Absent parents and orphan tropes

SIENNA LISTER reveals the reasons why children’s literature is so obsessed with killing the parents…..

Harry Potter, Frozen, Bambi, Dumbo... Any idea what these stories have in common?

What if you add Oliver Twist and Annie to the list?

These are just a few examples of the famous orphan trope, so common that it’s easy to accept it as a common character circumstance in literature and film. But maybe we need to challenge that mindset and find out what’s really going on behind the scenes.

So, why on Earth is children’s literature so obsessed with killing the parents?

Character Freedom or Just Convenient?

Firstly, it goes without saying that an engaging story needs drama or conflict of some kind. And while a child with both parents can certainly be part of a compelling story, according to blog writer Huw Powell “a child character cannot act autonomously in the presence of their parents.” In fact, “it’s only when they are removed that the children are free to step up.”

Put simply, removing a character’s parents rids them of all rules and gives the child complete freedom. This puts the story in the hands of a young character, creating a stronger sense of adventure which is exciting for younger audiences, whilst tapping into the protective side of adults, making them root for the child and feel more emotionally invested. It’s no wonder writers keep returning to this trope; it clearly works. I mean, is there anyone who doesn’t instantly sympathise with Harry Potter?

That said, there is strategy and then there is laziness. As popular as this trope may seem, it is heavily critiqued. Leila Sales (2010), author and editor, argues that “dead parents equals immediate sympathy,” adding that she finds this “a cop-out.”

She accepts that dead parents will “always have their place in children’s literature,” but argues that “a convenient story is not the same as a good story.” While many concur with Sales’ take, others suggest that the absent parent trope allows for a coming-of-age story.

For example, one commenter wrote in response that “the reason middle and high-school level literature have so many orphans is because it is coming-of-age literature”. They add: “how could one learn to be independent if their parents are trying to take care of them all the time?” However, while taking parents away from the story can be a good strategy, it has to actually add something. Direction. Depth.  

Breaking the Ice

The death of parents during a story can give the plot more momentum. It forces a visible change within the grieving character, and it’s also an excuse to bring other characters together.

For example, in Frozen (the film), it isn’t until the parents die that Elsa must become Queen and face her sister Anna again, after years of isolation. The attention that comes with royalty, along with hiding her pr-ICE-y secret, is what ultimately leads to her exposure and receiving the cold shoulder.

Building such intense emotional stakes would be a challenge if the parents were still around, as there’d be no coming-of-age journey. So, Frozen is a good example of the ‘dead parent’ trope working effectively.

Orphaned…Or Just Home Alone?

In some stories parents are alive but just absent for most of the plot. Think of Coraline: her parents don’t even realise that she’s exploring an alternate dimension and returning each night. In fact, her ‘Other Mother’ and ‘Other Father’ are more present in her life than her real parents are.

Coraline

But it’s not just Coraline who has absent parents. What about Kevin in Home Alone? The entire plot relies on the fact that he’s been forgotten at home while his family are enjoying their holiday elsewhere.

Perhaps this version of the trope is one that critics like Leila Sales could appreciate since the parents are still included, and sympathy is not really the point. Their absence is what allows the characters to have more fun and explore new possibilities. A classic example is when Home Alone’s Kevin nervously says, “I made my family disappear”, then, after a moment of reflection, repeats the line with a mischievous smirk, “I made my family disappear!”

This take on the absent-parent trope is arguably more effective than the dramatic orphan narrative—it doesn’t rely on sympathy yet still grants the protagonist full independence and freedom to explore.

Freedom is good for his Elf!

There are a multitude of reasons why a decision may be made to omit parents from a story - to seek sympathy, simplify the plot, or heighten drama. But one thing is undeniable - it remains a consistently effective trope. HBO’s decision to fund a 10-season TV adaptation of the whole Harry Potter series, at an estimated cost of an eye-watering four billion dollars, is evidence that punters want some parents to stay out of the limelight.

Absent parents pave the way for young protagonists to step into the spotlight, face danger alone, and grow without adult interference. And though it may not be strictly necessary to kill off the parents, their exclusion helps set the story in motion.

And yes, while the trope is often a way to gain the sympathy vote, it’s not always a formula for sadness and loss. Take Dobby, the house elf from Harry Potter, who only declares “Dobby is a free elf!” once he’s no longer bound to the Malfoy family. And Harry Potter serves as a figure of freedom and self-discovery, using his orphan status to step outside typical expectations. As Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling said, “Harry’s status as orphan gives him a freedom other children can only dream about”. And that’s the magic of stories; they allow you to explore alternative lives from the safety of your own.

Before you go…

So, next time you’re watching a new series or revisiting a Disney classic, ask yourself: where are the parents?

Chances are, they’re nowhere to be found!

Written by SIENNA LISTER (Creative Writing and English Literature undergraduate, University of Chester, UK)