Paper _ 201 Indian English Literature – Pre-Independence

Modern Child Psychology vs Traditional Discipline
in R.K. Narayan’s ‘Crime and Punishment’

1. Modern Child Psychology vs Traditional Discipline in R.K. Narayan’s ‘Crime and Punishment’ Presented by : Bhumi Mahida

2. Academic Information Name: Bhumi Mahida Roll No : 02 Enrollment No : 5108240017 Semester : 3 Batch : 2024-2026 Paper No : 201 Paper Code : 22406 Paper Name : Indian English Literature – Pre-Independence Date : 3 October 2025 E-mail id : [email protected]

3. Table of Content Introduction Modern Child-Centred Parenting Traditional Discipline Comparative Analysis Theoretical Insights on Child Discipline Empirical Evidence on Corporal Punishment Conclusion References

4. Introduction R.K. Narayan (1906–2001): One of the most prominent Indian English novelists; best known for creating the fictional town Malgudi. “Crime and Punishment”: A short story from his Malgudi Days collection; centers on a private tutor, his mischievous student, and the student’s indulgent parents. Central Conflict: The teacher represents traditional discipline (authority, corporal punishment), while the parents embody modern child-centred psychology (indulgence, over-protection). Cultural Context: Reflects tensions in postcolonial Indian society, where Western pedagogical ideas met traditional Indian views of authority. Relevance: Highlights broader issues of education, parenting, morality, and authority still debated in contemporary contexts. ( Narayan)

5. Research Question How does R.K. Narayan’s “Crime and Punishment” reflect the conflict between modern child-centred parenting and traditional discipline, and what insights can psychological theories and empirical research on corporal punishment provide for interpreting this tension? Hypothesis R.K. Narayan’s “Crime and Punishment” satirically demonstrates that both permissive parenting and traditional corporal punishment are flawed extremes; integrating literary analysis with child psychology and empirical evidence suggests that a balanced, authoritative approach is most effective for fostering discipline and learning.

6. Modern Child-Centred Parenting Psychological Basis : Rooted in Diana Baumrind’s permissive parenting style (1966), this approach emphasizes affection, low control, and maximum freedom for the child. It values the child’s autonomy and emotional security over strict discipline. Encouragement of Autonomy : By avoiding harsh punishments, parents aim to reduce fear and promote creativity, self-confidence, and open communication between adults and children. Progressive Middle-Class Ideal : In post-independence India, many urban middle-class families embraced ideas from modern child psychology, seeing them as humane and progressive alternatives to traditional strictness. ( Baumrind)

7. Corporal Punishment as Immediate Correction : The tutor resorts to slapping the boy when he deliberately makes mistakes, reflecting the traditional belief that punishment produces quick behavioural correction and reinforces teacherly authority. Cultural and Historical Norm : Corporal punishment was a common practice in Indian classrooms during the mid-20th century, rooted in the idea that respect for authority and strict discipline were necessary for learning. Pedagogical Risks and Failures : Instead of learning mathematics, the boy responds with defiance, threats, and manipulation, showing how punishment breeds resentment, fear, and resistance rather than genuine understanding. Consequences for Education : The story reveals that harsh discipline damages trust between teacher and student, reduces motivation, and results in poor learning outcomes, making it ineffective in the long run. Traditional Discipline ( Gershoff)

8. Comparative Analysis Modern Child Psychology Traditional Discipline Explanation Focuses on autonomy and creativity Focuses on clear boundaries and quick control Modern approach encourages children to think independently and be creative, while traditional methods prioritize obedience and fast correction. Prevents fear; treats children humanely Enforces respect and authority Modern methods aim to build trust and reduce fear; traditional methods rely on authority to gain respect, sometimes using fear. Can lead to spoiling or manipulation Can cause fear, retaliation, poor learning Too much freedom may lead to misuse, while harsh discipline can make children anxious, rebellious, or unable to learn effectively. May weaken teacher’s authority Ethically and socially risky Modern methods require more negotiation and patience, which can seem like less control; traditional discipline can harm relationships or create resentment.

9. Theoretical Insights on Child Discipline Piaget – Moral Development : Children internalize rules through social interactions rather than through fear or punishment. Moral understanding grows when children actively engage and negotiate with peers and adults. Vygotsky – Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD): Learning occurs most effectively when children receive guidance just beyond their current abilities. Scaffolding and support are essential; coercion or harsh punishment hinders development. ( Vygotsky) Baumrind – Parenting Styles: Authoritative parenting combines warmth with firm guidance. This style fosters respect, autonomy, and moral responsibility, unlike purely permissive or punitive approaches. ( Baumrind) ( Piaget)

10. Empirical Evidence on Corporal Punishment Impact on Child Behavior and Development: Research links corporal punishment to increased aggression, anxiety, and depression in children. Children subjected to physical discipline often exhibit poorer social and emotional adjustment. Academic and Cognitive Effects: Studies show that corporal punishment negatively affects learning outcomes and academic performance. Fear-based discipline reduces engagement and motivation in school settings. Public Health and Rights Perspective: The World Health Organization identifies corporal punishment as a violation of children’s rights. Recognized as a significant public health concern due to its widespread psychological and social harms. Connection to Literature: R.K. Narayan’s story anticipates these findings, illustrating how punitive, fear-based discipline can backfire. Literature and empirical research converge in showing that coercion harms children and undermines effective guidance. ( WHO)

11. Conclusion R.K. Narayan’s story highlights the moral ambiguity in child discipline, showing that neither indulgence nor violence produces ideal outcomes. By combining literary analysis with psychological research, we can see how extreme approaches—whether permissive or punitive—fail to foster healthy development. The evidence points toward an authoritative, balanced approach that integrates firm guidance with empathy, demonstrating the value of interdisciplinary insights in understanding and improving educational and parenting practices.

12. References : Baumrind, Diana. “Effects of Authoritative Parental Control on Child Behavior.” Child Development, vol. 37, no. 4, 1966, pp. 887–907 . Gershoff, Elizabeth T. “Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences.” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 128, no. 4, 2002, pp. 539–579 . Narayan, R. K. Malgudi Days. Indian Thought Publications, 1982. Accessed 1 October 2025. Piaget, Jean. The Moral Judgment of the Child . THE FREE PRESS 1932. Vygotsky, L. S. Mind in Society . Harvard University Press, 1978. World Health Organization: WHO. Corporal Punishment of Children and Health . 20 Aug. 20 25, www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/corporal-punishment-and-health .