I did promise you in the beginning I would let you know how my foray into gardening would progress. Being a self-confessed terrible gardener, I am currently bursting with unexplained pride (or half a bottle of good Spanish red). In the last several months I have learned several things: 1) only put in plants that you know what the leaves look like; 2) nothing beats good compost and lots of work with a fork; 3) weeds always spring up after rain.
For some of you this is a "duh!" set of realisations. However, for me this is a revelation.
I was cruel in the winter/spring and ripped out every known and possibly unknown plant in my various beds. My neighbour who really should be at Chelsea (the major garden show in the UK and possibly the world) has patiently sighed and groaned over my confusion between a clematis and a convolvulus. Many a fine clematis has died unnecessarily. Using much hard labour and an extreme number of green garden bags, I finally found the bare Earth. Starting at ground level has meant that I can spend lots of time with garden books and my neighbour Sarah discussing what is going in, what type of soil it needed (this also came as a shock to me -- seems there are lots of different types!), when it would bloom and, most importantly, WHAT THE BLOODY LEAVES LOOK LIKE. I now know when I am killing a convolvulus, I am killing a convolvulus!
Having access to horses makes the whole fertilizer problem much easier. The problem is bringing it home. I, no matter what people say, do not live at the stables. In fact, they are 8 miles away. This means taking the ubiquitous green bags with me and filling them with Mikey's little gifts to the garden and bringing them home. Even well rotted, these bags contain something that has more than a gentle perfume. And when placed upon the bare soil of my garden beds, my dear neighbour begged me to get it worked in as soon as possible because she could not open her windows. Sarah does not really like horses in any form. More work with the garden fork and my hard packed earth now is looking crumbly (like the books say it should) and I am finding that I can remove things like convolvulus roots and nettle roots (second most hated thing in garden because they sting!) with ease. Things are looking up.
So I carefully planned what I wanted to buy, took Sarah with me to the various garden centres (I'm learning only a fool ignores an expert), purchased the pots needed for the different soils, purchased the different soils, several pairs of gloves and spent enough money on plants to have paid for a trip to Ibiza. I planted it all up about 8 weeks ago and have sat waiting for things to die.
So far nothing has died even in the torrential rains we have had the last week. In fact every single thing looks great! I have fox gloves and lupines and red hot pokers shooting up and blooming. I have poppies about to pop. I have sun flowers that are nearly half a metre tall. I have rhododendrons and magnolias and camellias blooming. AND I have weeds. All my ground preparation did nothing to stop these little buggers. Rain and Mikey's digestive system seemed to have helped them considerably! But now that I know what my leaves look like and the beds are filled with soft crumbly earth, it took me about 2 hours to weed my beds. And they do look great.
Have I become a gardener? I would not go that far yet, but at least I have learned a thing or 3 about how I needed to do it. I am proud of what I have accomplished and it does look nice. The real test will be whether I can keep this up over the course of the summer. Will I remember to water and feed the "babies"? Will I end up like Prince Charles and talk to them??
Watch this spot......
Saturday, 31 May 2008
Monday, 26 May 2008
You're Nuts -- A Clarification
Sanely Maniacal recently wrote about his experiences as a carer to his Mother who is beginning to suffer from Alzheimer's. Ok, I know the sister and her family and I can tell you that it has had a profound effect on them and on their relationships. I know that this disease has pulled them closer together and that the next profit for BT will be because of the telephone bills they have run up discussing what to do next. It seems a shame, but ever is the way, that it is a tragedy that pulls families back together. At least they are together again.
Sanely tosses some terms around that I thought would be best if they were defined. As Dumbledore said in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, "Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself" (pg. 216) In the case of Alzheimer's, fear abounds because we, as humanity et al, don't understand the disease. Therefore, what is "Vascular Dementia" and should we be frightened?
Wikipedia provides an understandable basic definition:
Sanely's Mum also has the problem of denial or, at the very least, not being able to remember that she has this disease. A good source of information about what to do can be found through at www.alzheimers.org.uk/ where there are further links as well. Getting the elderly to take their medication is often very difficult and, having met Sanely's Mum (who should be included in ANY definition of stubborn), I can see he has his hand's full. Even so, a support group for him or any other member of his family could provide the mental release they will need should the disease progress to a debilitating level. I am sure there are similar organisations in the US. I do think training, in any event, is necessary in order clear the mist from what is "normal" and what is "The Disease".
As humanity all grows statically older due to better nutrition, education and housing, more and more of the population will be struck with this disease. It is important that is be understood and prepared for properly in the manner we have used for illnesses such as cancer rather than continue to act in a fearful, superstitious way only later suppling information and pity on the families of those affected.
Sanely tosses some terms around that I thought would be best if they were defined. As Dumbledore said in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, "Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself" (pg. 216) In the case of Alzheimer's, fear abounds because we, as humanity et al, don't understand the disease. Therefore, what is "Vascular Dementia" and should we be frightened?
Wikipedia provides an understandable basic definition:
Multi-infarct dementia, also known as vascular dementia, is the second most common form of dementia after Alzheimer disease (AD) in the elderly (persons over 65 years of age). The term refers to a group of syndromes caused by different mechanisms all resulting in vascular lesions in the brain. Early detection and accurate diagnosis are important, as vascular dementia is at least partially preventable.
The main subtypes of this disease described at the moment are: vascular mild cognitive impairment, multi-infarct dementia, vascular dementia due to a strategic single infarct (affecting the thalamus, the anterior cerebral artery, the parietal lobes or the cingulate gyrus), vascular dementia due to hemorrhagic lesions, small vessel disease (which includes vascular dementia due to lacunar lesions and Binswanger's disease), and mixed Alzheimer's and vascular dementia.
There are links here which will take you to the land of medical-ese, but will provide the reader with lots of information. The most important statement is that this "at least partially preventable", or in my friend's case, treatable.Sanely's Mum also has the problem of denial or, at the very least, not being able to remember that she has this disease. A good source of information about what to do can be found through at www.alzheimers.org.uk/ where there are further links as well. Getting the elderly to take their medication is often very difficult and, having met Sanely's Mum (who should be included in ANY definition of stubborn), I can see he has his hand's full. Even so, a support group for him or any other member of his family could provide the mental release they will need should the disease progress to a debilitating level. I am sure there are similar organisations in the US. I do think training, in any event, is necessary in order clear the mist from what is "normal" and what is "The Disease".
As humanity all grows statically older due to better nutrition, education and housing, more and more of the population will be struck with this disease. It is important that is be understood and prepared for properly in the manner we have used for illnesses such as cancer rather than continue to act in a fearful, superstitious way only later suppling information and pity on the families of those affected.
Thursday, 15 May 2008
Sense for fashion
You are what you eat. Or so we are told. I am sure that in some physical digestive cell replacement manner, I am. However I also think that I am more than the sum total of Quarter Pounders with Cheese, chicken kievs and onion bhajis. In fact to look at me, those may or may not even come to mind. Like most humans, I do not express myself in the food I consume (unless it is a dinner party I've cooked for my friends), but in the clothes I chose to wear.
Clothing has made a major social imprint since Adam and Even donned the first leaf. Through out history the type , styles, colours and fabrics which covered our nakedness have been regulated either by law or social standing. Today what governs your clothing choice is the amount of money you are willing to invest in a single garment or a whole wardrobe.
So far all of this is not earth shatteringly insightful, but basic statements of fact. However, with so many styles and colours available to us, why do we choose what we choose? Why do we stand looking at two seemingly identical pieces of sewn cloth and choose one over the other? Why does the fashion industry spend billions (pick your currency) to make us desire a fashion only to tell us 9 months later we look bad? Is it all economics?
Some if it is. A major portion of the world's employment, hence economies, is tied up in the ready to wear industry. They do need us to keep buying so that those workers, usually poor and ill educated, will have money to support themselves and their families. Yes, there are craftsmen and women in the Haute Couture who are truly artists with fabric, but this type of fashion is far beyond the means of most mortals. The Mexican/Indonesian/Thai/Chinese/Spanish/Indian textile worker is low paid and is often a "piece worker". As long as the product he sews is sold, he stays a step above starvation. This is possibly the best reason for changing your wardrobe completely once a year.
And the rest of those questions? OK, utility can be a factor in my choice. Sometimes I need to replace clothes that are indeed worn out. With all the horses and riding we do, jeans have a life span of about 4-6 months -- providing the children haven't grown too much (HA!). Therefore, do I choose Tesco value at £2.75 to £4 or Levi's 501s for £30 to £50? Both are made in countries that specialise in intensive manual labour that the mass clothing industry requires and aren't Fairtrade. The choice is obvious from a financial viewpoint. I can buy 10 pairs of of Tesco for every 1 pair of Levi's -- unless I am buying to Impress.
Now we come to the crux: "Dress to Impress". Impress WHO? Ourselves? Our Mates? Our Partners? Our Family? Our Boss? Our Secretary? The Public? The Builders? WHO??
Girls as young as 8 are wearing seductive clothes because they "want to look sexy". From the over simulating, over sexual media campaigns, These innocent children have been taught to equate looking nice with sex. Who in their right mind would market lacy bra-like things and transparent tops for children? Yet, they do. Who is type of dressing aiming to Impress? Why are high heeled (2 inch plus heels) available for children whose feet and legs are still soft and growing? We won't let them do en-pointe ballet because it will ruin their feet, but we will let them wear heels for school? Who is this for? It isn't only girls. Boys' shirts, tees, piques, and button front, are covered with images which are mostly violent and rebellious. The fashion is either athletic, military camouflage or slummy. Who is supposed to be impressed by this?
Adults may be thinking that dressing their 8 year olds this way is humorous. The messages on boys tee-shirts warning us of the approaching danger in the form of a toddler or child may bring a wry smile to other parent's faces. However, if this is the messages we give them at 8, when they are very impressionable, is it any surprise that they are over sexed, violent, low esteemed teenagers?
Stop and look at what your kids are wearing! What are you putting them in? Is this a reflection of yourself or how you really want your children to be viewed? Is this how you want your teenage son or daughter? How can we really be taken seriously when we tell them underage sex is wrong, yet dress them in the types of clothes we used to wear to nightclubs? Who are we telling them to Impress and for what reason?
Our own clothes reflect this principle too. I have seen lots of "mutton dressed as lamb", both male and female. Our body image obsessive society bombards us with airbrushed images of "perfection" that if we could only attain, then we would enjoy the wonders of "perfect" hedonistic pleasures. And we, the moronic consumer, must follow what we see. The result is people with dun-lop disease (their belly dun lopped over their belt) parade the streets of our towns and cities wearing crop tops, short tight tee shirts, hipster jeans and Lycra believing they are sexy. Not only is it a fashion offense, they look silly and don't realise it! Then there are the pregnant ones who do the same thing only to show us their unborn's movements and new acquired stretch marks. As one is pregnant, one is therefore sexually active and attractive to someone. The look is not complementary -- even if one is a famous "A-List" star.
Christians have it hard. They would like to be fashionable, yet not look immoral. They are told to be modest and conservative, but that is a hard look to achieve without looking dowdy. Mainstream Christians are often uncomfortable with, and sometimes unkind, to the more Fundamentalist types who wear a specific fashion to point out that they are different. Christians also like to Impress. But the question remains: WHO? For them, the answer should be easy, but the temptation is great.
Your clothes say a lot about you. We need to get the perspective right. Yes, there is a time and place to look sexy. However, is it right when it is a child? And there is a time took look athletic...but everyday and for every occasion? There is a time to look a mess in butt ripped and patched jeans, but is Church the right place? Ecclesiastes says there is time for every purpose under Heaven. We just need to use a bit more discernment and wisdom when we get dressed in the morning. People see your appearance long before your Big Mac.
Clothing has made a major social imprint since Adam and Even donned the first leaf. Through out history the type , styles, colours and fabrics which covered our nakedness have been regulated either by law or social standing. Today what governs your clothing choice is the amount of money you are willing to invest in a single garment or a whole wardrobe.
So far all of this is not earth shatteringly insightful, but basic statements of fact. However, with so many styles and colours available to us, why do we choose what we choose? Why do we stand looking at two seemingly identical pieces of sewn cloth and choose one over the other? Why does the fashion industry spend billions (pick your currency) to make us desire a fashion only to tell us 9 months later we look bad? Is it all economics?
Some if it is. A major portion of the world's employment, hence economies, is tied up in the ready to wear industry. They do need us to keep buying so that those workers, usually poor and ill educated, will have money to support themselves and their families. Yes, there are craftsmen and women in the Haute Couture who are truly artists with fabric, but this type of fashion is far beyond the means of most mortals. The Mexican/Indonesian/Thai/Chinese/Spanish/Indian textile worker is low paid and is often a "piece worker". As long as the product he sews is sold, he stays a step above starvation. This is possibly the best reason for changing your wardrobe completely once a year.
And the rest of those questions? OK, utility can be a factor in my choice. Sometimes I need to replace clothes that are indeed worn out. With all the horses and riding we do, jeans have a life span of about 4-6 months -- providing the children haven't grown too much (HA!). Therefore, do I choose Tesco value at £2.75 to £4 or Levi's 501s for £30 to £50? Both are made in countries that specialise in intensive manual labour that the mass clothing industry requires and aren't Fairtrade. The choice is obvious from a financial viewpoint. I can buy 10 pairs of of Tesco for every 1 pair of Levi's -- unless I am buying to Impress.
Now we come to the crux: "Dress to Impress". Impress WHO? Ourselves? Our Mates? Our Partners? Our Family? Our Boss? Our Secretary? The Public? The Builders? WHO??
Girls as young as 8 are wearing seductive clothes because they "want to look sexy". From the over simulating, over sexual media campaigns, These innocent children have been taught to equate looking nice with sex. Who in their right mind would market lacy bra-like things and transparent tops for children? Yet, they do. Who is type of dressing aiming to Impress? Why are high heeled (2 inch plus heels) available for children whose feet and legs are still soft and growing? We won't let them do en-pointe ballet because it will ruin their feet, but we will let them wear heels for school? Who is this for? It isn't only girls. Boys' shirts, tees, piques, and button front, are covered with images which are mostly violent and rebellious. The fashion is either athletic, military camouflage or slummy. Who is supposed to be impressed by this?
Adults may be thinking that dressing their 8 year olds this way is humorous. The messages on boys tee-shirts warning us of the approaching danger in the form of a toddler or child may bring a wry smile to other parent's faces. However, if this is the messages we give them at 8, when they are very impressionable, is it any surprise that they are over sexed, violent, low esteemed teenagers?
Stop and look at what your kids are wearing! What are you putting them in? Is this a reflection of yourself or how you really want your children to be viewed? Is this how you want your teenage son or daughter? How can we really be taken seriously when we tell them underage sex is wrong, yet dress them in the types of clothes we used to wear to nightclubs? Who are we telling them to Impress and for what reason?
Our own clothes reflect this principle too. I have seen lots of "mutton dressed as lamb", both male and female. Our body image obsessive society bombards us with airbrushed images of "perfection" that if we could only attain, then we would enjoy the wonders of "perfect" hedonistic pleasures. And we, the moronic consumer, must follow what we see. The result is people with dun-lop disease (their belly dun lopped over their belt) parade the streets of our towns and cities wearing crop tops, short tight tee shirts, hipster jeans and Lycra believing they are sexy. Not only is it a fashion offense, they look silly and don't realise it! Then there are the pregnant ones who do the same thing only to show us their unborn's movements and new acquired stretch marks. As one is pregnant, one is therefore sexually active and attractive to someone. The look is not complementary -- even if one is a famous "A-List" star.
Christians have it hard. They would like to be fashionable, yet not look immoral. They are told to be modest and conservative, but that is a hard look to achieve without looking dowdy. Mainstream Christians are often uncomfortable with, and sometimes unkind, to the more Fundamentalist types who wear a specific fashion to point out that they are different. Christians also like to Impress. But the question remains: WHO? For them, the answer should be easy, but the temptation is great.
Your clothes say a lot about you. We need to get the perspective right. Yes, there is a time and place to look sexy. However, is it right when it is a child? And there is a time took look athletic...but everyday and for every occasion? There is a time to look a mess in butt ripped and patched jeans, but is Church the right place? Ecclesiastes says there is time for every purpose under Heaven. We just need to use a bit more discernment and wisdom when we get dressed in the morning. People see your appearance long before your Big Mac.
Sunday, 11 May 2008
Happy Pentecost
Oh, Dear....
As I was in the sacred Household Reading Room Which No Child Dare Disturb, I perused a copy of Nature magazine. As I flipped the pages one small article jumped out at me. On page 1030 of Vol. 451, 28 February 2008, blazed the headline "Lone Star vs creationism", "The battle against anti-scientific literalism continues. Next stop Texas."
What the article is saying in a nut-shell is that the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board should not grant the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) the right to grant Master's Degrees in science education because (1) ICR believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible, (2) Nature magazine believes Creationism is irrational, (3) ICR asked people to pray for it. It says nothing about the quality of the education that being offered or the success of the candidates who have earned their degrees in California. It does say without offering proof, only opinion, that "The ICR has managed to con its way into the California educational system for decades." Nature has managed to insult the State of California for a lack of proper educational assessment follow up, but also the all the people who worked hard for their degrees. Yet this attitude is not shocking, it is to be expected.
I regularly hear and read that Christians are unwilling to enter into a "rational" debate regarding the Creationism-Evolution argument. What I find hard when I do enter into the fray is remaining rational when all around me have lost their perspective. Instead of engaging me mentally, I am often insulted before we begin. I read Matt Ridley's book, The Red Queen, and on page 17 I was informed that if I believed in a "being with a long grey beard" that there was no point for me to continue because I had closed my mind to the [obvious] evidence. Really?? Then I think all you wanted, Mr. Ridley, was the money for the book and a veneration of your opinion. I did read the rest of the book and found it to be the usual mix of science, science fiction and "faith" that all would soon be revealed. I have also read Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion and found the same attitude expressed on page 31. New Scientist jumped with joy and clapped its literary hands in the 1 March 2008 issue declaring that gaps in the fossil record are not that big and that there is proof of evolutionary change within the Ceratopsians. True, there is change in the species, but they fail to explain or show me how, where or when the Ceratopsians (ie. Triceratops) became dinosaurs from the lower orders of the reptile/lizard kingdom. How did life in the Permian and the earlier Carboniferous become so large in the Mesozoic? There's a gap there I would like filled. I have a hunch, but I am regularly told I am too stupid with my BSc, Masters, PhD and a religious background to understand.
In all these cases, there is an underlying belief that Freedom of Speech and Belief is perfectly fine as long as one believes what "The Scientists" are saying. Most religious people I know would welcome open debate but are tired of being insulted and screamed at. Yes, there are some interesting parts of the Bible that do require faith. Equally, there are gaps and guesses in the scientific doctrines of Dawkins, Hawking and Gould that require equal amounts, if not a bit more, faith. In all cases, there are extremes on every end and they must be looked at, weighed intellectually and debated for value and worth. If they are found lacking, then they must be discarded. Because one is a member of the Populist Science belief with a contract from Harper-Collins does not make one automatically above examination and criticism. This I believe is what would be considered a rational approach.
And this is why Pentecost is such a wonderful thing. In 30 AD (according to modern scholars and historians) when the original Pentecost miracle occurred, the Disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit and were given the gift of speaking in languages so that all men would understand them. The miracle was treated with both awe and derision (Acts 2). And this is what Christians need to pray for today. We need the language of science. We need to speak to this atheists and explain to them where they have misinterpreted their information. All humans make mistakes, even the most eminent scientific scholars, and understanding and interpretation is an area where people are at their weakest.
We all need to embrace them with love and patience, but not apathy and disdain. Jesus said his followers would be persecuted and to find this joyful. I can see why. No one gets het up over "foolish nonsense"and "weird beliefs" unless they aren't that foolish or weird and have something truthful about them. For over 6,000 years people have worshiped, praised and adored Jehovah. At times there has been and swelling of belief and, at other times, a serious contraction, but there has been belief. There is nothing new under the sun and the vitriolic sputterings against those of us who do not follow Populist Science are akin to those uttered against us once upon a time in Rome, Lyon and Antioch. Hiding in fear was never part of the Plan.
So enjoy the Pentecost. Use it to boldly embrace a new language and understanding. Use it to make yourself strong, to go forth and speak, to raise awareness to the Truth. God, The Father, does not fit in a box or a scientific equation. He is greater that the sum total of ALL our parts as humanity, including all the atheists mentioned. Let go and see where He will take you this Pentecost.
As I was in the sacred Household Reading Room Which No Child Dare Disturb, I perused a copy of Nature magazine. As I flipped the pages one small article jumped out at me. On page 1030 of Vol. 451, 28 February 2008, blazed the headline "Lone Star vs creationism", "The battle against anti-scientific literalism continues. Next stop Texas."
What the article is saying in a nut-shell is that the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board should not grant the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) the right to grant Master's Degrees in science education because (1) ICR believes in a literal interpretation of the Bible, (2) Nature magazine believes Creationism is irrational, (3) ICR asked people to pray for it. It says nothing about the quality of the education that being offered or the success of the candidates who have earned their degrees in California. It does say without offering proof, only opinion, that "The ICR has managed to con its way into the California educational system for decades." Nature has managed to insult the State of California for a lack of proper educational assessment follow up, but also the all the people who worked hard for their degrees. Yet this attitude is not shocking, it is to be expected.
I regularly hear and read that Christians are unwilling to enter into a "rational" debate regarding the Creationism-Evolution argument. What I find hard when I do enter into the fray is remaining rational when all around me have lost their perspective. Instead of engaging me mentally, I am often insulted before we begin. I read Matt Ridley's book, The Red Queen, and on page 17 I was informed that if I believed in a "being with a long grey beard" that there was no point for me to continue because I had closed my mind to the [obvious] evidence. Really?? Then I think all you wanted, Mr. Ridley, was the money for the book and a veneration of your opinion. I did read the rest of the book and found it to be the usual mix of science, science fiction and "faith" that all would soon be revealed. I have also read Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion and found the same attitude expressed on page 31. New Scientist jumped with joy and clapped its literary hands in the 1 March 2008 issue declaring that gaps in the fossil record are not that big and that there is proof of evolutionary change within the Ceratopsians. True, there is change in the species, but they fail to explain or show me how, where or when the Ceratopsians (ie. Triceratops) became dinosaurs from the lower orders of the reptile/lizard kingdom. How did life in the Permian and the earlier Carboniferous become so large in the Mesozoic? There's a gap there I would like filled. I have a hunch, but I am regularly told I am too stupid with my BSc, Masters, PhD and a religious background to understand.
In all these cases, there is an underlying belief that Freedom of Speech and Belief is perfectly fine as long as one believes what "The Scientists" are saying. Most religious people I know would welcome open debate but are tired of being insulted and screamed at. Yes, there are some interesting parts of the Bible that do require faith. Equally, there are gaps and guesses in the scientific doctrines of Dawkins, Hawking and Gould that require equal amounts, if not a bit more, faith. In all cases, there are extremes on every end and they must be looked at, weighed intellectually and debated for value and worth. If they are found lacking, then they must be discarded. Because one is a member of the Populist Science belief with a contract from Harper-Collins does not make one automatically above examination and criticism. This I believe is what would be considered a rational approach.
And this is why Pentecost is such a wonderful thing. In 30 AD (according to modern scholars and historians) when the original Pentecost miracle occurred, the Disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit and were given the gift of speaking in languages so that all men would understand them. The miracle was treated with both awe and derision (Acts 2). And this is what Christians need to pray for today. We need the language of science. We need to speak to this atheists and explain to them where they have misinterpreted their information. All humans make mistakes, even the most eminent scientific scholars, and understanding and interpretation is an area where people are at their weakest.
We all need to embrace them with love and patience, but not apathy and disdain. Jesus said his followers would be persecuted and to find this joyful. I can see why. No one gets het up over "foolish nonsense"and "weird beliefs" unless they aren't that foolish or weird and have something truthful about them. For over 6,000 years people have worshiped, praised and adored Jehovah. At times there has been and swelling of belief and, at other times, a serious contraction, but there has been belief. There is nothing new under the sun and the vitriolic sputterings against those of us who do not follow Populist Science are akin to those uttered against us once upon a time in Rome, Lyon and Antioch. Hiding in fear was never part of the Plan.
So enjoy the Pentecost. Use it to boldly embrace a new language and understanding. Use it to make yourself strong, to go forth and speak, to raise awareness to the Truth. God, The Father, does not fit in a box or a scientific equation. He is greater that the sum total of ALL our parts as humanity, including all the atheists mentioned. Let go and see where He will take you this Pentecost.
Monday, 21 April 2008
Oh Dear, He Failed...Hurray!
Realizing that the way I speak of my eldest son would lend one to think he would be up for Messiah of the Year Award, I wish to confirm that my boy is clearly on Tera Firma and has totally human feet. He is so human that he failed his math test today. What was surprising was his response to having failed the test.
In my experience, when a pupil fails a paper or test the first thing they look for is a scapegoat. In their mind this saves them from having to take the responsibility for their lack of preparation or concentration during the examination. It is a lot easier to blame the kid sitting next to/behind/in front of them for any and all problems. And we, as adults and teachers, allow them to get away with this behavior by not forcing them when necessary to take responsibility for their work.
If the pupil is unable to find a convenient scapegoat or is denied one by a teacher who is not willing to be the mug, what is displayed is anger, sometimes to the point of rage. How dare a teacher mark the paper in this manner? Who the hell do they think they are? I have been greeted more than once with these words and accompanying body language; however, my personal favourite is, "I'm going to get my dad on you and then you will be sorry!" I remember standing in one maths class and being told this. The school had in-class telephones, so I picked up the receiver and asked the boy for his dad's phone number. He backed down and proceeded to threaten me with the infamous "I know where you live". All this anger because the student felt, believed, or was taught somewhere along the line that you don't have to prepare for tests either in school or in life.
The third most common variation of behaviour is sullen silence. I do get worried with this one. The other two are easy, but this one does lend me to visions of children being beaten severely for bad test marks. I would like to deny that this happens, but unfortunately this is a trigger for abusive parents looking for a reason. Those pupils prone to sullen silence were invited to see me either after class or after school, lunch time or break time. We would talk the paper through and see if there was any way of salvaging a desperate situation. I do have to admit, I did get some improvement from these pupils.
So what did the boy do today that shocked me? He screamed that he wanted to resit the paper immediately before I had even marked it. The thing is that his "school room" is on a different floor of the house from where I was (doing the ironing). He brought me the paper and was crying harder than the last time he fell off his horse and nearly broke his leg. This near hysteria was from the fact that he had to take responsibility for failing that paper and none of the usual behavioral responses fit.
After nearly a half an hour of calming him down, I realized that we no longer allow our children to fail. Failing is now so taboo in our society that we go to extreme lengths to make sure that the developing young people never experience this -- until it is too late. Every so often I watch "The Apprentice". I see young and middle age people vying with each other for this coveted position. I can see the mistakes they are making and cringe because I know that Sir Alan will have them for toast. What is more interesting is the excuses they make for having failed. I have yet to see one of the contestants say, "Yes, I made of mess of it and he was right to fire me because I failed."
Failure is worthwhile. If you fail and keep your head, then you can actually learn something from the experience. Yes the idiots will say it is character building, but in truth it is intelligence building. It is not the successes that make the man but his failures and how he dealt with them. Back in the dark ages of the the 1980s I had a post graduate teaching position in an American university. I tried to fail a student in one of my classes and was immediately informed by my Department Head that I could do no such thing. His parents were major donors to the school. So I had a tough choice: my academic integrity or my PhD. What did the young man learn? That if you have enough money, then you never have to take responsibility for your actions.
Not having properly learned that one can not fail pupils, five years ago I tried again. I had another boy in my class who was not hopeless mathematically, he simply could not count, add, subtract, multiply or divide, and he did not care. His parents were insistent that he take the Higher OCR Maths Paper. There was no way that he could have passed it. I told my Head this. I told the School Governors this. In fact, I told them that the boy was failing and would be given an "F" grade for class and home work. I, in return, was told in no uncertain terms that the boy would not fail his math class because "we don't fail pupils at this school. It would cause untold psychological damage." The boy's result came back as a "U" and I took the heat for it.
So our children are not allowed to fail because of the psychological damage it will cause. We allow pupils to flow through the education system and teach them all the excuses they might need, but none the practicality that failing might. We teach them to blame others and not take responsibility for themselves. We don't show them with the little failures how to remedy the situation. And when they fail their GCSEs, A-Levels, university degrees and they are damaged to the point of suicide, we, the well meaning teachers of the world, ring our hands and wonder what went wrong.
So he failed today. Yet, he learned more about himself and world in that F than any top mark lecture or project could have taught him. And he knows that every failure has the chance to teach him what will be required of him in "The Real World".
He unexpectedly re-sat the test this afternoon when his brothers and sister came home from school. It was different paper but the same problem type. He didn't mess around or look for a reason to get out of it. He scored 19 out of 22.
And to this day, I hate being referred to as Dr.
In my experience, when a pupil fails a paper or test the first thing they look for is a scapegoat. In their mind this saves them from having to take the responsibility for their lack of preparation or concentration during the examination. It is a lot easier to blame the kid sitting next to/behind/in front of them for any and all problems. And we, as adults and teachers, allow them to get away with this behavior by not forcing them when necessary to take responsibility for their work.
If the pupil is unable to find a convenient scapegoat or is denied one by a teacher who is not willing to be the mug, what is displayed is anger, sometimes to the point of rage. How dare a teacher mark the paper in this manner? Who the hell do they think they are? I have been greeted more than once with these words and accompanying body language; however, my personal favourite is, "I'm going to get my dad on you and then you will be sorry!" I remember standing in one maths class and being told this. The school had in-class telephones, so I picked up the receiver and asked the boy for his dad's phone number. He backed down and proceeded to threaten me with the infamous "I know where you live". All this anger because the student felt, believed, or was taught somewhere along the line that you don't have to prepare for tests either in school or in life.
The third most common variation of behaviour is sullen silence. I do get worried with this one. The other two are easy, but this one does lend me to visions of children being beaten severely for bad test marks. I would like to deny that this happens, but unfortunately this is a trigger for abusive parents looking for a reason. Those pupils prone to sullen silence were invited to see me either after class or after school, lunch time or break time. We would talk the paper through and see if there was any way of salvaging a desperate situation. I do have to admit, I did get some improvement from these pupils.
So what did the boy do today that shocked me? He screamed that he wanted to resit the paper immediately before I had even marked it. The thing is that his "school room" is on a different floor of the house from where I was (doing the ironing). He brought me the paper and was crying harder than the last time he fell off his horse and nearly broke his leg. This near hysteria was from the fact that he had to take responsibility for failing that paper and none of the usual behavioral responses fit.
After nearly a half an hour of calming him down, I realized that we no longer allow our children to fail. Failing is now so taboo in our society that we go to extreme lengths to make sure that the developing young people never experience this -- until it is too late. Every so often I watch "The Apprentice". I see young and middle age people vying with each other for this coveted position. I can see the mistakes they are making and cringe because I know that Sir Alan will have them for toast. What is more interesting is the excuses they make for having failed. I have yet to see one of the contestants say, "Yes, I made of mess of it and he was right to fire me because I failed."
Failure is worthwhile. If you fail and keep your head, then you can actually learn something from the experience. Yes the idiots will say it is character building, but in truth it is intelligence building. It is not the successes that make the man but his failures and how he dealt with them. Back in the dark ages of the the 1980s I had a post graduate teaching position in an American university. I tried to fail a student in one of my classes and was immediately informed by my Department Head that I could do no such thing. His parents were major donors to the school. So I had a tough choice: my academic integrity or my PhD. What did the young man learn? That if you have enough money, then you never have to take responsibility for your actions.
Not having properly learned that one can not fail pupils, five years ago I tried again. I had another boy in my class who was not hopeless mathematically, he simply could not count, add, subtract, multiply or divide, and he did not care. His parents were insistent that he take the Higher OCR Maths Paper. There was no way that he could have passed it. I told my Head this. I told the School Governors this. In fact, I told them that the boy was failing and would be given an "F" grade for class and home work. I, in return, was told in no uncertain terms that the boy would not fail his math class because "we don't fail pupils at this school. It would cause untold psychological damage." The boy's result came back as a "U" and I took the heat for it.
So our children are not allowed to fail because of the psychological damage it will cause. We allow pupils to flow through the education system and teach them all the excuses they might need, but none the practicality that failing might. We teach them to blame others and not take responsibility for themselves. We don't show them with the little failures how to remedy the situation. And when they fail their GCSEs, A-Levels, university degrees and they are damaged to the point of suicide, we, the well meaning teachers of the world, ring our hands and wonder what went wrong.
So he failed today. Yet, he learned more about himself and world in that F than any top mark lecture or project could have taught him. And he knows that every failure has the chance to teach him what will be required of him in "The Real World".
He unexpectedly re-sat the test this afternoon when his brothers and sister came home from school. It was different paper but the same problem type. He didn't mess around or look for a reason to get out of it. He scored 19 out of 22.
And to this day, I hate being referred to as Dr.
Sunday, 20 April 2008
The Next Chapter....
It has been a (long) while since my last post and much has happened which is why I haven't had the time to blog properly or otherwise. The big thing has been that my 10 year old is no longer in school. After much soul searching and bouts of neurotic fear, we decided to home school.
Home schooling is not something I would recommend that one enter into lightly. We, my husband and myself, were given very little choice in the matter. The Local Education Authority became involved when my son achieved a full half term of unexcused absences. Apparently sending in to the school letter after letter stating my son was unwell and meetings with the school that included his psychiatrist and psychologist does not constitute a proper excuse for being ill. Mental illness is not an acceptable reason for missing school -- especially when it is the school that is the cause of the mental illness, in this case severe depression and anxiety. I met with the LEA representative and was informed that either my son was in school for the full of the following half term or he was officially withdrawn. If he was not officially withdrawn, then they would go to the courts and get a Mandatory School Attendance Order. Knowing the child was in no shape to attend school, we were forced to withdraw him and to commence home school.
As a teacher, I had always been informed, taught, led to believe, that the worst people for teaching children was in fact the parents. Parents are ill prepared and lack the necessary objectivity required for the proper education on young people. Parents lack the ability to discern the correct method to instruct children because they are blinded by the emotional tie that is present in the parent-child relationship. Not being a professional, parents bring to the educational atmosphere an almost voyeuristic, Münchhausenian expectation of their child's development. In other words, parents who home school are doing it for the benefit of themselves and not their the children.
This is utter rubbish.
With this having been beaten mentally into me, I was terrified of teaching my son. I have been observed and judged by OFSTED as an excellent teacher. I have helped my former pupils to high GCSE results. I have worked with educationally challenged teenagers and helped them to become academically achieving students capable of doing A-Levels. I know how to get children and teenagers to produce to the Government standard without them going insane. So why couldn't I do this with my own kids? My husband watched for years as my school pupils were able to take advantage of my knowledge and leadership while our own children suffered under less competent colleagues. It has only been through his support that I have been able to do this.
So what have I learned? Home school requires excellent time management skills and a knack for multi-tasking. I have learned that I can sort the laundry (forever the laundry!) and discuss political changes brought forward during the reign of Elizabeth I. I have found that a good discussion about the nature of various animals can be done while I iron (laundry part two: The Nightmare). I have also learned that I can cover the National Curriculum in about a day and half -- roughly 7 hours a week if I move at a medium pace. So what are they doing the other 3 1/2 days they are at school?
I learned that all text books that any student could possibly want are readily available for purchase and many come with a learning scheme. Perhaps things have changed, but I had been taught that parents who home school do so without the benefit of proper resources. OK, so I can't pop into my local WH Smith or Waterstones and pick up the latest version of a geography textbook, but I can sure order it on line. I also have the luxury of being able to drop the parts of the National Curriculum which are nothing more than governmental propaganda -- something a state school teacher can not do for fear of losing their job. The education my son is now receiving fits and benefits my son. Will this make him a better "citizen of the future"? Who can tell? All I know is that he will be a thinking member of society who will be able to form his own thoughts, opinions and judgments with minimal government spin.
In the last 12 weeks I have watched my "failing" and "emotionally immature" (directly from his school report) son become a calm, competent learner. For a boy who could not sit still and learn his multiplication tables, he is now able to long multiplication and division, understands equivalent fractions, the nature of contentious religious divides, how to properly use adjectives in his writing, the nature and purpose of plants, how weather affects the local environment and how to confidently complete a 9 fence show jumping course.
My son wasn't failing. The school and educational system failed.
Home schooling is not something I would recommend that one enter into lightly. We, my husband and myself, were given very little choice in the matter. The Local Education Authority became involved when my son achieved a full half term of unexcused absences. Apparently sending in to the school letter after letter stating my son was unwell and meetings with the school that included his psychiatrist and psychologist does not constitute a proper excuse for being ill. Mental illness is not an acceptable reason for missing school -- especially when it is the school that is the cause of the mental illness, in this case severe depression and anxiety. I met with the LEA representative and was informed that either my son was in school for the full of the following half term or he was officially withdrawn. If he was not officially withdrawn, then they would go to the courts and get a Mandatory School Attendance Order. Knowing the child was in no shape to attend school, we were forced to withdraw him and to commence home school.
As a teacher, I had always been informed, taught, led to believe, that the worst people for teaching children was in fact the parents. Parents are ill prepared and lack the necessary objectivity required for the proper education on young people. Parents lack the ability to discern the correct method to instruct children because they are blinded by the emotional tie that is present in the parent-child relationship. Not being a professional, parents bring to the educational atmosphere an almost voyeuristic, Münchhausenian expectation of their child's development. In other words, parents who home school are doing it for the benefit of themselves and not their the children.
This is utter rubbish.
With this having been beaten mentally into me, I was terrified of teaching my son. I have been observed and judged by OFSTED as an excellent teacher. I have helped my former pupils to high GCSE results. I have worked with educationally challenged teenagers and helped them to become academically achieving students capable of doing A-Levels. I know how to get children and teenagers to produce to the Government standard without them going insane. So why couldn't I do this with my own kids? My husband watched for years as my school pupils were able to take advantage of my knowledge and leadership while our own children suffered under less competent colleagues. It has only been through his support that I have been able to do this.
So what have I learned? Home school requires excellent time management skills and a knack for multi-tasking. I have learned that I can sort the laundry (forever the laundry!) and discuss political changes brought forward during the reign of Elizabeth I. I have found that a good discussion about the nature of various animals can be done while I iron (laundry part two: The Nightmare). I have also learned that I can cover the National Curriculum in about a day and half -- roughly 7 hours a week if I move at a medium pace. So what are they doing the other 3 1/2 days they are at school?
I learned that all text books that any student could possibly want are readily available for purchase and many come with a learning scheme. Perhaps things have changed, but I had been taught that parents who home school do so without the benefit of proper resources. OK, so I can't pop into my local WH Smith or Waterstones and pick up the latest version of a geography textbook, but I can sure order it on line. I also have the luxury of being able to drop the parts of the National Curriculum which are nothing more than governmental propaganda -- something a state school teacher can not do for fear of losing their job. The education my son is now receiving fits and benefits my son. Will this make him a better "citizen of the future"? Who can tell? All I know is that he will be a thinking member of society who will be able to form his own thoughts, opinions and judgments with minimal government spin.
In the last 12 weeks I have watched my "failing" and "emotionally immature" (directly from his school report) son become a calm, competent learner. For a boy who could not sit still and learn his multiplication tables, he is now able to long multiplication and division, understands equivalent fractions, the nature of contentious religious divides, how to properly use adjectives in his writing, the nature and purpose of plants, how weather affects the local environment and how to confidently complete a 9 fence show jumping course.
My son wasn't failing. The school and educational system failed.
Wednesday, 30 January 2008
Is there a bully in the house?
I was greeted this morning by my eldest son thusly:
"Do I have to go to that pile of bricks today?"
He backed himself up against the radiator on the far side of his room and prepared himself a truly defensive position that many combat soldiers would have envied. As it was 6:50 in the morning I gave him a very blank look.
"Mum, I can't go and I won't go." My mind clicked back into reality. The horrid reality that had been our lives for the last 4 months. As terror emanated from his body in such a manner that it was palpable 8 feet away, all I could do was gently tell him, "You're not going today. Or tomorrow. Or next week." For the last month this phrase had broken the tension each morning, but today was one of his "bad days".
It is now 9:29pm and I am trying to get him to go to sleep. He has trained himself to stay up as late as possible with books and torches (flashlights for the Americans) so that when he sleeps it is the rest of the exhausted. I am hoping that by 11 tonight he will be asleep. Then, maybe, I will be able to sleep some before he begins tossing and turning which causes his bunk bed to squeak something awful. And then we will start the cycle again tomorrow.
For some of you, this will be a very recognisable situation. For some of you, this will seem like the start of a horror novel. For me, this is life. My son has been destroyed by children.
According to Kay Morgan-Gurr, General Director of Children Worldwide, bullying occurs every 7 minutes on our playgrounds and every 25 minutes in our classrooms. Only 4% of bullying incidents are seen or noted by the teaching staff. Do I doubt her and her statistics? No. I have been dealing with this issue for that last 7 years as both a parent and a teacher. In truth, I do not know if I helped the children in my care any better than the teachers at my son's former school.
Why is bullying so endemic in our culture? Why can't it be eradicated in our schools? I have several theories on both these questions, but I have no answers.
Why do people feel the need to intimidate others, to crush others physically and emotionally? I believe it comes from a culture that puts children under severe pressure; a culture that is overstimulating in negative messages; a culture that is too frightened to take personal responsibility when a government will happily do it for them; a culture of isolation.
Children are under incredible pressure to perform. I was stunned when my 5 year old came home with an assignment to write a 7 line poem making sure lines 2 & 4 and 6 & 7 rhymed. The poem was due back in to the teacher in 5 days. The topic was "food I don't like". I found it a bit tricky and I have 37 years and a degree in English on the tyke. Yet, he had to do it. Then my six year old came home with a multiplication worksheet: 2s, 3s & 5s. My 8 year old was asked to spell words like "carbohydrates", "vegetables" and "anthology". You can imagine what my 10 year old had...."Preparation for KS2 Exams". This is madness! And who is this really benefiting? When do my children have time to play in the park? When do my children have time to be a child? They don't and this causes anxiety and anger. They don't know why and they lash out.
So why do they lash out and not negotiate or talk? Why can't children simply "work it out between themselves" as we did? Take a good look at what you give your children. Cartoon Network is filled with images that excessively violent, and unlike Roadrunner and Coyote, when the character is dead, it is DEAD. And the violence used in killing is rewarded. Ben 10 is a hero. Power Rangers are heros. The most popular games for Play Stations, Game Boys, Game Cubes and the like are violent fantasy. My 10 year old asked his best mate what he wanted for his birthday present and we were told "some cool violence like Spiderman 3". I'm not some pansy, softy parent who doesn't want my Little Johnny hurt. My kids play rugby and ride horses competitively -- boys and girl, but I fear that my mother's joke about "hit 'em first and argue later" is now the mantra for our society. This is a bad omen for our society. By giving our children violence we sow the seeds of our destruction.
It is sad to say that the most influential thing in a child's life is advertising. We would love to think that it is family or religion, but truthfully it is the messages they receive from the ever more vacuous media. An advertising media who will spend over £20 billion this year wooing the children of the UK. Have you ever looked carefully at the cover of a glossy magazine? Women and men told daily, weekly and monthly that they are not fulfilled, not worthy, not beautiful, not capable. Most adults can see through this for what it really is: advertising for a "miracle" that will only cost you (if you are lucky) about £30. Children and young people do not have the discernment to realise what the real purpose is. This is not only the territory of print media -- TV is just as vile and just as damaging. There is now serious proof that this is damaging children's health as nearly 30% of young girls under the age of 10 are claiming to be or currently on a diet to improve their appearance. The highest area of growth for eating disorders is now with teenage boys who want to be as thin as their airbrushed heroes. If we are not crushing their minds, then we are filling them with self loathing for failing to meet some fantasy of physical beauty and strength. And what happens to them when they realise they are never going to be "ideal" or "beautiful"? They lash out and crush any perceived competition.
So why don't we, the adults and parents, do something about it? Sometimes we try and soon discover that it is simply too difficult. These are our children we cry-only to be reminded that experts are available and will solve the problems for us. Experts. My dear father always said that an expert was someone who lived out of town and owned a brief case and usually didn't have clue. As he spent 37 years as a trial lawyer (barrister for those of you in the UK) and used experts regularly, I suspect he knew what he was talking about. To change this culture of pressure and emotional extortion upon our children, parents must accept and take back the responsibility for rearing their children. Our children belong to us. They are not the property of the government or the educational system. We decide what they are going to watch and read and listen to. Children do have some rights but all rights are tempered by responsibility. Children are not allowed to do certain things because they do not possess the knowledge or experience exercise the responsibility demanded. As adults and parents we are supposed to. Being a 30 year old teenager is simply uncool to the whole of society.
I believe that the greatest weapon the government, and the media by extension, has is fear. In the film of JK Rowlings book, Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix, Luna Lovegood makes a very profound statement, "If I were You-know-who I would want to keep you alone because then you aren't such a threat." What a wonderful insight and truthful comment on the whole of our society. As long as our fear keeps us closed up in our small, cheaply built little houses with gardens not large enough to properly exercise in, then we will fill our time with a diet shallow, critical, mentally vacant entertainment that we have been told will make us happy. Having children happily playing together in parks means that parents meet and talk. They become friends and have an influence on each other. Children playing in parks, taking the fresh air and arguing with each other in a wholesome and normal way (without ninja kicks), might also become adults who have "ideas". I have been told that "ideas" are dangerous and can lead to problems for the government. So we keep our children locked away, filling them with fear that every slightly old man with a nasty smell is a pedophile, that every person of a different colour to them is "out to get them", that every hoodie is criminal, and our reward for our protectionism is a society filled with angry, limited, pushed, neurotic children looking for something that will quell the ache.
I don't blame the teachers. The government has made it nearly impossible to do the job. I tried for 8 years before I decided that, in spite of loving working with the children and teenagers, I could no longer tolerate being pushed, pressured and forced to do the impossible. And before you ask was I one of the 25% of teachers who will admit to bullying pupils, I will confess that I think I was. I too had to create a miracle and get pupils through GCSE examinations I believed they should never have attempted. And I was told these students HAD to make a C or above. Between doing that and the mountain of paperwork and planning, I could no more be part of the solution to the problem than the Expert who evaluated the school for the government.
As I said, I don't have the answers. Suggestions maybe, but nothing definite. It is now very late and I am sure my son is asleep. I suppose I should get my rest as the battle for his heart and mind begins again tomorrow morning at 6:45.
"Do I have to go to that pile of bricks today?"
He backed himself up against the radiator on the far side of his room and prepared himself a truly defensive position that many combat soldiers would have envied. As it was 6:50 in the morning I gave him a very blank look.
"Mum, I can't go and I won't go." My mind clicked back into reality. The horrid reality that had been our lives for the last 4 months. As terror emanated from his body in such a manner that it was palpable 8 feet away, all I could do was gently tell him, "You're not going today. Or tomorrow. Or next week." For the last month this phrase had broken the tension each morning, but today was one of his "bad days".
It is now 9:29pm and I am trying to get him to go to sleep. He has trained himself to stay up as late as possible with books and torches (flashlights for the Americans) so that when he sleeps it is the rest of the exhausted. I am hoping that by 11 tonight he will be asleep. Then, maybe, I will be able to sleep some before he begins tossing and turning which causes his bunk bed to squeak something awful. And then we will start the cycle again tomorrow.
For some of you, this will be a very recognisable situation. For some of you, this will seem like the start of a horror novel. For me, this is life. My son has been destroyed by children.
According to Kay Morgan-Gurr, General Director of Children Worldwide, bullying occurs every 7 minutes on our playgrounds and every 25 minutes in our classrooms. Only 4% of bullying incidents are seen or noted by the teaching staff. Do I doubt her and her statistics? No. I have been dealing with this issue for that last 7 years as both a parent and a teacher. In truth, I do not know if I helped the children in my care any better than the teachers at my son's former school.
Why is bullying so endemic in our culture? Why can't it be eradicated in our schools? I have several theories on both these questions, but I have no answers.
Why do people feel the need to intimidate others, to crush others physically and emotionally? I believe it comes from a culture that puts children under severe pressure; a culture that is overstimulating in negative messages; a culture that is too frightened to take personal responsibility when a government will happily do it for them; a culture of isolation.
Children are under incredible pressure to perform. I was stunned when my 5 year old came home with an assignment to write a 7 line poem making sure lines 2 & 4 and 6 & 7 rhymed. The poem was due back in to the teacher in 5 days. The topic was "food I don't like". I found it a bit tricky and I have 37 years and a degree in English on the tyke. Yet, he had to do it. Then my six year old came home with a multiplication worksheet: 2s, 3s & 5s. My 8 year old was asked to spell words like "carbohydrates", "vegetables" and "anthology". You can imagine what my 10 year old had...."Preparation for KS2 Exams". This is madness! And who is this really benefiting? When do my children have time to play in the park? When do my children have time to be a child? They don't and this causes anxiety and anger. They don't know why and they lash out.
So why do they lash out and not negotiate or talk? Why can't children simply "work it out between themselves" as we did? Take a good look at what you give your children. Cartoon Network is filled with images that excessively violent, and unlike Roadrunner and Coyote, when the character is dead, it is DEAD. And the violence used in killing is rewarded. Ben 10 is a hero. Power Rangers are heros. The most popular games for Play Stations, Game Boys, Game Cubes and the like are violent fantasy. My 10 year old asked his best mate what he wanted for his birthday present and we were told "some cool violence like Spiderman 3". I'm not some pansy, softy parent who doesn't want my Little Johnny hurt. My kids play rugby and ride horses competitively -- boys and girl, but I fear that my mother's joke about "hit 'em first and argue later" is now the mantra for our society. This is a bad omen for our society. By giving our children violence we sow the seeds of our destruction.
It is sad to say that the most influential thing in a child's life is advertising. We would love to think that it is family or religion, but truthfully it is the messages they receive from the ever more vacuous media. An advertising media who will spend over £20 billion this year wooing the children of the UK. Have you ever looked carefully at the cover of a glossy magazine? Women and men told daily, weekly and monthly that they are not fulfilled, not worthy, not beautiful, not capable. Most adults can see through this for what it really is: advertising for a "miracle" that will only cost you (if you are lucky) about £30. Children and young people do not have the discernment to realise what the real purpose is. This is not only the territory of print media -- TV is just as vile and just as damaging. There is now serious proof that this is damaging children's health as nearly 30% of young girls under the age of 10 are claiming to be or currently on a diet to improve their appearance. The highest area of growth for eating disorders is now with teenage boys who want to be as thin as their airbrushed heroes. If we are not crushing their minds, then we are filling them with self loathing for failing to meet some fantasy of physical beauty and strength. And what happens to them when they realise they are never going to be "ideal" or "beautiful"? They lash out and crush any perceived competition.
So why don't we, the adults and parents, do something about it? Sometimes we try and soon discover that it is simply too difficult. These are our children we cry-only to be reminded that experts are available and will solve the problems for us. Experts. My dear father always said that an expert was someone who lived out of town and owned a brief case and usually didn't have clue. As he spent 37 years as a trial lawyer (barrister for those of you in the UK) and used experts regularly, I suspect he knew what he was talking about. To change this culture of pressure and emotional extortion upon our children, parents must accept and take back the responsibility for rearing their children. Our children belong to us. They are not the property of the government or the educational system. We decide what they are going to watch and read and listen to. Children do have some rights but all rights are tempered by responsibility. Children are not allowed to do certain things because they do not possess the knowledge or experience exercise the responsibility demanded. As adults and parents we are supposed to. Being a 30 year old teenager is simply uncool to the whole of society.
I believe that the greatest weapon the government, and the media by extension, has is fear. In the film of JK Rowlings book, Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix, Luna Lovegood makes a very profound statement, "If I were You-know-who I would want to keep you alone because then you aren't such a threat." What a wonderful insight and truthful comment on the whole of our society. As long as our fear keeps us closed up in our small, cheaply built little houses with gardens not large enough to properly exercise in, then we will fill our time with a diet shallow, critical, mentally vacant entertainment that we have been told will make us happy. Having children happily playing together in parks means that parents meet and talk. They become friends and have an influence on each other. Children playing in parks, taking the fresh air and arguing with each other in a wholesome and normal way (without ninja kicks), might also become adults who have "ideas". I have been told that "ideas" are dangerous and can lead to problems for the government. So we keep our children locked away, filling them with fear that every slightly old man with a nasty smell is a pedophile, that every person of a different colour to them is "out to get them", that every hoodie is criminal, and our reward for our protectionism is a society filled with angry, limited, pushed, neurotic children looking for something that will quell the ache.
I don't blame the teachers. The government has made it nearly impossible to do the job. I tried for 8 years before I decided that, in spite of loving working with the children and teenagers, I could no longer tolerate being pushed, pressured and forced to do the impossible. And before you ask was I one of the 25% of teachers who will admit to bullying pupils, I will confess that I think I was. I too had to create a miracle and get pupils through GCSE examinations I believed they should never have attempted. And I was told these students HAD to make a C or above. Between doing that and the mountain of paperwork and planning, I could no more be part of the solution to the problem than the Expert who evaluated the school for the government.
As I said, I don't have the answers. Suggestions maybe, but nothing definite. It is now very late and I am sure my son is asleep. I suppose I should get my rest as the battle for his heart and mind begins again tomorrow morning at 6:45.
Monday, 28 January 2008
Why Ainulindalë?
Yet another site from a Tolkien freak? Perhaps, but probably not. Yet the word is probably one of the prettiest in the Tolkien lexicon. For those of you who have not delved into the Mines of Moria or the appendix at the Return of the King or felt the need to be engrossed by The Silmarillion, I shall explain. Ainulindalë is "The Music of Ainur" -- the creation of Ea, the world. Iluvatar (God) creates first the Ainur (Angels), then gives them a musical theme which they use, embellish and ultimately create the world.
So what will the purpose of this blogspot be? Just that -- to discuss and explore music, God, religion and belief, hope and failure, children (not necessarily mine) and the impact the World has on each of them. Sorry, but you will have to search for Tolkien at a different site.
So what will the purpose of this blogspot be? Just that -- to discuss and explore music, God, religion and belief, hope and failure, children (not necessarily mine) and the impact the World has on each of them. Sorry, but you will have to search for Tolkien at a different site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)