Skip to main content

Older but nicer--Having babies when you've sorted things out (8 April 2009)

A lot of people I know become not just mellower but nicer as they age. (I sense this, perhaps, most especially in novelists -- where main protagonists are obviously more patient, sweeter, to other characters in later books than they were in the novelists' very vibrant but more charged and angry earliest works.) I have some suspicion that what happens with those who have self-esteem-enriching experiences of validation and attendance when they were young, but also hampering experiences of abandonment and sadistic treatment, is that they still have it in them to acquire more of what they were lacking and deal with some of what has tended to haunt and stop them, while they go through life. This may in fact be -- without them being consciously aware of it -- what a great deal of their life endeavors are mostly about. And if they end up getting some of the attention they were needing, learn not to denigrate but work to satisfy their own needs, they no doubt end up being better able to attend to their children when they have them than they would have been if they had had them when they were younger. That is, even if the seed is worse, the DNA somewhat hampered, the story of the unfolding and development into its final psychogenetic form may be a better one with older parents.

My mom is a nicer, more giving person than she was when I was a teen: she listens better, more generously, than she once did, and conversations with her leave me feeling warmer and more optimistic. She has largely satisfied her need to be the career woman, a pursuit which left us feeling like our own ambitions were of secondary import when we were teens. I wonder, given how important the quality and quantity of attendance is to the emotional/intellectual development of children of our species, if we should be looking more to the best PSYCHOLOGICAL age and less to the best biological age, for having children?

In any case, this is vein to be mined. Not just because real rightness will be discovered there, but much needed fairness too: as Vanessa argues, if you're in your 30s, without kids, and not obviously on a professional path, you will be looked at as if you are the runt of the pack. Conversely, if you are professional, late 20s, and have a child or two, you are being everywhere "told" you shine golden -- whatever the actual degree of dullness of your story.

Link: No Baby For Old Men (The Tyee)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...