Something that made me pissed off and a little bit thoughtful...
Firstly, read
this article , an excerpt from "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" by Amy Chua. Apparently a self help book for anyone who wants to turn their children into an asian prodigy child by using the most hypocritical method ever.
You may or may not know, but this article has been the subject of a lot of debate especially among parent communities and asians (for obvious reasons). I admit that I probably only care about this because it affects me in some way, but if you've read it you will probably have had SOME reaction to it as well.
I admit the ideas behind her points are well grounded, and a lot of them are logical. However, it seems that she takes everything a bit off the extreme end of the scale, rather than maintaining a balance -- incredibly hypocritical considering that she herself mentioned Confucian filial piety as a reason for the way she treats her children the way she does, yet another part of Confucianism is the importance of BALANCE and HARMONY. It does remind me a bit of Christians who only cite parts of the bible to back up their own points and disregard anything that may conflict.
Also I'm probably the only one who thought this, but I found the entire article to be a little sexist. There are so many mentions of the chinese mother, but where is the father? She tells about a story with her husband trying to be reasonable at the end of the article, gloating in triumph that she was right and he was wrong. But her logic does not hold. Just because she forced her daughter to practise piano until she got it right even though she was throwing tantrums and insulting her to make her more and more frustrated doesn't mean that this method is necessarily better than being more lenient. It simply means it is one way of getting things done. She has obviously never tried other methods, so she cannot in fact comment on the effectiveness of her own. For all she knows, there could be a better and more effective method out there that doesn't involve negative feelings between her and her children; just because A causes B doesn't mean B is only obtainable through A -- that's basic logic, something I would expect an Ivy League professor to consider and be open minded to.
"I'm willing to put in as long as it takes, and I'm happy to be the one hated. And you can be the one they adore because you make them pancakes and take them to Yankees games."
I can see here that she does somewhat have an idea about the concept of balance, but her idea of it seems to be in the extremes. There is no fluidity. Zebras are not grey, and if you stare at one up close for too long you'll probably get a headache. Everything in moderation is best in my opinion.
I find it extremely comical how her children are not allowed to get anything lower than an A grade at school -- except sport and drama. Why is sport and drama 'useless'? Professional sportsmen and actors are perhaps the most overpaid people in the world, so don't use the money excuse. I question whether it is because Chua herself has given into the stereotype that asians are no good at sports or drama? She herself accused her husband of not 'believing in' their daughter when she couldn't play the piano piece. Does that mean that if she believes in her daughters then they can do anything? If so, then why the limits on sports and drama? If she is trying to craft perfection, why not craft it in every way? Same with the instruments. Why are they not allowed to play any instruments apart from the piano and violin? True, they are instruments with lots of performance opportunity, but why not add a 3rd or 4th if she is trying to push her children to their full potentials?
In fact it's interesting that the children she is building seem to be in fact robot asian clones. We hear a lot about asian children like this. Her children are not that special. As the
other controversial article published by Macleans magazine makes evident, there is an issue with the number of asians compared to other ethnicities at institutes of higher education (especially in canada and the states). Many jokes and parodies are made about how a lot of asians apply to universities, especially the ivy league (eg.
this video by OnHarvardTime) By limiting her children to playing only the piano and violin and not motivating them as hard in sports and drama as other subjects, she is actually limiting their likelihood of getting into a good university, as well as obstructing their potential to become well rounded individuals. Also I would expect her to realise this seeing as she TEACHES AT YALE... (fair enough, she's not part of the admissions faculty. but I would expect her to have been in contact with enough of her students to realise that it's important to be well rounded) Then again maybe she is relying on the fact that her children are not technically fully asian to get them past this hurdle. Still I find that her wishing the best for her children conflicts with her limiting them. In case you haven't realised already, I find her very very annoyingly hypocritical. I question how she would have handled twins, if she expects her children to always be 1st in class.
Although, I question about myself when I read this article. It's true that I don't think anything of it when my own parents tell me I'm fat, and I never tell my parents to come to a show I'm starring in etc. I don't even care if they come to prizegiving or not. But I question whether this is due to my upbringing or because I am just like that as a person. I do not crave attention from my parents, and I am comfortable enough in my own skin to not care about what my parents think. This could conversely also mean that due to my upbringing I have realised that adults are full of shit and therefore I shouldn't take what they say too seriously. My parents have said that I am extremely headstrong and freespirited though, to the point where I dislike taking other people's advice and help. I do agree that children should not be indulged and spoilt so much that they become weak and fragile and thin-skinned though. It takes a certain amount of resilience (Mrs J year 7 :P) to survive in this world, and everything shouldn't be given to a child on a golden platter.
The one line that probably pisses me off the most in the whole article though, is probably this:
Chinese parents believe that they know what is best for their children and therefore override all of their children's own desires and preferences.
At least she said 'believe' and not just "chinese parents know..." The problem is, I hate it when parents believe their children are objects forever indebted to them that they can control as puppetmasters. If this is so, nobody would ever live their own lives, forever living vicariously through their children. Then those who are infertile wouldn't be able to live any life at all. Living vicariously through others also has extreme limits. We cannot feel what they are feeling, what we perceive as moments of happiness may not be things they are necessarily interested in. Living your own life as you wish is always better than trying to live someone else's. I would even go as far as to say that a parent who cared about children more than they cared about themselves would allow them the basic human right of free will at the very least.
She shouldn't kid herself. Her daughters have probably done a lot of shit that she doesn't know about. And it's probably from their own experiences that they have learnt more about themselves than she can ever teach them by preventing them from trying things on their own. I could be wrong, but ALL the teenagers I know have rebelled at some time or another and not told their parents about it. There is this impermeable wall between adolescents and their parents no matter how close they are. If they haven't rebelled yet, I would be really surprised.
I guess what I mean to say is that although I can see the logic behind her method, I completely disagree with the method itself. It's good to push the potential of your children, it's good to not be satisfied with anything but the best. But when you take it too far and force them into doing things they are not necessarily interested in, when you start depriving them of their social needs and freedom, when you start doing things that actually MAKE NO SENSE... that's when it's taking it too far.
Yes, her 'method' may have produced a 'stereotypically successful kid'. But what part? I can definitely say there are things in her method that are limiting her children's potential. But what happens with this stereotypically successful kid becomes an adult? Will they still be successful? In the real world, academic knowledge cannot replace experience. Well rounded individuals are the most successful. Being able to play the piano or violin doesn't mean anything if you can't stop your arms getting run over by a car because you've never crossed the road by yourself because you've never been allowed outside your own house without your parents. The stereotypical asian successful kid is only heard about up to undergraduate college level. We never hear about stereotypically successful asian adults to the same degree. Why? Maybe because they're all at home yelling at their own children to math harder... Who knows?
My parents didn't make me do of ANY the things on her precious list. I quit piano because I didn't like it. I went back to it because I saw the value in it. Yes, perhaps if my parents had grilled me harder I could have been a performance pianist. Perhaps not. I will never know, but I know that I would not have been happy. There would be little bits of happiness here and there, but the majority would be frustration. By doing things my own way, I have created my own form of happiness, perhaps not as extreme, but happiness all the same... A sweeter, more delicate kind of happiness that I am truly thankful for. A happiness that comes from my freedom, from crafting my life with my own two hands. And I will continue to craft my future with them, because there's no way I'd ever let anyone else take charge of the most valuable thing I have.
