The Homeschool Journey

Sword and Gun Play

(The first part of this entry is a re-worked post from my old yahoo group... I then went on to discuss gun play....)

 

 

I think the key to a lot of the questions around sword play is "can my child rise up to something within himself to play safely with this sword?"I think one should make a big deal of presenting a beautiful sword to a child - other families create little ceremonies. The point is that the child knows and understands that this is a special thing - to be used wisely.

 

But if the child is too young or if he's a forgetful child who loses himself in the heat of passionate play, then I think one should wait. Let him know that "one day, when he's ready" he will get his sword. Give him something to work on in his inner being, something to aspire to. Let him know that once he has that sword, it means he is trusted and that he, out of his own inner resources, is able to act responsibly.  Few children are ready for this until after about 6 or 7 years of age. Before that, I would let them make swords as they want to - but have strong, clear and firm rules about what is ok and what is not. Sticks will be taken away if necessary - no "swords" in the house, none when younger children are present, no running - and if he can heed these rules then you will know that he is moving toward the ability to be responsible for a proper wooden sword.

 

I wouldn't suggest discussing this rationally with such a little one, though. But through story and anecdote, you can let him know that once upon a time it was a very special thing when a knight got his sword. Only the King could give it to him. He had to perform many tasks and work very hard before he was deserving of his sword, before the king could trust him to be a guardian of the kingdom..... Give it life, breath imagination into it - your boy will be rapt! And repeat at frequent intervals.

 

Aa youth worker of over 20 years experience, as a mother of boys and hostess of frequent "boy weekends" at our farm (which included unsupervised use of fire, knives, walking on a frozen lake, being in a barn around horses etc etc) I know that children have the capacity to play safely with swords and to use tools such as knives safely. But not when they are tiny. It is not fair to expect a little person - who is meant to be at one with the world, not an inward looking being conscious of his actions in the world - to take responsibility before his time.

 

A whole other kettle of fish is the use of guns, both in play and for more serious pursuits. When my boys were little, there was no gun play. Then came water guns and who can say no to that? So they were allowed - but with rules. The main rule was "no shooting at people who are not playing." This became the main rule for all gun play - because soon we decided to let them play with guns. I have never been particularly keen on gun play. I much prefer swords because the players have to engage one another much more closely and cooperate and negotiate to make the play work. There is a lot of skill involved and one can really appeal to the "knights' code" and such to help the boys be uplifted in their play. With guns, there is none of this. Indeed, the whole scene around gun play can be really awful - noisy, undignified, thuggish and unpleasant.

 

But... there appears to be something in boys - not all, but most - that not just desires such play but needs it. I have worked for too long with children, children from a wide variety of racial, ethnic, religious and economic backgrounds, Waldorf children and not Waldorf children,  to not recognize this very deep need.

 

So I think it is something that parents need to honor. I think rules need to be established  and adhered to - we had a "no guns in the house" rule (they were kept in the garage or barn and could not be played with indoors). I also think swords should be emphasized over guns because of what I said above - but really, little ones under about 6 or 7 cannot be expected to understand and keep any sword etiquette rules. So that might mean guns for a while if older siblings or neighborhood boys have gotten them into guns. But it is not too late to set clear rules (which you will have to be the guardian of) and to also present them with their swords when they are older.

 

One thing I certainly saw with my sons was that the care that they took with their swords did seem to have a knock-on effect with how they treated their guns. I don't mean they cared for the guns themselves - but I did feel that far more of their gun play was actually elaborate planning and negotiating and making strategies with their friends than I have seen in other boys.

 

As they reached their teens, one son remains interested in guns and likes to shoot targets. The other is into archery and has no interest in guns. One of their similarly-raised friends at 18 is a pacifist with no interest in guns. And the fourth of this little group of previously gun-mad boys does occasionally go hunting with his father (he does live in rural Wisconsin!) but is otherwise the gentlest, most caring young man one would ever want to meet.

 

So does early "violent" play beget violent young men? I would emphatically say "NO." Not in my family, not in my experience with friends, not in my experience with youth and children I have worked with. Real play helps children find their orientation to the world and to make sense of it. It does not lead to violence.

Passive Learning

A concern that many people express is about children who do not seem to want to engage in play or who prefer to stand aside and to watch. As our society values a "get ahead" and assertive attitude toward life above all, parents with a child who does not embody these characteristics often worry. Is there something wrong? Why won't he join in?

 

As so often in the various things I write, I put the blame for this confusion squarely on our modern Western cultural norms which have inappropriately invaded childhood and which cause so many people to have  a poor understanding of the nature of childhood. And of course, as so many people become parents without actually having the chance to really observe and be with young children, the confusion is perpetuated by the myriad of "experts" who create milestones and expectation charts which basically say that if your child ain't a leader, he ain't gonna succeed.

 

(Of course we could digress into a lengthy exploration of what the parameters of success might be to those who hold this view - but that would take us too far away from the point I'm trying to make).

 

And that point is this: that all children learn, to some extent, passively and for some children, this is the main way that they internalize the world.

 

Let me define terms: by passive I mean outwardly inactive. Indeed, in a situation where a child might seem to be doing nothing, he might actually be extremely active. But his activity is an inner activity.

 

One of the things which drew me powerfully to an appreciation of attachment parenting was the idea of the passive baby. Jean Liedloff, on whose work much of AP is based, saw clearly that the babies strapped to the backs of native peoples learned an enormous amount in that seemingly passive position. Their bodies learned invaluable amounts about balance, movement, and rhythm. The children learned about their mothers' work, their siblings play and the customs and habits of their people by witnessing what happened around them and by absorbing, via their mother's very being, everyday life.

 

From a Waldorf point of view, with the aid of knowledge of the Madonna's Cloak, an etheric link between the mother and her child, we can bring an even deeper appreciation to understanding the importance of passive learning. Because of this link, the tiny child learns primarily via his mother, via her experiences, her feelings, her thoughts. There is no barrier between a mother and a very young child.  Waldorf then teaches us about the primacy of imitation which starts sometime after 3, reaches a peak around 5 and fades after 7 or 8. By 9, as the child reaches the 9 year change and separates more fully from his parents and teachers or other adults, this faculty fades. Whether we choose to cultivate it or not, all young children learn via imitation. What we would like him to learn and experience causes us to take great care with his surroundings and who the people are around him.The child imitates all that she sees with no discernment, internalizing her environment.

 

And here is the paradox: such passive learning is in fact extremely active. We know that young children especially (and all children) need to learn actively and to involve their bodies. This can take the form of hopping, clapping and all the rhythmical games and exercises which work so powerfully on the physical being of young children. But when we give the children the right story material to work with, we also engage them actively - even if they are sitting, seemingly passive. The right stories told or read at the right time work on the child's soul - and this is a crucial part of real learning, learning that actively engages the whole human being. Children who receive such lessons work actively with them and their bodies can respond as well as if they had spent the lesson climbing a tree!

 

Indeed, Steiner often said that the most important part of learning is that which takes place during sleep. This is the time when children take the lessons they have received during the day into the spiritual worlds (or into their subconscious of you prefer!) and actively - on a soul level - work with them. What they give back to the teacher and then work with artistically the next day is that much richer.

 

I should also say that passive learning in groups of mixed age children is the natural way for children to learn. In parts of the world where children still know how to play, much of group play involves a lot of standing around talking. Negotiating, planning, brainstorming and excited what if scenarios form much of children's play. And who is doing the talking? The older children - usually those over 9 years old. The younger ones may participate to some extent - but for the most part, they stand around and listen and watch. They are learning an enormous amount about how to be a child - and how to be a human being.

 

So the next time someone says your child should "join in" or you feel worried because you see her spending more time watching play than engaging in play, think about how children learn. American "go get 'em" attitudes are not the only way to be in this world.

"Violent" Play

(the following comes from my stock of old posts I kept from the yahoo group I used to run...)

 

One thing that needs to be addressed is the issue of media violence. I think normal good guy bad guy stuff is a vital part of childhood - but I also think that one has to put it into context. Just as we wouldn't want our children doing good guy bad guy stuff role playing Cowboys and Indians in this rather more enlightened day, I think one does have to help children find healthy outlets for this kind of play. Nourishing stories such as fairy tales and legends from many cultures give a good set of roles for a child to work with.

 

However, though it might be fairly straightforward for us to ensure that our own children get the kinds of images and archetypes we feel is healthy for them, we can't guarantee that that is the case for the children they play with. That's when it gets tough. If other children are playing Grand Auto Theft as you say and bringing that to your children than I think it's decision time - are these children you want your child to play with? It may be possible to ask their Moms to not let them "play" (and many people unfortunately think that video and game boys use is play) with those things when your child visits but that's not going to stop the talk and excitement about it if that's the hot game at the moment.  Then I think the only recourse you have is to firmly let your child know that you don't approve of these things, that unfortunately, so-and-so has this game but that you feel it's not for your family.

 

But I also think that this is delicate - you don't want your own child to feel bad about being interested in these things - and from your post(that I am responding to)  it seems he is conflicted. Of course he is. And he needs to be able to work this out.  I would suggest that you make your feelings clear to him - but that you also make sure you say plenty of positive things about these other boys. I think you should completely ignore the comment about "killing" you - he no more means that then a furious 4 year old means it when she screams "I hate you". He is simply experimenting with something that is obviously important - look how upset his mother got!

 

A primary way of approaching things like this from a Waldorf perspective is to always, when possible, redeem. Redeem, metamorphose, transform. Find the good, turn things around. It can take effort - if your son is a leader in the group, then give him roles and skills to bring to his friends. Find some heroic stories like Hiawatha the Peacemaker in my Saints & Heroes book or of Lancelot or Robin Hood - maybe he can bring some of that play to his friends. And if he can't because he's embarrassed or too young then don't worry - even if they seem to playing the most disgusting games you don't know what's going on in their heads, what their own internal dialogue is during this play. He might well be redeeming such things himself. And if you give plenty of story material that shows how this can be done - just as a matter of course, not telling him that this is what you're doing - and if you don't make him feel bad but make him feel supported in his search for what is good and true, then he'll come through just fine. As a youth worker with 20+ years experience working with all kinds of children - most from very rough non Waldorf backgrounds who didn't just have violence on their tv's but in their own lives - I can tell you that it can be ok. Trust your son, trust your powerful ability to love and see your role as redeemer. Consciously take in those media images - and in your prayer or meditation, transform them.

 

 

Rhythmic Play

In many different places - on this blog, in books and articles I've written - I refer to rhythmic play. I often get asked about this. So I will try to explain here what I mean by this term. And I should say that sometimes I refer to  it as formed play or relaxed play - depends on what mood I'm in when I choose the word that most appeals at the time!

 

In general, one can understand such play as having something to do with breathing in and breathing out - of active times alternating with quieter times. When one watches such play, one is aware of how relaxed yet focused the children are. There is a synergy between them, though there may be quarrels and disagreements, these don't dominate. One might think of watching a flock of starlings or sparrows to get a picture of what I mean: the birds occasionally squabble or argue over a choice feeding spot, but there is harmony in their movements and the flock as a whole is not disturbed. Rather, the pecking and shoving of a few birds is effortlessly absorbed by the healthy movements of the flock as a whole.

 

One can contrast this to the unformed play of a child who does not really know how to play. It is frantic, disjointed and usually uncomfortable for an adult (at least for a sensitive adult) to watch. If one looks closely, one can observe that often the child is holding his breath, is cramped up, has a lot of tension in his neck and chest region. There is no breathing in and breathing out. And when such children are in a group, there is a feeling of discordance, of selves hitting up against each other. There is no sense of a whole.

 

I think the role of the adult is important in these situations  - especially if all this is new to one's family.  One needs to think of ways to "kick start" play, to start the children off with a game or set up a play scenario for them. Here, the adult is not playing with the child, but holding the space as it were. The adult remains busy with her own work, her own tasks, keeping a strong and peaceful presence, and the children drift in and out of her aura, sometimes helping her, sometimes doing their own, equally important work/play. If trouble arises, the adult can come in, not as the voice of doom or the voice of peace negotiations, but as the one who can recreate the space and help the children find their balance again. This means, therefore, neither telling off anyone who is naughty nor  setting up a mini therapy session to explore the implications of not sharing! Rather, it means the adult will come in and, in a way that is appropriate for the age of the children, and help them to reform their play. So she might say to a couple of squabbling 5 year olds - "Poor dollie! She doesn't like to be fought over. Here - Jane, you set up her bed, Theo, you find her a warm blanket and Rose and Jill, you sing her a song." Children almost always respond to imaginative age appropriate direction. And with older ones , say of 9 and up, humor is usually best - "Daryl, what kind of silly behavior is that? Does that couch look like a trampoline?! I don't think so! Ok fellows, outside and let's see who can do the highest jump on the trampoline!" And this is said with a smile and a touch of playfulness - not in a voice dripping with unsaid recrimination!

 

A child who really knows how to play and whose life is held and carried in a strong rhythm can fully relax into her play. She might spontaneously talk or sing to herself - and the rhythms which she internalizes are expressed through skipping, hopping and the whole harmonious , musical quality which she expresses through her physical being. Herein lies one of the most powerful aides to good health that we can provide our children - and its expression is through play, through the relaxed rhythmic play that is the natural birthright of all children.

Star Wars and Lego

(this originally appeared in a slightly different form on my yahoo group, Waldorf_At_Home)

 

I have always loved Star Wars and have always been moved by what I perceive as a modern day fairy tale. I have two boys - and Stars Wars has been a feature of our lives since they were about 4 or 5 (no media before that so they didn't pick it up).

 

Having said that, they "got it" seemingly from the ethers as they weren't permitted to see the video (and only the first for a while as the violence gets a bit out of hand in Return of the Jedi if I remember correctly) until they were about 9/10 years old.  So these strong cultural influences do seem to effect us whether we like it or not!

 

Anyway.... as those of you who have my kindergarten book know, I am all for sword play -  with guidelines. One  rule that some people use is "no touching bodies". I  feel that swords can be a good thing because of how active the children need to be when they play with them. Light sabers would be the same.

 

Obviously, if a theme like Star Wars seems to be taking over a child's life, then parents might get concerned. But I would suggest this is perfectly normal - a good thing. Once upon a time it was cowboys and Indians in this country - I think (for a variety of reasons) that Star Wars is far preferable and that the storyline in those films is admirable (I'd prefer a bit more creative civil disobedience... but I guess pop culture hasn't gotten there yet!).

 

As for Lego, I do wish that more of it was open ended - unfortunately, most lego seems these days to be confined to these little Harry Potter or Star Wars kits - too limiting in scope, I would say. At least when you just get the plain pieces, the child can make up whatever story in her mind that she wants instead of being tied to what the manufacturers want to push. Plus they are so ridiculously expensive! So I don't have much problem with lego, either. It's not beautifully hand crafted out of wood from Germany.... but so what? I definitely think children need their senses protected but if their environments are generally nurturing and they have loads of opportunity for creative open ended non-adult directed play, then some lego - or playmobile or plastic farm or other figures - is, in my opinion, no biggie. My boys certainly had all this stuff. And to be honest, I think some lego and play  mobile is more open ended than carefully and beautifully crafted wooden refrigerators and cell phones - the point is, a cardboard box or block of wood would be better for those things. Because then, when the child's imagination and the needs of her play dictate, that cardboard box cum refrigerator can become a stable or cave or car or whatever. When the thing is made to only be a refrigerator - by an adult - then it can't be anything but.

 

And I mean no disrespect to any people reading this who make their livings either by making or selling beautiful wooden toys.

 

Choosing Toys

This piece first appeared in the Homeschool Journey newsletter, February 2005

Following on from the above, I want to talk a bit about choosing toys. Mainly this is about toys for younger children, but some will surely be used by older ones, especially if they have been raised in a family which values play.

I’m constantly amazed at the wealth of so-called ‘Waldorf toys’ now available. But I am also uncomfortably aware of the numbers of these toys which, though beautifully crafted out of the finest natural materials, are very formed and therefore of limited play-value. What makes toys genuinely ‘Waldorf’ is that they encourage open-ended, imaginative play - that the knot-dolly purposefully has no facial features so that he can be happy, sad or angry as the child’s play demands. ‘Waldorf toys’ should be bricks and boxes, and things like cloths which can be cloaks or blankets or wings as the child sees fit. That beautifully-made (and expensive!) toy telephone can only be a telephone - it could never be a car, a dog or a loaf of bread. A wooden brick, on the other hand, could be all these things and more.

Bricks, off-cuts of wood (which you and your child can sandpaper together - now there’s a first-rate kindergarten activity), a sandbox, empty boxes and cartons (delivered free to your house by your catalog company!), lots of dressing up, and old pots and pans from the charity shop, are really the best toys for children up until about 7. And, if you keep these things available, you’ll be amazed at how older children will also play with them.

A great ‘toy’ that has years of potential and unlimited scope in terms of use is ‘The Board’. This is a smoothly sanded wooden board, anywhere from 5’ to 8’ in length, and about 12” wide. It can be used indoors or out and, if it has slats of wood as cross-pieces on its middle, can fit over a stump and be used as a see-saw (the cross-pieces keep it from slipping). The Board can be a stage, an ironing board, a balance beam, a doorframe, a slide, a ramp... You get the idea.

Please don’t get me wrong - I certainly appreciate the quality and sense of aesthetics that beautifully-crafted toys bring to our homes. There is no comparison with cheap, mass-produced plastic toys. I simply urge parents (and toy makers!) to ensure that most of the toys for young children are as unformed as possible - leaving the child’s imagination freer. 

Extending Play

This article first appeared in the Homeschool Journey newsletter, February 2004

Some of the most joyful moments I have  had as a homeschooling mom have come during our occasional ‘Boy Days’, days when my sons invite their friends over, en masse. To see children of their age - some as old as 14 - playing makes my heart sing. To see them dressing up and improvising and organizing and running around, is just wonderful! One minute they’re soldiers, the next they’re Jedi or aliens, the next they’re voyageurs. Pausing only long enough to troop in and refuel (“Mom, is there any juice?”, “How many cookies can we have?”), these games can go on all day. And by the time the last boy reluctantly goes home, my boys are tired and satisfied in that way which only happens when a deep need has been met.

Our society does not value play - the qualifier ‘educational’ so often has to be tacked on, lest parents or others fear that the activity be somehow a waste of time. Many of you undoubtedly came to Waldorf education because of its emphasis on the value of creative play. None of us needs convincing of the imperative need of free, imaginative play in young children. But what about the older ones? What about the 10 and 11 year-olds, or even older? Do they also benefit from play? How do older children play?

Thirty years ago, when I was a 10 year old girl (give or take a year or two), girls played dress-up as well as with dolls and doll houses. Now? Apparently, the average Barbie owner is 5 years old and getting younger: older girls do not play with dolls. Make no mistake, I’m no fan of Barbie’s, but I think it’s a shame - more than a shame, a crime - that little girls of 10 or 11 are too ‘grown-up’ to play with dolls.

Little girls of 10 or 11 - does that jive with you?  Culturally, given our propensity to speed everything up, are we still able to think of 11 year-olds as little girls and boys? Obviously an 11 year-old is very different from a 6 year-old, able to take some responsibility around the  house, for instance, and beginning to experience growing intellectual abilities as well as some physical changes, but an 11 year-old is still a child and should be respected as such.

I love the film, The Sound of Music. Laugh if you will - and we can all share a chuckle about many aspects of the film - but it shows children who are expected to be children, treated like children, and allowed to be children. Not until she is 16 is the eldest understood to be on the threshold of womanhood. Sure, she’s more mature, grown-up, and is given more responsibilities than the younger ones - but she’s still allowed to be carefree, playful and open to life’s experiences. She’s allowed to play.

OK, so I don’t expect people to dress their children in rompers made out of curtains and, sure, 21st Century America (or Australia, Europe, Canada, Mexico...) is not 1930s make-believe Austria, but still... Do we as parents and adults allow and offer our older children opportunities for play, or have they slid into a regime of lessons, sports and controlled experiences like Scouts or 4-H?

So why is it so important for them to play, anyway? Because play is another term for creative, open-ended and flexible activities, those that summon up the child’s powers of imagination, and create in him the possibility for finding new ways to interact, create and explore. Play is an antidote to the rigid, dogmatic and controlling behaviors which can plague us as adults if we have not had enough freedom to play as children. I wonder how much of the modern adult’s desire for escapist ‘play’ - extreme sports come to mind - is a result of a childhood need that was not met. A characteristic of extreme sport is to challenge oneself and to overcome obstacles - these are also characteristics of children’s play. Could it be that when children aren’t allowed to be children, they then have a hard time moving on definitively into adulthood?

Many children from about 10 and up have little opportunity for play. When school time is over (and that often includes home school) then chores, enrichment activities, sports, reading and time on the computer or watching TV/videos, takes up most of the rest of the child’s schedule. Aside from the computer/TV time, all of these are worthwhile activities, certainly things to be encouraged. But what about play? Do our children have time to fiddle around, daydream, doodle, be bored, make things and play?

Children need ‘unformed time’, time when nothing is scheduled, nothing demanded, during which they are not allowed to watch TV or use the computer. Playtime. And when friends come over, parents can encourage play by not allowing the children to use the computer or watch TV or a video. Those activities are not play! Unfortunately, many modern children have been brought up to confuse media use with play, and you may have to be involved with the children when they come together, helping them form games and activities - something that our parents didn’t need to do!

Having lots of board games available - everything from traditional games like chess and mancala to competitive board games like Monopoly and cooperative games (available from www.familypastimes.com and good toy shops) - is helpful. Darts, pool, archery and ping-pong are all a lot of fun, as is a trampoline and a basketball hoop in the yard.

But none of the above is really in the same league as the kind of unformed play I’m getting at. Games and equipment, like the above, will hopefully get things going and lead to more open play. For this you need things like dressing-up - cloaks, swords, crowns, belts, hats... Bricks and figures (and, yes, action-type figures come in here) are great open-ended toys. In the yard, tree stumps and logs, a plain playhouse or tree house, and old tires are great. And, if they don’t associate sand play with babies, a sand box will still be used by older children.

Another possibility for when there is a group of children is to get them playing a game like kick-the-can, tag or hide-and-go-seek (the book, Hopscotch, Hangman, Hot Potato and Ha Ha Ha: A Rulebook of Children’s Games by Jack Maguire, is a great resource). As I mentioned earlier, one may need to ‘hold’ a group of children, especially if some of them are self-conscious about playing, or have been raised to think that using a GameBoy is play, or that hitting and fighting is play. Help them organize the game and then occupy yourself with something nearby, where you’re busy but still very aware of what’s going on. Gauge how things are going and either step in and smooth rough spots or, preferably, if all is well, disappear and leave them to it. With luck and, if you’ve judge the situation correctly, they’ll take hold of the game and then create something new out of it. This is the aim: to enable the children, out of themselves, their creativity and relationships, to form some new game, some new possibility, some new adventure.

Once upon a time, children had their own language, codes, activities and ways of relating to one another. They played on the street or at someone’s house, and they didn’t need adults to show them how to play. Now their play is the subject of books and studies by anthropologists, and real play has been pushed aside, either by over-scheduling or by the pervasive presence of electronic media. It is a fundamental need of children to play: let’s build families and communities where that need is honored.

(For more about play and the culture of childhood see the great article, Voices on the Green: the Importance of Play by Sally Jenkinson)