Showing posts with label attitude. Show all posts
Showing posts with label attitude. Show all posts
08 February, 2013
Of gendered tales
An article of mine, titled The Barbification of India has recently been published on Womensweb. What is it about?
For the past couple of years, my daughter has been struggling a lot with this business of what’s cool and what’s not, as far as my daughter’s peers are concerned: it had been proclaimed cool to be in the know about the latest movies, television programmes, Bollywood actors, pop singers, pop teen idols and Gangnam style - not necessarily in that order - along with sporting those Hannah Montana tees and neon tights. One child actually had a beach scene complete with figures lolling around in bikinis in as cake decoration in a beach themed party for her birthday. One can imagine the messages being given to these children. Yes, they are children at 11-12 years, never mind the self-possession and worldly airs. By these standards, my book-loving child, who has more sober tastes in music, clothes and everything else, who does not consider dancing to 'Sheila ki Jawani' as particularly desirable and who does reasonably well at academics is labelled uncool, a nerd!
These are the same peers whose idols were Barbie and the Disney Princesses not so long ago. Barbie might have been originally a teen icon for feminists at a time (the late 50s) when most women were not expected to step out of the home for a career, but over time it has evolved into a feminist’s worst nightmares. For one, the demographics have changed from teens to pre-teens; sometimes even younger. With her impossibly top-heavy figure (if extrapolated to adult female size, the measurements of 36-18-38 are near impossible in real life), long slim legs and vacuous sexuality, Barbie sends a skewed body image message to girls who buy into the unhealthy eating patterns that this propagates. A friend’s 7 year old refuses to eat fruits because her peers say they will make her fat.
To top it all, most Barbies come with accessories, clothes and domestic items in pepto-bismol shades of pink and purple that has spawned an entire parallel range of girls’ merchandise in similar colours complete with glitter and bling. Since the past few years, Barbie is available in India in an Indian avatar, complete with traditional Indian costumes, families, and the 'great Indian Culture'.
Most of these problems are shared by the Disney Princesses. A brain-child of Disney’s marketing executive Andy Mooney at the beginning of this century, it was a masterstroke of franchise that spawned a multimillion-dollar industry in dolls, clothes, accessories and other merchandise, a model that manufacturers for children have repeated over and over again with many other popular fictional characters. Considering the cool quotient of the movies, television shows and such, this was a shrewd business move.
Pink for girls and blue for boys! This polarisation by gender ensures double the sales for companies with vested interests. Younger children playing with toys originally targeted towards an older group has also created a demand for clothes unsuitable for that age. As utbtkids, a fellow blogger puts it, “if you are looking for non-pink, non-Disney characters, slightly loose, appropriate clothing, something that will withstand the running and climbing, and something that is not a mini version of adult clothing you might as well grow your own cotton and weave your own clothes.” Boys, too, suffer due to these brand and franchise excesses. A neighbour refuses to let her one year old son associate with anything even remotely considered feminine, in his clothes or choice of toys. Everything has to be only in shades of ‘manly’ colours, and aggressively in the realm of the ‘boyish’!
Most people see nothing wrong with girls playing ‘house’ with dolls, dressing up, having idols that promote domestication along with a sexualised self-image, and boys, at the other end of the spectrum, being encouraged to be sporty, playing ‘out there’, indulging in large motor activities geared towards being powerful. It is perceived as perfectly natural. They couldn’t be more wrong.
Children’s play always reinforces cultural messages, as they learn patterns of behaviour through it. Peggy Orenstein, social psychologist and author of Cinderella Ate My Daughter, puts it wonderfully well: “At issue, then, is not nature or nurture but how nurture becomes nature: the environment in which children play and grow can encourage a range of aptitudes or foreclose them. So blithely indulging — let alone exploiting — stereotypically gendered play patterns may have a more negative long-term impact on kids’ potential than parents imagine.”
************************************************
Also check out my review of the first part of Amruta Patil's retelling of the Mahabharat: Adi Parva, a feminist view, also on Womensweb. A wonderful book.
17 December, 2012
Focus on the ability- not disability: something I need to tell myself, too, every day
On 3rd December 2012, I attended the India Inclusion Summit. Here's an account written by me on Women's Web. Re-posting it here.
“Removing barriers to create an inclusive and accessible society for all”: United Nations.
It has been a few months now since I began volunteering at the Spastics Society of Karnataka school. My children there bring me a lot of joy, and I feel privileged to be a part of their lives. So I jumped at the chance to attend the 1st India Inclusion Summit on the 3rd of December, 2012.
Held at Vivanta by Taj on World Disability Day, it was a day-long event launched by SAP Labs India. There were an impressive lot of speakers, all of who were closely allied with and committed to the vision of an inclusive society in which the differently-abled would have their rightful place as productive members of society. Unfortunately, Arun Shourie, whose book Does He Know A Mother's Heart speaks of coping with his son’s disability couldn't make it to the summit- his son was ill and in hospital.
The other speakers more than made up for Mr Shourie’s absence. These were people who have seen disability from up close - in their family; or work closely with the differently-abled. The most inspirational speaker was Siddharth Jayakumar, who has battled cerebral palsy and come out on top. He began schooling only at the age of 9 as he was considered mentally retarded. Once he began school, though, there was no stopping him.
There were some interesting points that were highlighted by the speakers.
Around 70 million people in India are disabled or differently abled- these include the whole range from mild to moderate to severe to profound disability. Demographics are changing due to better health care and better awareness. Less than 1 lakh of these are employed.
Families and society often overestimate or underestimate abilities. There is a need for a more realistic appraisal. It is also necessary for self-help groups and respite for care-givers, who are those most affected emotionally. Most of the caregivers, close to 95%, are the affected person’s mother. This makes inclusion of care for the care-givers even more important. In our society, the mother is mostly blamed for the child’s condition, and it is considered her duty to give care, and respite for her is not considered a necessity.
Focus on the ability, not the disability. The problem is in how we as a society think about disability. A lack of awareness about the normalcy of a differently-abled person leads to discrimination and marginalisation. At the same time, lack of information about their own disability leads to the differently-abled not being aware of what they can do.
Awareness on disability can be spread by people in a position of maximum influence. These could be the health care professionals, media and religious heads. Of these, the potential of the media is immense- more people have become aware of disabilities after they have been portrayed in movies like Taare Zameen Par, however glamourized the version may be. I personally know of at least a handful of families who have gone from awareness of the special needs to acceptance of their child’s behavioural problems after this movie has been made. It is the right way to remedial action. Other mediums like music, sports, books, spirituality, etc. are just as effective platforms that can be used to this end, as also as therapy tools.
Do check out this impassioned blog-post about the summit by Sangitha at Life and Times in Bangalore.
“Removing barriers to create an inclusive and accessible society for all”: United Nations.
It has been a few months now since I began volunteering at the Spastics Society of Karnataka school. My children there bring me a lot of joy, and I feel privileged to be a part of their lives. So I jumped at the chance to attend the 1st India Inclusion Summit on the 3rd of December, 2012.
Held at Vivanta by Taj on World Disability Day, it was a day-long event launched by SAP Labs India. There were an impressive lot of speakers, all of who were closely allied with and committed to the vision of an inclusive society in which the differently-abled would have their rightful place as productive members of society. Unfortunately, Arun Shourie, whose book Does He Know A Mother's Heart speaks of coping with his son’s disability couldn't make it to the summit- his son was ill and in hospital.
The other speakers more than made up for Mr Shourie’s absence. These were people who have seen disability from up close - in their family; or work closely with the differently-abled. The most inspirational speaker was Siddharth Jayakumar, who has battled cerebral palsy and come out on top. He began schooling only at the age of 9 as he was considered mentally retarded. Once he began school, though, there was no stopping him.
There were some interesting points that were highlighted by the speakers.
Around 70 million people in India are disabled or differently abled- these include the whole range from mild to moderate to severe to profound disability. Demographics are changing due to better health care and better awareness. Less than 1 lakh of these are employed.
Families and society often overestimate or underestimate abilities. There is a need for a more realistic appraisal. It is also necessary for self-help groups and respite for care-givers, who are those most affected emotionally. Most of the caregivers, close to 95%, are the affected person’s mother. This makes inclusion of care for the care-givers even more important. In our society, the mother is mostly blamed for the child’s condition, and it is considered her duty to give care, and respite for her is not considered a necessity.
Focus on the ability, not the disability. The problem is in how we as a society think about disability. A lack of awareness about the normalcy of a differently-abled person leads to discrimination and marginalisation. At the same time, lack of information about their own disability leads to the differently-abled not being aware of what they can do.
Awareness on disability can be spread by people in a position of maximum influence. These could be the health care professionals, media and religious heads. Of these, the potential of the media is immense- more people have become aware of disabilities after they have been portrayed in movies like Taare Zameen Par, however glamourized the version may be. I personally know of at least a handful of families who have gone from awareness of the special needs to acceptance of their child’s behavioural problems after this movie has been made. It is the right way to remedial action. Other mediums like music, sports, books, spirituality, etc. are just as effective platforms that can be used to this end, as also as therapy tools.
Do check out this impassioned blog-post about the summit by Sangitha at Life and Times in Bangalore.
12 December, 2011
Book Review: The Diddakoi
 |
| Pic courtesy flipkart |
Written by Rumer Godden
Cover illustration by Christian Birmingham
Published by Macmillan Children's Books
Ages 8-12 yrs
I've learned a lot about adoption and attachment from Sangi's posts, and there are many nuances to the whole issue that I would not have otherwise being sensitised to. Thanks, Sangi!
So it was hardly a surprising thing that I unwittingly picked up quite a few books that deal with that on different levels. A few are books for children, and here is one of them. A complex, well written book that draws one into it.
A spirited, half-gypsy, half-Irish girl. An orphan. A misfit at school, targeted with some serious bullying for being different. The fact that 'normal, nice' children can, in fact, be very cruel, especially if they reflect the prejudices of their elders. The fact that prejudices can lead to fear of a situation/ person, and that it can become difficult to overcome.
An ordinary 'Miss Marple-ish' British village in the 1960s where everyone knows everybody. A legal care system where the best interests of a child is decided by the letter of the law, and not by what the child would want, or what might be truly best for the child. Some well meaning going wrong. Others unaware of their own ability to give and heal.
'It's good of you, Edna,' Miss Brooke repeated, but it might spoil your holiday. Besides, I don't think Kizzy would go.'
'Heavens, you don't have to ask her.'
'I think I do. People should always be asked before being disposed of.'
'A child?'
'Children are people, Edna,' said Miss Brooke as she had said it to Mrs Blount.
'Well, please yourself,' said Mrs Cuthbert. 'But I tell you, Olivia, that child's too much on your mind.'
'Isn't that what she came for?'
'For what?'
'To be on my mind.'
An ordinary children's story of extraordinary meanings, the book takes one on a roller coaster ride of emotions, which nevertheless unfold very gently at times and with the dramatic quality of a tempest at others. That brings home to us the fact that the human spirit is more resilient than one can imagine, and that we all that the light with the dark in all of us. That patience, love and care can wrought wonders.
Rumer Godden herself was very difficult, and different in many ways as a child, and in this book she writes from her own memories of it. Kizzy Lovell, our central girl character, the 'diddakoi'=half-gypsy, who is picked on by the other children for being different, and who is in the centre of a controversy over who should foster her, and how, is a throwback to that childhood. In some ways Kizzy reminded me of some of Enid Blyton's similar characters- Carlotta from the St. Clare series, and Lotta from her Circus books.
This is her best known book for children, which got the Whitbread Award in 1972. It has been called "the sort of book children had to fight for to get it from adults". The book should be read in the context of the period in which it is set, as there is much that can be considered 'politically incorrect'. And inspite of the many negatives, the many questions it raises, especially in young minds, it is an incredibly uplifting book, with a happy ending. A loved it!
Crossposted at Saffrontree.
10 August, 2011
Mommy is guilty as charged
Ranjani had tagged me some time back. Sorry, Ranjani, for not doing the tag for such a long time. I have no excuse but my laziness.
Yesterday, however, I went out with a friend and her one-and-a-half year old son, who adores A and will keep asking for her by his pronounciation of her name every time he sees me, expecting her to be somewhere around me all the time.
We did many things (like browsing in a bookshop and picking up some books) that I know A would have loved to do with us. I kept thinking of her all the time, and was wishing it was a holiday, so that she could have accompanied us. Maybe I will take her out on the next school holiday.
Mommy feeling guilty? You bet!
According to the tag, I have to
The first time I spent some time alone without A around was when she joined school. Even there, I would say it was I who had a bad case of separation anxiety - A was ready for mixing socially, and so settled down there quite soon.
Over the years, I have grown to like the 'me time' I get when I am by myself. I find that it is essential for me to have this time for myself, to do as I please, without worrying about the kid's or the husband's schedules. Reading, morning walks, blogging, working on something interesting, browsing in bookshops, going shopping or catching a movie/theatre programme with friends or by myself, eating out sometimes. When A was younger, I also caught up on the listening to music other than nursery rhymes and other children's songs when she was elsewhere. All the things a stay-at-home-mom may do after all her chores are done!
Of course, I love the times we can spend together on days when she has a holiday. Some of the best times we have spent together are sitting together, each with her book in her hands. Yes, I have a little reader at home, and I'm glad it's so.
So I would have to really think for doing this tag. Let me see-
1. Harry Potter. A is as much into the series as I am. Only difference being, that I discovered the series in 2004, when she was just three, and she began reading them in 2009, two years after book 7 was published. True to my belief that she should read the books before she watches the movies, she has watched them all only on TV. Except for Deathly Hallows 1 & 2. She began with book 7 much after DH 1 had gone from theatres, and we are still waiting for the movie to come on TV, or for us to pick up the DVD, which we will probably do only after all the movies come on DVD, and we can buy the boxed set. Of course we finished reading book 7 at super speed in time for her to watch the last movie on the big screen. Went to watch it with Choxbox, her FB and another friend from school and her mother, all big on Harry Potter.
So I would go to watch all the earlier HP movies on big screen without her, even when I knew that she would have loved to watch them with me on big screen. That would be Order of the Phoenix, Half-Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows 1. If I count the fact that most of her friends went to these movies without reading the books, that would include Goblet of Fire, too.
2. A has never been one of those kids who pester their parents to buy something, anything, everytime they make a visit to a shop. Except when we are in a bookshop. Woe betide me if I take her to a bookshop and do not buy something that she will enjoy. So I do not plan a bookshop visit with her if I have not budgeted for at least one book for her to choose and buy. There are also all those books that are interesting enough to pick up, small enough to be read quickly, but too expensive to pick up, and sometimes for a younger age group. Think of all those fabulous picture books we have not yet got our hands on! So we take advantage of bookshops' policies which allow the customers to make themselves comfortable and read away if they may.
Considering her love of books, and of browsing in bookshops, there have been many occasions when I have gone for it alone- when I have to go to a book sale which it might not be possible to go for on the week-end, which might be in a far-off location, or if I just up and go plonk myself in my favourite book shop on a day when I need some retail therapy. Do I feel guilty? Yes, I do, indeed. As Choxbox will be able to testify, I often pick up a whole lot of books, then realising that they would be way beyond my budget, put away most of those that are for myself, and end up buying those that I know A will enjoy!
To A's credit, she has never consciously made me feel guilty about these things, taking it as gospel that the book has to be read first, and she is overjoyed when I get her something on my book-shopping trips. Yes, she makes me feel guilty about that, too. Contrarily, I would not have felt as bad if she had gotten upset about it.
That was my rather wordy take on the tag. I would like to tag Choxbox and Sangi. Both are ladies I admire immensely for their out-of-the-box thinking and from whom I learn so much. There are some more out there whom I would have loved to tag, but the rules say I have to tag two. So anyone else who wants to take it up is welcome to do so. Let us hear your mommy-guilt secrets, ladies!
Yesterday, however, I went out with a friend and her one-and-a-half year old son, who adores A and will keep asking for her by his pronounciation of her name every time he sees me, expecting her to be somewhere around me all the time.
We did many things (like browsing in a bookshop and picking up some books) that I know A would have loved to do with us. I kept thinking of her all the time, and was wishing it was a holiday, so that she could have accompanied us. Maybe I will take her out on the next school holiday.
Mommy feeling guilty? You bet!
According to the tag, I have to
- Write about 2 instances where you have put yourself before your child/ children... been a wee bit selfish.
- How did you feel? Did you feel a pang of guilt or were you comfortable?
- Tag 2 more moms
The first time I spent some time alone without A around was when she joined school. Even there, I would say it was I who had a bad case of separation anxiety - A was ready for mixing socially, and so settled down there quite soon.
Over the years, I have grown to like the 'me time' I get when I am by myself. I find that it is essential for me to have this time for myself, to do as I please, without worrying about the kid's or the husband's schedules. Reading, morning walks, blogging, working on something interesting, browsing in bookshops, going shopping or catching a movie/theatre programme with friends or by myself, eating out sometimes. When A was younger, I also caught up on the listening to music other than nursery rhymes and other children's songs when she was elsewhere. All the things a stay-at-home-mom may do after all her chores are done!
Of course, I love the times we can spend together on days when she has a holiday. Some of the best times we have spent together are sitting together, each with her book in her hands. Yes, I have a little reader at home, and I'm glad it's so.
So I would have to really think for doing this tag. Let me see-
1. Harry Potter. A is as much into the series as I am. Only difference being, that I discovered the series in 2004, when she was just three, and she began reading them in 2009, two years after book 7 was published. True to my belief that she should read the books before she watches the movies, she has watched them all only on TV. Except for Deathly Hallows 1 & 2. She began with book 7 much after DH 1 had gone from theatres, and we are still waiting for the movie to come on TV, or for us to pick up the DVD, which we will probably do only after all the movies come on DVD, and we can buy the boxed set. Of course we finished reading book 7 at super speed in time for her to watch the last movie on the big screen. Went to watch it with Choxbox, her FB and another friend from school and her mother, all big on Harry Potter.
So I would go to watch all the earlier HP movies on big screen without her, even when I knew that she would have loved to watch them with me on big screen. That would be Order of the Phoenix, Half-Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows 1. If I count the fact that most of her friends went to these movies without reading the books, that would include Goblet of Fire, too.
2. A has never been one of those kids who pester their parents to buy something, anything, everytime they make a visit to a shop. Except when we are in a bookshop. Woe betide me if I take her to a bookshop and do not buy something that she will enjoy. So I do not plan a bookshop visit with her if I have not budgeted for at least one book for her to choose and buy. There are also all those books that are interesting enough to pick up, small enough to be read quickly, but too expensive to pick up, and sometimes for a younger age group. Think of all those fabulous picture books we have not yet got our hands on! So we take advantage of bookshops' policies which allow the customers to make themselves comfortable and read away if they may.
Considering her love of books, and of browsing in bookshops, there have been many occasions when I have gone for it alone- when I have to go to a book sale which it might not be possible to go for on the week-end, which might be in a far-off location, or if I just up and go plonk myself in my favourite book shop on a day when I need some retail therapy. Do I feel guilty? Yes, I do, indeed. As Choxbox will be able to testify, I often pick up a whole lot of books, then realising that they would be way beyond my budget, put away most of those that are for myself, and end up buying those that I know A will enjoy!
To A's credit, she has never consciously made me feel guilty about these things, taking it as gospel that the book has to be read first, and she is overjoyed when I get her something on my book-shopping trips. Yes, she makes me feel guilty about that, too. Contrarily, I would not have felt as bad if she had gotten upset about it.
That was my rather wordy take on the tag. I would like to tag Choxbox and Sangi. Both are ladies I admire immensely for their out-of-the-box thinking and from whom I learn so much. There are some more out there whom I would have loved to tag, but the rules say I have to tag two. So anyone else who wants to take it up is welcome to do so. Let us hear your mommy-guilt secrets, ladies!
08 March, 2011
There's hope yet!
March 8th. Women's day. A day to celebrate feminism. A woman myself, mother of a daughter, I hope to see my daughter have a better life. Not to need to make the compromises I have had to make. Not to be presented with choices like the ones I have had to choose between- choices that were not really choices- at times.
Here is a poem by a woman poet, written almost 2500 years ago. Followed by a poem by a woman of the 20th century. An inspirational woman. Decide for yourselves if things have really changed that much over the centuries!
A WOMAN WELL SET FREE
At last free
at last I am a woman free
No more tied to the kitcen
stained amid the stained pots,
No more tied to the husband
who thought me less
than the shade he wove with his hands.
No more anger, no more hunger,
I sit now in the shade of my own tree.
Meditating thus, I am happy, serene.
by Sumangalamata : "Sumangala's mother." She was the wife of a weaver of baskets and shade-umbrellas, circa 600 B.C. A member of the women-followers of Gautama Buddha. This poem has been translated from Pali. From a compilation called Therigatha.
STILL I RISE
You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise.
Does my sassiness upset you?
Why are you beset with gloom?
'Cause I walk like I've got oil wells
Pumping in my living room.
Just like moons and like suns,
With the certainty of tides,
Just like hopes springing high,
Still I'll rise.
Did you want to see me broken?
Bowed head and lowered eyes?
Shoulders falling down like teardrops.
Weakened by my soulful cries.
Does my haughtiness offend you?
Don't you take it awful hard
'Cause I laugh like I've got gold mines
Diggin' in my own back yard.
You may shoot me with your words,
You may cut me with your eyes,
You may kill me with your hatefulness,
But still, like air, I'll rise.
Does my sexiness upset you?
Does it come as a surprise
That I dance like I've got diamonds
At the meeting of my thighs?
Out of the huts of history's shame
I rise
Up from a past that's rooted in pain
I rise
I'm a black ocean, leaping and wide,
Welling and swelling I bear in the tide.
Leaving behind nights of terror and fear
I rise
Into a daybreak that's wondrously clear
I rise
Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,
I am the dream and the hope of the slave.
I rise
I rise
I rise.
by Maya Angelou. A thinker, poet, educator, historian, best-selling author, actress, playwright, civil-rights activist, producer and director, but most of all, an inspirational woman. This poem was posted yesterday by The Mad Momma on her blog.
I'm hopeful that there will come a day, when we can just be human beings, with all that it means to be human. Neither being put on a pedestal, nor marginalised, nor judged. Just let be!
Here is a poem by a woman poet, written almost 2500 years ago. Followed by a poem by a woman of the 20th century. An inspirational woman. Decide for yourselves if things have really changed that much over the centuries!
A WOMAN WELL SET FREE
At last free
at last I am a woman free
No more tied to the kitcen
stained amid the stained pots,
No more tied to the husband
who thought me less
than the shade he wove with his hands.
No more anger, no more hunger,
I sit now in the shade of my own tree.
Meditating thus, I am happy, serene.
by Sumangalamata : "Sumangala's mother." She was the wife of a weaver of baskets and shade-umbrellas, circa 600 B.C. A member of the women-followers of Gautama Buddha. This poem has been translated from Pali. From a compilation called Therigatha.
STILL I RISE
You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise.
Does my sassiness upset you?
Why are you beset with gloom?
'Cause I walk like I've got oil wells
Pumping in my living room.
Just like moons and like suns,
With the certainty of tides,
Just like hopes springing high,
Still I'll rise.
Did you want to see me broken?
Bowed head and lowered eyes?
Shoulders falling down like teardrops.
Weakened by my soulful cries.
Does my haughtiness offend you?
Don't you take it awful hard
'Cause I laugh like I've got gold mines
Diggin' in my own back yard.
You may shoot me with your words,
You may cut me with your eyes,
You may kill me with your hatefulness,
But still, like air, I'll rise.
Does my sexiness upset you?
Does it come as a surprise
That I dance like I've got diamonds
At the meeting of my thighs?
Out of the huts of history's shame
I rise
Up from a past that's rooted in pain
I rise
I'm a black ocean, leaping and wide,
Welling and swelling I bear in the tide.
Leaving behind nights of terror and fear
I rise
Into a daybreak that's wondrously clear
I rise
Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,
I am the dream and the hope of the slave.
I rise
I rise
I rise.
by Maya Angelou. A thinker, poet, educator, historian, best-selling author, actress, playwright, civil-rights activist, producer and director, but most of all, an inspirational woman. This poem was posted yesterday by The Mad Momma on her blog.
I'm hopeful that there will come a day, when we can just be human beings, with all that it means to be human. Neither being put on a pedestal, nor marginalised, nor judged. Just let be!
25 February, 2011
.....or not to...is the question!
What made me write this post? Well, for one, this post and this one, both by Sangi, this post by Monika, and a talk we attended at A's school.
The school has come across some children of middle school using social networking sites, for which they are clearly underage. There has also been some instances of inappropriate behaviour that has been noticed among students, which has been traced to unsupervised viewership of television programmes with age-inappropriate content, bad language, etc., as also unsupervised access to the internet, especially if both parents are working. According to the school, it is the responsibility of the parents to be aware of what their child is being exposed to, and take steps to correct any oversights. As for children of working parents, it was suggested that they install a password operated net connection, and speak to the children about what can or cannot be watched, reinforcing the message by repetition. For this was the time when the children are just beginning to take the first steps out of childhood, and are still influentiable. For the better or worse.
There was an interesting point raised. There are children, and then there are children. Of different kinds. For every child that is influenced by all this, and loses focus of what is right, there may be some who are not, who manage to take it in their stride, and come through unscathed. It was upto every parent to be aware of how their child is, educate the child accordingly and be available for the child at all times if need be. The school on its part would discourage anything age-inappropriate, and have a no-tolerance policy for anything inappropriate for school. This was something that was to be handled on a two-way-street.
So what does this have to do with the three posts I mentioned at the beginning? Quite a bit.
I come from Bram roots. My grandparents would not even partake of anything that contained onions or garlic, these been considered as tamasic foods. My parents, though, encouraged us to eat eggs, although my mother could never touch the stuff herself. We had a separate vessel and pan which was washed after use and put away separately. No eggs were allowed when my paternal grandparents were staying with us. My maternal grandmother lived with us for many years, and although she never tasted them, would cook the eggs for us.
We had quite a few friends who ate non-veg food, but never once do I remember wanting to try it. We were happy enough with our ghaas-phoos, as one friend once put it, except for the very occasional eggs.
When I got married, I did not expect to be eating any either, as the husband is from the same community, an arranged marriage. He had, however, tried it during his student days, and found that he liked it, though not extraordinarily so. I tried chicken tentatively in those early days, liked it enough to have some while eating out once in a while. We never tried cooking it at home though. Even on our travels overseas, I did not really become a regular eater.
Then A came along, and somewhere at 3-4 years of age, she realised she liked the non-veg that we occasionally tried while eating out. It was purely so that the finicky mother in me would be sure of the hygiene and of what has gone in it that I agreed to cook the stuff at home. Even then, cooking non-veg is more the husband's territory than mine, I help with getting the masalas ready and then sit twiddling my thumbs (or reading some book with A). I also do not like red meat or fish dishes overmuch. And I will be more than willing to give it all up if need be. At times when we haven't had any non-veg for a longish period of time, I've never felt the urge to eat some. I'll be fine without it in my life. Maybe a point will come when I no longer want to eat it. Already on days when I prepare eggs for breakfast I have only plain toast with cheese or jam, and avoid the eggs.
A loves the stuff, of couse, especially the way Dad makes it, and is a confirmed non-vegetarian. The only reason for which I see her leaving it is if at some point in her life the softie animal lover in her decides to surface. I'm fine with whatever she decides. The choice has to be hers.
As for alcohol, I grew up in a teetotaler household. No smoking either. I am sure my parents never thought that they needed to say anything to us about it. We never thought it was a done thing, and that was that. I really do not know about my brothers, who were students when I got married, but I was never tempted by the lure of either alcohol or nicotine or any other substance in my growing up years, and I thank God for that. Of course that does not mean that I was an exemplary teenager, with no rebellion in me. There were other things that my parents came down heavily upon, without, I regret, any real communication or education about them, and I contrarily chose to focus my rebellious energies on those. So I have made my mistakes in life like anyone else.
I have worked extensively with the AA in my post-grad days, and I have seen the devastation that the addiction can cause. The rehabilitation has to be done one day at a time- something that the ex-addict has to follow all his life. Along with the counselling for psychological factors, the person has to make a commitment to avoid alcohol on an everyday basis. There is no place here for the "I can handle it" (mis)confidence. I have seen long-term rehabilitated addicts relapsing after something as innocuous as a course of cough medicine with an alcohol content, and it is tough.
At the same time, not everyone who tastes alcohol in their life gets addicted to it. I have tried alcohol with my husband, on rare occasions, as I never really aquired a taste for it. I have got really drunk once or twice, but that was just to try it out, with different brands of alcohol, and as Sangi puts it "being drunk SUCKS!" Even then I probably had a drink once in 2-3 months, that too with guests or on a holiday. And ever since daughter has started showing curiosity in the contents of mom's /dad's glass, I've stopped drinking, not even an occasional one. I don't think I miss it at all, and feel no urge to indulge myself for any reason whatsoever.
The husband has a drink or two on weekends, and is extremely responsible about his drinking, AND of the drinking of those who drink under our roof, and have to drive back to their homes. Of late, even this has decreased. Reason- A read about a character in Black Beauty (by Anne Sewell) who drank and rode a horse to its ruin and his death. (I always fall back on books if I want to say something. Maybe books are my addiction!) She had many questions about alcohol and its effects at the time, and since then, she gets upset if her father has a drink. He has had a talk with her about it, and I'm sure it will be all for the best.
The point I'm trying to make here, is that some things, though present elsewhere in the world, were absent in my environment, either in reality, or hypothetically as subjects of discussion. We just ignored those, and never considered trying them as an option. And when I did try them, I did not get over-much attached to them. Whereas I was wrongly influenced by those things that were strongly spoken against, especially under peer-pressure, without any education from my parents as to the consequences of a mis-step, and have suffered for it.
Moral of the story- Although my first reaction to anthing that A wants to do that is wrong in my eyes is an authoritarian one, I try to simmer down and talk to her about it, rather than talk at her. I agree with the school that we need to be available to the children when they are in a communicative mood, else they will take their communication to someone else, someone completely unsuitable. Also that each child may react differently to the same set of conditions, and take away something quite different from it.
On my part, I hope to keep communication channels open with A, as it is very likely that she might find things she finds yuck not so yuck (again quoting Sangi!) in her terrible teens, and I would like to be with her on every step of the way, with reasonable (I hope! Sometimes the streaks of an authoritarian parent tends to get the better of me, and I have to tell myself to simmer down and GET REASONABLE!) restrictions, handholding, educating and counselling. And I hope that she always trusts us, and finds it worth the while coming to me with anything that bothers her.
So help me God!
The school has come across some children of middle school using social networking sites, for which they are clearly underage. There has also been some instances of inappropriate behaviour that has been noticed among students, which has been traced to unsupervised viewership of television programmes with age-inappropriate content, bad language, etc., as also unsupervised access to the internet, especially if both parents are working. According to the school, it is the responsibility of the parents to be aware of what their child is being exposed to, and take steps to correct any oversights. As for children of working parents, it was suggested that they install a password operated net connection, and speak to the children about what can or cannot be watched, reinforcing the message by repetition. For this was the time when the children are just beginning to take the first steps out of childhood, and are still influentiable. For the better or worse.
There was an interesting point raised. There are children, and then there are children. Of different kinds. For every child that is influenced by all this, and loses focus of what is right, there may be some who are not, who manage to take it in their stride, and come through unscathed. It was upto every parent to be aware of how their child is, educate the child accordingly and be available for the child at all times if need be. The school on its part would discourage anything age-inappropriate, and have a no-tolerance policy for anything inappropriate for school. This was something that was to be handled on a two-way-street.
So what does this have to do with the three posts I mentioned at the beginning? Quite a bit.
I come from Bram roots. My grandparents would not even partake of anything that contained onions or garlic, these been considered as tamasic foods. My parents, though, encouraged us to eat eggs, although my mother could never touch the stuff herself. We had a separate vessel and pan which was washed after use and put away separately. No eggs were allowed when my paternal grandparents were staying with us. My maternal grandmother lived with us for many years, and although she never tasted them, would cook the eggs for us.
We had quite a few friends who ate non-veg food, but never once do I remember wanting to try it. We were happy enough with our ghaas-phoos, as one friend once put it, except for the very occasional eggs.
When I got married, I did not expect to be eating any either, as the husband is from the same community, an arranged marriage. He had, however, tried it during his student days, and found that he liked it, though not extraordinarily so. I tried chicken tentatively in those early days, liked it enough to have some while eating out once in a while. We never tried cooking it at home though. Even on our travels overseas, I did not really become a regular eater.
Then A came along, and somewhere at 3-4 years of age, she realised she liked the non-veg that we occasionally tried while eating out. It was purely so that the finicky mother in me would be sure of the hygiene and of what has gone in it that I agreed to cook the stuff at home. Even then, cooking non-veg is more the husband's territory than mine, I help with getting the masalas ready and then sit twiddling my thumbs (or reading some book with A). I also do not like red meat or fish dishes overmuch. And I will be more than willing to give it all up if need be. At times when we haven't had any non-veg for a longish period of time, I've never felt the urge to eat some. I'll be fine without it in my life. Maybe a point will come when I no longer want to eat it. Already on days when I prepare eggs for breakfast I have only plain toast with cheese or jam, and avoid the eggs.
A loves the stuff, of couse, especially the way Dad makes it, and is a confirmed non-vegetarian. The only reason for which I see her leaving it is if at some point in her life the softie animal lover in her decides to surface. I'm fine with whatever she decides. The choice has to be hers.
As for alcohol, I grew up in a teetotaler household. No smoking either. I am sure my parents never thought that they needed to say anything to us about it. We never thought it was a done thing, and that was that. I really do not know about my brothers, who were students when I got married, but I was never tempted by the lure of either alcohol or nicotine or any other substance in my growing up years, and I thank God for that. Of course that does not mean that I was an exemplary teenager, with no rebellion in me. There were other things that my parents came down heavily upon, without, I regret, any real communication or education about them, and I contrarily chose to focus my rebellious energies on those. So I have made my mistakes in life like anyone else.
I have worked extensively with the AA in my post-grad days, and I have seen the devastation that the addiction can cause. The rehabilitation has to be done one day at a time- something that the ex-addict has to follow all his life. Along with the counselling for psychological factors, the person has to make a commitment to avoid alcohol on an everyday basis. There is no place here for the "I can handle it" (mis)confidence. I have seen long-term rehabilitated addicts relapsing after something as innocuous as a course of cough medicine with an alcohol content, and it is tough.
At the same time, not everyone who tastes alcohol in their life gets addicted to it. I have tried alcohol with my husband, on rare occasions, as I never really aquired a taste for it. I have got really drunk once or twice, but that was just to try it out, with different brands of alcohol, and as Sangi puts it "being drunk SUCKS!" Even then I probably had a drink once in 2-3 months, that too with guests or on a holiday. And ever since daughter has started showing curiosity in the contents of mom's /dad's glass, I've stopped drinking, not even an occasional one. I don't think I miss it at all, and feel no urge to indulge myself for any reason whatsoever.
The husband has a drink or two on weekends, and is extremely responsible about his drinking, AND of the drinking of those who drink under our roof, and have to drive back to their homes. Of late, even this has decreased. Reason- A read about a character in Black Beauty (by Anne Sewell) who drank and rode a horse to its ruin and his death. (I always fall back on books if I want to say something. Maybe books are my addiction!) She had many questions about alcohol and its effects at the time, and since then, she gets upset if her father has a drink. He has had a talk with her about it, and I'm sure it will be all for the best.
The point I'm trying to make here, is that some things, though present elsewhere in the world, were absent in my environment, either in reality, or hypothetically as subjects of discussion. We just ignored those, and never considered trying them as an option. And when I did try them, I did not get over-much attached to them. Whereas I was wrongly influenced by those things that were strongly spoken against, especially under peer-pressure, without any education from my parents as to the consequences of a mis-step, and have suffered for it.
Moral of the story- Although my first reaction to anthing that A wants to do that is wrong in my eyes is an authoritarian one, I try to simmer down and talk to her about it, rather than talk at her. I agree with the school that we need to be available to the children when they are in a communicative mood, else they will take their communication to someone else, someone completely unsuitable. Also that each child may react differently to the same set of conditions, and take away something quite different from it.
On my part, I hope to keep communication channels open with A, as it is very likely that she might find things she finds yuck not so yuck (again quoting Sangi!) in her terrible teens, and I would like to be with her on every step of the way, with reasonable (I hope! Sometimes the streaks of an authoritarian parent tends to get the better of me, and I have to tell myself to simmer down and GET REASONABLE!) restrictions, handholding, educating and counselling. And I hope that she always trusts us, and finds it worth the while coming to me with anything that bothers her.
So help me God!
01 February, 2011
No Kidding!
Two things.
First : I posted a review of a book, which in my opinion was suitable for the 12+ age group. I meticulously follow this format whenever the book reviewed is for young adults or younger.
Here, there was a difference of opinion with one reader. Bear with me while I quote the comment, my answer, and the reader's comment again.
Comment : Although I read this myself many many years ago it is one I still remember and highly recommend. I do not like the age or YA tag on books though, it should be a matter of personal choice!
Me : Agree that books are a matter of personal choice. I like to include the age factor, though, in the review of a book that may be read by those under 18. Makes it simpler for parents. And since I do a lot of reviewing under that category, the tag invariably appears.:)
Comment : I understand what you are saying about the YA and age tag from a parents point of view, but I still do not like the idea of children being told that they can not read a book because they are too young! Every reader matures differently and I think the whole concept of the YA genre can be off putting to certain groups of people.
I am not sure how to reply to this. Agree that 'every reader matures differently'. My job as a reviewer, however asks for a guideline to the average age at which a reader is reasonably able to enjoy and appreciate the contents of a book. The reader, then, has to decide. An adult reader can pretty much decide for him/herself, but in my opinion, if a kid is not old enough to vote, or to drive independently, he/ she does not have the maturity to decide on all aspects of a book's content. Which is why we have age tags on the books themselves in the first place.
In the debate between the commentor and myself, I am going to gracefully bow out after replying that the age tag is just a general guide on age-appropriateness and it is my personal opinion as the reviewer, as to be fair, the book in question does not have any age specifications on my copy.
Second : This news item appeared in the TOI headlines today.
12 years is the age for pursuing an education and develop a sense of self. A hard enough pursuit without the emotional turmoil of an ill-timed sexual escapade. Time enough for all that- and the responsibilities it brings- once you are older.
What do you think- of both the points?
First : I posted a review of a book, which in my opinion was suitable for the 12+ age group. I meticulously follow this format whenever the book reviewed is for young adults or younger.
Here, there was a difference of opinion with one reader. Bear with me while I quote the comment, my answer, and the reader's comment again.
Comment : Although I read this myself many many years ago it is one I still remember and highly recommend. I do not like the age or YA tag on books though, it should be a matter of personal choice!
Me : Agree that books are a matter of personal choice. I like to include the age factor, though, in the review of a book that may be read by those under 18. Makes it simpler for parents. And since I do a lot of reviewing under that category, the tag invariably appears.:)
Comment : I understand what you are saying about the YA and age tag from a parents point of view, but I still do not like the idea of children being told that they can not read a book because they are too young! Every reader matures differently and I think the whole concept of the YA genre can be off putting to certain groups of people.
I am not sure how to reply to this. Agree that 'every reader matures differently'. My job as a reviewer, however asks for a guideline to the average age at which a reader is reasonably able to enjoy and appreciate the contents of a book. The reader, then, has to decide. An adult reader can pretty much decide for him/herself, but in my opinion, if a kid is not old enough to vote, or to drive independently, he/ she does not have the maturity to decide on all aspects of a book's content. Which is why we have age tags on the books themselves in the first place.
In the debate between the commentor and myself, I am going to gracefully bow out after replying that the age tag is just a general guide on age-appropriateness and it is my personal opinion as the reviewer, as to be fair, the book in question does not have any age specifications on my copy.
Second : This news item appeared in the TOI headlines today.
Twelve-year-old children will be legally permitted to have non-penetrative sex with children their age, according to a draft Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Bill, 2010, that has been sent to states by the ministry of women and child development for their views.12 year olds are NOT, in my opinion, mature enough to indulge in any kind of sex, even if their hormones have already begun to rage. They have a hard enough time dealing with the changes happening in their own bodies and minds, and most of all, are not physically, emotionally or intellectually mature enough to handle any kind of consequences- immediate or long term- of any kind of sexual explorations. Their perspective in terribly short sighted, and they may end up being scarred for life.
12 years is the age for pursuing an education and develop a sense of self. A hard enough pursuit without the emotional turmoil of an ill-timed sexual escapade. Time enough for all that- and the responsibilities it brings- once you are older.
What do you think- of both the points?
03 July, 2010
Unwomanly behaviour, anyone?
Picking this tag up from Art. When I checked out the rules of the tag at this post by IHM, I found out that she had invited both Sandhyas to pick up the tag. So here is my list.
1. I do pretty much all the banking, payments, grocery shopping, etc. at home, in my time, on weekdays. No keeping anything for the weekends when the husband is at home. Unless it is for something decided on the spur of the moment.
2. My nails have always been kept cut short. I don't remember a time even in my teens when I grew them. Also I couldn't ever abide by nail polish on my fingernails. I do use it on my toes although even they are always trimmed short. Polish on my toe-nails has more to do with protecting them from infections. Don't go much by the cleanser-and-moisturiser-and-blow-drying-hair routine most of my girlfriends swear by. A thorough scrubbing at the morning bath, a quick combing through the hair and a tie around it and I am ready to face the world. Moisturisers are to be used only if the Bangalore weather makes things so dry that my skin itches. To sooth. Never use makeup too.
3. Furnishings at home are of the no-nonsense kind with none of the 'girly' stuff. There are also books everywhere instead of curios, flowers, etc. Certainly not 'ladylike.'
4. I prefer putting on denims and a tee-shirt at home or a kurti if going out. Cannot abide by saris even if they are voted to be 'the most graceful attire' by most people. Other women may feel graceful in it. I just feel as if I am wearing a strait-jacket and find it extremely difficult to go about my daily business in it. I wear saris only at weddings and such and only because I'll be clobbered by my sisters-in-law.(Actually we are all sinners-in-cahoots. Am great friends with all these ladies as well as being related to them through marriage. Maybe this is one more unfeminine thing. Aren't we supposed to speak against each other?). This distaste extends to broad dupattas on salwar-kameezes. If they have to be worn, they are worn with a chiffon dupatta which does not need much 'sanwarna', or with none at all if they happen to have a high collar. I have been nagged at by many friends for not 'dressing up' on many occasions.
5. Only jewellery I use is the mangalsutra, my engagement ring, one bangle on right hand/watch on the other, and earstuds. These never come off. There is no 'changing jewellery to match attire' or any costume jewellery. In fact I don't own any. Never bought any jewellery myself except that which was bought at my wedding.
6. I prefer to spend on books more than on anything else. My idea of a good time: Go to a bookshop and spend the whole afternoon browsing.
7. When A goes to play downstairs in the evening, I always accompany her there with a book in my hand. I sit there reading, lost to the world while the other ladies are discussing 'matters of importance'. Read gossip. I am never in the know, and sometimes am laughed at for not knowing the latest. That's OK with me. Though it is me they come to when they want anything to do with books or language or some such thing. Oh, well, it takes all kinds.
8. I am not very good with womenly skills like cooking or embroidery, etc. The husband is a much better cook than I am and I can just about cook typical Maharashtrian food which I learnt at my mother's and grandmother's elbow. And needlework? Well I must say I can mend torn clothes or sew on buttons, but that is about, it.
9. Even as a child I rebelled against "having to learn housework because I was a girl and I should know how to do everything in the house." It would have been OK with me if all of us had to learn it because it is an essential skill. It always angered me that my brothers didn't have to do it while I had to.
10. Have been guilty of encouraging my daughter not to take bullying behaviour from any of her peers. On one occasion when we had gone to a friend's place for dinner, there was a younger boy who was hitting the girls, (all other children were girls) pulling their hair, etc. All of them kept coming to complain to the parents and there was a lot of crying that happened. Suddenly we heard the boy screaming. Some of us went to that room to see what was happenning, and we saw A firmly holding the boy's hands to prevent him from doing whatever it was that he intended doing. Probably pulling her hair. I came to know later that after we left, a lot of talk that day was on how 'a girl was doing this, and how other girls weren't'. As far as I saw, A was just preventing the boy from hitting her, and was not retaliating in kind. We did have a talk with her about the boy being younger and how she should be careful lest she hurt him.
I do, however, love chocolates, soulful music, cuddly toys. In fact, some of the toys I bought for A have been bought because I loved the feel of them. I love little babies and can spend hours playing with them. Although I can't hold a conversation with an older child with 'attitude' for very long.
I have a question, though. How do we decide if any of this behaviour is to be desired or not? Why is it such a sin to be womanly or manly? Shouldn't we just stick to what comes naturally to us and makes us comfortable?
According to the tag, you will be cursed to "wear blue clothes pants if you are a woman and pink shirts if you are a man – for next twelve years" if I don't tag 12 other people. So I tag Choxbox, Subha, utbtkids , Usha, the mad momma, Vibha, and anyone else woman enough to pick it up. Sorry, everybody else I know of is already tagged.
1. I do pretty much all the banking, payments, grocery shopping, etc. at home, in my time, on weekdays. No keeping anything for the weekends when the husband is at home. Unless it is for something decided on the spur of the moment.
2. My nails have always been kept cut short. I don't remember a time even in my teens when I grew them. Also I couldn't ever abide by nail polish on my fingernails. I do use it on my toes although even they are always trimmed short. Polish on my toe-nails has more to do with protecting them from infections. Don't go much by the cleanser-and-moisturiser-and-blow-drying-hair routine most of my girlfriends swear by. A thorough scrubbing at the morning bath, a quick combing through the hair and a tie around it and I am ready to face the world. Moisturisers are to be used only if the Bangalore weather makes things so dry that my skin itches. To sooth. Never use makeup too.
3. Furnishings at home are of the no-nonsense kind with none of the 'girly' stuff. There are also books everywhere instead of curios, flowers, etc. Certainly not 'ladylike.'
4. I prefer putting on denims and a tee-shirt at home or a kurti if going out. Cannot abide by saris even if they are voted to be 'the most graceful attire' by most people. Other women may feel graceful in it. I just feel as if I am wearing a strait-jacket and find it extremely difficult to go about my daily business in it. I wear saris only at weddings and such and only because I'll be clobbered by my sisters-in-law.(Actually we are all sinners-in-cahoots. Am great friends with all these ladies as well as being related to them through marriage. Maybe this is one more unfeminine thing. Aren't we supposed to speak against each other?). This distaste extends to broad dupattas on salwar-kameezes. If they have to be worn, they are worn with a chiffon dupatta which does not need much 'sanwarna', or with none at all if they happen to have a high collar. I have been nagged at by many friends for not 'dressing up' on many occasions.
5. Only jewellery I use is the mangalsutra, my engagement ring, one bangle on right hand/watch on the other, and earstuds. These never come off. There is no 'changing jewellery to match attire' or any costume jewellery. In fact I don't own any. Never bought any jewellery myself except that which was bought at my wedding.
6. I prefer to spend on books more than on anything else. My idea of a good time: Go to a bookshop and spend the whole afternoon browsing.
7. When A goes to play downstairs in the evening, I always accompany her there with a book in my hand. I sit there reading, lost to the world while the other ladies are discussing 'matters of importance'. Read gossip. I am never in the know, and sometimes am laughed at for not knowing the latest. That's OK with me. Though it is me they come to when they want anything to do with books or language or some such thing. Oh, well, it takes all kinds.
8. I am not very good with womenly skills like cooking or embroidery, etc. The husband is a much better cook than I am and I can just about cook typical Maharashtrian food which I learnt at my mother's and grandmother's elbow. And needlework? Well I must say I can mend torn clothes or sew on buttons, but that is about, it.
9. Even as a child I rebelled against "having to learn housework because I was a girl and I should know how to do everything in the house." It would have been OK with me if all of us had to learn it because it is an essential skill. It always angered me that my brothers didn't have to do it while I had to.
10. Have been guilty of encouraging my daughter not to take bullying behaviour from any of her peers. On one occasion when we had gone to a friend's place for dinner, there was a younger boy who was hitting the girls, (all other children were girls) pulling their hair, etc. All of them kept coming to complain to the parents and there was a lot of crying that happened. Suddenly we heard the boy screaming. Some of us went to that room to see what was happenning, and we saw A firmly holding the boy's hands to prevent him from doing whatever it was that he intended doing. Probably pulling her hair. I came to know later that after we left, a lot of talk that day was on how 'a girl was doing this, and how other girls weren't'. As far as I saw, A was just preventing the boy from hitting her, and was not retaliating in kind. We did have a talk with her about the boy being younger and how she should be careful lest she hurt him.
I do, however, love chocolates, soulful music, cuddly toys. In fact, some of the toys I bought for A have been bought because I loved the feel of them. I love little babies and can spend hours playing with them. Although I can't hold a conversation with an older child with 'attitude' for very long.
I have a question, though. How do we decide if any of this behaviour is to be desired or not? Why is it such a sin to be womanly or manly? Shouldn't we just stick to what comes naturally to us and makes us comfortable?
According to the tag, you will be cursed to "wear blue clothes pants if you are a woman and pink shirts if you are a man – for next twelve years" if I don't tag 12 other people. So I tag Choxbox, Subha, utbtkids , Usha, the mad momma, Vibha, and anyone else woman enough to pick it up. Sorry, everybody else I know of is already tagged.
23 June, 2010
Of Spies and Writers
Just finished reading HARRIET THE SPY. The first time I heard of the book was in a discussion with a friend. I liked the name, and it stuck. As usual, I took to scanning shelves at the library and bookstores for it, but soon realised that it was not available anywhere but at Flipkart. I was seriously considering buying it, as it had become like the proverbial itch that had to be scratched. Then the same friend told me that she had borrowed it from their library, Hippocampus. Since we already had plans of changing over our membership to Hippocampus, I decided to be patient and hold on. And hold on we did, for many impatient weeks.
In the meantime, we found out that the book had been made into a film. The film features Michelle Tractenberg in the central role, and was made in 1996. There was a screening on TV which we missed. Now this eminently watchable actress had last been seen by us in a Disney movie called Ice Princess. Another one of those "makeover" stories, made in 2005. She was wonderful in this movie, and I would recommend it to anyone for its strong female characters, wonderful acting, feel-good factor and some breathtaking ice-skating sequences. So Michelle Tractenberg would have been in her early teens when she made "Harriet the Spy." Just the right age for our 11year old Harriet. Now all I had to do was to read the book, and then search out the movie and Watch it.
Let me digress here a bit. There have been a lot of books that have been made into movies over the whole of movie history. Most people prefer to sit through a few hours of the movie and enjoy it rather than read the book. I know of many of A's friends who have watched the whole Harry Potter series on screen, but not held a single one of the books in their hand, leave alone read any. If that is not blasphemeous, (in my view) what is? J.K.Rowling's work has revived most children's interest in the printed word. Her book releases have had all the hysteria of a sold-out rock concert, and she has enchanted children and adults alike. Her work and its aftermath deserves a whole post on its own. Shall do it some other time.
I feel that reading a book unfetters one's imagination. You are free to imagine the characters in any way you want. A movie, on the other hand, has its limits as everything has been pre-digested and characterised. There is also the limitation of the time in which the whole story has to be told. Going back to the Harry Potter series, it is my opinion that the movies do not do complete justice to the books. There is so much more in the books that has to be edited out, and sometimes there are additions out of context which completely alter the original flavour of the books. Maybe I'm being a purist here, but Rowling's work is so complete in itself that it shouldn't be tampered with. It is just wonderful how all her dots connect perfectly.
OK. Point well made. Read the book before you watch the movie. Wherever possible. Let me come back to the topic at at hand before I go off on a complete tangent. Which is the book we are reviewing.
HARRIET THE SPY.
Written and illustrated by Loise Fitzhugh.
Cover art by Michael Deas.
This edition published by HarperCollins.
Ages 8-13 yrs.
Image :Courtesy Amazon.
Harriet M. Welsch is a very smart 11 yr old. She has a way with words, and follows a "spy-route" everyday after school, complete with a notebook in which she jots down every little thing she observes. Even at school, she is ruthless about what she writes down about her classmates, her best friends Sport and Janie included. There is a raw truthfulness to her observations, the kind children indulge in when they are not used to guilding of any kind. She is amply encouraged by her nanny, "Old Golly," who has realised the potential in her charge. She encourages her to observe, analyse and write down about everything that she sees or hears. The first stepping stone to becoming a great writer. Harriet does not quite look at it in those terms, but does have "becoming a writer" in her list of aspirations. Old Golly herself is an avid reader, and quotes often and at every possible occasion.
Then one day, she leaves to get married. Harriet is, in her opinion now old enough to take care of herself. Soon after that, disaster strikes, when Harriet loses her notebook in a game of tag. Her classmates read aloud all the uncomplimentary truths about themselves, and boycott her. Harriet reacts like a typical pre-teen by getting back at them by playing some nasty tricks, writing even more ugly things in another book, not going to school and behaving very badly at home with her worried parents, who do not understand how to handle their daughter. Her notebook is taken away at school, when the matter is noticed by the teachers. That really brings matters to a head.
"She didn't care anymore about signing her name, and she got no pleasure from the work she did, but she did it. Everything bored her. She found that when she didn't have a notebook it was hard for her to think. The thoughts came slowly, as though they had to squeeze through a tiny door to get to her, whereas when she wrote, they flowed out faster than she could put them down. She sat very stupidly with a blank mind until finally 'I feel different' came slowly into her head.''
Harriet rebels and blocks everyone out, including her parents. She is like a cornered animal, hitting out at anyone and anything. Her world has turned on its head and nothing makes sense anymore. All she wants is to get Old Golly back and cries for her in her sleep.
To their credit, her parents do the right thing and decide to get help before matters escalate. They set up an appointment with a psychologist, who tells them that nothing is actually wrong with Harriet, and that she is actually an extraordinarily intelligent and articulate young lady, whose talent for observation and penmanship is to be nurtured and channelised, and not quashed.
So what happens next? How does Harriet get back all that she has lost? Does she really get it all back or does something change? What happens vis-a-vis Old Golly? What about her friends and classmates? Does she make up for the hurtful things that she has said and done? What does she learn from the whole thing?
There are some wonderful things that are written to Harriet by Old Golly in a letter that she sends her. Knowing that Harriet can be painfully truthful, she writes, "Little lies that make people feel better are not bad, like thanking someone for a meal they made even if you hated it, or telling a sick person they look better when they don't,.....Remember that writing is to put love in the world, not to use against your friends. But to yourself you must always tell the truth."
Another aspect that the writer has dealt with, which is like a sub-plot is Harriet's puzzling over 'matters of the heart' after she realises that Old Golly has a boy-friend. She tries to speak to her mother about it..."what does it feel like when you meet the person you're going to marry?...I'm not worried." Harriet squirmed around. What am I? she wondered. Just curious. "I just wondered what it felt like," she said, sulking slightly.
That evening, after feeling that Old Golly was behaving very unlike herself, she wrote in her notebook, "There is more to this thing of love than meets the eye. I am going to have to think about this a great deal but I don't think it will get me anywhere. I think maybe they're all right when they say there are some things I won't know anything about until I'm older. But if it makes you like to eat all kinds of wurst (when you don't really like them) I'm not sure I'm going to like this." Very astute and very articulate for an eleven year old.
So now I am going to look out for the movie and enjoy Michelle Tractenberg's excellent acting. And what about A? She is next in line for the book. She will be done with it long before I can get the movie.
In the meantime, we found out that the book had been made into a film. The film features Michelle Tractenberg in the central role, and was made in 1996. There was a screening on TV which we missed. Now this eminently watchable actress had last been seen by us in a Disney movie called Ice Princess. Another one of those "makeover" stories, made in 2005. She was wonderful in this movie, and I would recommend it to anyone for its strong female characters, wonderful acting, feel-good factor and some breathtaking ice-skating sequences. So Michelle Tractenberg would have been in her early teens when she made "Harriet the Spy." Just the right age for our 11year old Harriet. Now all I had to do was to read the book, and then search out the movie and Watch it.
Let me digress here a bit. There have been a lot of books that have been made into movies over the whole of movie history. Most people prefer to sit through a few hours of the movie and enjoy it rather than read the book. I know of many of A's friends who have watched the whole Harry Potter series on screen, but not held a single one of the books in their hand, leave alone read any. If that is not blasphemeous, (in my view) what is? J.K.Rowling's work has revived most children's interest in the printed word. Her book releases have had all the hysteria of a sold-out rock concert, and she has enchanted children and adults alike. Her work and its aftermath deserves a whole post on its own. Shall do it some other time.
I feel that reading a book unfetters one's imagination. You are free to imagine the characters in any way you want. A movie, on the other hand, has its limits as everything has been pre-digested and characterised. There is also the limitation of the time in which the whole story has to be told. Going back to the Harry Potter series, it is my opinion that the movies do not do complete justice to the books. There is so much more in the books that has to be edited out, and sometimes there are additions out of context which completely alter the original flavour of the books. Maybe I'm being a purist here, but Rowling's work is so complete in itself that it shouldn't be tampered with. It is just wonderful how all her dots connect perfectly.
OK. Point well made. Read the book before you watch the movie. Wherever possible. Let me come back to the topic at at hand before I go off on a complete tangent. Which is the book we are reviewing.
Written and illustrated by Loise Fitzhugh.
Cover art by Michael Deas.
This edition published by HarperCollins.
Ages 8-13 yrs.
Image :Courtesy Amazon.
Harriet M. Welsch is a very smart 11 yr old. She has a way with words, and follows a "spy-route" everyday after school, complete with a notebook in which she jots down every little thing she observes. Even at school, she is ruthless about what she writes down about her classmates, her best friends Sport and Janie included. There is a raw truthfulness to her observations, the kind children indulge in when they are not used to guilding of any kind. She is amply encouraged by her nanny, "Old Golly," who has realised the potential in her charge. She encourages her to observe, analyse and write down about everything that she sees or hears. The first stepping stone to becoming a great writer. Harriet does not quite look at it in those terms, but does have "becoming a writer" in her list of aspirations. Old Golly herself is an avid reader, and quotes often and at every possible occasion.
Then one day, she leaves to get married. Harriet is, in her opinion now old enough to take care of herself. Soon after that, disaster strikes, when Harriet loses her notebook in a game of tag. Her classmates read aloud all the uncomplimentary truths about themselves, and boycott her. Harriet reacts like a typical pre-teen by getting back at them by playing some nasty tricks, writing even more ugly things in another book, not going to school and behaving very badly at home with her worried parents, who do not understand how to handle their daughter. Her notebook is taken away at school, when the matter is noticed by the teachers. That really brings matters to a head.
"She didn't care anymore about signing her name, and she got no pleasure from the work she did, but she did it. Everything bored her. She found that when she didn't have a notebook it was hard for her to think. The thoughts came slowly, as though they had to squeeze through a tiny door to get to her, whereas when she wrote, they flowed out faster than she could put them down. She sat very stupidly with a blank mind until finally 'I feel different' came slowly into her head.''
Harriet rebels and blocks everyone out, including her parents. She is like a cornered animal, hitting out at anyone and anything. Her world has turned on its head and nothing makes sense anymore. All she wants is to get Old Golly back and cries for her in her sleep.
To their credit, her parents do the right thing and decide to get help before matters escalate. They set up an appointment with a psychologist, who tells them that nothing is actually wrong with Harriet, and that she is actually an extraordinarily intelligent and articulate young lady, whose talent for observation and penmanship is to be nurtured and channelised, and not quashed.
So what happens next? How does Harriet get back all that she has lost? Does she really get it all back or does something change? What happens vis-a-vis Old Golly? What about her friends and classmates? Does she make up for the hurtful things that she has said and done? What does she learn from the whole thing?
There are some wonderful things that are written to Harriet by Old Golly in a letter that she sends her. Knowing that Harriet can be painfully truthful, she writes, "Little lies that make people feel better are not bad, like thanking someone for a meal they made even if you hated it, or telling a sick person they look better when they don't,.....Remember that writing is to put love in the world, not to use against your friends. But to yourself you must always tell the truth."
Another aspect that the writer has dealt with, which is like a sub-plot is Harriet's puzzling over 'matters of the heart' after she realises that Old Golly has a boy-friend. She tries to speak to her mother about it..."what does it feel like when you meet the person you're going to marry?...I'm not worried." Harriet squirmed around. What am I? she wondered. Just curious. "I just wondered what it felt like," she said, sulking slightly.
That evening, after feeling that Old Golly was behaving very unlike herself, she wrote in her notebook, "There is more to this thing of love than meets the eye. I am going to have to think about this a great deal but I don't think it will get me anywhere. I think maybe they're all right when they say there are some things I won't know anything about until I'm older. But if it makes you like to eat all kinds of wurst (when you don't really like them) I'm not sure I'm going to like this." Very astute and very articulate for an eleven year old.
So now I am going to look out for the movie and enjoy Michelle Tractenberg's excellent acting. And what about A? She is next in line for the book. She will be done with it long before I can get the movie.
26 May, 2010
When the quality of mercy got a bit strained!
In her English class, A and her friends are being introduced to literature other than that in their textbook. They are doing "The Wizard of Oz" in the original, as also daily readings from one of the "Chicken Soup" books appropriate for their age. As an offshoot of this, they have been introduced to concepts like "Thought for the day" which the children themselves have to share with the others in assembly, and "A daily act of kindness" which is shared in class too. I think it is a very good thing, and makes the children think outside their curriculum. A sort of "literature project", if you please, other than the book review, biography and autobiography that they did last year. Also a great way of sensitising them to others' needs and thoughts.
So we have been having help at home as "acts of kindness". Discussions if something she reads in the current book qualifies as a suitable "thought for the day" and what it really means.
Yesterday, she came home a little thoughtful. When I asked her, she said, "Aai (mother in marathi), today in class Kn (a boy in her class) dropped the colour pencil box by mistake and all the pencils rolled around everywhere. When he was picking them up I got up and helped him to put them back. Is that an act of kindness?"
"Yes," I said. "Did anybody else also help him?"
"No." She said. "The others kept sitting in their seats. The boys anyway do not help if anything like this happens. And the girls were all thinking 'why must we help a boy?' They were all looking at me and must be wondering why I was helping. Is it OK if I helped Kn?"
"Yes, it was nice of you." Now I do not know this child, but that didn't matter. A had been helpful to someone spontaneously, and was obviously feeling proud of her "act of kindness," and that was all that mattered to me. I was also glad that she was trying to internalise being kind.
She still seemed worried about something. "But aai, he did not say 'thank you' to me. And later in the bus he pushed me when he wanted to get down at his stop. That was not nice of him. It was rude."
Now my husband, who was listening quietly all this time, joined in. "Yes, it was rude of him. So don't be helpful to him next time. Do you think you should?"
"Yes!" Pat came the reply. "If he is rude, that is his problem. Why shouldn't I help him next time if I want to?"
Why indeed! I was proud of her attitude, but was a bit busy at that time to add my bit, and then the conversation moved to matters of homework. Today morning, while getting her ready for school, I had the time to speak to her.
Now A has been reading "William Shakespeare and his Dramatic act" from the Dead Famous series for the past few days. This has been her first exposure to Shakespeare, and I am glad it is a fun one. So I decided to take advantage of the fact and told her at this point that Shakespeare has written a play called A merchant of Venice, in which there are some famous lines...and I quoted the first few relevant lines to her.
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes."
She was enchanted and was listening with her whole being. It was simple enough for her to understand, although I had to repeat it two times with stress on some words and some action.
"So even if he is rude to me, I should still help him?"
"You have to decide, A. What do you think?"
"Aai, that poem says that we should forgive."
"See, A. Just as it is important for you to tell the truth, or to not hit anybody, or be kind, it is also important to be able to forgive. See, that poem says it is good for both the person who is forgiven and for the person who forgives." I could sense that she was paying close attention. "Just like when you do something that I don't like."
Here she supplied her own example. "Like that time when I broke the thermometer?" Not a very good example as it was not something major that needed forgiving, but it would do for the sake of the discussion.
"Yes," I said. "At that time I scolded you for playing with it but have I kept scolding you for it? Everytime you do something you shouldn't, you sometimes get scolded. But do I keep going back to whatever you have done earlier and scold you for that or anything else every time? No. Just imagine if I keep doing that. Won't it be very bad? It does not mean that I have forgotten about it. But what you did can be forgiven."
I still had her attention. "So if somebody is rude to you, you don't have to keep on tolerating it, if it happens every time. Just pay no attention to such people. But you can certainly forgive them and not hold it against them. And if then they do ask for help, you can be kind and help them. It will certainly make you feel better about yourself . You felt nice helping him, didn't you?"
"Yes!" Big grin on her face. Forgiveness as a concept that she could handle without feeling weak was introduced. I thought the rest of it- what if someone had done something by mistake or deliberately...how to handle being forgiving then- could wait for a later date.
She came back home from school today with another big grin. "Aai, you know today Kk(another boy) knocked down some books and asked if someone can please help him pick them up? I went immediately and helped him. You know, nobody else came to help."
"So did he thank you for it?" Me.
"Yes. He took the books and said thanks." A.
"So did that feel good?" Me.
"Yes!" Big smile and a hug.
Bless her!
So we have been having help at home as "acts of kindness". Discussions if something she reads in the current book qualifies as a suitable "thought for the day" and what it really means.
Yesterday, she came home a little thoughtful. When I asked her, she said, "Aai (mother in marathi), today in class Kn (a boy in her class) dropped the colour pencil box by mistake and all the pencils rolled around everywhere. When he was picking them up I got up and helped him to put them back. Is that an act of kindness?"
"Yes," I said. "Did anybody else also help him?"
"No." She said. "The others kept sitting in their seats. The boys anyway do not help if anything like this happens. And the girls were all thinking 'why must we help a boy?' They were all looking at me and must be wondering why I was helping. Is it OK if I helped Kn?"
"Yes, it was nice of you." Now I do not know this child, but that didn't matter. A had been helpful to someone spontaneously, and was obviously feeling proud of her "act of kindness," and that was all that mattered to me. I was also glad that she was trying to internalise being kind.
She still seemed worried about something. "But aai, he did not say 'thank you' to me. And later in the bus he pushed me when he wanted to get down at his stop. That was not nice of him. It was rude."
Now my husband, who was listening quietly all this time, joined in. "Yes, it was rude of him. So don't be helpful to him next time. Do you think you should?"
"Yes!" Pat came the reply. "If he is rude, that is his problem. Why shouldn't I help him next time if I want to?"
Why indeed! I was proud of her attitude, but was a bit busy at that time to add my bit, and then the conversation moved to matters of homework. Today morning, while getting her ready for school, I had the time to speak to her.
The matter was still playing on her mind and she opened the topic herself. "Aai, was it OK what I said yesterday? I can help if I am someone's friend, can't I? Even if they are rude?"
Now A has been reading "William Shakespeare and his Dramatic act" from the Dead Famous series for the past few days. This has been her first exposure to Shakespeare, and I am glad it is a fun one. So I decided to take advantage of the fact and told her at this point that Shakespeare has written a play called A merchant of Venice, in which there are some famous lines...and I quoted the first few relevant lines to her. "The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest: It blesseth him that gives and him that takes."
She was enchanted and was listening with her whole being. It was simple enough for her to understand, although I had to repeat it two times with stress on some words and some action.
"So even if he is rude to me, I should still help him?"
"You have to decide, A. What do you think?"
"Aai, that poem says that we should forgive."
"See, A. Just as it is important for you to tell the truth, or to not hit anybody, or be kind, it is also important to be able to forgive. See, that poem says it is good for both the person who is forgiven and for the person who forgives." I could sense that she was paying close attention. "Just like when you do something that I don't like."
Here she supplied her own example. "Like that time when I broke the thermometer?" Not a very good example as it was not something major that needed forgiving, but it would do for the sake of the discussion.
"Yes," I said. "At that time I scolded you for playing with it but have I kept scolding you for it? Everytime you do something you shouldn't, you sometimes get scolded. But do I keep going back to whatever you have done earlier and scold you for that or anything else every time? No. Just imagine if I keep doing that. Won't it be very bad? It does not mean that I have forgotten about it. But what you did can be forgiven."
I still had her attention. "So if somebody is rude to you, you don't have to keep on tolerating it, if it happens every time. Just pay no attention to such people. But you can certainly forgive them and not hold it against them. And if then they do ask for help, you can be kind and help them. It will certainly make you feel better about yourself . You felt nice helping him, didn't you?"
"Yes!" Big grin on her face. Forgiveness as a concept that she could handle without feeling weak was introduced. I thought the rest of it- what if someone had done something by mistake or deliberately...how to handle being forgiving then- could wait for a later date.
She came back home from school today with another big grin. "Aai, you know today Kk(another boy) knocked down some books and asked if someone can please help him pick them up? I went immediately and helped him. You know, nobody else came to help."
"So did he thank you for it?" Me.
"Yes. He took the books and said thanks." A.
"So did that feel good?" Me.
"Yes!" Big smile and a hug.
Bless her!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)