|   CM SERIES HOME   |   CONCISE SUMMARIES   |   PARAPHRASED IN MODERN ENGLISH   |



Charlotte Mason in Modern English

Charlotte Mason's ideas are too important not to be understood and implemented in the 21st century, but her Victorian style of writing sometimes prevents parents from attempting to read her books. This is an imperfect attempt to make Charlotte's words accessible to modern parents. You may read these, print them out, share them freely--but they are copyrighted to me, so please don't post or publish them without asking.
~L. N. Laurio


pg 80

Chapter 5 - The Sacredness of Personality

Principle 4: These principles (authority and submission) are limited by the respect due to the personality of children, which must not be encroached upon whether by the direct use of fear or love, suggestion or influence, or by undue play upon any one natural desire.

All too often, children are used as pawns for pet agendas, which change all the time. We need a better method of education. We need an accurate understanding of children--we need to realize that, whether they're brilliant or slow, or advanced or challenged, they are first of all, complete persons. Gifted children's abilities will be nurtured and slow children will advance; all children will benefit from this kind of education, as I've said in previous chapters, regardless of their inborn intelligence. Our job is to seek a greater understanding of what the person is. What we do grows out of what we think, and which foundational concepts we adhere to. If we seriously consider personality, we'll come to see that we cannot allow ourselves to damage or crush or suppress any part of a person.

Yet we have many clever and even kindly ways of doing this, and they're all based more on less on ego. Our own conceit persuades us that we're superior only as long as the child is dependent on us. Everything we do for the child is out of our grace and favor, and we adults have a right to do whatever we want with our own children or students. But we need to consider that, in God's eyes, children have a higher place than adults. We are told that we need to

pg 81

'become as little children,' they aren't told that they need to be more like grown-ups. The rules God gives us for bringing up children are mostly negative: Don't despise them, don't hinder them, don't offend them with our harsh, clumsy acts or lack of thought. The only positive rule we have is to 'feed' (or, 'pasture') 'my lambs.' We are to place them in the middle of an abundant supply of food. A Yorkshire County teacher renders this concept as, 'I left them in the pasture and came back and found them eating.' In other words, she left her classroom during a reading lesson, and, when she came back, they were still happily reading with interest. 'Our utmost reverence is due to the child' means more than we give it credit for. We think it means that we shouldn't do or say anything inappropriate in front of children. But it also suggests a profound, reverent understanding of what children are like and the possibilities within them.

We don't need to be discouraged at the task before us. Our greatest fault, the fault that makes us unable to treat children as we should is the one that the Bible warns about. We are not simple [transparent and sincere?]. We fill our roles and manipulate children in ways we shouldn't to motivate them. Perhaps the teaching sin we most condemn isn't the worst one after all. Perhaps the terror of 'Mr. Creakle' [David Copperfield] isn't so bad as the more subtle ways we use to undermine children's personalities. I'll only mention a few examples, but I think they'll give the general idea. For an example of using fear as a motive, the best example is David Copperfield (which is a great commentary about education). Mr. Creakle gives a great picture of fear in the classroom, and Mr. Murdock gives a great picture of fear in the home. But, possibly through Dickens' influence, fear is no longer accepted as the foundation of school discipline. Now we have

pg 82

more subtle methods than mere fear of breaking the rules. One of these methods is love. A teacher with a charismatic personality can charm students into doing anything for the teacher's sake. The children are affectionate and enthusiastic in everything. They're so submissive that their very personalities are buried, and they live for an approving smile, and are devastated when their adored teacher shuns them. Parents smile approvingly and think that all is well, but Robert or Melissa is losing that opportunity for growth that should be making them self-dependent and self-ordered. Day by day, they are becoming more like a parasite who can only go on when they're carried along. They'll be the easy prey of any fanatic or zealot. This intrusion on children's love turns the motive into 'do this for my sake.' Students avoid doing wrong so they won't grieve the teacher, and they do good to please her. To win the teacher's approval, a boy will learn his lessons, behave properly, be cooperative, display all kinds of virtues. Yet his very character is being undermined.

'Suggestion' is even more subtle. The teacher has become an expert about what motivates human nature, and knows how to make suggestions that relate to any one of them. He might not bribe with lollipops or scare with threats of a boogeyman. His suggestions have a more subtle, spiritual flavor. He can alter his suggestions to fit a particular child's individual idiosyncrasies. The method of suggestion is too subtle to illustrate well. Dr. Stephen Paget says that suggestion should only be used like a surgeon uses anesthesia [in small doses], but it's such an easy tool to use. Rash suggestions play on a child's mind like wind spins a weathervane. The poor child is doomed to be unstable, constantly changing. After all, how can a child have stability of mind and character if he's always influenced by constantly changing suggestions? But, someone might say, that may be true of rash, unconsidered suggestions. What about carefully planned suggestions that lead a child in the direction of producing perseverance,

pg 83

sincerity, courage, or any other worthy virtue? No, the child is even worse off in that case. When a specific virtue is used, he begins to hate that virtue, and to be disinterested in all virtues. He isn't developing any strength of character to stand alone. Instead, he waits for someone else to prompt him. Perhaps the most serious harm is that every time a person receives a suggestion, he's more likely to accept the next one. Respecting children's personalities will make us dread doing anything that might make them incompetent to live their lives well. We won't want to use such a dangerous method of motivating, no matter how attractive the immediate result may seem.

Influence is related to suggestion. It doesn't work so much by a well-directed word or coaxing action, as by a kind of atmosphere that comes from the teacher and surrounds the students. Late in the last century, moralistic books were written about influence--the beauty of influence, the duty of influence, learning how to influence. Children were brought up to think that influencing others deliberately was their moral duty. Undoubtedly, we all do influence each other. It's impossible for us not to affect one another, not so much by what we say or do, but by what we are. In that respect, influence is natural and healthy. We absorb influence from real and imaginary people, and we're kept strong by currents and counter-currents of influence we aren't even fully aware of. But submission to one single, constant, persistent influence is a different thing altogether. A schoolgirl who idolizes her teacher, or a boy who worships his school master, is deprived of the chance to live freely and independently. His personality fails to develop and he goes out into the world as a parasitic plant, always clinging for support to some stronger character.

So far we've considered unintentional ways of invading on a child's right to his own personality. But there some even more pervasive ways of

pg 84

stunting children's intellectual and moral growth, although they may not be as damaging. Our whole school ethic and school discipline rests on unfairly manipulating certain innate drives in children. Remember that the mind, like the body, has its own appetites, or desires. It is as important for the mind as it is for the body to be fed, to grow and to be productive. If the body never felt the pangs of hunger, it would never think to eat. In the same way, the mind needs those appetites to ensure that it seeks its food. So it's not such a bad thing for teachers to make use of children's natural desires in their education. The problem is when teachers stimulate the wrong desires to accomplish their end. There is the desire for approval, which even a baby shows. He isn't happy unless Mama or his daycare giver approves of him. Later, this desire for approval will motivate him to conquer a math problem, or climb a challenging hill, or bring home a good report card. All of those things are beneficial and help the mind to grow, because the people whose approval he wants have his best interests at heart. They want him to learn and know, to conquer laziness, develop habits of persistence in work, so that his inner self is as healthy as his outer body. But how unfortunate that vanity often goes along with the desire to be approved of. It can make a boy more concerned about impressing the cool young teen at the gas station than winning the approval of his respected teacher. In fact, this desire for approval may become such an obsession that he can't think of anything else. He feels that he has to have approval, whether it's from someone worthy of his respect, or someone totally worthless and lacking in character. Some acts of violence, robbery, even murder, happen just because someone wants infamy, in the same way that some good deeds have been done for the sake of fame. Infamy and fame are similar in that both mean being thought about and talked about by a lot of people. And we're all familiar with how the natural desire for approval is manipulated by the media. They report about a movie star one day, a

pg 85

spy the next day, or a hero or scientist for us to admire and applaud.

Emulation, the desire to be the best, can work wonders in the hands of a teacher. Indeed, this natural desire can be a powerful motivator to intellectual and moral effort. When two or more students are trying to outdo each other in virtue, the school gains a better atmosphere, and parents are justifiably happy to send their children to that school. But when it comes to academics, the desire to be first is dangerous. The worst thing that's happened to our schools is that many are practically ruled by grades, prizes and place ratings. A student can become so caught up with an obsession to win that he can't think of anything else. It isn't what he's learning that interests him, he's only doing his work to get ahead of the others.

But the competitive desire to win doesn't rule by itself in our schools. Another natural desire whose most straightforward name is avarice works alongside competitiveness. A small boy understands before he even enters kindergarten that his duty is to win a scholarship to an exclusive boarding school--perhaps justifiably, if his family won't be able to afford to send him to a good school any other way. Sometimes wealthy students get scholarships, but generally they go to those for whom they were intended, such as children of families who work for the ministry and have very little money. The scholarship program is really just a way for rich people to help out those less fortunate. Every prep school offers its own scholarships, universities have open scholarships and sometimes wealthy treasuries for the benefit of students. A free, or affordable education is available to most upper middle class students, if they're intelligent. No wonder every prep school and private boarding school for teens bases its curriculum on scholarship requirements. They know exactly what

pg 86

score in which subject will guarantee a scholarship to a particular school, they know precisely which students have a chance of winning the scholarship, and they arrange the term's work with that end in mind. It's hard to say what arrangement would be an improvement, yet I believe that deliberately 'teaching the test' is disastrous. It's inevitable that some students will suffer a lack in growth in their inner persons because of the limited intellectual study. They didn't learn because they loved knowing during their school days, and, as a result, in adulthood, they are shallow-minded and make judgments on a whim.

It's no use fighting a system from without when that system is somewhat effective at helping with the education of our future leaders and workers. But England needs to do to more. Many of the students could be more than they are. But change needs to come from within, from within the school, and what needs to happen seems obvious: make better use of the time allotted for 'English.' Most schools spend 11 hours a week in the lowest grades on 'English,' and 8 hours in the highest grades. 20 or 16 consecutive readings could be scheduled in that time, and the readings could be from a wide selection of books: literature, history, economics, etc. The books could be read with concentrated attention so that only one single reading would be necessary. Narrating from the readings might be useful for those students who need practice in public speaking. With just this one minor change in a way that wouldn't take any more time, our schools could graduate more students who are well-read, informed and better public speakers. Even if this kind of change were applied only to 'English' classes, then schools would no longer be places merely for cramming to pass exams. Students would be infected with a love for knowledge, and their natural inclination to collect things would be redirected. After all, what's more delightful to hoard than knowledge?

I won't take too much time discussing ambition, or the desire for power. It has a role in every life. But the teacher must

pg 87

be sure that it isn't over-emphasized. Power is useful when it it's used to serve others, but it's dangerous when abused for the sheer enjoyment of ruling and managing others. Just like all the other desires, it can ruin a life if it's allowed to take over. Mis-used desire for power accounts for half of the disasters of mankind. A person who's ruled by ambition would just as soon lead others in riot and disorder as in a noble effort for a good cause. Who knows how much of our labor unrest is due to ambitious men who just wanted to lead others, even if only for the excitement of rousing others? It feels good to say, 'I have them wrapped around my little finger.' But the over-worked school principal needs to be careful. If one capable, power-hungry person is allowed to lead the rest, he is cheating the others of the right to manage their own lives. No child should be allowed to step aside feebly to make room for a more controlling child to take over. That isn't just to protect the rights of the more submissive child. The stronger child's welfare should also be considered. If he's allowed to muscle in, he could become a mean, manipulative person. The teacher needs to find him a healthy outlet. Perhaps with her guidance, he can strive to master knowledge as a way of exercising his power rather than bossing others around. This gives him plenty of opportunity to control without infringing on the rights of others.

Another desire that teachers can direct is the desire for society. Craving companionship can result in mischievous boys, delinquent youths and gossiping girls. It's pure fun to mingle with our peers, but a lot depends on the people we choose to hang out with, and why we choose them. This is an area where students benefit greatly from guidance. If they are taught in such a way that they love learning for knowledge's sake, then they'll want to make friends who share that passion. That's how princes are trained--they have to know a little bit about everything. They have to know something about plants to be able to chat with botanists, some history to

pg 88

talk to historians. They can't afford to be around scientists, adventurers, poets, painters, philanthropists or economists, and be too ignorant to talk about anything more than the weather. They need to know foreign languages so they can talk freely with men from other countries, and to be familiar with classical references. These are the things to be considered when educating princes. But doesn't every boy deserve the same education, so that he can hold his own in the company of people in knowledgeable circles?

Some people complain about the rigidity of society's class structure. But some of that is the fault of ignorance that limits most people so that they can only talk with those in their own clique--soldiers with other soldiers, teachers with other teachers, students with same-age peers. It's a worthy goal for a child to want to feel comfortable in the company of people in the know.

We've considered several desires that stimulate the mind and save us from the danger of mental apathy. Each desire has its purpose, but could lead to disastrous results if allowed to dominate. The final desire we'll talk about, the desire to know, is often pushed aside in schools, and replaced with a competitive spirit, the drive to be first, or a greedy desire to have wealth and things. The God-given curiosity that should create a thirst to learn is reduced to a desire to know trivial things: What did it cost? What did she say? Who was with him? Where are they going? How many postage stamps in a line would go round the world? And curiosity is content with a few disconnected, incomplete useless facts. That kind of information can never nourish the mind like real knowledge does. But our concept of education is so confused that

pg 89

we've convinced ourselves that children are repulsed by knowledge like bitter medicine, instead of craving it like they crave delicious food. So we resort to grades, prizes, games, entertaining presentations--any trick to disguise learning. But anyone who willingly depends on crutches will never develop his legs. A person who persists in going around blindfolded will never be able to tolerate sunlight. A person who lives on pre-digested liquid food will always have weak digestion. And a student whose mind depends on the crutches of competition and greed loses the only efficient power that can truly develop his mind. The loss of a love for pure learning is the price that students pay when we use inferior means to motivate them. They won't read unless a test is coming up [or, unless they get Pizza Hut coupons as a reward?] They're good-natured and pleasant enough, but they lack interest in a wide variety of things, they don't have any noble guiding purpose, and they don't have as much compassion for others as a good citizen should have. Great thoughts and brave deeds are unknown to them, although the potential for them is still within them. They may yet display great acts like those we saw and marvelled at during WWI. But we can't depend on a major war to draw forth such characteristics from our youth. The world can't afford to lose that many lives again. So the stimulus that the war gave to spur men to great deeds will need to come from the routine of their education.

Knowledge itself is fascinating. All of us have the kind of 'satiable curiosity' that Rudyard Kipling's Elephant had, although we often content ourselves with scraps of information from the daily headlines. Knowledge is like mother's milk. It helps us grow, and the very act of ingesting it is satisfying.

The work of teaching can be simplified once we realize that children, all children, want to know everything about human knowledge. They have a natural appetite for whatever is set in front of them. When we realize this, our

pg 90

teaching seems like less of an effort because our convictions give us confidence. Richeliu closed the colleges in France, both Jesuit and secular. He wanted to prevent the 'mania' of poor people educating their children instead of focusing their time on training for jobs and war. This same 'mania' is still with us, not just with parents, but with children, whose hungry souls yearn for mental meat. But we starve them, not by closing their schools, but by giving them lessons that no living soul can digest. How tragic that teachers and students complain that schoolwork is monotonous. It's commendable that some teachers try to make education less drudgery with entertaining methods. But the mind doesn't live and grow on entertainment. It needs solid meals.

Under Mr. Household's direction, the teachers in Gloucestershire have fully committed to using the method I outline. It's tempting to use their experience for most of my proof that the method works. But they aren't the only ones succeeding. Hundreds of other teachers have had similar experiences and shared them when given the opportunity. We have discovered a power that has been like striking a vein of gold in the mines of the wealthy country of Human Nature. Our great discovery is finding out that children naturally take to literary expression. They love hearing it, reading it, and using it in their own tellings and writings. We should have known this a long time ago. All the old ballads and songs of the ancient wild warriors and barbaric kings have been thought too complicated for anyone but highly educated people to enjoy. But we'll soon see that only minds like a child's could have produced such fresh, finely expressed thoughts. Children have a natural aptitude for literature. Their inclination for it can overcome

pg 91

the challenge of the vocabulary without effort. Knowing that should direct the kind of teaching we give. It should rule out our constant chattering and lectures. It should also rule out compilations and textbooks. Instead, it should lead us to put real books in the hands of students, only literary books that are crisp and spirited, as literary work should be. Children's natural desire to know will do the rest, and their minds will feed and grow.

Remember that every time inferior desires are stimulated, the love of knowledge is suppressed. A teacher who motivates with grades and first-place standing might get the students to do the work, but her students won't love knowledge for its own sake. They won't develop that relationship with learning that will save their mind from stagnation in their adult lives. Monotonous drudgery goes along with all schoolwork that's been motivated with grades and standings. It makes students work mechanically. The promise of rewards won't carry a student through twelve years of school. One Prep School teacher said, 'It seems to be the rule that average students coming into a new school are put in classrooms beneath their ability. It's a common occurrence. When we send up new students, even if they're gifted in math or literature, or language, it takes a couple of years before they're doing even the same work they were doing when they left our school.' Boarding school teachers have the same problem, he says. 'At twenty, a student is climbing the same pear tree he climbed when he was twelve.' In other words, when schools teach to pass a test, lessons have to be narrow and mechanical. How else can the questions be standardized and grading be absolutely fair? But that's not real education. Real education means definite progress, continual advance day by day, and no re-covering of the same old ground.

Some people are uneasy about providing a broad-minded

pg 92

education for everyone, as it appears will happen. They're concerned that it might cause the kind of social upheaval that took place in the French Revolution. But this fear is unfounded, it's based on a misconception. The doctrine of equal opportunity for everyone is dangerous. From an intellectual standpoint, it means 'survival of the fittest,' and we've already seen how terrible that can be in practice. Those who have uneasy, ambitious spirits force their way to the top and monopolize all the opportunities. They dominate everyone else and think that no upheaval is too great a sacrifice to advance themselves and their desires. These are the kinds of people who come out at the top when exams are the standard of measurement. After ambition (and maybe greed) comes perseverance. Someone said about Louis XIV that these kinds of men promote what they do as if it was a great scientific theory, and set up their own character as if it should be the principle of government. But they're just psuedo-principles, they're not real, and they rouse the masses because they promise that every person will have power and position in the government. But if each man has power and position, then each position can't be very powerful. I suspect that our current labor unrest is somehow related to student habits of working for prizes and good grades. A student whose motivation at school is to be at the top of his class and get something out of it, is less likely to be a calm, well-ordered citizen who will help to unite society and do whatever work the government needs.

Knowledge for its own sake is pleasing because it's so fulfilling. When you see evidence that a student in your class shares your delight in knowing, and shares your pleasure in expressing what he knows, and shares your affinity for some wise philosopher or brave hero, you both connect and share a kind of bond. A student who has that kind of satisfaction from learning is less likely to have a compulsive need to be better than everyone else. It may seem overwhelming for an intelligent, conscientious teacher to realize all the factors that go into raising up a well-rounded citizen, and everything that needs to be considered

pg 93

for each student in their care. It's true that,

'Our souls within us can't spare even the tiniest part.
The smallest public good needs to have dignity within its reach.
It needs the enthusiastic cooperation of everything it can find, and everything it needs, if men are going to be raised from the mire of vulgar activities and have their hearts freed from the enslavement of utilitarianism.
We need inspiring impulses from the past if we're going to do any good at all in the future.'

And Wordsworth is right. In the great work of education, we can't afford to leave out any part of the soul. But if we make knowledge for its own sake the goal of our education, then every faculty, or power, of the soul will work together to the same end. We find that children are ready and eager for this challenge, and what they can accomplish will surprise us.

 

Previous Page | Next Page




Paraphrased by L. N. Laurio
Please direct any comments or questions to me by emailing me at cmseries-owner at yahoogroups dot com.



|   CM SERIES HOME   |   CONCISE SUMMARIES   |   PARAPHRASED IN MODERN ENGLISH   |