Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Why Chinese Mothers are Superior.....(WSJ article)

I am fascinated by Amy Chua's article, but haven't had time to post until now, so my apologies for the barge. Also, I am no expert, but I wonder if there are not multiple facets to creativity. And while I am not endorsing all the tactics in the article, a routine of intense practice may bring some important elements of creativity - in addition to mastery it brings a rhythm that can put you in "the zone" where creativity flows.

I am reading Keith Richard's autobiography - he describes the origin of the Rolling Stones. I found it interesting that he said they never set out to become the sensation they did. Their ambition in the early '60s was to become the ultimate cover band of American blues, enough to make ends meet. And they were obsessive students of the blues - it was a full time job to decipher and reproduce the blues music on the records they could get. It took me by surprise for some reason to hear that there was years of focused effort involved, with no greater ambition than to be a cover band. But it was that intense effort and resulting mastery that led to the band's creativity - adapting the blues to the context of their own experiences.

The difference is that Keith's mom was not there cracking the whip. In this case, his discipline came from his own passion for the music he was listening to, but I'd venture a guess that there are a few creative geniuses out there who got their start under the watch of a tiger mother....

From what I can tell Wren just has the one daughter who seems to be thriving in an over-privileged urban lifestyle. From what I can tell. I've been bluntly wrong before. But you do bring up a very good point and I forget where I read it but parents run into the most problems when they have a kid who's not like them. It's confusing and leads to mistakes and conflict of a different sort. I haven't read the book, only the Internet buzz. Quite theraputic seeing over 4000 people saying what I said as a child, the ends dont justify the means and cruelty is abusive. But it looks like Mrs. Chain's method seemed to work until the second daughter entered puberty. It worked on one daughter, differently on the other. Seems like strictness often backfires when applied to a stubborn child. And it's debatable if it's all that healthy for the mediocre unambitious child which is the one it seems to serve, especially in a competitive neighborhood. More thoughts on this later, believe it or not lol.. Gotta run.

Wren,

Forget about creativity. Don't you think everybody needs and deserves downtime? You know unstructured free time when one is pleased to do whatever he wants within given constrains. Sorry, couldn't skip the constrain part BTW I found ColinsMum's definition both quite accurate and funny.

I believe we all need time to do our own thing whatever that can be. I am a stronger believer in a free time. We homeschool and besides all the academic reasons, for us giving our children more free time is one of the top reasons to homeschool. I am trying to make sure they do have free time every day and feel quite a guilty if some of their days get way too busy. I go even so far, that if they have a busy weekend, I give them Monday off school. Yes, day without learning, so we can all (that includes me too) can relax and recharge. Sorry to say that, but 5 minutes of free time is laughable.

I don't really care what my children do with their free time. Let me see, today they had about 2 hours and they decided to spend 1 hour playing outside, 25 minutes watching TV, and the rest playing/wrestling with each other. Yeah, it was so not academical, but it was NOT waste of their time. They enjoyed their time together, they had fun. Yesterday DS6 spent his free time reading a book about pirates, dressing up like one, and designing a pirate flag. The day before he opted to play math games on the computer which led to him asking me to teach him more about decimal numbers. All of that was his/their choice.

I believe kids need to get bored here and there. Free time may lead to academic development or it may be a pure play, but honestly who cares? My children are years ahead as it is. I refuse to plan and structure every single hour of their lives. My kids need the freedom to explore and follow their interests or do the unimaginable nothing. You see, some of my older one's obsessions would have never happened, hadn't he had his free time. For example I would never make him spend hours upon hours learning about geography as he did on his own. To this day geography is one of his favorite subjects.

I don't let my children do whatever they want all the time, but I do give them what I hope is enough time to do as they please. We homeschool, so they are told what to do quite often. I ask them to practice the piano and yes, we have had our own share of fights over it.

I know this isn't really part of this thread, but I wanted to point it anyway. Interestingly enough this week the piano teacher mentioned that DS8 had overcome some of the major hurdles and can now really enjoy piano (his 3rd year). You would have to see the change in him. The kid who wanted to quit a year ago now asks to practice these days! Something I didn't expect to happen. Ever. It reminded me of the article and how mastery brings more joy. Perhaps there is some truth to it. He liked piano the first six months, then he was ok with it. The 2nd year with a new and more strict teacher was mostly no good. He was asked to work harder and his mistakes were pointed out, something he had hard time dealing with. I didn't let him quit, but I did offer to find a different teacher. He decided to stay with the same teacher and now he is enjoying playing again. Am I glad he stayed with piano? Yes. Do I believe he is happy he got this far? I believe so, at least for now.

OK, I'll quantify it. They need enough time to get bored. And TV doesn't count, because it is so addictive. You could lose eight hours in channel surfing.

I just ordered this book from amazon. ��Your Child's Strengths: Discover Them, Develop Them, Use Them. It was recommended somewhere in the middle of all that poundsign quiestionmark star exclaimationpoint I was reading about Amy Chau's sensational book. (had to say that, it's in a cheesy new country song on the radio. Was waiting for a good chance to use it.)

What I liked about this book I ordered is it says it shows you which motivations apply to your kid in what circumstances and supposedly this lady says she can tell you which motivation to use on your kid according to what your kid needs at that moment. It promotes teaching to their strengths rather than exclusively working on their weaknesses. It's worth a read. I'll try it. We'll see if I learn something new.

"Instead of focusing on weaknesses, Fox submits that children do far better when the focus is on their strengths. Childhood is for "creative dreaming," not preparation for standardized tests. Fox identifies three types of strengths: activity, learning and relationship strengths, and helps parents guide their children toward self-discovery, explaining that true strengths include not only what a child is good at, but what she enjoys and makes her feel strong. "

I think it means some things they learn for pleasure, some for learning sake, and some learning is for other people's sake. Like I said, I don't think I've heard this yet. We'll see.

PS Amy chan: saying pushy parenting is better than neglect does not make it superior. Now if you could produce results superrior to well taken care of children with involved parents you'd have come up with something.
Darn it? That's the best I could do. Yai, yai, yai. That's not evEn a quiestion. And it's already a week past Thursday. The challenge is over. I'm going to dig this thread up next year when I come up with the right Jeopardy answer here. Watch.

http://www.flylady.net/pages/column16.asp/

This timely advice arrived in my mailbox today. Are you a beloved queen or a despised dictator? Don't make excuses that "because only cruelty works". It's a lie. Honestly, I lost my patience too much lately with a three year old in the house. Next time I'll tell him to get his toys out of my living room for the one-hundreth time a day in a whisper with a smile on my face. I hope.

If I gave DD as much free time to get bored, she never eat dinner, get her homework done, brush her teeth, get outside for air and exercise. For a creative kid, there is no boredom with free time.....

But thank you, I asked and I got an intangible.

LaTexican, I really like your posts and thanks for the link.

I do not think you need cruelty, but strict rules are necessary. I expect DD to behave with manners, put her clothes in the hamper when she takes them off and try and tidy her room, etc. She has 3 friends over for a playdate (at the current moment) and it will be a cyclone hit in her room after they leave. It usually takes more than one reminder (request). Sometimes the requests get strident. Since it seems there is a constant request when we come in that snow boots live in the closet and hats and mitts go in their drawer.

DD would definitely put off homework if we did not make her get it done first. And we want her to learn that if she gets her tasks done first, she will usually end up with more free time. And if she does it well, instead of sloppy, it takes less time. Does that mean I am not building to her strengths?

I know the tangent isn't exactly what LaTexican was referring to but I think rules of behavior and expectation are getting slack. When I was growing up, people went to college, then you got a job and paid for an apt and food. You did not go home. It was kind of loser thing to do. Those were the expectations and everyone I know did that.
Eighteen year olds are in the army and getting killed for this country and yet people in their 20s are moping about their prospects. Kids are not taught responsibility for themselves these days. If we send an eighteen year old off to war, then kids should be basically taught that after college they can feed and shelter themselves. Part of survival. Does that make me a dictator?

Ren

On a light note, one of my friends sent me this link to a cute cartoon about the article.
http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/01/13/battle-hymn-of-the-tiger-mother-a-cartoonist-responds/

I enjoy reading the commentary on this. While there were certainly many sections of the original article that made me wince, I do think there are many truths to the stereotypical Westerner. For example, I do know a lot of "Western parents" who ignore the benefits of focused goal-setting and expect schools to provide any type of academic challenge for their children.
I also liked the follow-up article this weekend by the "Western" parent. While she, too, was tongue-in-cheek, I thought she sounded more balanced in her approach than many I personally know.

It's hard. I don't want my kids to rot their brains on tv and computer games all day so I do encourage a lot of creative time with Legos, imaginary play, writing, etc. Surprisingly, though, I've discovered that there are also benefits to letting them watch a little bit of tv. For my DS6, if he didn't get to enjoy Star Wars Clone Wars cartoons, he wouldn't fit in with any of the boys his age around here who act it out whenever they're together. If I had to choose, I'd much rather they be happy, healthy children with friends than a famous pianist who is socially isolated from peers.

You might be surprised, actually. We don't have TV (not a "religious" decision, DH and I have just never really seen the point; we rather assumed that when we had a child we'd need to get one for the kind of reason you mention, but so far DS7 doesn't show any sign of wanting one either). Yet DS somehow knows enough to join in with the playground games! Maybe it's just that the other kids enjoy telling him what he needs to know, but it doesn't seem to hold him back. I asked him explicitly once whether he ever felt left out through not having TV, and he said not. This may change later, of course, but it's our experience so far.

I like the cartoon!

My parents were divorced when I was young. One was a strict, tough, fair, and highly intelligent man who ran a farm after a hugely successful career in the military. The other was a lazy, extremely intelligent, hardworking (when she needed to be) autodidact. I spent time with both. I also spent a lot of self-directed time in sports ( which I paid for), scouts, and other pursuits.

The freedom under my mother allowed me to develop self-direction and to pursue my interests that have allowed me to find my spot in my adult life. My dad gave me the toughness and and discipline to buckle down and get unpleasant things done. Sports and other group activities gave me the willingness to do the blocking so someone else can make the touchdowns.

IMHO, based on this and my observations of other people, kids need strictness in order to develop discipline and need to learn how to do the dirty work, then they need increasing levels of autonomy to become individuals.

Amy Chua lives in a highly insulated world and thinks her brand of parenting is unique. It is not.

There are many subcultures in the USA where parents drive kids and whole families drive kids to excel. Most of these areas revolve around athletics. For instance, the Black community in the US dominates little league basketball. Most weekends in a lot of families revolve around tournaments. That is all these kids do. Another subculture is rodeo. In fact, there are hundreds of subcultures where parents push and push their kids.

For Chua, she thinks her subculture, Classical Music, is the only one in the world. LOL.

Ironically, I think her blindness to much of it is due to her very strict upbringing and lack of contact with the rest of the world.

Her serious book on diversity is very interesting and I agree with much of it. But she used the Soviet Union as an example of a high diversity society, which is embarrassing to most serious scholars of Communism and of the Soviet Union.

The inclusion of the USSR and her ignorance of US subcultures highlights a serious flaw in her ability to look for and synthesize information. And it may go back to how she was raised - she never had the free time to go and LOOK for stuff - just walk the stacks and pull books down at random - or just go to conferences on things she does not know anything about - developing her curiosity about the world and methods to sate it.

And this is the flaw in the rigorous upbringing approach. The child becomes very good a limited set of skills and can work well within a circumscribed area of knowledge, but the world does not work that way. Sooner or later they have to adjust.