You cannot ignore it. The child will often not let you.
Absolutely true in child-led situations. I definitely wasn't suggesting otherwise.
Nor, to address Dusty's remark, am I expressing "sour grapes" of any kind. Frankly, I
do think that my DD probably has potential prodigy talent in a couple of domains-- but it would not have been child-led, and like ashley, I'm a wimpy, pale shadow of a TigerMom.
Honestly-- I'm
relieved that this isn't a parenting problem that I am faced with. I have quite enough on my plate already with a PG child, tyvm. I don't need or even want fame in my life or hers. I think media attention is fairly toxic-- IMHO.
I've known a handful of child-athletes who were elite level. Everything in their lives, and much of their parents' as well, revolves around the talent and its insatiable demands. Their lives
are strange as a result of those sacrifices, and you really don't ever get those years of childhood and adolescence back. If you have no common experience with others to draw from, it can make you a lonely and awkward adult. I've also seen the "tempered" form of prodigy-raising; where parents place reasonable (though it might not seem that way to outsiders) limits on how much, and enforce them. No, those kids mostly do NOT rise to international prominence, but then again, they also take the time to develop OTHER aspects of themselves, so that failure in the prodigy domain doesn't assume epic proportions and prove destructive. It's inevitable that at some point you WILL lose, you will fail, etc. If you have other parts to your identity, it doesn't destroy you. My experience there is competitive gymnastics, btw-- male and female family members who were nationally competitive, but whose parents put their feet firmly down re: quitting school to do it full time, and were reluctant to do international competition. They did NOT push through injuries to compete, etc.
I think that most of us here can identify with that-- we all TRY to balance our kids' cravings for intellectually meaningful experiences with the ability to still be their chronological ages for some portion of their lives, right? Some of us make deliberate choices to encourage/provide popular materials (books, games, movies, etc. etc.) even if we think them vapid and pointless-- simply for social currency. It's a very conscious thing at our house, anyway.
But what happens when there just isn't enough TIME to do that? As a parent, it is awfully tempting to justify sacrificing normative childhood experiences in the name of extraordinary talent... but no, I am not sure that it is always a wise thing to do, even if it works out well on the talent side of things.
By definition, a prodigy has an extraordinary area of development, one that outstrips OTHER development. It's extreme asynchrony that has been encouraged and nurtured. So yes, I
do think that probably is inherently not "balanced" development, and I also don't think that there is any way around the fact that it can dominate a child's developmental arc and swamp out other legitimate issues/concerns/needs. In spite of well-meaning parents.
I suppose that gets back to parenting philosophy when you get right down to it. I would probably
discourage a prodigy by insisting on time
away from the obsession. In the name of living in the world with others, I mean, and retaining additional facets of one's self. Parents who are 100% child-led
or seduced by the idea of a prodigy for a child wouldn't see it that way.
It's not an easy set of conditions to parent. That much is certain.
