is narrated by Garet as an autobiography, we never see what is going on in Daisy's head. Giving Daisy such an obvious psychological quirk gives us more insight into her than could be gleaned from conversation alone. While Daisy brought the food-separation with her from the past (as indicated when Garet has dinner with her "real" family), we are told that Daisy has become more finicky since arriving in 1993:
"Smiling primly at me, she takes a tiny bite of meat and wipes her fork on her napkin before taking a tiny bite of potato. Over the past weeks she has become finickier than ever. Shepherd's pie is a real problem for her. You'd think Gratkins would get wise and eliminate it from the menu!"34
Even though Daisy had this attitude before she traveled to 1993, the fact that she becomes more finicky since arriving emphasizes two points. One, it highlights the fact that she is a different person from Garet and Gratkins. Gratkins obviously outgrew the finickiness and Garet never developed it at all, except where shepherd's pie is concerned. Two, given Daisy's reaction to the revelation that she is Gratkins, the food separation could also be interpreted as an attempt to separate herself from Gratkins. The most elaborate scene of Daisy separating food (the previously mentioned ice cream sundae scene) happens when Gratkins reveals who she is. This revelation understandably shakes Daisy, who probably suspected something. This suspicion is manifested in her attitude toward food.
...it is through their relationship to food and the mentorship of their mothers and elders that the young female characters become empowered...
Genny Ballard, 'The Keys to the Kitchen: Cooking and Latina Power in Latin(o) American Children’s Stories,' Critical Approaches to Food in Children's Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 168.
Shepherd’s Pie and the Maternal Influence
One unique thing about Three Lives to Live is the noticeable absence of males. Garet, Gratkins and Daisy are the only people in their household. Garet and Daisy attend an all-girls school where all their teachers are female. Gratkins is the only mother figure Garet has ever known, and quickly assumes this role for Daisy too. As the maternal figure, Gratkins is the provider of food for her children/alternate selves. But what of the food she provides? "The good mother provides the eater with beneficial sustenance/energy/power, in exchange she seems content with the emotional satisfaction she receives. The smothering mother, however, provides food that inevitably poisons the eater in some way, draining them of vitality/power/subjectivity."35 Gratkins is, overall, a perfectly good mother, especially when one considers she was thrust into the role not only unexpectedly becoming a mother, but becoming a mother to herself, twice. The food she provides, while simple, is accepted without question by Garet, usually. It is only Daisy, the newest arrival to the family who still struggles with Gratkins (first as a mother and then as an alternate self), who has issue with the food but does, eventually, eat, just on her own terms. The food Gratkins is most often described as preparing is shepherd's pie.
Shepherd’s pie becomes the primary symbol of the three Margarets and their quest to find an identity separate from each other. Janet Burroway defines a symbol as "an object or event that, by virtue of association, represents something more or something other than itself."36 Shepherd's pie functions in many different ways throughout the book, but it always symbolizes some conflict between the three Margarets, as well as the primary sustenance provided by the mother figure. While Daisy is always separating her food, shepherd's pie is the only food that we ever see Garet separate, symbolizing that Garet still has some issues with being one of three Margarets, but not as much as Daisy.
Shepherd’s pie is the only complex dish that we know Gratkins prepares (other foods that Daisy is shown separating are either purchased, such as pizza or a sundae, or very simple, such as a sandwich or vegetables). Food "often metaphorically represents the body of the mother in popular culture."37 This concept takes on a very interesting dimension when the mother figure is, in fact, the same person biologically as the children. Holly Blackford argues that "mother figures that cook food have omnipotent powers over the young."38 Gratkins holds not only the power of food and sustenance, but also the power of knowledge as she is the only one who knows throughout the entire book exactly what is going on. She also knows that even though all three Margarets began as the same person, they don’t have to make the same choices. As she explains to Garet:
"The way I see it, we started out the same way, with what was – I don't know – in our cells. Then for a while our families influenced us. Daisy and I had large families, but all you had was me. . . . We get what we are born with, then we get our upbringing. But after that, we're on our own. So the three of us are all different from each other. Not just our personalities, but physically too. You think you're overweight. Well, Daisy is too thin. But you’re both already taller than I am."39
Gratkins has had thirteen years to come to terms with being duplicated. She wishes the girls to accept it as she does, so she insists on making shepherd’s pie for them rather than explaining it initially. Once she realizes that she must actually tell the girls what happened, however, she ceases trying to unite them through food.
Garet herself uses shepherd's pie to illustrate the differences between the three Margarets: "'You like the whole of shepherd's pie, but Daisy and I used to split up the meat and the potatoes.'"40 Even Garet’s preference for the meat over the potatoes in the shepherd’s pie gives us hints to Garet’s character. Although shown to be bold and brash, Garet’s preference for potatoes over meat, as well as her love of her dog, demonstrates an area where Garet might be more sensitive than Gratkins and Daisy. Perry Nodleman states that "the fact that we eat creatures that once lived but were too weak to protect themselves suggests that we – particularly those of us who are weak children – might therefore also be eaten."41 Only Garet appears to have a favourite animal: a pig, as evidenced in her toy collection. In addition to her not wanting to eat the beef in shepherd's pie, she also tries to negotiate a trade with Daisy over pizza: "'I'll eat your mushrooms if you’ll eat my sausage.'"42 Garet even writes a story for a contest "about a country called New Pork where the people are all carnarians. Meaning meat eaters . . . In this country, it's ok to eat meat, but eating vegetables is a crime."43 Garet likely would be very happy as a vegetarian, whereas Daisy and Gratkins are fine with eating the meat in shepherd’s pie.
Daisy and Garet are never seen eating with their fellow students (thus placing more importance on the Margaret-only meals). However, shepherd's pie is mentioned in conjunction with the school cafeteria: "We had road kill yesterday, but that doesn't mean we won't have it again today served up as shepherd's road-kill pie."44 Shepherd's pie also factors in two events that make Garet particularly envious of Daisy. During one meal shortly after her arrival, Daisy convinces Gratkins to buy her a canopy bed. Garet's description of that scene includes the following:
"That evening last August, I was grateful for Daisy's attitude. It was easy to convince her that life would be simpler if she had all meat and I had all potatoes. We were negotiating a trade when Gratkins brought up the question of the bed."45
A month later, Daisy tells Garet that she can get a computer by faking a learning disability. Garet wants a computer more than anything, but she ends up with a dog because Daisy tells Gratkins it is what Garet wants. In reality, Garet only wants a dog to eat the meat from her shepherd's pie. Daisy, however, successfully fakes a learning disability and gets the computer Garet covets. One trait of Daisy's that Garet envies is her ability to manipulate Gratkins, but Garet later finds out that her jealousy of Daisy is meaningless because they are the same person. Two examples of this are shown while they are eating shepherd's pie.
For all its importance, we only see the characters actually eating shepherd's pie twice. The third time, after Gratkins has told Daisy that they are the same person, Gratkins serves:
"Hamburgers and baked potatoes – that's what. One result of that nightmare conference was no more shepherd's pie. When Mrs. Magorian told her what I wrote about it, Gratkins gave up. Not that it really matters, now that I have a dog to eat the meat. But it proves that when all else fails, writing is a means of communication."46
Garet's mention of communication reflects the fact that now that there are no more lies (or so we think at this point in the story), Daisy and Garet are no longer forced to separate their meals for themselves. Gratkins makes mealtime easier at the same time she has made their lives easier by telling the girls the truth.
Shepherd’s pie also is used to draw attention to one particularly unique play on words and writing terms. Garet comments about her teacher overseeing the writing of her autobiography: "I was hoping to get down to business. But she says first I have to put in a flashback. . . . a flashback should pivot on a useful gimmick such as the scent of a rose or a familiar old tune that takes you back in time. Mine is shepherd's pie."47 LaFaye explains a flashback as
"The dramatic depiction of a past event through the use of scene or dramatic telling. Flashbacks should always have a trigger, something in the present action that makes a character revisit the past. They require a transition that makes it clear that the character is moving back in time and returning to the present action."48
Flashbacks abound in children’s books without any mention of what they are. However, Three Lives to Live is written as Garet writing her autobiography for a class project, and thus contains many references to the act of writing. Garet comments often about her reasons for writing something in a certain way, and there are numerous scenes with her teacher talking about and teaching the writing craft. Garet is developing her identity as a writer throughout the book, and by using shepherd's pie as a writing technique, it ties into Garet's identity as a budding writer.
Later, Garet 'writes' a flash forward using shepherd's pie:
"Flashing forward is trickier than flashing back. I know from the books I've read that there are two ways of doing it. One is just to quit the italic print and start the normal print again. The other is for the heroine to give a little shiver as she comes to her senses and remembers she's back in the present. I'm bored with both ways, so I've invented a third. It's called the Useful Gimmick Flash-Forward, and you guessed it, the gimmick is still shepherd's pie."49
LaFaye defines a flashforward as "A narrative move into the future either in an imagined progression of events or a full scene as seen by an omniscient narrator. . . . Like flashbacks, flashforwards require a trigger, time period transitions, and brevity."50 Garet uses simplified yet accurate description of a literary term combined with shepherd's pie to highlight a very important hint she is giving the reader by using flashbacks and flashforwards. We later find out that Garet and Daisy both 'flashforward' through time by sliding down the laundry chute, and then 'flashback' by climbing up it. Lindbergh uses literary terms to hint at the time travel aspect of the book, highlighted by the shepherd's pie that is tied so closely to the three Margarets' identity.
Flashing forward is trickier than flashing back. I know from the books I've read that there are two ways of doing it. One is just to quit the italic print and start the normal print again. The other is for the heroine to give a little shiver as she comes to her senses and remembers she's back in the present. I'm bored with both ways, so I've invented a third. It's called the Useful Gimmick Flash-Forward, and you guessed it, the gimmick is still shepherd's pie.
Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 27.
Conclusion
Daniel states that "the food text is . . . capable of doing something exceptionally intense, pleasurable, and profound to the reader"51 and that "Food events within children’s literature seduce child readers and add flavor and spice to the narrative."52 In Three Lives to Live, the food adds yet another dimension to the reader’s experience, giving hints and foreshadowing about not only the plot, but each character’s inner struggle. 'You are what you eat' is a very old and familiar saying. Daisy seeks to separate herself from her mother/alternate self, and thus separates her food. Gratkins seeks to unite the two younger versions of herself and makes a food that is difficult to separate (not that it stops Garet and Daisy from trying). Garet takes a middle approach: separating some food, but not others, and never to the extreme of her sister/alternate self, instead carving a niche for herself completely different from her other selves by writing, yet cannot escape using food in her writing as a literary device. While there are many books dealing with children seeking to find an identity separate from their mother's, and food is often used to mirror that struggle, Three Lives to Live offers much that is unique, in both the complex plot that involves separating one's self from a mother and sister that actually were once, the same person.
End Notes
Go to footnote reference 1.Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, 'Introduction: Food in Children's Literature,' Critical Approaches to Food in Children's Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 5.
Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, 'Introduction: Food in Children's Literature,' Critical Approaches to Food in Children's Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 17.
Go to footnote reference 3.Anne Lindbergh is the daughter of aviator Charles Lindbergh and author Anne Morrow Lindbergh, and therefore, a sibling to Charles Augustus Lindbergh, victim of the famous kidnapping case. The psychological ramifications of growing up in the shadow of a missing sibling, and such a famous missing sibling at that, are, of course, major. The plot of Three lives to Live involves children mysteriously vanishing from their family and going elsewhere, but in a way that their family does not know they are even missing. Lindbergh’s personal background is worth considering when exploring the overall plot, but is beyond the scope of this paper.
Go to footnote reference 4.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 82.
Go to footnote reference 5.Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children’s Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 1.
Go to footnote reference 6.Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 3.
Go to footnote reference 7.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 63-65
ibid, 28.
Go to footnote reference 9.Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 105.
Go to footnote reference 10.ibid, 89.
Go to footnote reference 11.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 62-63.
Go to footnote reference 12.ibid, 64.
Go to footnote reference 13.ibid, 149.
Go to footnote reference 14.ibid, 153.
Go to footnote reference 15.Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 95.
Go to footnote reference 16.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 172-173.
Go to footnote reference 17.ibid, 173.
Go to footnote reference 18.ibid, 172.
Go to footnote reference 19.ibid, 178.
Go to footnote reference 20.Genny Ballard, 'The Keys to the Kitchen: Cooking and Latina Power in Latin(o) American Children’s Stories,' Critical Approaches to Food in Children's Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 168.
Go to footnote reference 21.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 9.
Go to footnote reference 22.ibid, 73.
Go to footnote reference 23.ibid, 3.
Go to footnote reference 24.Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 185
Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 18.
ibid, 91.
Go to footnote reference 27.ibid, 179.
Go to footnote reference 28.ibid, 28.
Go to footnote reference 29.ibid, 151.
Go to footnote reference 30.Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 25.
Alexandria LaFaye, The Primed Mind, Unpublished book, 2007, 26.
Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 18.
Go to footnote reference 33.Alexandria LaFaye, The Primed Mind, Unpublished book, 2007, 267-268.
Go to footnote reference 34.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 28.
Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 103.
Go to footnote reference 36.Janet Burroway, Writing Fiction: A Guide to the Narrative Craft, New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc, 1992, 278.
Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 89.
Go to footnote reference 38.Holly Blackford, 'Recipe for Reciprocity and Repression', Critical Approaches to Food in Children's Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 42.
Go to footnote reference 39.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 152-153.
ibid, 153.
Perry Nodelman, The Pleasures of Children's Literature, New York: Longman, 1996, 152.
Go to footnote reference 42.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 87.
Go to footnote reference 43.ibid, 137.
Go to footnote reference 44.ibid, 17.
Go to footnote reference 45.ibid, 18.
Go to footnote reference 46.ibid, 74.
Go to footnote reference 47.ibid, 16-17.
Go to footnote reference 48.Alexandria LaFaye, The Primed Mind, Unpublished book, 2007, 265.
Go to footnote reference 49.Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992, 27
Alexandria LaFaye, The Primed Mind, Unpublished book, 2007, 266.
Go to footnote reference 51.Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 81.
Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children's Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006, 212.
Bibliography
Genny Ballard, 'The Keys to the Kitchen: Cooking and Latina Power in Latin(o) American Children’s Stories,' Critical Approaches to Food in Children’s Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 167-179.
Holly Blackford, 'Recipe for Reciprocity and Repression,' Critical Approaches to Food in Children’s Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 41-55.
Janet Burroway, Writing Fiction: A Guide to the Narrative Craft, New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc,1992.
Carolyn Daniel, Voracious Children: Who Eats Whom in Children’s Literature, New York: Routledge, 2006.
Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, 'Introduction: Food in Children’s Literature,' Critical Approaches to Food in Children’s Literature, Ed. Kara K. Keeling & Scott T. Pollard, New York: Routledge, 2009, 3-17.
Alexandria LaFaye, The Primed Mind, Unpublished book, 2007.
Anne Lindbergh, Three Lives to Live, Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1992.
Maria Nikolajeva, The Rhetoric of Character in Children's Literature, Lanham, MD: Scarecrow, 2002.
Perry Nodelman, The Pleasures of Children’s Literature, New York: Longman, 1996.
Amie Rose Rotruck is a graduate of the Hollins University Children’s Literature Program, earning her M.A. in 2006 and her M.F.A in 2009. She served as the Children’s and Young Adult Literature division head for the International Association of the Fantastic in the Arts from 2008 to 2011. She is the author of Bronze Dragon Codex (writing as R.D. Henham) and Young Wizards Handbook: How to Trap a Zombie, Track a Vampire, and Other Hands-On Activities for Monster Hunters. Her main focus for both creative and critical works is middle-grade children’s fantasy.