This study explores reasons for Enid Blyton’s vast popularity. Blyton and her life are discussed in terms of the production and reception of her texts in the light of changing dominant discourses in society and varying horizons of expectation. It has been found that selected aspects of reception theory (in particular the horizon of expectation posited by Hans-Georg Gadamer and developed by Hans Jauss) and the theories of Michel Foucault on power and discourse can be used to examine the influence of societal and literary discourses on both Blyton’s writing and on those who read her work, including adults and children. The study includes a discussion of Blyton’s personal life, her role in education and her success in business. Blyton’s horizons of expectation – shaped not only by the dominant discourses that surrounded her, but also her training in the Froebel method of education – are examined. Furthermore, a number of aspects of Blyton’s life and writing subvert dominant discourses and these are discussed in terms of Foucault’s ideas on power relations. Evidence of the influence of her life on her work has been found in her texts. The criticism of Blyton is discussed in terms of both literary criticism and social criticism. Blyton’s popularity as a storyteller is also considered and it has been found that, regardless of criticism by adults, she remained popular with children. Furthermore, Blyton used a number of specific techniques (such as fast-paced plots and simple language and style) and it has been found that her techniques can be linked to both formula writing, the oral tradition, and to her training as a teacher in the Froebel method of education. These techniques are examined in terms of their manifestation in her writing, particularly in her series books – including adventure stories and school stories. In conclusion, the place of Blyton’s writing in contemporary society is deliberated and recommendations for further research are made. / Dissertation (MA (English))--University of Pretoria, 2003. / English / unrestricted

Si la manière de produire une image depuis la reproductibilité technique a toujours été profondément déterminée par la captation d’une réalité physique, le numérique (qui constitue une méthode d’inscription visuelle distincte) devrait, en théorie, modifier la relation du spectateur à ces « nouvelles images ». Toutefois, en pratique, le spectateur fait-il l’expérience des images numériques d’une manière différente de celles issues de la captation? Afin de répondre à cette question, ce mémoire analyse, à l’aide de l’approche sémio-pragmatique, comment le spectateur a conditionné son regard à travers les techniques de la captation (photographie, cinéma et vidéo). Ensuite, cette étude compare les habitudes et les attentes visuelles engendrées par ces techniques aux images numériques. Enfin, cette étude situe le problème de la rupture dans une perspective plus large que celle des techniques afin de poser le questionnement dans toute une tradition de la représentation artistique. / The means of producing an image have always been influenced by the inscription of a tangible physical reality. The digital image, which is a distinct method of visual rendering, should therefore change our relationship to visual representations. However, in reality, is the viewer’s experience of digital images in any way different from those issued by the recording techniques? To answer this question, this thesis mainly analyzes, using the semio-pragmatic approach, how the viewer's perception is conditioned through the recording techniques (photography, film and video). Then, this study compares the habits and visual expectations generated by these techniques with digital images. Finally, this study attempts to expand the problem of digital rupture into a broader perspective, and establish the question in the global tradition of artistic representation.