Home. The kids were either watching TV, devouring their meals, or both at the same time. While the parents eat a quiet dinner, the kids watch another hour of TV and then go to bed with only half an hour left, just enough time to take a shower, put on pajamas, brush their teeth, and so on. The children's evenings were planned with precision, like a well-trained military operation. They watch their favorite shows, and when "there's nothing I really like to watch," they watch whatever else is on - because watching TV is an important thing. Their mother didn't see anything wrong with watching television, she just watched it for the sake of watching television; she just wanted some good children's programming to be available during this time.
In the Victorian era, some family games were often held in large families, and dinners were leisurely and contented. If you don’t need to recall the happy family life of that era, then here is a question: as long as children have time, I will watch TV night after night. Is this bleak, mechanized arrangement good? Is there a better family life?
Of course, today’s families still often hold some special activities together: Summer camps, sunny Sunday trips to the zoo, all kinds of trips and adventures, but their ordinary daily life together was reduced - such as eating dinner at the table; spontaneous activities; When doing it, children come up with games on the spur of the moment: doodling, chatting, even quarreling and all the activities that form the structure of family life and reveal childhood life. Instead, the children watch TV regularly, go to bed regularly, and parents enjoy a quiet dinner together.
The author of this article in the New York Times writes: "Ensuring a strong and healthy family means mediating the needs of children and parents." But it is certain that the needs of adults are far greater than those of adults. Children are easy to be satisfied. As long as the children's attention is effectively diverted so that they no longer make noise, parents will pursue nothing and enjoy life contentedly like couples who have not given birth to children. In fact, children desperately need a family environment that is conducive to their growth, and parents should work hard to create an environment for their children and jointly create harmonious family relationships needed for future families. If a family does not accumulate shared experiences, daily experiences that occur, reoccur, change, and develop, then what need is there to sustain it? How is such a family any different from a nursery?
Unit 6 Preparing for College
The period from 1884 to 1885 was an amazing adventure for me. I came to Berkeley to take the entrance exam for the University of California, but I failed Greek, Latin, and several other subjects and had to postpone the exam for a year. At this time my father panicked. I was eighteen, and I think he might have thought that my failure was his fault: he thought he had picked the wrong school for me, but the right school for me and people like me didn't exist. At that time, there were indeed some schools that sent boys from all over the west to college. Those boys were all younger than me. Later, I gradually became familiar with those children. Primary and secondary schools, universities and even the world are prepared for them (boys at that time, men in the future). I'm often jealous of them, but more often than not I'm glad that I'm different from them.
Generally speaking, the boys selected are those who have been educated to take on their responsibilities. They remember everything the teacher asked them to learn, and they can remember and recite it whether they want to learn it or not, and whether they understand it or not. It seemed to me that what motivated their learning was not curiosity: they rarely talked about our learning, and when I mentioned things related to what we had read or heard, they either looked blank or were indifferent. Their motivation for learning is: to defeat their opponents, come out on top, and bring glory to the school. This kind of learning motivation is beyond my understanding.
My parents did not educate me personally. They sent me to school and found me a music teacher and an art teacher. They did everything they could to provide me with opportunities; but they also gave me freedom and a different way of life: horseback riding, shooting, raising dogs, and roaming in the wilderness. As I show: I am interested in all kinds of people, all kinds of careers and the beautiful things in this life; I learn well in what I am interested in, and if the study courses happen to coincide with my extracurricular interests and hobbies, I studied both inside and outside school.
The reading content exceeded the teacher’s requirements and I devoted myself seriously. To this day, I still remember these courses, just like I still remember and love the men, women, and teenagers who made friends with me and gave me a certain understanding of the depths of human nature; however, I do not remember the teachers who taught me the lessons. I have almost forgotten those courses that seem to have nothing to do with my life.
Some of the other courses were interesting and should have interested me, but no one ever tried to pique my interest in them. These courses were placed in front of me: these were required for college. The teachers of these courses did not mobilize my curious and active brain. The result was that I did not study these courses seriously and only mastered some things that were inculcated over and over again--- Basic knowledge of schooling.
When I knocked on the door of college, I was only prepared for college study in certain subjects; I was eager to find answers to some profound questions. This search made me continue to learn to improve myself, especially in some areas that are not yet readily available. In the field of answers, I know that there are still many questions in these fields: for example, in the fields of science and metaphysics. I had no interest in Greek, Latin, mathematics, or any of the other “knowledge” required by the educational standards of the time.
My father discovered this and sent me to one of the best private schools in San Francisco as a special student to study "cramming" in order to go to Berkeley. My father hired a teacher for me there, Mr. Evelyn Nixon, and asked him to tutor me after class. Of course, as usual, my father also gave me a lot of freedom: a room for me to study and sleep, no one to supervise or take care of me, and I could come and go freely. I really come and go freely. In San Francisco I walked out alone, thinking, as I had done in the Sacramento countryside; my favorite place was the seaside; there I relived the lives of Greek heroes, Roman generals, and poets of all ages. life. Sometimes I am so fascinated that I forget myself, but I never regard myself as a hero. This was also the case when I was a teenager. My life changed.
Mr. Evelyn Nixon made a difference in my life. He was the first teacher who made me interested in the lessons I had to learn—not in myself, but in the world outside, in the world of conscious culture. He is a poetry fanatic, especially classical poetry. When he reads or recites Greek poetry, the Greeks in the poetry come to life; the romantic feelings and beautiful language are like songs in my ears. I long to be like him, not a hero. , let alone a poet, but a Greek scholar, so that he can play this beautiful language. Life is full of meaning, full of purpose, and full of joy. But my youthful imitation and courage were far from bringing to life those great and infinitely varied poems. I wrote a little poetry just to learn the skills of writing poetry. I didn’t want to do great things or become a great person-Mr. Nixon once said this.
He used to say: "I am the unknown, the little man, the multitude for whom Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, Caesar, popes, generals and statesmen sing, fight, and work. One of them is an appreciator of all beautiful words and actions. ”
Being the recipient of all beautiful creations, not the creator, this is a new and noble role. Evelyn Nixon was its brilliant representative. He is British. I heard that he got two firsts at Oxford University and then came to San Francisco for health reasons. There is a group of such people in San Francisco, and they each have their own stories. They are both scholars and athletes at Oxford and Cambridge. They have developed strong muscles and lung capacity; however, scholars often need to work at their desks, and it is not necessary and difficult to maintain developed muscles. Muscle and lung capacity, lung disease forced them to leave Oxford, Cambridge.
They warned: "Stay away from college athletics and don't develop muscles that you won't need in daily life." In school, Mr. Nixon taught me Greek, Latin, and English. In his home, he opened up to me the beauty and meaning of another class of courses that I needed to take for college. I study for him, and I study for myself. He saw it, he saw my desire to find answers to my questions, and he smiled.
He said loudly: "I won't answer any of your questions. Adults can't answer children's simple questions. We can only highlight your questions and make you obsessed with seeking answers. And then assume that we questions to inspire you and spur you to find answers—one or two, and then tell us! This is what it means to be young, to answer questions that adults cannot answer." He said when I looked frustrated and hesitant. would roar at me like a demon.
"Go, child, the world is yours, nothing is yet done, nothing is known, the greatest poem is not yet written, the best railroad is not yet The ideal blueprint for the country has not yet been drawn up. Everything is waiting for you to complete it - yes, everything."
He said this again and again. Finally, to motivate me, he made Saturdays between seven and eight our special time, so that I could stay late with his group of educated, thoughtful friends. A collection of conflicting obsessions, four or ten, all English, all Oxford and Cambridge academics, recuperating in America. They are interested in all subjects, and when talking about those subjects, they are full of knowledge and have the rigorous demeanor of scholars, but it is obviously difficult to achieve complete knowledge on any topic. Among them are extreme conservatives, liberals, and ultra-leftists: William Owen, I think he is definitely a descendant of Robert Owen, the first person of early socialism in Britain; at least one of these people is A Roman Catholic, he taught me the Christian spirit in an unforgettable way. His most proud point is that the Puritans believe in returning to the covenant and are a just sect, but they know very little about Christ’s teachings on love and tolerance; there are also Puritans among them, and they have all studied the history of Christianity. When the debate is fierce , it’s hard to tell the difference. They quote from exact authorities and can stand the test of the original text. I remember one time that Catholic quoted a bull from the overseeing pope.
The result was a heated debate, and when challenged, he quoted the original Latin text verbatim. I was surprised: how did they know so much, how did they know? However, I was even more surprised that there were some things they didn’t know. They cannot achieve complete knowledge of anything except hard facts. They are extremely knowledgeable and talented. They do not admit that there is absolute truth.
What I heard was free and passionate conversation, witty and thoughtful conversations. Their brains are as sharp as sharp tools; their attitudes are gentle and courteous; they never whisper to each other or make jokes, they always talk about issues in public; when they explain something, everyone (regardless of their position) (no matter what) will actively tell the facts he knows, or the views of a certain philosopher or the wonderful phrases of a certain poet that he remembers, to make the discussion more thorough and exciting; even if they have different opinions, they will maintain their They had a gentle and courteous attitude; they drank California red wine with relish, they smoked cigars, and the room was filled with thick smoke; when they insisted on their opinions, they spoke passionately and sincerely, but never lost their grace. It's real conversation. I had never heard a conversation like this before, and when I did, it was few and far between, and definitely not as exciting as the Saturday night conversations in San Francisco that prepared me for college.
I sat back and listened in silence. To me, these conversations were both wonderful, wise and knowledgeable, but also contained a clear understanding of things I didn’t know
and revealed a lot about graduating from college. Life is a truth that they know nothing about. Really, they have evidence and know what the wise men of the world have said about all things in the past, but they do not make a final conclusion. Absolutely not. I must go to university to study by myself and seek more knowledge. I am very eager to do this. It seems that I must enter university immediately. My head was busy thinking about problems before. It was even more so at that time. I felt that my head was full of holes. The hole is like an empty belly, hungry. My problem was clear: I seemed not just hungry, but hungry for some particular food, and my curiosity was no longer as nebulous as it had been before.