In keeping with the broad strokes (plenty of time for microscopic close reads later on) I wonder about the role of Winnie's pal the toad. I imagine Kermit (of Henson fame) sympathizing with him as he endures the miseries of August, the two escaping to a Hensonian swamp where they clank beer steins and croon about the woes of a loden lifestyle. Then of course my brain does a smash cut to a Muppet version of Tuck which, I may say is nothing short of spectacular and frankly, I'd go see it, but I'm a sucker for all things Henson - I digress.
As we're smack dab in the throes of the green revolution, I'm drawn to the text's environmental sympathies. It's fair to say it has a conservation discourse and Winnie's confidante, the old toad is the venerable poster child. When Winnie tells the toad she might like to have him as a pet in a "nice cage with lots of grass" the toad stirs, blinks, gives a heave of muscles and "plop(s) a few inches farther away from her." He's nobody's pet and he's certainly nobody's fool. He'd rather live outside thankyouverymuch. From the story's beginning, the reader is reminded of the life cycle, the naturalness of life and death and the outdoors is the privileged place to be. Winnie prefers to be outside, her only escape from the stifling influences in her home and family. She's drawn to the representational power of the wood. "There was something strange about (it)" and its "sleeping, otherworld appearance" that made one, "want to speak in whispers." "Let it keep its peace," the cows must have thought.
Ownership of the wood is an important theme in Tuck. Winnie's parents, the wood's owners, at least on paper, are helpless when confronted with the power of nature in the form of the spring and the havoc that it wreaks on their lives. Mr. and Mrs. Foster never know the secret of the spring anymore than they know to appreciate the joys of the world that exists just beyond their fence line. It never occurs to them to protect the wood because they own it. Babbitt writes:
"The ownership of land is an odd thing when you come to think of it. How deep, after all, can it go? If a person owns a piece of land, does he own it all the way down, in ever narrowing dimensions...or does ownership consist only of a thin crust under which the friendly worms have never heard of such trespassing...Nothing ever seems interesting when it belongs to you - only when it doesn't." The question of ownership forces the reader to ask who is responsible for caring for the wood and by extension the spring. In Babbitt's text, this role is filled by animals, as if to say, nature takes care of itself:
"It was the cows who were responsible for the wood's isolation, and the cows, through some wisdom they were not wise enough to know that they possessed, were very wise indeed." Even cows know more than people in Babbitt's world. Their seemingly mindless wanderings wore a path around the wood rather than through it, protecting the eternal spring from those who would disrespect its power. Though the Tucks make their home deep within the wood, they are accidental caretakers who guard its secrets to protect a big secret of their own.
The natural world is privileged in Babbitt's text. Winnie's choice to respect nature and refuse to drink from the spring is further evidence pointing to the text's sympathies with the sanctity of nature. I'd also argue that Babbitt reminds readers in plain terms, that they have a choice in how they interact with/disturb the natural world.
Despite all of this, one question troubles me about Tuck. If drinking from the spring damns the drinker, why does Winnie choose to douse the toad with eternal life? If she herself sees it as a doomed existence why doom the toad? Why not throw the spring water on a flower, or simply toss it into the dirt? For better or for worse, the toad is baptized with eternal life.
This question has many answers I suppose, but I'll offer my theory. If we agree that eco-criticism is an appropriate tool to evaluate this text, it seems to me that Winnie's gift to the toad is a blessing, not a curse and lines up with an ecological discourse I argue is in the novel. In Babbitt's world, Winnie's parents represent a humanity trapped by its own desires; people who are far too comfortable living otu of sync with the natural world. Still others, (the man in yellow) are too driven by selfish desires to be responsible for such an awesome power. By bestowing the spring's blessing on the poor toad, Babbit lifts up the lowliest of creatures and gives him a voice that time will never silence.
