a treatise on parents and children(父母与子女专题研究)-第3章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
enough。 In any case it may want to make a noise more than to spare your
feelings。 You may therefore have to explain that the effect of the irritation
will be that you will do something unpleasant if the noise continues。 The
something unpleasant may be only a look of suffering to rouse the child's
affectionate sympathy （if it has any）； or it may run to forcible expulsion
from the room with plenty of unnecessary violence； but the principle is the
same： there are no false pretences involved： the child learns in a
straightforward way that it does not pay to be inconsiderate。 Also；
perhaps； that Mamma； who made the child learn the Sermon on the Mount；
is not really a Christian。
8
… Page 9…
A TREATISE ON PARENTS AND CHILDREN
The Sin of Nadab and Abihu
But there is another sort of answer in wide use which is neither
straightforward； instructive； nor harmless。 In its simplest form it
substitutes for 〃Stop that noise；〃 〃Dont be naughty；〃 which means that the
child； instead of annoying you by a perfectly healthy and natural infantile
procedure； is offending God。 This is a blasphemous lie； and the fact that
it is on the lips of every nurserymaid does not excuse it in the least。
Dickens tells us of a nurserymaid who elaborated it into 〃If you do that；
angels wont never love you。〃 I remember a servant who used to tell me
that if I were not good； by which she meant if I did not behave with a
single eye to her personal convenience； the cock would come down the
chimney。 Less imaginative but equally dishonest people told me I should
go to hell if I did not make myself agreeable to them。 Bodily violence；
provided it be the hasty expression of normal provoked resentment and not
vicious cruelty； cannot harm a child as this sort of pious fraud harms it。
There is a legal limit to physical cruelty； and there are also human limits to
it。 There is an active Society which brings to book a good many parents
who starve and torture and overwork their children； and intimidates a good
many more。 When parents of this type are caught； they are treated as
criminals； and not infrequently the police have some trouble to save them
from being lynched。 The people against whom children are wholly
unprotected are those who devote themselves to the very mischievous and
cruel sort of abortion which is called bringing up a child in the way it
should go。 Now nobody knows the way a child should go。 All the ways
discovered so far lead to the horrors of our existing civilizations； described
quite justifiably by Ruskin as heaps of agonizing human maggots；
struggling with one another for scraps of food。 Pious fraud is an attempt
to pervert that precious and sacred thing the child's conscience into an
instrument of our own convenience； and to use that wonderful and terrible
power called Shame to grind our own axe。 It is the sin of stealing fire
from the altar： a sin so impudently practised by popes； parents； and
pedagogues； that one can hardly expect the nurserymaids to see any harm
in stealing a few cinders when they are worrited。
9
… Page 10…
A TREATISE ON PARENTS AND CHILDREN
Into the blackest depths of this violation of children's souls one can
hardly bear to look； for here we find pious fraud masking the violation of
the body by obscene cruelty。 Any parent or school teacher who takes a
secret and abominable delight in torture is allowed to lay traps into which
every child must fall； and then beat it to his or her heart's content。 A
gentleman once wrote to me and said； with an obvious conviction that he
was being most reasonable and high minded； that the only thing he beat
his children for was failure in perfect obedience and perfect truthfulness。
On these attributes； he said； he must insist。 As one of them is not a virtue
at all； and the other is the attribute of a god； one can imagine what the
lives of this gentleman's children would have been if it had been possible
for him to live down to his monstrous and foolish pretensions。 And yet
he might have written his letter to The Times （he very nearly did； by the
way） without incurring any danger of being removed to an asylum； or
even losing his reputation for taking a very proper view of his parental
duties。 And at least it was not a trivial view； nor an ill meant one。 It
was much more respectable than the general consensus of opinion that if a
school teacher can devise a question a child cannot answer； or overhear it
calling omega omeega； he or she may beat the child viciously。 Only； the
cruelty must be whitewashed by a moral excuse； and a pretence of
reluctance。 It must be for the child's good。 The assailant must say
〃This hurts me more than it hurts you。〃 There must be hypocrisy as well as
cruelty。 The injury to the child would be far less if the voluptuary said
frankly 〃I beat you because I like beating you； and I shall do it whenever I
can contrive an excuse for it。〃 But to represent this detestable lust to the
child as Divine wrath； and the cruelty as the beneficent act of God； which
is exactly what all our floggers do； is to add to the torture of the body； out
of which the flogger at least gets some pleasure； the maiming and blinding
of the child's soul； which can bring nothing but horror to anyone。
10
… Page 11…
A TREATISE ON PARENTS AND CHILDREN
The Manufacture of Monsters
This industry is by no means peculiar to China。 The Chinese （they
say） make physical monsters。 We revile them for it and proceed to make
moral monsters of our own children。 The most excusable parents are
those who try to correct their own faults in their offspring。 The parent
who says to his child： 〃I am one of the successes of the Almighty：
therefore imitate me in every particular or I will have the skin off your
back〃 （a quite common attitude） is a much more absurd figure than the
man who； with a pipe in his mouth； thrashes his boy for smoking。 If you
must hold yourself up to your children as an object lesson （which is not at
all necessary）； hold yourself up as a warning and not as an example。 But
you had much better let the child's character alone。 If you once allow
yourself to regard a child as so much material for you to manufacture into
any shape that happens to suit your fancy you are defeating the experiment
of the Life Force。 You are assuming that the child does not know its own
business； and that you do。 In this you are sure to be wrong： the child
feels the drive of the Life Force （often called the Will of God）； and you
cannot feel it for him。 Handel's parents no doubt thought they knew
better than their child when they tried to prevent his becoming a musician。
They would have been equally wrong and equally unsu
