Yet, as for mothers, one should ask Mrs. Feynman, Mrs. Wiener, Mrs. Von Neumann, Mrs. Einstein and the list goes on. Guilt works well also. But the hubris of having Chinese motherhood is hardly the only way to move civilization forward. I wonder how well Mrs. Mao did?
Chua states:
What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you're good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences. ... Western parents tend to give up. But if done properly, the Chinese strategy produces a virtuous circle. ... Once a child starts to excel at something—whether it's math, piano, pitching or ballet—he or she gets praise, admiration and satisfaction. This builds confidence and makes the once not-fun activity fun. This in turn makes it easier for the parent to get the child to work even more.
What some parents have done it to say that fun of any type is a waste of time, work is the only solution. The old Pilgrim way. Parents who spend time making their children happy and being their children;s friends often find a conflict when discipline is needed when the child cannot accept boundaries, after all the parents made them equal. Chua, one thinks perhaps, has a great publicist and in many ways one could say that her approach has certain superiority overtones devoid of substantial historical fact.
I keep thinking of all the kids in New York at the end of the 1950s and their overall competitiveness. I remember Saturday, yes Saturday, classes at Bronstein and Wiener's SAT Prep, kids not satisfied with 700 or 720, going for not only 800 but finding the mistakes on the SAT, yes the game was to find out what they screwed up on ... and who got the letter off first ... a Feynmann like trick ... in a sense the New York way ... and after the class back to work with dad or uncle Harry, and if lucky after Sunday dinner you had a few hours off.
So perhaps there are some who have managed to prosper without a Chinese mother.
Posts
