The Life!

[CurtisEdmonds]

VERY thoughtful article on raising kids (something I know nothing about, of course, just offering for what value it has):

http://www.nationalreview.com/derbys...hire042803.asp

The Life! is pop music and cool movies. The Life! is current slang and clothing fashions. The Life! is staying up late, going to parties, interacting with the opposite sex, doing things your parents have told you not to do, doing things that are slightly illegal, improper, or dangerous. The Life! is your buddies, the in-jokes you have among yourselves, the places where you hang out. The Life! is smoking and drinking, sometimes doing the milder kind of drugs.

The following things are not part of the Life!: books with no pictures, music more than ten years old, art other than comic strips, playing organized sports, parents, siblings, religion, school, politics, creative work with the hands, creative work with the mind, work in general, any academic pursuit, “early to bed, early to rise,” any uniformed service (police, military), chastity, self-restraint, discipline.

For a certain kind of person, the Life! exerts an irresistible gravitational pull. It probably exerts some pull on any healthy teenager.

[theeye]

This is my nightmare.

[magenta321]

The thing that struck me in this was that the reporter repeated the idea that "the parents tried everything" and yet, these kids still partook in "the life".

I'm not a parent, so, I really can't comment beyond my own experience -- however, there is a normal rebellion which happens between all teens and their parents. This is part of growing up and finding our own identity.

For many, the circle of friends is more important than anything else (and comes before school and family). That's sad, but, it's normal too.

I dunno... I partook in the life. I did all the bad stuff in HS. I got caught for some of it, didn't get caught for other stuff. But, come to find out, my parents did all the same stuff -- going to NY to drink, smoking pot, etc. They turned out perfectly respectable, and I think I've turned out pretty ok too.

I got off my point somewhere -- anyway... some of this stuff... the hanging out with friends (and all friends are bad, because no kid is perfect, and no kid is the ideal friend for yours), the odd dress, and even the minor experimentation with sex and soft drugs, while, not wonderful things, are something that almost all of us go through. (I'm not advocating sex and drugs, don't get me wrong.) And the more parents try to control the minor rebellion (my kid dresses funny, I don't like his friends, I don't like his music, he doesn't do the sports or play the instruments I want him to) the more kids try to rebel more majorly (breaking stuff, loathing their parents, turning to drugs, turning to sex to feel good, etc).

I don't mean to make this black and white. I just think that an open line of communication, and a little leeway is exactly what kids need so they don't go completely wild. They do need rules, lots of them, and consquences too, don't get me wrong. It just seems like more often than not it has to do with picking battles wisely -- from both the parents and the kids.

[ms_n]

As a mother of a 14, 12, 10, and 5 year-old, I feel so much more encouraged now...

[AuntieEmma[$]]

And then there are kids who pick some from Column A and some from Column B. It's not like they're all mutually exclusive.
---------------------------

From the article:

A world that consisted of nothing but bourgeois lawn-tenders would be very dull, and probably not very creative. (What, for example, would there be for Tom Wolfe to write about?)

And it's also possible that not only would there be nothing for Tom Wolfe to write about, but there would be no Tom Wolfes in the first place to write about anything or nothing. (If Tom Wolfe were content being a lawntender, would he have bothered to write novels?)

That’s an adult perception though, of the sort that should be kept carefully hidden from the young ones. What we have to do is push them and push them, nag them and encourage them, towards the bourgeois virtues, and hope to God we succeed.

Ooch. I think that kind of "careful hiding" on the part of parents is exactly what produces the kinds of teenage rebellions the writer seems to dread so much.

P.S. This kind of hit a nerve with me because I'm right in the middle of reading a book of essays by Tom Wolfe -- and I think Wolfe was a really poor example for the National Review writer to use to make his point.

Wolfe skewers the wealthy at least as much as he does the street punks, and he's not too kind to the middle class either. What he's really interested in is class distinctions -- the markers that people use to display their class, whether that class may be street punk or stockbroker (ironic, in that context, that the National Review writer used stockbroker as his example of a proper goal for a kid who turns out right, considering the scorn Wolfe poured on the "Masters of the Universe" in Bonfire) -- and in how the different classes interact. And the hero -- and he was very much a hero, in the classical sense -- of Wolfe's last novel was in jail (for assault, as I recall) -- hardly the kind of "bourgeois" role model the National Review writer would admire.

Also, there's a world of difference between the real street punks that Wolfe was writing about in the passage quoted in the article -- the ones in court facing the robbery charges -- and the suburban kids who are merely aping the street punk's clothes and diction and other superficial matters of style -- but not imitating the armed robbery part.
-----------------------
P.P.S.:

Many more, though, will regret their lost opportunities, and spend their twenties and thirties trying to make up for what they squandered in those irreplaceable teens.

I could probably be a poster child for the kind of rotten adult that the writer prays his kids won't grow up to become -- but I don't attribute that to squandering my teens, even though, in fact, I did squander my teens (along with picking several items from Column B, the column of National Review virtues). It's a lot more complicated than that.

They say that youth is wasted on the young -- and one of the things that makes youth so precious is the ability to squander it. Adults don't have that luxury -- and it is a luxury -- because they know, in a deep-down way that kids often don't -- that they won't live forever. But aren't you nostalgic for the time before you knew that?

I also think the kind of pressure the writer is talking about -- to do everything exactly right during your "irreplaceable teens" or you will spend the rest of your life regretting it -- is not good, and it can overwhelm some kids. I actually think that kind of pressure is a contributing cause of Columbine-type shootings in proper "bourgeois" suburban schools.

[pluckyduck]

I'm all over the same portion of the article that caught Auntie:

It doesn’t suit every adult, of course, and from the social-anthropological point of view, there is a case to be made for the Life! A world that consisted of nothing but bourgeois lawn-tenders would be very dull, and probably not very creative. (What, for example, would there be for Tom Wolfe to write about?) That’s an adult perception though, of the sort that should be kept carefully hidden from the young ones. What we have to do is push them and push them, nag them and encourage them, towards the bourgeois virtues, and hope to God we succeed. If we fail, to judge from what I’m seeing and hearing around me, we shall at least have plenty of friends and relatives to commiserate with.

With 9 and 11 year olds, the jury is out for another 15 years as to how our parental approach will turn out...but.... if all of this work turns out bourgeois lawn-tenders, I'm going to be disappointed. I'd rather have a struggling musician in a rock and roll band than a pod person at the state college.

I work to keep the kids plugged into pop culture, mostly because they are both so clueless, they'd be alienated from their peer group if I didn't put effort into it. Harry Potter and Sponge Bob and the latest (appropriate!) video games or movies are a family affair..Mom, Dad and the kids, not something that is on the outside and separate from what goes on at home. Yeah, we read The Phantom Tollbooth and all of the stuff that is good for you, too....it blends.

We don't stress participation in The System for the its sole sake. The only occasions I can recall Don and I ever butting heads over the kids regarded same. If I disagree with a teacher, it's my inclination to just spell that out to the children. Don, probably wisely, thinks that's confusing for the kids...so we compromised. I can put out the message that I think XYZ rule or requirement in an assignment is stupid or meaningless but that since this is the teacher's game, we'll play it her way, then we'll make up our own games with our own rules.

The biggest area that I don't think we're doing well in is materialism. Our kids have everything, and it's really hard when you grew up poor, like I did, to not give your kids everything you can. They aren't overly spoiled or grabby or snotty or demanding, which makes it easier to keep the good stuff flowing to them...but it's an unrealistic view of life. Right now, first time, the kids are saving their money for something they want...Sony Playstation 2, the only game system they don't already have.

How did they get the money they are saving? We gave it to them for an allowance. !sigh

Andrea

[CurtisEdmonds]

Auntie said in post # :
I could probably be a poster child for the kind of rotten adult that the writer prays his kids won't grow up to become -- but I don't attribute that to squandering my teens, even though, in fact, I did squander my teens (along with picking several items from Column B, the column of National Review virtues). It's a lot more complicated than that.

There are worse things than growing up to be the kind of person that reads National Review.

[CurtisEdmonds]

a/k/a pluckychicken said in post # :
The biggest area that I don't think we're doing well in is materialism. Our kids have everything, and it's really hard when you grew up poor, like I did, to not give your kids everything you can. They aren't overly spoiled or grabby or snotty or demanding, which makes it easier to keep the good stuff flowing to them...but it's an unrealistic view of life. Right now, first time, the kids are saving their money for something they want...Sony Playstation 2, the only game system they don't already have.

How did they get the money they are saving? We gave it to them for an allowance. !sigh

Andrea

This bothers the heck out of me (in the abstract, anyway). You know how, in the first Harry Potter book, Dudley has two rooms -- one for him, and a separate room for his toys? My nephew has this exact same setup. He's got more toys right now than I and my sister had for our entire childhood, combined - probably more toys than anyone on our street even had. And what's happening -- to the extent that I know about -- is that there's an expectation that he'll always get every toy he wants. Not to mention that there's an aggressive consumer marketing campaign to ensure he will always want more toys.

But that's really another story.

[cristina1]

Does anyone else seem to think that these parents want maybe a little too much from their kids? I think the example of Amy and Jeff's huge fight with their teenaged son over his unwillingness to play the clarinet anymore got to me. Is it that important he continue with his music lessons? Forcing an interest he just doesnt have will most certainly have alienating effects.

I am not siding with the teenagers over the parents here, but there needs to be a compromise somewhere. Margaret said it - choose your battles. Is it worth spending that much energy on the simple things? I can see important issues - alcohol, drugs, sex - but not things like playing a musical instrument.

[pluckyduck]

Curtis said in post #8 :


This bothers the heck out of me (in the abstract, anyway). You know how, in the first Harry Potter book, Dudley has two rooms -- one for him, and a separate room for his toys? My nephew has this exact same setup. He's got more toys right now than I and my sister had for our entire childhood, combined - probably more toys than anyone on our street even had. And what's happening -- to the extent that I know about -- is that there's an expectation that he'll always get every toy he wants. Not to mention that there's an aggressive consumer marketing campaign to ensure he will always want more toys.

But that's really another story.

I don't know any parents in my real world peer group who aren't wired this way, and I agree, it is something to be bothered about. My kids don't have more or less than the norm for the community/age. Because they both have social challenges, I work at keeping their outter trappings very "normal"...but then I'm haunted at nights by the middle class suburban norm I'm plugging them into. No, I don't think too much.

I can remember wanting a Footsie with all of my heart when I was kid. I begged and begged for a Footsie. I had to have begged for a Footsie for 6 months before I got one, and it made me outrageously happy, to finally have one. You're talking the cheapest piece of plastic toy possible...how much could one have cost?

Our kids have never had to beg for anything, other than their own computer, which Don and I deliberately sat on for awhile, to help them want something.

I got my work ethic from going to work when I was 13 to finally be able to earn my own money and buy the things that I wanted and needed and have freedom to make my own choices. What's going to give my kids their work ethic?

These are the things that keep me up nights. :p

Andrea

[magenta321]

May I make a suggestion Duck? Feel free to ignore it, if you please.

I never really had anything I didn't get. I had the waterbed, the nintendo, the tv, the vcr, the good stereo... etc. I was an only child, and my mother and father had decent jobs, so it wasn't difficult to provide all these things.

I did, however, have a strong work ethic too. Being handed everything and building a work ethic are not mutually exclusive.

I knew since I was little that when I was in HS I'd be expected to get good grades AND work. So I did. I got my first job at 14, working at a diner.

I think the seed was planted at a young age, but was fertilized when I was 11. I wanted my own phone line. My parents of course had it installed, and bought me the Swatch phone I wanted (which was a big deal). However, things changed right then. *I* had to pay the bill, and understood that if I couldn't pay it, I'd lose my phone. I also had a checking acct opened in my name. I babysat, so, I had disposable income with which to pay the phone bill.

I was one of the first kids making friends online (these were the days of prodigy) so I had friends across the country, who I did talk with on a regular basis by phone. I had $300 a mo. phone bills. I paid them off every month, and never went to my parents for money.

I worked full time through highschool, worked full time through college, and did that normal break for independence that all kids do where they eventually stop expecting mommy to buy clothes and books, etc. It started in HS, but, I didn't totally make the break until I was older.

I think the checkbook did a lot for me. I've never had big credit problems that my friends had. I never took working for granted. I was the one person in college that I knew that could do whatever I wanted to do because I had the money to do it. Most of my friends were waiting on handouts from mom and dad to buy groceries, so, they went without food. They scrounged for quarters to do laundry. I didn't have those problems too much, and if I did, it was when I was holding myself back from spending too much.

I don't know if the checkbook idea would work for all kids, but, I do think it was the best thing my parents could have ever done for me.

Oh... and, most people hated this one... but... my mom was working two jobs and didn't have time to clean the house like she wanted to, so she paid me $25/week to clean. It was a great idea, but, I also knew that if I didn't do it, she'd do it, and I wouldn't get paid. That suited me just fine. I decided I'd rather pay someone else $25 to clean than to do it myself (I still loathe it). It worked for a few weeks until I had more money than I knew what to do with (I used to carry hundreds of dollars cash on me in middle school! Scary!!!) and realized that it just meant that I wouldn't get paid if I didn't do it. Who cared at that point? LOL

I didn't get an allowance before that, though. My dad was totally against allowances or any type of reward for behavior. I think that might have put me in better standing when it came to the cleaning for $25/week thing if I ever had to do chores to earn an allowance before that. I'm not sure how I feel about it now, or how I'd do it with my kids. If kids only do things when a reward is involved, they can totally miss the point of doing things. But, let's face it, none of us would go to work if there wasn't a financial incentive. Who knows...

Anyway... perhaps the checkbook idea would work with your boys. You'd know better than I would, however. I'm not sure every kid could handle that one.

[CurtisEdmonds]

a/k/a pluckychicken said in post # :
I got my work ethic from going to work when I was 13 to finally be able to earn my own money and buy the things that I wanted and needed and have freedom to make my own choices. What's going to give my kids their work ethic?

These are the things that keep me up nights. :p

Andrea

I don't think I ever had an allowance. I learned how to earn money and to save money by working nights and weekends; my parents worked the Coke-and-popcorn stand at a lot of school events. Did that from when I was ten to when I was 18. Worked my way through college doing a lot of odd jobs. Wouldn't have had it any other way, either; and learned a ton.

Whether my nephew will have that same experience I have no idea. Unless his parents go way into debt buying Thomas the Tank Engine stuff.

[ms_n]

Rest well, Duckie. I was spoiled rotten.

I didn't work through college. My mom wanted me to study. She even offered me her credit card to purchase new clothes every month. No, I didn't accept it.

Mom wasn't rich. There was a time she worked two shifts gutting squid and another shift cleaning hotel toilets to make house payments. She just wanted her kids to have a life she didn't.

Thanks to Mom, I'm able to take care of myself now and understand what hard work is, why it is good, and what sacrifice truly is.

I believe who you are as a parent says a lot more than a roomful of toys.

[KateTPZ]

Curtis said in post # :


Worked my way through college doing a lot of odd jobs. Wouldn't have had it any other way, either; and learned a ton.

I have so many friends who are totally stressed over paying for college for their kids, who feel that funding their kids' educations is more important than their own retirements. When I say that I'm not saving for the educations of my boys - that they will be relying on scholarships, employment and student loans if needed, I'm treated as if I must not love my kids very much. We're to believe that no one works their way through college these days. I have a hard time accepting that. It's not just "it was good enough for me - it's good enough for them" - I worked my way through college and got a lot out of it; my friends whose parents paid their way through and didn't let them work didn't always get much out of the process. More than a few partied/flunked out.