The stories you tell are so interesting in comparison. The Sears guy did strive up to a point (or had help getting into Harvard) but the woman didn't even apply. I don't know, I guess I am just more suspect of her rationale. She didn't feel over her head enough to either voluntarily leave or be asked to leave (granted that rarely happens) and Tufts is a wonderful school. So clearly she is quite bright but didn't in her mind live up to the dreaded potential of her at 4, the Harvard guy in a sense fulfilled his potential and then "wasted" it. The 2 seem so different in terms of ownership, he seems to be owning that he had the key and threw it away, she seems to be saying it was the schools fault she wasn't more. Maybe I am reading too much into it. I don't expect all kids at Hunter or Stuy to be Nobel prize winners but I know deciding somewhere between 7th and 12th that you aren't good enough because there seem to be smarter people who work
harder just gives away that potential so it just seems psychological rather than actually intellectual. Really interesting that both lament in terms of intelligence and opportunity, the guilt factor, you are bright, you must be more, what in that scenario could ever be enough, would the nobel be satisfying? Really speaks to our job as parents to make them feel that striving is worth it in and of itself and learning should always continue and that their self worth can't be dependent on comparisons or awards.
And the woman who got divorced, one has to hope that the first rationale was just an excuse to get out of a marriage she didn't want because throwing away a dream as a consequence of marriage seems so sad.
DeHe
