Kids

[Terrance]

Some notes from Aries, Hoyle & Evens  -==0


Until sometime around the twelfth century, European society
did not see childhood
as a distinct period of development the way that we do now
(Aries,). Children
were viewed as miniature adults and participated fully in
adult life. With a child mortality rate in the first five
years of life often exceeding 75% (Hoyles & Evans, 1989), it
was not wise to get too attached to one's children. Once
infants grew out of their swaddling, they were dressed just
like adults. There was no differentiation between adults'
and children's clothing or pastimes. Adults and children
alike played blind man's bluff, parlor games, leapfrog, and
engaged in snowball fights (Aries,  Hoyles & Evans,)---GR,
games, fairy tales, etc. 


According to Aries, the modern, Western conception of
childhood began to
develop during the sixteenth century with the rise of the
middle class and its demand
for formalized education for its sons. In the middle ages,
the apprenticeship system
was the main conduit of education and preparation for adult
life. Children of all
social standings were sent into other families' homes.
During the fifteenth century,
the idea of education began to encapsulate formal schooling.
This shift reflected an
increasing attachment to the child. Middle-class parents
preferred to keep their
children close to them. At first, this shift towards sending
children to school rather
than apprenticing them affected only boys. They were sent to
school in order to
give them and their families the opportunity for upward
mobility. Differentiation
between boys' and adult men's clothing appeared at this time
as a result of their now
separated roles of student and breadwinner (Aries, Hoyles &
Evans,). 

The development of the modern family can be shown to follow
the progress of the
importance of private life (Aries, 1962). Until the
sixteenth century, iconography did
not include interior scenes of family life. Scenes of public
life - on the streets, at
play, etc. - dominated artists' subject matter well into the
seventeenth century
(Aries, Hoyles & Evans,). The internal structure of homes at
this time
reflects the lack of privacy. Rooms were not separated by
corridors; they opened
onto each other. Other than the kitchen, rooms were not
specialized. Beds could be,
and were, set up in any room (Aries,  Hoyles & Evans,). 

The modern house did not become the norm among the richer
classes until the
eighteenth century (Aries, 1962). Rooms became separated and
specialized. It was
at this time that the child became seen as an irreplaceable
and unique individual. By
the eighteenth century, the child had become the center of
the family and had
assumed great importance in society. The Cult of the Child
Jesus influenced this
development via a fashionable interest in His life as a
child, His popularization as an
object of devotion especially for the children, and His
depiction in the art of this
period (Hoyles & Evans,). This evolution of the
conceptualization of
childhood occurred mainly in the upper-and middle-class. The
poor (which made up
the bulk of the population) continued living like medieval
families into the early
1800's (Aries,). By the eighteenth century, the concept of
the family had
achieved its modern character. Rather than changing
conceptually, it spread to
encompass larger and larger portions of society. 

In the early seventeenth century, there did not seem to be
the same
emphasis on sexual decency and propriety that we see in
later years (Aries,).
People were not shocked by coarse jokes and sexual games
with children (e.g.,
attempting to grab a child's genitals). Children under the
age of puberty were simply
not considered aware of sexual matters. Nobody thought that
sexual references
could corrupt a child's innocence because the idea of
childish innocence did not yet
exist (Aries,). 


Alternatively, the development of our modern conception of
childhood can be
structured according to Muller's four phases demarcated by
trends in birth
and death rates. During phase one, which persisted until
around 1750, the birth and
death rates were both very high but quite similar. As a
result, the population was
reasonably stable. In these times of high childhood
mortality and an average life
expectancy of twenty-five years, children were seen as
fragile, easily replaceable,
and of little importance (Muller, Hoyles & Evans). Childhood
was
considered a necessary evil on the way to productive
adolescence. 

In phase two, which encompassed the period between 1750 and
1880, infant
mortality dropped drastically (most likely due to the
invention of the microscope and
the discovery of bacteria) without a corresponding drop in
the birth rate. An
unheralded of population boom resulted. This rise in the
population combined with
rapid industrialization and urban expansion was largely
responsible for child labor.
Children were cheap and plentiful sources of labor and were
often small enough to
perform jobs that full-grown adults could not (such as
crawling under machines to
repair them). As late as 1866, the International Alliance of
Workers lauded child
labor as "a legitimate and logical step forward . . . . In a
rational society, every
child over the age of nine years should be a productive
worker" (cited in Muller). 

Phase three (1880-1930) saw the birth rate go down. It was
in this phase that
children assumed central importance in the family.
Rousseau's idea that childhood
was a desirable state of innocence and that society needed
to protect child against
adult corruption began to gain in popularity among the
upper-and middle-class in the
late eighteenth century. Phase three marks the period when
this idea crossed class
boundaries (Muller,). 

Several factors can be assumed to be involved in this shift.
Children began to be
financial burdens on their parents rather than sources of
income. They were less
likely to contribute to the family income because of
compulsory education and the
raising of the minimum age for many areas of employment. As
more families moved
to towns, the family lost its status as a economic unit that
produced food and other
necessary commodities and took on the role of a consumer. As
the birth rate
dropped, family size shrank. Not only were fewer children
being born, but
intergenerational households were becoming less common. 

Because of these factors, children came to assume a central
place in the family.
They had much more contact with their parents and were
increasingly dependent
upon them (rather than other members of the household) to
provide the necessities
of life. Increased contact generally meant more punishment,
as the idea that children
were innocent but easily corrupted grew in popularity. In
general, children were
financially prohibitive but emotionally invaluable because
they were seen as an
avenue for upward mobility and a guarantee that parents
would be taken care of
later in life. 

Phase four stretches from 1930 to the present day and is
exemplified in the United
Nation's 1959 Declaration of the Rights of the Child. Our
"phase four" society is also
child- centered, but in a different way from phase three
society. The contemporary
goal is care, understanding, and respect for what the child
(rather than the parent)
needs. 

At the same time as the shifts in social attitudes that
proclaimed the arrival of the
modern conceptualization of childhood were occurring, the
dualistic conception of
childhood as innocent opposed to childhood as evil that
still exists, to a certain
extent, today (as illustrated in the contemporary movies
"Poltergeist" and "Damian")
which was first becoming popular. The conception of children
as innocent became
popular in the late seventeenth century. This attitude
required that children be
closely supervised, strictly disciplined, and treated with
and taught modesty (Aries, Hoyles & Evans). This idea
existed in opposition to the older belief that
children were instinctually sinful because of the
Judeo-Christian tenet of original sin,
and thus needed to be prevented from engaging in sinful
behavior. 

Now Adolescence in quite another matter, both Plato and
Aristotle describe it in terms we would recognize, rather
Freudian. 

One little thing and I'll let this sly dog lie, the
majority of postgraduates are not prepared, qualified, nor
licensed to teach in our primary or secondary schools. 
Teaching is not the focus of what they study or research. In
fact, here in the U.S. many of our Professors lament the
fact that they have not received enough education and
training in teaching. 

Cornerstoned, 

Terrance