Tag: Soul

  • Glossary of Youth: Its Education, Regimen, and Hygiene, by G. Stanley Hall

    Glossary of Youth: Its Education, Regimen, and Hygiene, by G. Stanley Hall

    GLOSSARY

    AGAMIC. Unmarried; unmarriageable, sometimes non-sexed.

    AGENIC. Lacking in reproductive power; sterile.

    AMPHIMIXIS. That form of reproduction which involves the mingling of substance from two individuals so as to effect a mixture of hereditary characteristics. It includes the phenomena of conjugation and fertilization among both unicellular and multicellular organisms.

    ANABOLISM. See METABOLISM.

    ANAMNESIC. Pertaining to or aiding recollection.

    ANEMIC. Deficient in blood; bloodless.

    ANTHROPOMORPHISM. The attributing of human characteristics to natural, supernatural, or divine beings.

    ANTHROPOMETRY. Science of measurement of the human body.

    ARTIFACT. Any artificial product.

    APHASIA. Impairment or lose of the ability to understand or use speech.

    ASSOCIATIONISM. The psychological theory which regards the laws of association as the fundamental laws of mental action and development.

    ATAVISTIC. Pertaining to reversion through the influence of heredity to remote ancestral characteristics.

    ATAXIC. Pertaining to inability to coördinate voluntary movements; irregular.

    CALAMO-PAPYRUS. Reed papyrus or pen-paper.

    CATABOLISM. See METABOLISM.

    CATHARSIS. Purgation or cleansing. Aristotle’s esthetic theory that little renders immune for much.

    CEREBRATION. Brain action, conscious or unconscious.

    CHOREA. St. Vitus’s dance; a nervous disease marked by irregular and involuntary movements of the limbs and face.

    CHRESTOMATHY. A collection of extracts and choice pieces.

    CHRISTENTHUM. The Christian belief; the spirit of Christianity.

    COMMANDO EXERCISES. Gymnastic exercises whose order is dependent upon the spoken command of the director.

    CORTEX. The gray matter of the brain, mostly on its surface.

    CORTICAL. Pertaining to the cortex.

    CRANIOMETRY. The measurement of skulls.

    CRYPTOGAMOUS. Having an obscure mode of fertilization; or, of plants that do not blossom.

    CULTUS. A system of religious belief and worship.

    DEUTSCHENTHUM. The spirit of the German people.

    DIATHESIS. A constitutional predisposition.

    EPHEBIC. Pertaining to the Greek system of instruction given to young men to fit them for citizenship; adolescent.

    EPIGONI. Successors; followers who only follow.

    EPISTEMOLOGY. The theory of knowledge; that branch of logic which undertakes to explain how knowledge is possible and to define its limitations, meaning, and worth.

    EUPEPTIC. Having good digestion.

    EUPHORIA. The sense of well-being; of fullness of life.

    EVIRATION. Emasculation; loss of manly characteristics.

    FERAL. Wild by nature; untamed; undomesticated.

    FORMICARY. An artificial ants’ nest.

    GEMÜTH. Disposition; the entire affective soul and its habitual state.

    HEBETUDE. Dullness; stupidity.

    HEDONISTIC. Relating to hedonism, that form of Greek philosophy which taught that pleasure is the chief end of existence.

    HETAERA. A Greek courtesan. This class was often highly trained in music and social art, and represented the highest grade of culture among Greek women.

    HETEROGENY. (1) The spontaneous generation of animals and vegetables, low in the scale of organization, from inorganic elements. (2) That kind of generation in which the parent, whether plant or animal, produces offspring differing in structure or habit from itself, but in which after one or more generations the original form reappears.

    HETERONOMOUS. Having a different name.

    HOROLOGY. The science of measuring time and of constructing instruments for that purpose.

    HYGEIA. The Greek goddess of health; health.

    HYPERMETHODIC. Methodic to excess; overmethodic.

    HYPERTROPHY. Excessive growth.

    INDISCERPTIBLE. Incapable of being destroyed by separation of parts.

    INHIBITION. Interference with the normal result of a nervous excitement by an opposing force.

    IRRADIATION. The diffusion of nervous stimuli out of the path of normal discharge which, as a result of the excitation of a peripheral end organ may excite other central organs than those directly connected with it.

    KINESOLOGICAL. Pertaining to the science of tests and measurements of bodily strength.

    KINESOMETER. An instrument for measuring muscular strength.

    MEDULLATION. The investment of nerve fibers with a protective covering or medullary sheath, consisting of white, fat-like matter.

    MERISTIC. Pertaining to the levels or spinal and cerebral segments of the body.

    METABOLISM. The act or process by which, on the one hand, dead food is built up into living matter—anabolism, and by which, on the other, the living matter is broken down into simpler products within a cell or organism—catabolism.

    METAMORPHOSIS. Change of form or structure; transformation.

    METEMPSYCHOSIS. The doctrine of the transmigration of the soul from one body to another.

    MONOPHRASTIC. Pertaining to or consisting of a single phrase.

    MONOTECHNIC. Pertaining to a single art or craft.

    MORPHOLOGY. The science of form and structure of plants and animals without regard to function.

    MYOLOGY. The scientific knowledge of the muscular system.

    MYTHOPOEIC. Producing or having a tendency to produce myths.

    NOETIC. Of, pertaining to, or conceived by, mind.

    NUANCE. Slight shade; difference; distinction; degree.

    ORTHOGENIC. Pertaining to right beginning and development.

    ORTHOPEDIC. Relating to the art of curing deformities.

    OSSUARY. A depository of dry bones.

    PALEOPSYCHIC. Pertaining to the antiquity of the soul.

    PANTHEISTIC. Relating to that doctrine which holds that the entire phenomenal universe, including man and nature, is the ever-changing manifestation of God, who rises to self-consciousness and personality only in man.

    PATRISTICS. That department of study occupied with the doctrines and writings of the fathers of the Christian Church.

    PHOBIA. Excessive or morbid fear of anything.

    PHYLETICALLY. In accordance with the phylum or race; racially.

    PHYLETIC. Pertaining to a race or clan.

    PHYLOGENY. The history of the evolution of a species or group; tribal history; ancestral development as opposed to ontogeny or the development of the individual.

    PHYLUM. A term introduced by Haeckel to designate the great branches of the animal and vegetable kingdoms. Each phylum may include several classes.

    PICKELHAUBE. The spiked helmet of the German army.

    PLANKTON. Sea animals and plants collectively; distinguished from coast or bottom forms and floating in a great mass.

    POLYGAMIC (LOVE). Pertaining to the habit of having more than one mate of the opposite sex.

    POLYPHRASTIC. Having many phrases; pertaining to rambling, incoherent speech.

    POST-SIMIAN. Pertaining to an age later than that in which simian or monkey-like forms prevailed.

    PRENUBILE. Pertaining to the age before sexual maturity or marriageability is reached.

    PRIE DIEU. A praying desk.

    PROPEDEUTIC. Preliminary; introductory.

    PROPHYLACTIC. Any medicine or measure efficacious in preventing disease.

    PSEUDOPHOBIAC. Pertaining to a morbid condition in which the subject is continually in fear of having said something not strictly true.

    PSYCHOGENESIS. The origin and development of soul.

    PSYCHONOMIC. Pertaining to the laws of mind.

    PSYCHOSIS. Mental constitution or condition; any change in consciousness, especially if abnormal.

    PUBERTY. The age of sexual maturity.

    PUBESCENT. Relating to the dawning of puberty.

    PYGMOID. Of pygmy size and form.

    RABULIST. A chronic wrangler; one who argues about everything.

    SCHEMA. A synopsis; a summary. In the Kantian sense, a general type.

    SCHEMATISM. An outline of any systematic arrangement; an outline.

    SUPERFOETATION. A second conception some time after a prior one, by which two foetuses of different age exist together in the same female. Often used figuratively.

    TEMIBILITY. (From Italian temibile, to be feared.) The principle of adjustment of penalty to crime in just that degree necessary to prevent a repetition of the criminal act.

    TIC. A nervous affection of the muscles; a twitching.

    TRANSCENDENTAL. In the Kantian system having an a priori character, transcending experience, presupposed in and necessary to experience.

    TRAUMATA. Wounds.

    TRAUMATISM. A wound; any morbid condition produced by wounds or other external violence.

    VERBIGERATION. The continual utterance of certain words or phrases at short intervals, without reference to their meaning, as seen in insane Gedankenflucht or rapid flight of thought.

    Extract from Youth: Its Education, Regimen, and Hygiene, by G. Stanley Hall

    Views: 0

  • MORAL AND RELIGIOUS TRAINING OF THE YOUTH

    MORAL AND RELIGIOUS TRAINING OF THE YOUTH

    MORAL AND RELIGIOUS TRAINING

    Dangers of muscular degeneration and overstimulus of brain—Difficulties in teaching morals—Methods in Europe—Obedience to commands—Good habits should be mechanized—Value of scolding—How to flog aright—Its dangers—Moral precepts and proverbs—Habituation—Training will through intellect—Examinations—Concentration—Originality—Froebel and the naive—First ideas of God—Conscience—Importance of Old and New Testaments—Sex dangers—Love and religion—Conversion.

    From its nature as well as from its central importance it might be easily shown that the will is no less dependent on the culture it receives than is the mind. It is fast becoming as absurd to suppose that men can survive in the great practical strain to which American life subjects all who would succeed, if the will is left to take its doubtful chances of training and discipline, as to suppose that the mind develops in neglect. Our changed conditions make this chance of will-culture more doubtful than formerly. A generation or two ago[1] most school-boys had either farm work, chores, errands, jobs self-imposed, or required by less tender parents; they made things, either toys or tools, out of school. Most school-girls did house-work, more or less of which is, like farm-work, perhaps the most varied and most salutary as well as most venerable of all schools for the youthful body and mind. They undertook extensive works of embroidery, bed-quilting, knitting, sewing, mending, if not cleaning, and even spinning and weaving their own or others’ clothing, and cared for the younger children. The wealthier devised or imposed tasks for will-culture, as the German Kaiser has his children taught a trade as part of their education. Ten days at the hoe-handle, axe, or pitchfork, said an eminent educator lately in substance, with no new impression from without, and one constant and only duty, is a schooling in perseverance and sustained effort such as few boys now get in any shape; while city instead of country life brings so many new, heterogeneous and distracting impressions of motion rather than rest, and so many privileges with so few corresponding duties, that with artificial life and bad air the will is weakened, and eupeptic minds and stomachs, on which its vigor so depends, are rare. Machines supersede muscles, and perhaps our athleticism gives skill too great preponderance over strength, or favors intense rather than constant, long-sustained, unintermittent energy. Perhaps too many of our courses of study are better fitted to turn out many-sided but superficial paragraphists, than men who can lay deep plans, and subordinate many complex means to one remote end. Meanwhile, if there is any one thing of which our industries and practical arts are in more crying need than another, it is the old-fashioned virtue of thoroughness, of a kind and degree which does not address merely the eye, is not limited by the letter of a contract, but which has some regard for its products for their own sake, and some sense for the future. Whether in science, philosophy, morals, or business, the fields for long-ranged cumulative efforts are wider, more numerous, and far more needy than in the days when it was the fashion for men contentedly to concentrate themselves to one vocation, life-work, or mission, or when cathedrals or other yet vaster public works were transmitted, unfinished but ever advancing, from one generation of men to another.

    It is because the brain is developed, while the muscles are allowed to grow flabby and atrophied, that the deplored chasm between knowing and doing is so often fatal to the practical effectiveness of mental and moral culture. The great increase of city and sedentary life has been far too sudden for the human body—which was developed by hunting, war, agriculture, and manifold industries now given over to steam and machinery—to adapt itself healthfully or naturally to its new environment. Let any of us take down an anatomical chart of the human muscles, and reflect what movements we habitually make each day, and realize how disproportionately our activities are distributed compared with the size or importance of the muscles, and how greatly modern specialization of work has deformed our bodies. The muscles that move the scribbling pen are insignificant fraction of those in the whole body, and those that wag the tongue and adjust the larynx are also comparatively few and small. Their importance is, of course, not underrated, but it is disastrous to concentrate education upon them too exclusively or too early in life. The trouble is that few realize what physical vigor is in man or woman, or how dangerously near weakness often is to wickedness, how impossible healthful energy of will is without strong muscles which are its organ, or how endurance and self-control, no less than great achievement, depend on muscle-habits. Both in Germany and Greece, a golden age of letters was preceded, by about a generation, by a golden age of national gymnastic enthusiasm which constitutes, especially in the former country, one of the most unique and suggestive chapters in the history of pedagogy. Symmetry and grace, hardihood and courage, the power to do everything that the human body can do with and without all conceivable apparatus, instruments, and even tools, are culture ideals that in Greece, Rome, and Germany respectively have influenced, as they might again influence, young men, as intellectual ideals never can do save in a select few. We do not want “will-virtuosos,” who perform feats hard to learn, but then easy to do and good for show; nor spurtiness of any sort which develops an erethic habit of work, temper, and circulation, and is favored by some of our popular sports but too soon reacts into fatigue. Even will-training does not reach its end till it leads the young up to taking a intelligent, serious and life-long interest in their own physical culture and development. This is higher than interest in success in school or college sport; and, though naturally later than these, is one of the earliest forms of will-culture in which it is safe and wise to attempt to interest the young for its own sake alone. In our exciting life and trying climate, in which the experiment of civilization has never been tried before, these thoughts are merely exercises.

    But this is, of course, preliminary. Great as is the need, the practical difficulties in the way are very great. First, there are not only no good text-books in ethics, but no good manual to guide teachers. Some give so many virtues or good habits to be taught per term, ignoring the unity of virtue as well as the order in which the child’s capacities for real virtue unfold. Advanced text-books discuss the grounds of obligation, the nature of choice or freedom, or the hedonistic calculus, as if pleasures and pains could be balanced as measurable quantities, etc., so that philosophic morality is clearly not for children or teachers. Secondly, evolution encourages too often the doubt whether virtue can be taught, when it should have the opposite effect. Perversity and viciousness of will are too often treated as constitutional disease; and insubordination or obstinacy, especially in school, are secretly admired as strength, instead of being vigorously treated as crampy disorders of will, and the child is coddled into flaccidity. Becomes the lowest develops first, there is danger that it will interfere with the development of the higher, and thus, if left to his own, the child may come to have no will. The third and greatest difficulty is, that with the best effort to do so, so few teachers can separate morality from religious creed. So vital is the religions sentiment here that it is hard to divorce the end of education from the end of life, proximate from ultimate grounds of obligation, or finite from infinite duties. Those whose training has been more religious than ethical can hardly teach morality per se satisfactorily to the noli me tangere [Touch me not] spirit of denominational freedom so wisely jealous of conflicting standards and sanctions for the young.

    How then can we ever hope to secure proper training for the will?

    More than a generation ago Germany developed the following method: Children of Lutheran, Catholic and Jewish parentage, which include most German children, were allowed one afternoon a week for several years, and two afternoons a week for a few months preceding confirmation, to spend half of a school day with instructors of these respective professions, who were nominated by the church, but examined by the state as to their competence. These teachers are as professional, therefore, as those in the regular class work. Each religion is allowed to determine its own course of religious instruction, subject only to the approval of the cultus minister or the local authorities. In this way a rupture between the religious sentiments and teaching of successive generations is avoided and it is sought to bring religious training to bear upon morals. These classes learn Scripture, hymns, church service,—the Catholics in Latin and the Jewish in Hebrew,—the history of their church and people, and sometimes a little systematic theology. In some of these schools, there are prizes and diplomas, and the spirit of competition is appealed to. A criticism sometimes made against them, especially against the Lutheran religious pedagogy, is that it is too intellectual. It is, of course, far more systematic and effective from this point of view than the American Sunday School, so that whatever may be said of its edifying effects, the German child knows these topics far better than the American. This system, with modifications, has been adopted in some places in France, England and in America, more often in private than in public schools, however.

    The other system originated in France some years after the Franco-Prussian War when the clerical influence in French education gave way to the lay and secular spirit. In these classes, for which also stated times are set apart and which are continued through all the required grades under the name of moral and civic instruction, the religious element is entirely absent, except that there are a few hymns, Bible passages and stories which all agree upon as valuable. Most of the course is made up of carefully selected maxims and especially stories of virtue, records of heroic achievements in French history and even in literature and the drama. Everything, however, has a distinct moral lesson, although that lesson is not made offensively prominent. We have here nearly a score of these textbooks, large and small. It would seen as though the resources of the French records and literature had been ransacked, and indeed many deeds of heroism are culled from the daily press. The matter is often arranged under headings such as cleanliness, acts of kindness, courage, truthfulness versus lying, respect for age, good manners, etc. Each virtue is thus taught in a way appropriate to each stage of childhood, and quite often bands of mercy, rescue leagues and other societies are the outgrowth of this instruction. It is, of course, exposed to much criticism from the clergy on the cogent ground that morality needs the support of religion, at the very least, in childhood. This system has had much influence in England where several similar courses have been evolved, and in this country we have at least one very praiseworthy effort in this direction, addressed mainly, however, to older children.

    Besides this, two ways suggest themselves. First, we may try to assume, or tediously enucleate a consensus of religious truth as a basis of will training, e.g., God and immortality, and, ignoring the minority who doubt these, vote them into the public school. Pedagogy need have nothing whatever to say respecting the absolute truth or falsity of these ideas, but there is little doubt that they have an influence on the will, at a certain stage of average development, greater and more essential than any other; so great that even were their vitality to decay like the faith in the Greek or German mythology, we should still have to teach God and a future life as the most imperative of all hypotheses in a field where, as in morals, nothing is so practical as a good theory; and we should have to fall to teaching the Bible as a moral classic, and cultivate a critical sympathy for its view of life. But this way ignores revelation and supernatural claims, while some have other objections to emancipating or “rescuing” the Bible from theology just yet. Indeed, the problem how to teach anything that the mind could not have found out for itself, but that had to be revealed, has not been solved by modern pedagogy, which, since Pestalozzi, has been more and more devoted to natural and developing methods. The latter teaches that there must not be too much seed sown, too much or too high precept, or too much iteration, and that, in Jean Paul’s phrase, the hammer must not rest on bell, but only tap and rebound, to bring out a clear tone. Again, a consensus of this content would either have to be carefully defined and would be too generic and abstract for school uses, or else differences of interpretation, which so pervade and are modified by character, culture, temperament, and feeling, would make the consensus itself nugatory. Religious training must be specific at first, and, omitting qualifications, the more explicit the denominational faith the earlier may religious motives affect the will.

    This is the way of our hopes, to the closer consideration of which we intend to return in the future, though it must be expected that the happiest consensus will be long quarantined from most schools. Meanwhile a second way, however unpromising, is still open. Noble types of character may rest on only the native instincts of the soul or even on broadly interpreted utilitarian considerations. But if morality without religion were only a bloodless corpse or a plank in a shipwreck, there is now need enough for teachers to study its form, drift, and uses by itself alone. This, at least, is our purpose in considering the will, and this only.

    The will, purpose, and even mood of small children when alone, are fickle, fluctuating, contradictory. Our very presence imposes one general law on them, viz., that of keeping our good will and avoiding our displeasure. As the plant grows towards the light, so they unfold in the direction of our wishes, felt as by divination. They respect all you smile at, even buffoonery; look up in their play to call your notice, to study the lines of your sympathy, as if their chief vocation was to learn your desires. Their early lies are often saying what they think will please us, knowing no higher touchstones of truth. If we are careful to be wisely and without excess happy and affectionate when they are good, and saddened and slightly cooled in manifestations of love if they do wrong, the power of association in the normal, eupeptic child will early choose right as surely as pleasure increases vitality. If our love is deep, obedience is an instinct if not a religion. The child learns that while it can not excite our fear, resentment or admiration, etc., it can act on our love, and this should be the first sense of its own efficiency. Thus, too, it first learns that the way of passion and impulse is not the only rule of life, and that something is gained by resisting them. It imitates our acts long before it can understand our words. As if it felt its insignificance, and dreaded to be arrested in some lower phase of its development, its instinct for obedience becomes almost a passion. As the vine must twine or grovel, so the child comes unconsciously to worship idols, and imitates bad patterns and examples in the absence of worthy ones. He obeys as with a deep sense of being our chattel, and, at bottom, admires those who coerce him, if the means be wisely chosen. The authority must, of course, be ascendancy over heart and mind. The more absolute such authority the more the will is saved from caprice and feels the power of steadiness. Such authority excites the unique, unfathomable sense of reverence, which measures the capacity for will-culture, and is the strongest and soundest of all moral motives. It is also the most comprehensive, for it is first felt only towards persons, and personality is a bond, enabling any number of complex elements to act or be treated as whole, as everything does and is in the child’s soul, instead of in isolation and detail. In the feeling of respect culminating in worship almost all educational motives are involved, but especially those which alone can bring the will to maturity; and happy the child who is bound by the mysterious and constraining sympathy of dependence, by which, if unblighted by cynicism, a worthy mentor directs and lifts the will. This unconscious reflection of our character and wishes is the diviner side of childhood, by which it is quick and responsive to everything in its moral environment. The child may not be able to tell whether its teacher often smiles, dresses in this way or that, speaks loud or low, has many rules or not, though every element of her personality affects him profoundly. His acts of will have not been choices, but a mass of psychic causes far greater than consciousness can estimate have laid a basis of character, than which heredity alone is deeper, before the child knows he has a will. These influences are not transient but life-long, for if the conscious and intentional may anywhere be said to be only a superficial wave over the depths of the unconscious, it is in the sphere of will-culture.

    But command and obedience must also be specific to supplant nature. Here begins the difficulty. A young child can know no general commands. “Sit in your chair,” means sit a moment, a sort of trick, with no prohibition to stand the next instant. Any just-forbidden act may be done in the next room. All is here and now, and patient reiteration, till habit is formed, and no havoc-making rules which it cannot understand or remember, is our cue. Obedience can, however, be instinct even here, and is its chief virtue, and there is no more fear of weakening the will by it than in the case of soldiers. As the child grows older, however, and as the acts commanded are repugnant, or unusual, there should be increasing care, lest authority be compromised, sympathy ruptured, or lest mutual timidity and indecision, if not mutual insincerity and dissimulation, as well as parodied disobedience, etc., to test us, result. We should, of course, watch for favorable moods, assume no unwonted or preternatural dignity or owlish air of wisdom, and command in a low voice which does not too rudely break in upon the child’s train of impressions. The acts we command or forbid should be very few at first, but inexorable. We should be careful not to forbid where we cannot follow a untrusty child, or what we can not prevent. Our own will should be a rock and not a wave. Our requirements should be uniform, with no whim, mood, or periodicity of any sort about them. If we alternate from caresses to severity, are fields and capricious instead of commanding by a fixed and settled plan, if we only now and then take the child in hand, so he does not know precisely what to expect, we really require the child to change its nature with every change in us, and well for the child who can defy such a changeable authority, which not only unsettles but breaks up character anew when it is just at the beginning of the formative period. Neglect is better than this, and fear of inconsistency of authority makes the best parents often jealous of arbitrariness in teachers. Only thus can we develop general habits of will and bring the child to know general maxims of conduct inductively, and only thus by judicious boldness and hardihood in command can we bring the child to feel the conscious strength that comes only from doing unpleasant things. Even if instant obedience be only external at first, it will work inward, for moods are controlled by work, and it is only will which enlarges the bounds of personality.

    Yet we must not forget that even morality is relative, and is one thing for adults and often quite another for children. The child knows nothing of absolute truth, justice, or virtues. The various stimuli of discipline are to enforce the higher though weaker insights which the child has already unfolded, rather than to engraft entirely unintuited good. The command must find some ally, feeble though it be, in the child’s own soul. We should strive to fill each moment with as little sacrifice or subordination, as mere means or conditions to the future, as possible, for fear of affectation and insincerity. But yet the hardier and sounder the nature, the more we may address training to barely nascent intuitions, with a less ingredient of immediate satisfaction, and the deeper the higher element Of interest will be grounded in the end. The child must find as he advances towards maturity, that every new insight, or realization of his own reveals the fact that you have been there before with commands, cultivating sentiments and habits, and not that he was led to mistake your convenience or hobby for duty, or failed to temper the will by temporizing with it. The young are apt to be most sincere at an age when they are also most mistaken, but if sincerity be kept at its deepest and best, will be least harmful and easiest overcome. If authority supplement rather than supersede good motives, the child will so love authority as to overcome your reluctance to apply it directly, and as a final result will choose the state and act you have pre-formed in its slowly-widening margin of freedom, and will be all the less liable to undue subservience to priest or boss, or fashion or tradition later, as obedience gives place to normal, manly independence.

    In these and many other ways everything in conduct should be mechanized as early and completely as possible. The child’s notion of what is right is what is habitual, and the simple, to which all else is reduced in thought, is identified with the familiar. It is this primitive stratum of habits which principally determines our deepest belief which all must have over and above knowledge—to which men revert in mature years from youthful vagaries. If good acts are a diet and not a medicine, are repeated over and over again, as every new beat of the loom pounds in one new thread, and sense of justice and right is wrought into the very nerve-cells and fibers; if this ground texture of the soul, this “memory and habit-plexus,” this sphere of thoughts we oftenest think and acts we oftenest do, is early, rightly and indiscerptibly wrought, not only does it become a web of destiny for us, so all-determining is it, but we have something perdurable to fall back on if moral shock or crisis or change or calamity shall have rudely broken up the whole structure of later associations. Not only the more we mechanize thus, the more force of soul is freed for higher work, but we are insured against emergencies in which the choice and deed is likely to follow the nearest motive, or that which acts quickest, rather than to pause and be influenced by higher and perhaps intrinsically stronger motives. Reflection always brings in a new set of later-acquired motives and considerations, and if these are better than habit-mechanism, then pause is good; if not, he who deliberates is lost. Our purposive volitions are very few compared with the long series of desires, acts and reactions, often contradictory, many of which were never conscious, and many once willed but now lapsed to reflexes, the traces of which crowding the unknown margins of the soul, constitute the organ of the conscious will.

    It is only so far as this primitive will is wrong by nature or training, that drastic reconstructions of any sort are needed. Only those who mistake weakness for innocence, or simplicity for candor, or forget that childish faults are no less serious because universal, deny the, at least, occasional depravity of all children, or fail to see that fear and pain are among the indispensables of education, while a parent, teacher, or even a God, all love, weakens and relaxes the will. Children do not cry for the alphabet; the multiplication table is more like medicine than confectionery, and it is only affected thoroughness that omits all that is hard. “The fruits of learning may be sweet, but its roots are always bitter,” and it is this alone that makes it possible to strengthen the will while instructing the mind. The well-schooled will comes, like Herder, to scorn the luxury of knowing without the labor of learning. We must anticipate the future penalties of sloth as well as of badness. The will especially is a trust we are to administer for the child, not as he may now wish, but as he will wish when more mature. We must now compel what he will later wish to compel himself to do. To find his habits already formed to the same law that his mature will and the world later enjoin, cements the strongest of all bonds between mentor and child. Nothing, however, must be so individual as punishment. For some, a threat at rare intervals is enough; while for others, however ominous threats may be, they become at once “like scarecrows, on which the foulest birds soonest learn to perch.” To scold well and wisely is an art by itself. For some children, pardon is the worst punishment; for others, ignoring or neglect; for others, isolation from friends, suspension from duties; for others, seclusion—which last, however, is for certain ages beset with extreme danger—and for still others, shame from being made conspicuous. Mr. Spencer’s “natural penalties” can be applied to but few kinds of wrong, and those not the worst. Basedow tied boys who fell into temptation to a strong pillar to brace them up; if stupid and careless, put on a fool’s cap and bells; if they were proud, they were suspended near the ceiling in a basket, as Aristophanes represented Socrates. Two boys who quarreled, were made to look into each other’s eyes before the whole school till their angry expressions gave way before the general sense of the ridiculous. This is more ingenious than wise. The object of discipline is to avoid punishment, but even flogging should never be forbidden. It maybe reserved, like a sword in its scabbard, but should not get so rusted in that it can not be drawn on occasion. The law might even limit the size and length of the rod, and place of application, as in Germany, but it should be of no less liberal dimensions here than there. punishment should, of course, be minatory and reformatory, and not vindictive, and we should not forget that certainty is more effective than severity, nor that it is apt to make motives sensuous, and delay the psychic restraint which should early preponderate over the physical. But will-culture for boys is rarely as thorough as it should be without more or less flogging. I would not, of course, urge the extremes of the past. The Spartan beating as a gymnastic drill to toughen, the severity which prevailed in Germany for a long time after its Thirty Years’ Wars,[2] the former fashion in many English schools of walking up not infrequently to take a flogging as a plucky thing to do, and with no notion of disgrace attaching to it, shows at least an admirable strength of will. Severe constraint gives poise, inwardness, self-control, inhibition, and not-willingness, if not willingness, while the now too common habit of coquetting for the child’s favor, and tickling its ego with praises and prizes, and pedagogic pettifogging for its good-will, and sentimental fear of a judicious slap to rouse a spoiled child with no will to break, to make it keep step with the rest in conduct, instead of delaying a whole school-room to apply a subtle psychology of motives on it, is bad. This reminds one of the Jain who sweeps the ground before him lest he unconsciously tread on a worm. Possibly it may be well, as Schleiermacher suggests, not to repress some one nascent bad act in some natures, but let it and the punishment ensue for the sake of Dr. Spankster’s tonic. Dermal pain is not the worst thing in the world, and by a judicious knowledge of how it feels at both ends of the rod, by flogging and being flogged, far deeper pains may be forefended. Insulting defiance, deliberative disobedience, ostentatious carelessness and bravado, are diseases of the will, and, in very rare cases of Promethean obstinacy, the severe process of breaking the will is needful, just as in surgery it is occasionally needful to rebreak a limb wrongly set, or deformed, to set it over better. It is a cruel process, but a crampy will in childhood means moral traumatism of some sort in the adult. Few parents have the nerve to do this, or the insight to see just when it is needed. It is, as some one has said, like knocking a man down to save him from stepping off a precipice. Even the worst punishments are but very faint types of what nature has in store in later life for some forms of perversity of will, and are better than sarcasm, ridicule, or tasks, as penalties. The strength of obstinacy is admirable, and every one ought to have his own will; but a false direction, though almost always the result of faulty previous training when the soul more fluid and mobile, is all the more fatal. While so few intelligent parents are able to refrain from the self-indulgence of too much rewarding or giving, even though it injures the child, it is perhaps too much to expect the hardihood which can be justly cold to the caresses of a child who seeks, by displaying all its stock of goodness and arts of endearment, to buy back good-will after punishment has been deserved. If we wait too long, and punish in cold blood, a young child may hate us; while, if we punish on the instant, and with passion, a little of which is always salutary, on the principle, ohne Affekt kein Effekt, [Without passion, no effect] an older child may fail of the natural reactions of conscience, which should always be secured. The maxim, summum jus summa injuria, [The rigor of the law may be the greatest wrong] we are often told, is peculiarly true in school, and so it is; but to forego all punishment is no less injustice to the average child, for it is to abandon one of the most effective means of will-culture. We never punish but a part, as it were, of the child’s nature; he has lied, but is not therefore a liar, and we deal only with the specific act, and must love all the rest of him.

    And yet, after all, indiscriminate flogging is so bad, and the average teacher is so inadequate to that hardest and most tactful of all his varied duties, viz., selecting the right outcrop of the right fault of the right child at the right time and place, mood, etc., for best effect, that the bold statement of such principles as above is perhaps not entirely without practical danger, especially in two cases which Madame Necker and Sigismund have pointed out, and in several cases of which the present writer has notes. First, an habitually good child sometimes has a saturnalia of defiance and disobedience; a series of insubordinate acts are suddenly committed which really mark the first sudden epochful and belated birth of the instinct of independence and self-regulation, on which his future manliness will depend. He is quite irresponsible, the acts are never repeated, and very lenient treatment causes him, after the conflict of tumultuous feelings has expanded his soul, to react healthfully into habitual docility again, if some small field for independent action be at once opened him. The other case is that of ennui, of which children suffer such nameless qualms. When I should open half a dozen books, start for a walk, and then turn back, wander about in mind or body, seeking but not finding content in anything, a child in my mood will wish for a toy, an amusement, food, a rare indulgence, only to neglect or even reject it petulantly when granted. These flitting “will-spectres” are physical, are a mild form of the many fatal dangers of fatigue; and punishment is the worst of treatment. Rest or diversion is the only cure, and the teacher’s mind must be fruitful of purposes to that end. Perhaps a third case for palliative treatment is, those lies which attend the first sense of badness. The desire to conceal it occasionally accompanies the nascent effort to reform and make the lie true. These cases are probably rare, while the temptation to lie is far greater for one who does ill than for one who does well, for fear is the chief motive, and a successful lie which concealed would weaken the desire to cure a fault.

    We have thus far spoken of obedience, and come now to the later necessity of self-guidance, which, if obedience has wrought its perfect work, will be natural and inevitable. It is very hard to combine reason and coercion, yet it is needful that children think themselves free long before we cease to determine them. As we slowly cease to prescribe and begin to inspire, a very few well-chosen mottoes, proverbs, maxims, should be taught very simply, so that they will sink deep. Education has been defined as working against the chance influences of life, and it is certain that without some precepts and rules the will will not exert itself. If reasons are given, and energy is much absorbed in understanding, the child will assent but will not do. If the mind is not strong, many wide ideas are very dangerous. Strong wills are not fond of arguments, and if a young person falls to talking or thinking beyond his experience, subjective or objective, both conduct and thought are soon confused by chaotic and incongruous opinions and beliefs; and false expectations, which are the very seducers of the will, arise. There can be little will-training by words, and the understanding can not realize the ideals of the will. All great things are dangerous, as Plato said, and the truth itself is not only false but actually immoral to unexpanded minds. Will-culture is intensive, not extensive, and the writer knows a case in which even a vacation ramble with a moralizing fabulist has undermined the work of years. Our precepts must be made very familiar, copiously illustrated, well wrought together by habit and attentive thought, and above all clear cut, that the pain of violating them may be sharp and poignant. Vague and too general precepts beyond the horizon of the child’s real experience do not haunt him if they are outraged. Now the child must obey these, and will, if he has learned to obey well the command of others.

    One of the best sureties that he will do so is muscle-culture, for if the latter are weaker than the nerves and brain, the gap between knowing and doing appears and the will stagnates. Gutsmuths, the father of gymnastics in Germany before Jahn, used to warn men not to fancy that the few tiny muscles that moved the pen or tongue had power to elevate men. They might titillate the soul with words and ideas; but rigorous, symmetrical muscle-culture alone, he and his Turner societies believed, could regenerate the Fatherland, for it was one thing to paint the conflict of life, and quite another to bear arms in it. They said, “The weaker the body the more it commands; the stronger it is the more it obeys.”

    In this way we shall have a strong, well-knit soul-texture, made up of volitions and ideas like warp and woof. Mind and will will be so compactly organized that all their forces can be brought to a single point. Each concept or purpose will call up those related to it, and once strongly set toward its object, the soul will find itself borne along by unexpected forces. This power of totalizing, rather than any transcendent relation of elements, constitutes at least the practical unity of the soul, and this unimpeded association of its elements is true or inner freedom of will. Nothing is wanting or lost when the powers of the soul are mobilized for a great task, and its substance is impervious to passion. With this organization, men of really little power accomplish wonders. Without it great minds are confused and lost. They have only velleity or caprice. The will makes a series of vigorous, perhaps almost convulsive, but short, inconsistent efforts. As Jean Paul says, there is sulphur, charcoal, and saltpetre in the soul, but powder is not made, for they never find each other. To understand this will-plexus is preeminent among the new demands now laid on educators.

    But, although this focalizing power of acting with the whole rather than with a part of the soul, gives independence of many external, conventional, proximate standards of conduct, deepening our interests in life, and securing us against disappointment by defining our expectations, while such a sound and simple will-philosophy is proof against considerable shock and has firmness of texture enough to bear much responsibility, there is, of course, something deeper, without which all our good conduct is more or less hollow. This is that better purity established by mothers in the plastic heart, before the superfoetation of precept is possible, or even before the “soul takes flight in language”; it is perhaps pre-natal or hereditary. Much every way depends on how aboriginal our goodness is, whether the will acts with effort, as we solve an intricate problem, in solitude, or as we say the multiplication table, which only much distraction can confuse, or as we repeat the alphabet, which the din of battle could not hinder. Later and earlier training should harmonize with each other and with nature. Thrice happy he who is so wisely trained that he comes to believe he believes what his soul deeply does believe, to say what he feels and feel what he really does feel, and chiefly whose express volitions square with the profounder drift of his will as the resultant of all he has desired or wished, expected, attended to, or striven for. When such an one comes to his moral majority by standing for the first time upon his own careful conviction, against the popular cry, or against his own material interests or predaceous passions, and feels the constraint and joy of pure obligation which comes up from this deep source, a new, original force is brought into the world of wills. Call it inspiration, or Kant’s transcendental impulse above and outside of experience, or Spencer’s deep reverberations from a vast and mysterious past of compacted ancestral experiences, the most concentrated, distilled and instinctive of all psychic products, and as old as Mr. Tyndall’s “fiery cloud”—the name or even source is little. We would call it the purest, freest, most prevailing, because most inward, will or conscience.

    This free, habitual guidance by the highest and best, by conviction with no sense of compulsion or obligation, impractical if not dangerous ideal, for it can be actually realized only by the rarest moral genius. For most of us, the best education is that which makes us the best and most obedient servants. This is the way of peace and the way of nature, for even if we seriously try to keep up a private conscience at all, apart from feeling, faction, party or class spirit, or even habit, which are our habitual guides, the difficulties are so great that most hasten, more or less consciously and voluntarily, to put themselves under authority again, serving only the smallest margin of independence in material interests, choice of masters, etc, and yielding to the pleasing and easy illusion that inflates the minimum to seem the maximum of freedom, and uses the noblest ideal of history, viz., that of pure autonomous oughtness, as a pedestal for idols of selfishness, caprice and conceit. The trouble is in interpreting these moral instincts, for even the authorities lack the requisite self-knowledge in which all wisdom culminates. The moral interregnum which the Aufklärung [Enlightenment] has brought will not end till these instincts are rightly interpreted by in intelligence. The richest streams of thought must flow about them, the best methods must peep and pry till their secrets are found and put into the idea-pictures in which most men think.

    This brings us, finally, to the highest and also immediately practical method of moral education, viz., training the will by and for intellectual work. Youth and childhood must not be subordinated as means to maturity. Learning is more useful than knowing. It is the way and not the goal, the work and not the product, the acquiring and not the acquisition, that educates will and character. To teach only results, which are so simple, without methods by which they were obtained, which are so complex and hard, to develop the sense of possession without the strain of activity, to teach great matters too easily or even as play, always to wind along the lines of least resistance into the child’s mind, is imply to add another and most enervating luxury to child-life. Only the sense and power of effort, which made Lessing prefer the search to the possession of truth, which trains the will in the intellectual field, which is becoming more and more the field of its activity, counts for character and makes instruction really educating. This makes mental work a series of acts, or living thoughts, and not merely words. Real education, that we can really teach, and that which is really most examinable, is what we do, while those who acquire without effort may be extremely instructed without being truly educated.

    It is those who have been trained to put forth mental power that come to the front later, while it is only those whose acquisitions are not transpeciated into power who are in danger of early collapse.

    It is because of this imperfect appropriation through lack of volitional reaction that mental training is so often dangerous, especially in its higher grades. Especially wherever good precepts are allowed to rest peacefully beside undiscarded bad habits, moral weakness is directly cultivated. Volitional recollection, or forcing the mind to reproduce a train of impressions, strengthens what we may call the mental will; while if multifarious impressions which excite at the time are left to take their chances, at best, fragmentary reproduction, incipient amnesia, the prelude of mental decay, may be soon detected. Few can endure the long working over of ideas, especially if at all fundamental, which is needful to full maturity of mind, without grave moral danger. New standpoints and ideas require new combinations of the mental elements, with constant risk that during the process, what was already secured will fall back into its lower components. Even oar immigrants suffer morally from the change of manners and customs and ideas, and yet education menus change; the more training the more change, as a rule, and the more danger during the critical transition period while we oscillate between control by old habits, or association within the old circle of thought, and by the new insights, as a medical student often suffers from trying to bring the regulation of his physical functions under new and imperfect hygienic insights. Thus most especially if old questions, concerning which we have long since ceased to trust ourselves to give reasons, need to be reopened, there is especial danger that the new equilibrium about which the dynamic is to be re-resolved into static power will be established, if at all, with loss instead of with gain. Indeed, it is a question not of schools but of civilization, whether mental training, from the three R’s to science and philosophy, shall really make men better, as the theory of popular education assumes, and whether the genius and talent of the few who can receive and bear it can be brought to the full maturity of a knowledge fully facultized—a question paramount, even in a republic, to the general education of the many.

    The illusion is that beginnings are hard. They are easy. Almost any mind can advance a little way into almost any subject. The feeblest youth can push on briskly in the beginning of a new subject, but he forgets, and so does the examiner who marks him, that difficulties increase not in arithmetical but in almost geometrical ratio as he advances. The fact, too, that all topics are taught by all teachers and that we have no specialized teaching in elementary branches, and that examinations are placed in the most debilitating part of our peculiarly debilitating spring, these help us to solve the problem which China has solved so well, viz., how to instruct and not to educate. A pass mark, say of fifty, should be given not for mastery of the first half of the book, or for knowledge of half the matter in it, but for that of three-fourths or more. Suppose one choose the easier method of tattooing his mind by attaining the easy early stages of proficiency in many subjects, as is possible and even encouraged in too many of our school and college curricula, he weakens the will-quality of his mind. Smattering is dissipation of energy. Only great, concentrated and prolonged efforts in one direction really train the mind, because only they train the will beneath it. Many little, heterogeneous efforts of different sorts leave the mind in a muddle of heterogeneous impressions, and the will like a rubber band is stretched to flaccidity around one after another bundle of objects too large for it to clasp into unity. Here again, in der Beschränkung zeigt sich der Meister [The master shows himself in self-limitation]; all-sidedness through one-sidedness; by stalking the horse or cow out in the spring time, till he gnaws his small allotted circle of grass to the ground, and not by roving and cropping at will, can he be taught that the sweetest joint is nearest the root, are convenient symbols of will-culture in the intellectual field. Even a long cram, if only on one subject, which brings out the relations of the parts, or a “one-study college,” as is already devised in the West, or the combination of several subjects even in primary school grades into a “concentration series,” as devised by Ziller and Rein, the university purpose as defined by Ziller of so combining studies that each shall stand in the course next to that with which it is inherently closest connected by matter and method, or the requirements of one central and two collateral branches for the doctorate examination—all these devices no doubt tend to give a sense of efficiency, which is one of the deepest and proudest joys of life, in the place of a sense of possession so often attended by the exquisite misery of conscious weakness. The unity of almost any even ideal purpose is better than none, if it tend to check the superficial one of learning to repeat again or of boxing the whole compass of sciences and liberal arts, as so many of our high schools or colleges attempt.

    Finally, in the sphere of mental productivity and originality, a just preponderance of the will-element makes men distrust new insights, quick methods, and short cuts, and trust chiefly to the genius of honest and sustained work, in power of which perhaps lies the greatest intellectual difference between men. When ideas are ripe for promulgation they have been condensed and concentrated, thought traverses them quickly and easily—in a word, they have become practical, and the will that waits over a new idea patiently and silently, without anxiety, even though with a deepening sense of responsibility, till all sides have been seen, all authorities consulted, all its latent mental reserves heard from, is the man who “talks with the rifle and not with the water-hose,” or, in a rough farmer’s phrase, “boils his words till he can give his hearers sugar and not sap.” Several of the more important discoveries of the present generation, which cost many weary months of toil, have been enumerated in a score or two of lines, so that every experimenter could set up his apparatus and get the results in a few minutes. Let us not forget that, in most departments of mental work, the more we revise and reconstruct our thought, the longer we inhibit its final expression, while the oftener we return to it refreshed from other interests, the clearer and more permeable for other minds it becomes, because the more it tends to express itself in terms of willed action, which is “the language of complete men.”

    So closely bound together are moral and religious training that a discussion of one without the other would be incomplete. In a word, religion is the most generic kind of culture as opposed to all systems or departments which are one sided. All education culminates in it because it is chief among human interests, and because it gives inner unity to the mind, heart, and will. How now should this common element of union be taught?

    To be really effective and lasting, moral and religious training must begin in the cradle. It was a profound remark of Froebel that the unconsciousness of a child is rest in God. This need not be understood in guy pantheistic sense. From this rest in God the childish soul should not be abruptly or prematurely aroused. Even the primeval stages of psychic growth are rarely so all-sided, so purely unsolicited, spontaneous, and unprecocious, as not to be in a sense a fall from Froebel’s unconsciousness or rest in God. The sense of touch, the mother of all the other senses, is the only one which the child brings into the world already experienced; but by the pats, caresses, hugs, etc., so instinctive with young mothers, varied feelings and sentiments are communicated to the child long before it recognizes its own body as distinct from things about it. The mother’s face and voice are the first conscious objects as the infant soul unfolds, and she soon comes to stand in the very place of God to her child. All the religion of which the child is capable during this by no means brief stage of its development consists of those sentiments—gratitude, trust, dependence, love, etc., now felt only for her—which are later directed toward God. The less these are now cultivated toward the mother, who is now their only fitting if not their only possible object, the more feebly they will later be felt toward God. This, too, adds greatly to the sacredness and the responsibilities of motherhood. Froebel perhaps is right that thus fundamental religious sentiments can be cultivated in the earliest months of infancy. It is of course impossible not to seem, perhaps even not to be, sentimental upon this theme, for the infant soul has no other content than sentiments, and because upon these rests the whole superstructure of religion in child or adult. The mother’s emotions, and physical and mental states, indeed, imparted and reproduced in the infant so immediately, unconsciously, and through so many avenues, that it is no wonder that these relations see mystic. Whether the mother is habitually under the influence of calm and tranquil emotions, or her temper is fluctuating or violent, or her movements are habitually energetic or soft and caressing, or she be regular or irregular in her ministrations to the infant in her arms, all these characteristics and habits are registered in the primeval language of touch upon the nervous system of the child. From this point of view, poise and calmness, the absence of all intense annuli and of sensations or transitions which are abrupt or sudden, and an atmosphere of quieting influences, like everything which retards by broadening, is in the general line of religious culture. The soul of an infant is well compared to a seed planted in a garden. It is not pressed or moved by the breezes which rustle the leaves overhead. The sunlight does not fall upon it, and even dew and evening coolness scarcely reach it; but yet there is not a breath of air or a ray of sunshine, nor a drop of moisture to which it is responsive, and which does not stir all its germinant forces. The child is a plant, must live out of doors in proper season, and there must be no forcing. Religion, then, at this important stage, at least, is naturalism pure and simple, and religious training is the supreme art of standing out of nature’s way. So implicit is the unity of soul and body at this formative age that care of the body is the most effective ethico-religious culture.

    Next to be considered are the sentiments which unfold under the influence of that fresh and naive curiosity which attends the first impressions of natural objects from which both religion and science spring as from one common root. The awe and sublimity of a thunderstorm, the sights and sounds of a spring morning, objects which lead the child’s thoughts to what is remote in time and space, old trees, ruins, the rocks, and, above all, the heavenly bodies—the utilization of these lessons is the most important task of the religious teacher during the kindergarten stage of childhood. Still more than the undevout astronomer, the undevout child under such influences is abnormal. In these directions the mind of the child is as open and plastic as that of the ancient prophet to the promptings of the inspiring Spirit. The child can recognize no essential difference between nature and the supernatural, and the products of mythopoeic fancy which have been spun about natural objects, and which have lain so long and so warm about the hearts of generations and races of men, are now the best of all nutriments for the soul. To teach scientific rudiments only about nature, on the shallow principle that nothing should be taught which must be unlearned, or to encourage the child to assume the critical attitude of mind, is dwarfing the heart and prematurely forcing the head. It has been said that country life is religion for children at this stage. However this may be, it is clear that natural religion is rooted in such experiences, and precedes revealed religion in the order of growth and education, whatever its logical order in systems of thought may be. A little later, habits of truthfulness[3] are best cultivated by the use of the senses in exact observation. To see a simple phenomenon in nature and report it fully and correctly is no easy matter, but the habit of trying to do so teaches what truthfulness is and leaves the impress of truth upon the whole life and character. I do not hesitate to say, therefore, that elements of science should be taught to children for the moral effects of its influences. At the same time all truth is not sensuous, and this training alone at this age tends to make the mind pragmatic, dry, and insensitive or unresponsive to that other kind of truth the value of which is not measured by its certainty so much as by its effect upon us. We must learn to interpret the heart and our native instincts as truthfully as we do external nature, for our happiness in life depends quite as largely upon bringing our beliefs into harmony with the deeper feelings of our nature as it does upon the ability to adapt ourselves to our physical environment. Thus not only all religious beliefs and moral acts will strengthen if they truly express the character instead of cultivating affectation and insincerity in opinion, word, and deed, as with mistaken pedagogic methods they may do. This latter can be avoided only by leaving all to naturalism and spontaneity at first, and feeding the soul only according to its appetites and stage of growth. No religious truth must be taught as fundamental—especially as fundamental to morality—which can be seriously doubted or even misunderstood. Yet it must be expected that convictions will be transformed and worked over and over again, and only late, if at all, will an equilibrium between the heart and the truth it clings to as finally satisfying be attained. Hence most positive religious instruction, or public piety, if taught at all, should be taught briefly as most serious but too high for the child yet, or as rewards to stimulate curiosity for them later, but sacred things should not become too familiar or be conventionalized before they can be felt or understood.

    The child’s conception of God should not be personal or too familiar at first, but He should appear distant and vague, inspiring awe and reverence far more than love; in a word, as the God of nature rather than as devoted to serviceable ministrations to the child’s individual wants. The latter should be taught to be a faithful servant rather than a favorite of God. The inestimable pedagogic value of the God-idea consists in that it widens the child’s glimpse of the whole, and gives the first presentment of the universality of laws, such as are observed in its experiences and that of others, so that all things seem comprehended under one stable system or government. The slow realization that God’s laws are not like those of parents and teachers, evadible, suspensible, but changeless, and their penalties sure as the laws of nature, is most important factor of moral training. First the law, the schoolmaster, then the Gospel; first nature, then grace, is the order of growth.

    The pains or pleasures which follow many acts are immediate, while the results that follow others are so remote or so serious that the child must utilize the experience of others. Artificial rewards and punishments must be cunningly devised so as to simulate and typify as closely as possible the real natural penalty, and they must be administered uniformly and impartially like laws of nature. As commands are just, and as they are gradually perceived to spring from superior wisdom, respect arises, which Kant called the bottom motive of duty, and defined as the immediate determination of the will by law, thwarting self-love. Here the child reverences what is not understood as authority, and to the childish “Why?” which always implies imperfect respect for the authority, however displeasing its behest, the teacher or parent should always reply, “You cannot understand why yet,” unless quite sure that a convincing and controlling insight can be given, such as shall make all future exercise of outward authority in this particular unnecessary. From this standpoint the great importance of the character and native dignity of the teacher is best seen. Daily contact with some teachers is itself all-sided ethical education for the child without a spoken precept. Here, too, the real advantage of male over female teachers, especially for boys, is seen in their superior physical strength, which often, if highly estimated, gives real dignity and commands real respect, and especially in the unquestionably greater uniformity of their moods and their discipline.

    During the first years of school life, a point of prime importance in ethico-religious training is the education of conscience. This latter is the most complex and perhaps the most educable of all our so-called “faculties.” A system of carefully arranged talks, with copious illustrations from history and literature, about such topics as fair play, slang, cronies, dress, teasing, getting mad, prompting in class, white lies, affectation, cleanliness, order, honor, taste, self-respect, treatment of animals, reading, vacation pursuits, etc., can be brought quite within the range of boy-and-girl interests by a sympathetic and tactful teacher, and be made immediately and obviously practical. All this is nothing more or less than conscience-building. The old superstition that children have innate faculties of such a finished sort that they flash up and grasp the principle of things by a rapid sort of first “intellection,” an error that made all departments of education so trivial, assumptive and dogmatic for centuries before Comenius, Basedow and Pestalozzi, has been banished everywhere save from moral and religious training, where it still persists in full force. The senses develop first, and all the higher intuitions called by the collective name of conscience gradually and later in life. They first take the form of sentiments without much insight, and are hence liable to be unconscious affectation, and are caught insensibly from the environment with the aid of inherited predisposition, and only made more definite by such talks as the above. But parents are prone to forget that healthful and correct sentiments concerning matters of conduct are, at first, very feeble, and that the sense of obligation needs the long and careful guardianship of external authority. Just as a young medical student with a rudimentary notion of physiology and hygiene is sometimes disposed to undertake a more or less complete reform of his diet, regimen, etc., to make it “scientific” in a way that an older and a more learned physician would shrink from, so the half-insights of boys into matters of moral regimen are far too apt, in the American temperament, to expend, in precocious emancipation and crude attempts at practical realization, the force which is needed to bring their insights to maturity. Authority should be relaxed gradually, explicitly, and provisionally over one definite department of conduct at a time. To distinguish right and wrong in their own nature is the highest and most complex of intellectual processes. Most men and all children are guided only by associations of greater or less subtlety. Perhaps the whole round of human duties might be best taught by gathering illustrations of selfishness and tracing it in its countless disguises and ramifications through every stage of life. Selfishness is opposed to a sense of the infinite and is inversely as real religion, and the study of it is not, like systematic ethics, apt to be confused and made unpractical by conflicting theories.

    The Bible, the great instrument in the education of conscience, is far less juvenile than it is now the fashion to suppose. At the very least, it expresses the result of the ripest human experience, the noblest traditions of humanity. Old Testament history, even more than most very ancient history, is distilled to an almost purely ethical content. For centuries Scripture was withheld from the masses for the same reason that Plato refused at first to put his thoughts into writing, because it would be sure to be misunderstood by very many and lead to that worst of errors and fanaticism caused by half-truths. Children should not approach it too lightly.

    The Old Testament, perhaps before or more than the New, is the Bible for childhood. A good, protracted course of the law pedagogically prepares the way for the apprehension of the Gospel. Then the study of the Old Testament should begin with selected tales, told, as in the German schools, impressively, in the teacher’s language, but objectively, and without exegetical or hortatory comment. The appeal is directly to the understanding only at first, but the moral lesson is brought clearly and surely within the child’s reach, but not personally applied after the manner common with us.

    Probably the most important changes for the educator to study are those which begin between the ages of twelve and sixteen and are completed only some years later, when the young adolescent receives from nature a new capital of energy and altruistic feeling. It is physiological second birth, and success in life depends upon the care and wisdom with which this new and final invoice of energy is husbanded. These changes constitute a natural predisposition to a change of heart, and may perhaps be called, in Kantian phrase, its schema. Even from the psychophysic standpoint it is a correct instinct which has slowly led churches to center so much of their cultus upon regeneration. In this I, of course, only assert here the neurophysical side, which is everywhere present, even if everywhere subordinate to the spiritual side. As everywhere, so here, too, the physical may be called in a sense regulative rather than constitutive. It is therefore not surprising that statistics show that far more conversions, proportionately, take place during the adolescent period, which does not normally end before the age of twenty-four or five, than during any other period of equal length. At this age most churches confirm.

    Before this age the child lives in the present, is normally selfish, deficient in sympathy, but frank and confidential, obedient to authority, and without affectation save the supreme affectation of childhood, viz., assuming the words, manners, habits, etc., of those older than itself. But now stature suddenly increases, and the power of physical and mental endurance and effort diminishes for a time; larynx, nose, chin change, and normal and morbid ancestral traits and features appear. Far greater and more protracted, though unseen, are the changes which take place in the nervous system, both in the development of the cortex and expansion of the convolutions and the growth of association-fibers by which the elements shoot together and relation of things are seen, which hitherto seemed independent, to which it seems as if for a few years the energies of growth were chiefly directed. Hence this period is so critical and changes in character are so rapid. No matter how confidential the relations with the parent may have been, an important domain of the soul now declares its independence. Confidences are shared with those of equal age and withheld from parents, especially by boys, to an extent probably little suspected by most parents. Education must be addressed to freedom, which recognizes only self-made law, and spontaneity of opinion and conduct is manifested, often in extravagant and grotesque forms. There is now a longing for that kind of close sympathy and friendship which makes cronies and intimates; there is a craving for strong emotions which gives pleasure in exaggerations; and there are nameless longings for what is far, remote, strange, which emphasizes the self-estrangement which Hegel so well describes, and which marks the normal rise of the presentiment of something higher than self. Instincts of rivalry and competition now grow strong in boys, and girls grow more conscientious and inward, and begin to feel their music, reading, religion, painting, etc., and to realize the bearing of these upon their future adult life. There is often a strong instinct of devotion and self-sacrifice toward some, perhaps almost any, object, or in almost any cause which circumstances may present. Moodiness and perhaps a love of solitude are developed. “Growing fits” make hard and severe labor of body and mind impossible without dwarfing or arresting the development, by robbing of its nutrition some part of the organism—stomach, lungs, chest, heart, back, brain, etc.—which is peculiarly liable to disease later. It is never so hard to tell the truth plainly and objectively and without any subjective twist. The life of the mere individual ceases and that of person, or better, of the race, begins. It is a period of realization, and hence often of introspection. In healthy natures it is the golden age of life, in which enthusiasm, sympathy, generosity, and curiosity are at their strongest and best, and when growth is so rapid that, e.g., each college class is conscious of a vast interval of development which separates it from the class below; but it is also a period subject to Wertherian crises, such as Hume, Richter, J.S. Mill, and others passed through, and all depends on the direction given to these new forces.

    The dangers of this period are great and manifest. The chief of these, far greater even than the dangers of intemperance, is that the sexual elements of soul and body will be developed prematurely and disproportionately. Indeed, early maturity in this respect is itself bad. If it occurs before other compensating and controlling powers are unfolded, this element is hypertrophied and absorbs and dwarfs their energy and it is then more likely to be uninstructed and to suck up all that is vile in the environment. Far more than we realize, the thoughts and feelings of youth center about this factor of his nature. Quite apart, therefore, from its intrinsic value, education should serve the purpose of preoccupation, and should divert attention from an element of our nature the premature or excessive development of which dwarfs every part of soul and body. Intellectual interests, athleticism, social and esthetic tastes, should be cultivated. There should be some change in external life. Previous routine and drill-work must be broken through and new occupations resorted to, that the mind may not be left idle while the hands are mechanically employed. Attractive home-life, friendships well chosen and on a high plane, and regular habits, should of course be cultivated. Now, too, though the intellect is not frequently judged insane, so that pubescent insanity is comparatively rare, the feelings, which are yet more fundamental to mental sanity, are most often perverted, and lack of emotional steadiness, violent and dangerous impulses, unreasonable conduct, lack of enthusiasm and sympathy, are very commonly caused by abnormalities here. Neurotic disturbances, such as hysteria, chorea, and, in the opinion of some physicians, sick-headache and early dementia are peculiarly liable to appear and become seated during this period. In short, the previous selfhood is broken up like the regulation copy handwriting of early school years, and a new individual is in process of crystallization. All is solvent, plastic, peculiarly susceptible to external influences.

    Between love and religion, God and nature have wrought a strong and indissoluble bond. Flagellations, fasts, exposure, excessive penances of many kinds, the Hindoo cultus of quietude, and mental absorption in vacuity and even one pedagogic motive of a cultus of the spiritual and supernatural, e. g. in the symposium of Plato, are all designed as palliatives and alteratives of degraded love. Change of heart before pubescent years, there are several scientific reasons for thinking means precocity and forcing. The age signalized by the ancient Greeks as that at which the study of what was comprehensively called music should begin, the age at which Roman guardianship ended, as explained by Sir Henry Maine, at which boys are confirmed in the modern Greek, Catholic, Lutheran and Episcopal churches, and at which the child Jesus entered the temple, is as early as any child ought consciously to go about his heavenly Father’s business. If children are instructed in the language of these sentiments too early, the all-sided deepening and broadening of soul and of conscience which should come with adolescent years will be incomplete. Revival sermon which the writer has heard preached to very young children are analogous to exhorting them to imagine themselves married people and inculcating the duties of that relation. It is because this precept is violated in the intemperate haste for immediate results that we may so often hear childish sentiments and puerile expressions so strangely mingled in the religious experience of otherwise apparently mature adults, which remind one of a male voice constantly modulating from manly tones into boyish falsetto. Some one has said of very early risers that they were apt to be conceited all the forenoon, and stupid and uninteresting all the afternoon and evening. So, too, precocious infant Christians are apt to be conceited and full of pious affectations all the forenoon of life, and thereafter commonplace enough in their religious life. One is reminded of Aristotle’s theory of Catharsis, according to which the soul was purged of strong or bad passions by listening to vivid representations of them on the stage. So, by the forcing method we deprecate, the soul is given just enough religious stimulus to act as an inoculation against deeper and more serious interest later. At this age the prescription of a series of strong feelings is very apt to cause attention to concentrate on physical states in a way which may culminate in the increased activity of the passional nature, or may induce that sort of self-flirtation which is expressed in morbid love of autobiographic confessional outpourings, or may issue in the supreme selfishness of incipient and often unsuspected hysteria. Those who are led to Christ normally by obeying conscience are not apt to endanger the foundation of their moral character if they should later chance to doubt the doctrine of verbal inspiration or some of the miracles, or even get confused about the Trinity, because their religious nature is not built on the sand. The art of leading young men through college without ennobling or enlarging any of the religious notions of childhood is anti-pedagogic and unworthy philosophy, and is to leave men puerile in the highest department of their nature.

    At the age we have indicated, when the young man instinctively takes the control of himself into his own hands, previous ethico-religious training should be brought to a focus and given a personal application, which, to be most effective, should probably, in most cases, be according to the creed of the parent. It is a serious and solemn epoch, and ought to be fittingly signalised. Morality now needs religion, which cannot have affected life much before. Now duties should be recognised as divine commands, for the strongest motives, natural and supernatural, are needed for the regulation of the new impulses, passions, desires, half insights, ambitions, etc., which come to the American temperament so suddenly before the methods of self-regulation can become established and operative. Now a deep personal sense of purity and impurity are first possible, and indeed inevitable, and this natural moral tension is a great opportunity to the religious teacher. A serious sense of God within, and of responsibilities which transcend this life as they do the adolescent’s power of comprehension; a feeling for duties deepened by a realization and experience of their conflict such as some have thought to be the origin of religion itself in the soul—these, too, are elements of the “theology of the heart” revealed at this age to every serious youth, but to the judicious emphasis and utilization of which, the teacher should lend his consummate skill. While special lines of interest leading to a career must be now well grounded, there must also be a culture of the ideal and an absorption in general views and remote and universal ends. If all that is pure and disciplining in what is transcendent, whether to the Christian believers, the poet or the philosopher, had even been devised only for the better regulation of human energies set free at this age, but not yet fully defined or realized, they would still have a most potent justification on this ground alone. At any rate, what is often wasted in excess here, if husbanded, ripens into philosophy, the larger love to the world, the true and the good, in a sense not unlike that in the symposium of Plato.

    Finally, there is danger lest this change, as prescribed and formulated by the church, be too sudden and violent, and the capital of moral force which should last a lifetime be consumed in a brief, convulsive effort, like the sudden running down of a watch if its spring be broken. Piety is naturally the slowest because the most comprehensive kind of growth. Quetelet says that the measure of the state of civilization in a nation is the way in which it achieves its revolutions. As it becomes truly civilized, revolutions cease to be sudden and violent, and become gradually transitory and without abrupt change. The same is true of that individual crisis which psycho-physiology describes as adolescence, and of which theology formulates a higher spiritual potency as conversion. The adolescent period lasts ten years or more, during all of which development of every sort is very rapid and constant, and it is, as already remarked, intemperate haste for immediate results, of reaping without sowing, which has made so many regard change of heart as an instantaneous conquest rather than as a growth, and persistently to forget that there is something of importance before and after it in healthful religious experience.

    [Footnote 1: See author’s Boy Life, in Massachusetts Country Town Forty Years Ago. Pedagogical Seminary, June, 1906, vol. 13, pp. 192-207.]

    [Footnote 2: Those interested in school statistics may value the record kept by a Swabian schoolmaster named Hauberle, extending over fifty-one years and seven months’ experience as a teacher, as follows: 911,527 blows with a cane; 124,010 with a rod; 20,939 with a ruler; 136,715 with the hand; 19,295 over the mouth; 7,905 boxes on the ear; 1,115,800 snaps on the head; 22,763 nota benes with Bible, catechism, hymnbook and grammar; 777 times boys had to kneel on peas; 613 times on triangular blocks of wand; 5,001 had to carry a timber mare; and, 7,701 hold the rod high; the last two being punishments of his own invention. Of the blows with the cane 800,000 were for Latin vowels, and 76,000 of those with the rod for Bible verses and hymns. He used a scolding vocabulary of over 3,000 terms, of which one-third were of his own invention.]

    [Footnote 3: For most recent and elaborate study of children’s lies see Zeitschrift für pädagogische Psychologie, Pathologie und Hygiene, Juli, 1905. Jahrgang 7, Heft 3, pp. 177-205.]

    * * * * *

    Extract from Youth: Its Education, Regimen, and Hygiene, by G. Stanley Hall

    Views: 0

  • THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS

    THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS

    THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS

    Equal opportunities of higher education now open—Brings new dangers to women—Ineradicable sex differences begin at puberty, when the sexes should and do diverge—Different interests—Sex tension—Girls more mature than boys at the same age—Radical psychic and physiological differences between the sexes—The bachelor women—Needed reconstruction—Food—Sleep—Regimen—Manners—Religion—Regularity—The topics for a girls’ curriculum—The eternal womanly.

    The long battle of woman and her friends for equal educational and other opportunities is essentially won all along the line. Her academic achievements have forced conservative minds to admit that her intellect is not inferior to that of man. The old cloistral seclusion and exclusion is forever gone and new ideals are arising. It has been a noble movement and is a necessary first stage of woman’s emancipation. The caricatured maidens “as beautiful as an angel but as silly as a goose” who come from the kitchen to the husband’s study to ask how much is two times two, and are told it is four for a man and three for a woman, and go back with a happy “Thank you, my dear”; those who love to be called baby, and appeal to instincts half parental in their lovers and husbands; those who find all the sphere they desire in a doll’s house, like Nora’s, and are content to be men’s pets; whose ideal is the clinging vine, and who take no interest in the field where their husbands struggle, will perhaps soon survive only as a diminishing remainder. Marriages do still occur where woman’s ignorance and helplessness seem to be the chief charm to men, and may be happy, but such cases are no farther from the present ideal and tendency on the one hand than on the other are those which consist in intellectual partnerships, in which there is no segregation of interests but which are devoted throughout to joint work or enjoyment.

    A typical contemporary writer[1] thinks the question whether a girl shall receive a college education is very like the same question for boys. Even if the four K’s, Kirche, Kinder, Kuchen, and Kleider (which may be translated by the four C’s, Church, Children, Cooking, and Clothes), are her vocation, college may help her. The best training for a young woman is not the old college course that has proven unfit for young men. Most college men look forward to a professional training as few women do. The latter have often greater sympathy, readiness of memory, patience with technic, skill in literature and language, but lack originality, are not attracted by unsolved problems, are less motor-minded; but their training is just as serious and important as that of men. The best results are where the sexes are brought closer together, because their separation generally emphasizes for girls the technical training for the profession of womanhood. With girls, literature and language take precedence over science; expression stands higher than action; the scholarship may be superior, but is not effective; the educated woman “is likely to master technic rather than art; method, rather than substance. She may know a good deal, but she can do nothing.” In most separate colleges for women, old traditions are more prevalent than in colleges for men. In the annex system, she does not get the best of the institution. By the coeducation method, “young men are more earnest, better in manners and morals, and in all ways more civilized than under monastic conditions. The women do more work in a more natural way, with better perspective and with saner incentives than when isolated from the influence of the society of men. There is less silliness and folly where a man is not a novelty. In coeducational institutions of high standards, frivolous conduct or scandals of any form are rarely known. The responsibility for decorum is thrown from the school to the woman, and the woman rises to the responsibility.” The character of college work has not been lowered but raised by coeducation, despite the fact that most of the new, small, weak colleges are coeducational. Social strain, Jordan thinks, is easily regulated, and the dormitory system is on the whole best, because the college atmosphere is highly prized. The reasons for the present reaction against coeducation are ascribed partly to the dislike of the idle boy to have girls excel him and see his failures, or because rowdyish tendencies are checked by the presence of women. Some think that girls do not help athletics; that men count for most because they are more apt to be heard from later; but the most serious new argument is the fear that woman’s standards and amateurishness will take the place of specialization. Women take up higher education because they like it; men because their careers depend upon it. Hence their studies are more objective and face the world as it is. In college the women do as well as men, but not in the university. The half-educated woman as a social factor has produced many soft lecture courses and cheap books. This is an argument for the higher education of the sex. Finally, Jordan insists that coeducation leads to marriage, and he believes that its best basis is common interest and intellectual friendship.

    From the available data it seems, however, that the more scholastic the education of women, the fewer children and the harder, more dangerous, and more dreaded is parturition, and the less the ability to nurse children. Not intelligence, but education by present man-made ways, is inversely as fecundity. The sooner and the more clearly this is recognized as a universal rule, not, of course, without many notable and much vaunted exceptions, the better for our civilization. For one, I plead with no whit less earnestness and conviction than any of the feminists, and indeed with more fervor because on nearly all their grounds and also on others, for the higher education of women, and would welcome them to every opportunity available to men if they can not do better; but I would open to their election another education, which every competent judge would pronounce more favorable to motherhood, under the influence of female principals who do not publicly say that it is “not desirable” that women students should study motherhood, because they do not know whether they will marry; who encourage them to elect “no special subjects because they are women,” and who think infant psychology “foolish.”

    Various interesting experiments in coeducation are now being made in England.[2] Some are whole-hearted and encourage the girls to do almost everything that the boys do in both study and play. There are girl prefects; cricket teams are formed sometimes of both sexes, but often the sexes matched against each other; one play-yard, a dual staff of teachers, and friendships between the boys and girls are not tabooed, etc. In other schools the sexes meet perhaps in recitation only, have separate rooms for study, entrances, play-grounds, and their relations are otherwise restricted. The opinion of English writers generally favors coeducation up to about the beginning of the teens, and from there on views are more divided. It is admitted that, if there is a very great preponderance of either sex over the other, the latter is likely to lose its characteristic qualities, and something of this occurs where the average age of one sex is distinctly greater than that of the other. On the other hand, several urge that, where age and numbers are equal, each sex is more inclined to develop the best qualities peculiar to itself in the presence of the other.

    Some girls are no doubt far fitter for boys’ studies and men’s careers than others. Coeducation, too, generally means far more assimilation of girls’ to boys’ ways and work than conversely. Many people believe that girls either gain or are more affected by coeducation, especially in the upper grades, than boys. It is interesting, however, to observe the differences that still persist. Certain games, like football and boxing, girls can not play; they do not fight; they are not flogged or caned as English boys are when their bad marks foot up beyond a certain aggregate; girls are more prone to cliques; their punishments must be in appeals to school sentiment, to which they are exceedingly sensitive; it is hard for them to bear defeat in games with the same dignity and unruffled temper as boys; it is harder for them to accept the school standards of honor that condemn the tell-tale as a sneak, although they soon learn this. They may be a little in danger of being roughened by boyish ways and especially by the crude and unique language, almost a dialect in itself, prevalent among schoolboys. Girls are far more prone to overdo; boys are persistingly lazy and idle. Girls are content to sit and have the subject-matter pumped into them by recitations, etc., and to merely accept, while boys are more inspired by being told to do things and make tests and experiments. In this, girls are often quite at sea. One writer speaks of a certain feminine obliquity, but hastens to say that girls in these schools soon accept its code of honor. It is urged, too, that singing classes the voices of each sex are better in quality for the presence of the other. In many topics of all kinds boys and girls are interested in different aspects of the same theme, and therefore the work is broadened. In manual training, girls excel in all artistic work; boys, in carpentry. Girls can be made not only less noxiously sentimental and impulsive, but their conduct tends to become more thoughtful; they can be made to feel responsibility for bestowing their praise aright and thus influencing the tone of the school. Calamitous as it world be for the education of boys beyond a certain age to be entrusted entirely or chiefly to women, it would be less so for that of girls to be given entirely to men. Perhaps the great women teachers, whose life and work have made them a power with girls comparable to that of Arnold and Thring with boys, are dying out. Very likely economic motives are too dominant for this problem to be settled on its merits only. Finally, several writers mention the increased healthfulness of moral tone. The vices that infest boys’ schools, which Arnold thought a quantity constantly changing with every class, are diminished. Healthful thoughts of sex, less subterranean and base imaginings on the one hand, and less gushy sentimentality on the other, are favored. For either sex to be a copy of the other is to be weakened, and each comes normally to respect more and to prefer its own sex.

    Not to pursue this subject further here, it is probable that many of the causes for the facts set forth are very different and some of them almost diametrically opposite in the two sexes. Hard as it is per se, it is after all a comparatively easy matter to educate boys. They are less peculiarly responsive in mental tone to the physical and psychic environment, tend more strongly and early to special interests, and react more vigorously against the obnoxious elements of their surroundings. This is truest of the higher education, and more so in proportion as the tendencies of the age are toward special and vocational training. Woman, as we saw, in every fiber of her soul and body is a more generic creature than man, nearer to the race, and demands more and more with advancing age an education that is essentially liberal and humanistic. This is progressively hard when the sexes differentiate in the higher grades. Moreover, nature decrees that with advancing civilization the sexes shall not approximate, but differentiate, and we shall probably be obliged to carry sex distinctions, at least of method, into many if not most of the topics of the higher education. Now that woman has by general consent attained the right to the best that man has, she must seek a training that fits her own nature as well or better. So long as she strives to be manlike she will be inferior and a pinchbeck imitation, but she must develop a new sphere that shall be like the rich field of the cloth of gold for the best instincts of her nature.

    Divergence is most marked and sudden in the pubescent period—in the early teens. At this age, by almost world-wide consent, boys and girls separate for a time, and lead their lives during this most critical period more or less apart, at least for a few years, until the ferment of mind and body which results in maturity of functions then born and culminating in nubility, has done its work. The family and the home abundantly recognize this tendency. At twelve or fourteen, brothers and sisters develop a life more independent of each other than before. Their home occupations differ as do their plays, games, tastes. History, anthropology, and sociology, a well as home life, abundantly illustrate this. This is normal and biological. What our schools and other institutions should do, is not to obliterate these differences but to make boys more manly and girls more womanly. We should respect the law of sexual differences, and not forget that motherhood is a very different thing from fatherhood. Neither sex should copy nor set patterns to the other, but all parts should be played harmoniously and clearly in the great sex symphony.

    I have here less to say against coeducation in college, still less in university grades after the maturity which comes at eighteen or twenty has been achieved; but it is high time to ask ourselves whether the theory and practise of identical coeducation, especially in the high school, which has lately been carried to a greater extreme in this country than the rest of the world recognizes, has not brought certain grave dangers, and whether it does not interfere with the natural differentiations seen everywhere else. I recognize, of course, the great argument of economy. Indeed, we should save money and effort could we unite churches of not too diverse creeds. We could thus give better preaching, music, improve the edifice, etc. I am by no means ready to advocate the radical abolition of coeducation, but we can already sum up in a rough, brief way our account of profit and loss with it. On the one hand, no doubt each sex develops some of its own best qualities best in the presence of the other, but the question still remains, how much, when, and in what way, identical coeducation secures this end?

    As has been said, girls and boys are often interested in different aspects of the same topic, and this may have a tendency to broaden the view-point of both and bring it into sympathy with that of the other, but the question still remains whether one be not too much attracted to the sphere of the other, especially girls to that of boys. No doubt some girls become a little less gushy, their conduct more thoughtful, and their sense of responsibility greater; for one of woman’s great functions, which is that of bestowing praise aright, is increased. There is also much evidence that certain boys’ vices are mitigated; they are made more urbane and their thoughts of sex made more healthful. In some respects boys are stimulated to good scholarship by girls, who in many schools and topics excel them. We should ask, however, What is nature’s way at this stage of life? Whether boys, in order to be well virified later, ought not to be so boisterous and even rough as to be at times unfit companions for girls; or whether, on the other hand, girls to be best matured ought not to have their sentimental periods of instability, especially when we venture to raise the question, whether for a girl in the early teens, when her health for her whole life depends upon normalizing the lunar month, there is not something unhygienic, unnatural, not to say a little monstrous, in school associations with boys when she must suppress and conceal her feelings and instinctive promptings at those times which suggest withdrawing, to let nature do its beautiful work of inflorescence. It is a sacred time of reverent exemption from the hard struggle of existence in the world and from mental effort in the school. Medical specialists, many of the best of whom now insist that through this period she should be, as it were, “turned out to grass,” or should lie fallow, so far as intellectual efforts go, one-fourth the time, no doubt often go too far, but their unanimous voice should not entirely be disregarded.

    It is not this, however, that I have chiefly in mind here, but the effects of too familiar relations and, especially, of the identical work, treatment, and environment of the modern school.

    We have now at least eight good and independent statistical studies which show that the ideals of boys from ten years on are almost always those of their own sex, while girls’ ideals are increasingly of the opposite sex, or those of men. That the ideals of pubescent girls are not found in the great and noble women of the world or in their literature, but more and more in men, suggests a divorce between the ideals adopted and the line of life best suited to the interests of the race. We are not furnished in our public schools with adequate womanly ideals in history or literature. The new love of freedom which women have lately felt inclines girls to abandon the home for the office. “It surely can hardly be called an ideal education for women that permits eighteen out of one hundred college girls to state boldly that they would rather be men than women.” More than one-half of the schoolgirls in these censuses choose male ideals, as if those of femininity are disintegrating. A recent writer,[3] in view of this fact, states that “unless there is a change of trend, we shall soon have a female sex without a female character.” In the progressive numerical feminization of our schools most teachers, perhaps naturally and necessarily, have more or less masculine ideals, and this does not encourage the development of those that constitute the glory of womanhood. “At every age from eight to sixteen, girls named from three to twenty more ideals than boys.” “These facts indicate a condition of diffused interests and lack of clear-cut purposes and a need of integration.”

    When we turn to boys the case is different. In most public high schools girls preponderate, especially in the upper classes, and in many of them the boys that remain are practically in a girls’ school, sometimes taught chiefly, if not solely, by women teachers at an age when strong men should be in control more than at any other period of life. Boys need a different discipline and moral regimen and atmosphere. They also need a different method of work. Girls excel them in learning and memorization, accepting studies upon suggestion or authority, but are often quite at sea when set to make tests and experiments that give individuality and a chance for self-expression, which is one of the best things in boyhood. Girls preponderate in our overgrown high school Latin and algebra, because custom and tradition and, perhaps, advice incline them to it. They preponderate in English and history classes more often, let us hope, from inner inclination. The boy sooner grows restless in a curriculum where form takes precedence over content. He revolts at much method with meager matter. He craves utility, and when all these instincts are denied, without knowing what is the matter, he drops out of school, when with robust tone and with a truly boy life, such as prevails at Harrow, Eton, and Rugby, he would have fought it through and have done well. This feminization of the school spirit, discipline, and personnel is bad for boys. Of course, on the whole, perhaps, they are made more gentlemanly, more at ease, their manners improved, and all this to a woman teacher seems excellent, but something is the matter with the boy in early teens who can be truly called “a perfect gentleman.” That should come later, when the brute and animal element have had opportunity to work themselves off in a healthful normal way. They still have football to themselves, and are the majority perhaps in chemistry, and sometimes in physics, but there is danger of a settled eviration. The segregation, which even some of our schools are now attempting, is always in some degree necessary for full and complete development. Just as the boys’ language is apt to creep into that of the girl, so girls’ interests, ways, standards and tastes, which are crude at this age, sometimes attract boys out of their orbit. While some differences are emphasized by contact, others are compromised. Boys tend to grow content with mechanical, memorized work and, excelling on the lines of girls’ qualities, fail to develop those of their own. There is a little charm and bloom rubbed off the ideal of girlhood by close contact, and boyhood seems less ideal to girls at close range. In place of the mystic attraction of the other sex that has inspired so much that is best in the world, familiar comradeship brings a little disenchantment. The impulse to be at one’s best in the presence of the other sex prows lax and sex tension remits, and each comes to feel itself seen through, so that there is less motive to indulge in the ideal conduct which such motives inspire, because the call for it is incessant. This disillusioning weakens the motivation to marriage sometimes on both sides, when girls grow careless in their dress and too negligent in their manners, one of the best schools of woman’s morals; and when boys lose all restraints which the presence of girls usually enforces, there is a subtle deterioration. Thus, I believe, although of course it is impossible to prove, that this is one of the factors of a decreasing percentage of marriage among educated young men and women.

    At eighteen or twenty the girl normally reaches a stage of first maturity when her ideas of life are amazingly keen and true; when, if her body is developed, she can endure a great deal; when she is nearest, perhaps, the ideal of feminine beauty and perfection. Of this we saw illustrations in Chapter VIII. In our environment, however, there is a little danger that this age once well past there will slowly arise a slight sense of aimlessness or lassitude, unrest, uneasiness, as if one were almost unconsciously feeling along the wall for a door to which the key was not at hand. Thus some lose their bloom and, yielding to the great danger of young womanhood, slowly lapse to a anxious state of expectancy, or desire something not within their reach, and so the diathesis of restlessness slowly supervenes. The best thing about college life for girls is, perhaps, that it postpones this incipient disappointment; but it is a little pathetic to me to read, as I have lately done, the class letters of hundreds of girl graduates, out of college one, two, or three years, turning a little to art, music, travel, teaching, charity work, one after the other, or trying to find something to which they can devote themselves, some cause, movement, occupation, where their capacity for altruism and self-sacrifice can find a field. The tension is almost imperceptible, perhaps quite unconscious. It is everywhere overborne by a keen interest in life, by a desire to know the world at first hand, while susceptibilities are at their height. The apple of intelligence has been plucked at perhaps a little too great cost of health. The purely mental has not been quite sufficiently kept back. The girl wishes to know a good deal more of the world and perfect her own personality, and would not marry, although every cell of her body and every unconscious impulse points to just that end. Soon, it may be in five or ten years or more, the complexion of ill health is in these notes, or else life has been adjusted to independence and self-support. Many of these bachelor women are magnificent in mind and body, but they lack wifehood and yet more—motherhood.

    In fine, we should use these facts as a stimulus to ask more searchingly the question whether the present system of higher education for both sexes is not lacking in some very essential elements, and if so what these are. Indeed, considering the facts that in our social system man makes the advances and that woman is by nature more prone than man to domesticity and parenthood, it is not impossible that men’s colleges do more to unfit for these than do those for women. One cause may be moral. Ethics used to be taught as a practical power for life and reënforced by religious motives. Now it is theoretical and speculative and too often led captive by metaphysical and epistemological speculations. Sometimes girls work or worry more over studies and ideals than is good for their constitution, and boys grow idle and indifferent, and this proverbially tends to bad habits. Perhaps fitting for college has been too hard at the critical age of about eighteen, and requirements of honest, persevering work during college years too little enforced, or grown irksome by physiological reaction of lassitude from the strain of fitting and entering. Again, girls mature earlier than boys; and the latter who have been educated with them tend to certain elements of maturity and completeness too early in life, and their growth period is shortened or its momentum lessened by an atmosphere of femininity. Something is clearly wrong, and more so here than we have at present any reason to think is the case among the academic male or female youth of other lands. To see and admit that there is an evil very real, deep, exceedingly difficult and complex in its causes, but grave and demanding a careful reconsideration of current educational ideas and practises, is the first step; and this every thoughtful and well-informed mind, I believe, must now take.

    It is utterly impossible without injury to hold girls to the same standards of conduct, regularity, severe moral accountability, and strenuous mental work that boys need. The privileges and immunities of her sex are inveterate, and with these the American girl in the middle teens fairly tingles with a new-born consciousness. Already she occasionally asserts herself in the public high school against a male teacher or principal who seeks to enforce discipline by methods boys respect, in a way that suggests that the time is at hand when popularity with her sex will be as necessary in a successful teacher as it is in the pulpit. In these interesting oases where girl sentiment has made itself felt in school it has generally carried parents, committeemen, the press, and public sentiment before it, and has already made a precious little list of martyrs whom, were I an educational pope, I would promptly canonize. The progressive feminization of secondary education works its subtle demoralization on the male teachers who remain. Public sentiment would sustain them in many parental exactions with boys which it disallows in mixed classes. It is hard, too, for male principals of schools with only female teachers not to suffer some deterioration in the moral tone of their virility and to lose in the power to cope successfully with men. Not only is this often confessed and deplored, but the incessant compromises the best male teachers of mixed classes must make with their pedagogic convictions in both teaching and discipline make the profession less attractive to manly men of large caliber and of sound fiber. Again, the recent rapid increase of girls, the percentage of which to population in high schools has in many communities doubled in but little more than a decade, almost necessarily involves a decline in the average quality of girls, perhaps as much greater for them as compared with boys as their increase has been greater. When but few were found in these institutions they were usually picked girls with superior tastes and ability, but now the average girl of the rank and file is, despite advanced standard, of admission, of an order natively lower. From this deterioration both boys and teachers suffer, even though the greatest good for the greatest number may be enhanced. Once more, it is generally admitted that girls in good boarding-schools, where evenings, food, and regimen are controlled, are in better health than day pupils with social, church, and domestic duties and perhaps worries to which boys are less subject. This is the nascent stage of periodicity to the slow normalization of which, during these few critical years, everything that interferes should yield. Some kind of tacit recognition of this is indispensable, but in mixed classes every form of such concession is baffling and demoralizing to boys.

    The women who really achieve the higher culture should make it their “cause” or “mission” to work out the new humanistic or liberal education which the old college claimed to stand for and which now needs radical reconstruction to meet the demands of modern life. In science they should aim to restore the humanistic elements of its history, biography, its popular features at their best, and its applications in all the more non-technical fields, as described in Chapter XII, and feel responsibility not to let the moral, religious, and poetic aspects of nature be lost in utilities. Woman should be true to her generic nature and take her stand against all premature specialization, and when the Zeitgeist [Spirit of the Times] insists on specialized training for occupative pursuits without waiting for broad foundations to be laid, she should resist all these influences that make for psychological precocity. Das Ewig-Weibliche [The eternal womanly] is no iridescent fiction but a very definable reality, and means perennial youth. It means that woman at her best never outgrows adolescence as man does, but lingers in, magnifies and glorifies this culminating stage of life with its all-sided interests, its convertibility of emotions, its enthusiasm, and zest for all that is good, beautiful, true, and heroic. This constitutes her freshness and charm, even in age, and makes her by nature more humanistic than man, more sympathetic and appreciative. It is not chiefly the 70,000 superfluous Massachusetts women of the last census, but representatives of every class and age in the 4,000 women’s clubs of this country that now find some leisure for general culture in all fields, and in which most of them no doubt surpass their husbands. Those who still say that men do not like women to be their mental superiors and that no man was ever won by the attraction of intellect, on the one hand, and those who urge that women really want husbands to be their intellectual superiors, both misapprehend. The male in all the orders of life is the agent of variation and tends by nature to expertness and specialisation, without which his individuality is incomplete. In his chosen line he would lead and be authoritative, and he rarely seeks partnership in it in marriage. This is no subjection, but woman instinctively respects and even reveres, and perhaps educated woman coming to demand, it in the man of her whole-hearted choice. This granted, man was never more plastic to woman’s great work of creating in him all the wide range of secondary sex qualities which constitute his essential manhood. In all this, the pedagogic fathers we teach in the history of education are most of them about as luminous and obsolete as is patristics for the religious teacher, or as methods of other countries are coming to be in solving our own peculiar pedagogic problems. The relation of the academically trained sexes is faintly typified by that of the ideal college to the ideal university, professional or technical school. This is the harmony of counterparts and constitutes the best basis of psychic amphimixis. For the reinstallation of the humanistic college, the time has come when cultivated woman ought to come forward and render vital aid. If she does so and helps to evolve a high school and an A.B. course that is truly liberal, it will not only fit her nature and needs far better than anything now existing, but young men at the humanistic stage of their own education will seek to profit by it, and she will thus repay her debt to man in the past by aiding him to de-universitize the college and to rescue secondary education from its gravest dangers.

    But even should all this be done, coeducation would by means be thus justified. If adolescent boys normally pass through a generalized or even feminized stage of psychic development in which they are peculiarly plastic to the guidance of older women who have such rare insight into their nature, such infinite sympathy and patience with all the symptoms of their storm and stress metamorphosis, when they seek everything by turns and nothing long, and if young men will forever afterward understand woman’s nature better for living out more fully this stage of their lives and will fail to do so if it is abridged or dwarfed, it by no means follows that intimate daily and class-room association with girls of their own age is necessary or best. The danger of this is that the boy’s instinct to assert his own manhood will thus be made premature and excessive, that he will react against general culture, in the capacity for which girls, who are older than boys at the same age, naturally excel them. Companionship and comparisons incline him to take premature refuge in some one talent that emphasizes his psycho-sexual difference too soon. Again, he is farther from nubile maturity than the girl classmate of his own age, and coeducation and marriage between them are prone to violate the important physiological law of disparity that requires the husband to be some years the wife’s senior, both in their own interests, as maturity begins to decline to age, and in those of their offspring. Thus the young man with his years of restraint and probation ahead, and his inflammable desires, is best removed from the half-conscious cerebrations about wedlock, inevitably more insistent with constant girl companionship. If he resists this during all the years of his apprenticeship, he grows more immune and inhibitive of it when its proper hour arrives, and perhaps becomes in soul a bachelor before his time. In this side of his nature he is forever incommensurate with and unintelligible to woman, be she even teacher, sister, or mother. Better some risk of gross thoughts and even acts, to which phylogeny and recapitulation so strongly incline him, than this subtle eviration. But if the boy is unduly repelled from the sphere of girls’ interests, the girl is in some danger of being unduly drawn to his, and, as we saw above, of forgetting some of the ideals of her own sex. Riper in mind and body than her male classmate, and often excelling him in the capacity of acquisition, nearer the age of her full maturity than he to his, he seems a little too crude and callow to fulfil the ideals of manhood normal to her age which point to older and riper men. In all that makes sexual attraction best, a classmate of her own age is too undeveloped, and so she often suffers mute disenchantment, and even if engagement be dreamed of, it would be, on her part, with unconscious reservations if not with some conscious renunciation of ideals. Thus the boy is correct in feeling himself understood and seen through by his girl classmates to a degree that is sometimes quite distasteful to him, while the girl finds herself misunderstood by and disappointed in men. Boys arrive at the humanistic stage of culture later than girls and pass it sooner; and to find them already there and with their greater aptitude excelling him, is not an inviting situation, and so he is tempted to abridge or cut it out and to hasten on and be mature and professional before his time, for thus he gravitates toward his normal relation to her sex of expert mastership on some bread- or fame-winning line. Of course, these influences are not patent, demonstrable by experiment, or measurable by statistics; but I have come to believe that, like many other facts and laws, they have a reality and a dominance that is all-pervasive and inescapable, and that they will ultimately prevail over economic motives and traditions.

    To be a true woman means to be yet more mother than wife. The madonna conception expresses man’s highest comprehension of woman’s real nature. Sexual relations are brief, but love and care of offspring are long. The elimination of maternity is one of the great calamities, if not diseases, of our age. Marholm[4] points out at length how art again to-day gives woman a waspish waist with no abdomen, as if to carefully score away every trace of her mission; usually with no child in her arms or even in sight; a mere figurine, calculated perhaps to entice, but not to bear; incidentally degrading the artist who depicts her to a fashion-plate painter, perhaps with suggestions of the arts of toilet, cosmetics, and coquetry, as if to promote decadent reaction to decadent stimuli. As in the Munchausen tale, the wolf slowly ate the running nag from behind until he found himself in the harness, so in the disoriented woman the mistress, virtuous and otherwise, is slowly supplanting the mother. Please she must, even though she can not admire, and can so easily despise men who can not lead her, although she become thereby lax and vapid.

    The more exhausted men become, whether by overwork, unnatural city life, alcohol, recrudescent polygamic inclinations, exclusive devotion to greed and pelf; whether they become weak, stooping, blear-eyed, bald-headed, bow-legged, thin-shanked, or gross, coarse, barbaric, and bestial, the more they lose the power to lead woman or to arouse her nature, which is essentially passive. Thus her perversions are his fault. Man, before he lost the soil and piety, was not only her protector and provider, but her priest. He not only supported and defended, but inspired the souls of women, so admirably calculated to receive and elaborate suggestions, but not to originate them. In their inmost souls even young girls often experience disenchantment, find men little and no heroes, and so cease to revere and begin to think stupidly of them as they think coarsely of her. Sometimes the girlish conceptions of men are too romantic and exalted; often the intimacy of school and college wear off a charm, while man must not forget that to-day he too often fails to realize the just and legitimate expectations and ideals of women. If women confide themselves, body and soul, less to him than he desires, it is not she, but he, who is often chiefly to blame. Indeed, in some psychic respects, it seems as if in human society the processes of subordinating the male to the female, carried so far in some of the animal species, had already begun. If he is not worshiped as formerly, it is because he is less worshipful or more effeminate, less vigorous and less able to excite and retain the great love of true, not to say great, women. Where marriage and maternity are of less supreme interest to an increasing number of women, there are various results, the chief of which are as follows:

    1. Women grow dollish; sink more or less consciously to man’s level; gratify his desires and even his selfish caprices, but exact in return luxury and display, growing vain as he grows sordid; thus, while submitting, conquering, and tyrannizing over him, content with present worldly pleasure, unmindful of the past, the future, or the above. This may react to intersexual antagonism until man comes to hate woman as a witch, or, as in the days of celibacy, consider sex a wile of the devil. Along these lines even the stage is beginning to represent the tragedies of life.

    2. The disappointed woman in whom something is dying comes to assert her own ego and more or less consciously to make it an end, aiming to possess and realize herself fully rather than to transmit. Despairing of herself as a woman, she asserts her lower rights in the place of her one great right to be loved. The desire for love may be transmuted into the desire for knowledge, or outward achievement become a substitute for inner content. Failing to respect herself as a productive organism, she gives vent to personal solutions; seeks independence; comes to know very plainly what she wants; perhaps becomes intellectually emancipated, and substitutes science for religion, or the doctor for the priest, with the all-sided impressionability characteristic of her sex which, when cultivated, is so like an awakened child. She perhaps even affects mannish ways, unconsciously copying from those not most manly, or comes to feel that she has been robbed of something; competes with men, but sometimes where they are most sordid, brutish, and strongest; always expecting, but never finding, she turns successively to art, science, literature, and reforms; craves especially work that she can not do; and seeks stimuli for feelings which have never found their legitimate expression.

    3. Another type, truer to woman’s nature, subordinates self; goes beyond personal happiness; adopts the motto of self-immolation; enters a life of service, denial, and perhaps mortification, like the Countess Schimmelmann; and perhaps becomes a devotee, a saint, and, if need be, a martyr, but all with modesty, humility, and with a shrinking from publicity.

    In our civilization, I believe that bright girls of good environment of eighteen or nineteen, or even seventeen, have already reached the above-mentioned peculiar stage of first maturity, when they see the world at first hand, when the senses are at their very best, their susceptibilities and their insights the keenest, tension at its highest, plasticity and all-sided interests most developed, and their whole psychic soil richest and rankest and sprouting everywhere with the tender shoots of everything both good and bad. Some such—Stella Klive, Mary MacLane, Hilma Strandberg, Marie Bashkirtseff—have been veritable epics upon woman’s nature; have revealed the characterlessness normal to the prenubile period in which everything is kept tentative and plastic, and where life seems to have least unity, aim, or purpose. By and by perhaps they will see in all their scrappy past, if not order and coherence, a justification, and then alone will they realize that life is governed by motives deeper than those which are conscious or even personal. This is the age when, if ever, no girl should be compelled. It is the experiences of this age, never entirely obliterated in women, that enable them to take adolescent boys seriously, as men can rarely do, in whom these experiences are more limited in range though no less intense. It is this stage in woman which is most unintelligible to man and even unrealized to herself. It is the echoes from it that make vast numbers of mothers pursue the various branches of culture, often half secretly, to maintain their position with their college sons and daughters, with their husbands, or with society.

    But in a very few years, I believe even in the early twenties with American girls, along with rapidly in creasing development of capacity there is also observable the beginnings of loss and deterioration. Unless marriage comes there is lassitude, subtle symptoms of invalidism, the germs of a rather aimless dissatisfaction with life, a little less interest, curiosity, and courage, certain forms of self-pampering, the resolution to be happy, though at too great cost; and thus the clear air of morning begins to haze over and unconsciously she begins to grope. By thirty, she is perhaps goaded into more or less sourness; has developed more petty self-indulgences; has come to feel a right to happiness almost as passionately as the men of the French Revolution and as the women in their late movement for enfranchisement felt for liberty. Very likely she has turned to other women and entered into innocent Platonic pairing-off relations with some one. There is a little more affectation, playing a rôle, and interest in dress and appearance is either less or more specialized and definite. Perhaps she has already begun to be a seeker who will perhaps find, lose, and seek again. Her temper is modified; there is a slight stagnation of soul; a craving for work or travel; a love of children with flitting thoughts of adopting one, or else aversion to them; an analysis of psychic processes until they are weakened and insight becomes too clear; sense of responsibility without an object; a slight general malaise and a sense that society is a false “margarine” affair; revolt against those that insist that in her child the real value of a woman is revealed. There are alternations between excessive self-respect which demands something almost like adoration of the other sex and self-distrust, with, it may be, many dreameries about forbidden subjects and about the relations of the sexes generally.

    A new danger, the greatest in the history of her sex, now impends, viz., arrest, complacency, and a sense of finality in the most perilous first stage of higher education for girls, when, after all, little has actually yet been won save only the right and opportunity to begin reconstructions, so that now, for the first time in history, methods and matter could be radically transformed to fit the nature and needs of girls. Now most female faculties, trustees, and students are content to ape the newest departures in some one or more male institutions as far as their means or obvious limitations make possible with a servility which is often abject and with rarely ever a thought of any adjustment, save the most superficial, to sex. It is the easiest, and therefore the most common, view typically expressed by the female head of a very successful institution,[5] who was “early convinced in my teaching experience that the methods for mental development for boys and girls applied equally without regard to sex, and I have carried the same thought when I began to develop the physical, and filled my gymnasium with the ordinary appliances used in men’s gymnasia.” There is no sex in mind or in science, it is said, but it might as well be urged that there is no age, and hence that all methods adapted to teaching at different stages of development may be ignored. That woman can do many things as well as man does not prove that she ought to do the same things, or that man-made ways are the best for her. Mrs. Alice Freeman Palmer[6] was right in saying that woman’s education has all the perplexities of that of man, and many more, still more difficult and intricate, of its own.

    Hence, we must conclude that, while women’s colleges have to a great extent solved the problem of special technical training, they have done as yet very little to solve the larger one of the proper education of woman. To assume that the latter question is settled, as is so often done, is disastrous. I have forced myself to go through many elaborate reports of meetings where female education was discussed by those supposed to be competent; but as a rule, not without rare, striking exceptions, these proceedings are smitten with the same sterile and complacent artificiality that was so long the curse of woman’s life. I deem it almost reprehensible that, save a few general statistics, the women’s colleges have not only made no study themselves of the larger problems that impend, but have often maintained a repellent attitude toward others who wished to do so. No one that I know of connected with any of these institutions, where the richest material is going to waste, is making any serious and competent research on lines calculated to bring out the psycho-physiological differences between the sexes and those in authority are either conservative by constitution or else intimidated because public opinion is still liable to panics if discussion here becomes scientific and fundamental, and so tend to keep prudery and the old habit of ignoring everything that pertains to sex in countenance.

    Again, while I sympathize profoundly with the claim of woman for every opportunity which she can fill, and yield to none in appreciation of her ability, I insist that the cardinal defect in the woman’s college is that it is based upon the assumption, implied and often expressed, if not almost universally acknowledged, that girls should primarily be trained to independence and self-support, and that matrimony and motherhood, if it come, will take care of itself, or, as some even urge, is thus best provided for. If these colleges are, as the above statistics indicate, chiefly devoted to the training of those who do not marry, or if they are to educate for celibacy, this is right. These institutions may perhaps come to be training stations of a new-old type, the agamic or even agenic woman, be she nut, maid—old or young—nun, school-teacher, or bachelor woman. I recognize the very great debt the world owes to members of this very diverse class in the past. Some of them have illustrated the very highest ideals of self-sacrifice, service, and devotion in giving to mankind what was meant for husband and children. Some of them belong to the class of superfluous women, and others illustrate the noblest type of altruism and have impoverished the heredity of the world to its loss, as did the monks, who Leslie Stephens thinks contributed to bring about the Dark Ages, because they were the best and most highly selected men of their age and, by withdrawing from the function of heredity and leaving no posterity, caused Europe to degenerate. Modern ideas and training are now doing this, whether for racial weal or woe, can not yet be determined, for many whom nature designed for model mothers.

    The bachelor woman is an interesting illustration of Spencer’s law of the inverse relation of individuation and genesis. The completely developed individual is always a terminal representative in her line of descent. She has taken up and utilized in her own life all that was meant for her descendants, and has so overdrawn her account with heredity that, like every perfectly and completely developed individual, she is also completely sterile. This is the very apotheosis of selfishness from the standpoint of every biological ethics. While the complete man can do and sometimes does this, woman has a far greater and very peculiar power of overdrawing her reserves. First she loses mammary functions, so that should she undertake maternity its functions are incompletely performed because she can not nurse, and this implies defective motherhood and leaves love of the child itself defective and maimed, for the mother who has never nursed can not love or be loved aright by her child. It crops out again in the abnormal or especially incomplete development of her offspring, in the critical years of adolescence, although they may have been healthful before, and a less degree of it perhaps is seen in the diminishing families of cultivated mothers in the one-child system. These women are the intellectual equals and often the superiors of the men they meet; they are very attractive as companions, like Miss Mehr, the university student, in Hauptmann’s “Lonely Lives,” who alienated the young husband from his noble wife; they enjoy all the keen pleasures of intellectual activity; their very look, step, and bearing is free; their mentality makes them good fellows and companionable in all the broad intellectual spheres; to converse with them is as charming and attractive for the best men as was Socrates’s discourse with the accomplished hetaerae; they are at home with the racquet and on the golf links; they are splendid friends; their minds, in all their widening areas of contact, are as attractive as their bodies; and the world owes much and is likely to owe far more to high Platonic friendships of this kind. These women are often in every way magnificent, only they are not mothers, and sometimes have very little wifehood in them, and to attempt to marry them to develop these functions is one of the unique and too frequent tragedies of modern life and literature. Some, though by no means all, of them are functionally castrated; some actively deplore the necessity of child-bearing, and perhaps are parturition phobiacs, and abhor the limitations of married life; they are incensed whenever attention is called to the functions peculiar to their sex, and the careful consideration of problems of the monthly rest are thought “not fit for cultivated women.”

    The slow evolution of this type is probably inevitable as civilization advances, and their training is a noble function. Already it has produced minds of the greatest acumen who have made very valuable contributions to science, and far more is to be expected of them in the future. Indeed, it may be their noble function to lead their sex out into the higher, larger life, and the deeper sense of its true position and function, for which I plead. Hitherto woman has not been able to solve her own problems. While she has been more religious than man, there have been few great women preachers; while she has excelled in teaching young children, there have been few Pestalozzis, or even Froebels; while her invalidism is a complex problem, she has turned to man in her diseases. This is due to the very intuitiveness and naïveté of her nature. But now that her world is so rapidly widening, she is in danger of losing her cue. She must be studied objectively and laboriously as we study children, and partly by men, because their sex must of necessity always remain objective and incommensurate with regard to woman, and therefore more or less theoretical. Again, in these days of intense new interest in feelings, emotions, and sentiments, when many a psychologist now envies and, like Schleiermacher, devoutly wishes he could become a woman, he can never really understand das Ewig-Weibliche, [The eternal womanly] one of the two supreme oracles of guidance in life, because he is a man; and here the cultivated woman must explore the nature of her sex as man can not, and become its mouthpiece. In many of the new fields opening in biology since Darwin, in embryology, botany, the study of children, animals, savages (witness Miss Fletcher), sociological investigation, to say nothing of all the vast body of work that requires painstaking detail, perseverance, and conscience, woman has superior ability, or her very sex gives her peculiar advantages where she is to lead and achieve great things in enlarging the kingdom of man. Perhaps, too, the present training of women may in the end develop those who shall one day attain a true self-knowledge and lead n the next step of devising a scheme that shall fit woman’s nature and needs.

    For the slow evolution of such a scheme, we must first of all distinctly and ostensively invert the present maxim, and educate primarily and chiefly for motherhood, assuming that, if that does not come, single life can best take care of itself, because it is less intricate and lower and its needs far more easily met. While girls may be trained with boys, coeducation should cease at the dawn of adolescence, at least for a season. Great daily intimacy between the sexes in high school, if not in college, tends to rub of the bloom and delicacy which can develop in each, and girls suffer in this respect, let us repeat, far more than boys. The familiar comradeship that ignores sex should be left to the agenic class. To the care of their institutions, we leave with pious and reverent hands the ideals inspired by characters like Hypatia, Madame de Staël, the Misses Cobb, Martineau, Fuller, Bronté, by George Eliot, George Sand, and Mrs. Browning; and while accepting and profiting by what they have done, and acknowledging every claim for their abilities and achievements, prospective mothers must not be allowed to forget a still larger class of ideal women, both in history and literature, from the Holy Mother to Beatrice Clotilda de Vaux, and all those who have inspired men to great deeds, and the choice and far richer anthology of noble mothers.

    We must premise, too, that she must not be petted or pampered with regimen or diet unsuited to her needs; left to find out as best she can, from surreptitious or worthy sources, what she most of all needs to know; must recognize that our present civilization is hard on woman and that she is not yet adjusted to her social environment; that as she was of old accused of having given man the apple of knowledge of good and evil, so he now is liable to a perhaps no less serious indictment of having given her the apple of intellectualism and encouraged her to assume his standards at the expense of health. We must recognize that riches are probably harder on her, on the whole, than poverty, and that poor parents should not labor too hard to exempt her from its wholesome discipline. The expectancy of change so stamped upon her sex by heredity as she advances into maturity must not be perverted into uneasiness or her soul sown with the tares of ambition or fired by intersexual competition and driven on, to quote Dr. R.T. Edes, “by a tireless sort of energy which is a compound of conscience, ambition, and desire to please, plus a peculiar female obstinacy.” If she is bright, she must not be overworked in the school factory, studying in a way which parodies Hood’s “Song of the Shirt”; and if dull or feeble, she should not be worried by preceptresses like a eminent lady principal,[7] who thought girls’ weakness is usually imaginary or laziness, and that doctors are to blame for suggesting illness and for intimating that men will have to choose between a healthy animal and an educated invalid for a wife.

    Without specifying here details or curricula, the ideals that should be striven toward in the intermediate and collegiate education of adolescent girls with the proper presupposition of motherhood, and which are already just as practicable as Abbotsholme[8] or L’Ecole des Roches,[9] may be rudely indicated somewhat as follows.

    First, the ideal institution for the training of girls from twelve or thirteen on into the twenties, when the period most favorable to motherhood begins, should be in the country in the midst of hills, the climbing of which is the best stimulus for heart and lungs, and tends to mental elevation and breadth of view. There should be water for boating, bathing, and skating, aquaria and aquatic life; gardens both for kitchen vegetables and horticulture; forests for their seclusion and religious awe; good roads, walks, and paths that tempt to walking and wheeling: playgrounds and space for golf and tennis, with large covered but unheated space favorable for recreations in weather really too bad for out-of-door life and for those indisposed; and plenty of nooks that permit each to be alone with nature, for this develops inwardness, poise, and character, yet not too great remoteness from the city for a wise utilization of its advantages at intervals. All that can be called environment is even more important for girls than boys, significant as it is for the latter.

    The first aim, which should dominate every item, pedagogic method and matter, should be health—a momentous word that looms up beside holiness, to which it is etymologically akin. The new hygiene of the last few years should be supreme and make these academic areas soared to the cult of the goddess Hygeia. Only those who realize what advances have been made in health culture and know something of its vast new literature can realize all that this means. The health of woman is, as we have seen, if possible even more important for the welfare of the race than that of man; and the influence of her body upon her mind is, in a sense, greater, so that its needs should be supreme and primary. Foods should favor the completest digestion, so that metabolism be on the highest plane. The dietary should be abundant, plain, and varied, and cooked with all the refinements possible in the modern cooking-school, which should be one of its departments, with limited use of rich foods or desserts and stimulating drinks, but with wholesome proximity to dairy and farm. Nutrition is the first law of health and happiness, the prime condition and creator of euphoria; and the appetite should be, as it always is if unperverted, like a kind of somatic conscience steadfastly pointing toward the true pole of needs.

    Sleep should be regular, with a fixed retiring hour and curfew, on plain beds in rooms of scrupulous neatness reserved chiefly for it with every precaution for quiet, and, if possible, with windows more or less open the year round, and, like other rooms, never overheated. Bathing in moderation, and especially dress and toilet should be almost raised to fine arts and objects of constant suggestion. Each student should have three rooms, for bath, sleep, and study, respectively, and be responsible for their care, with every encouragement for expressing individual tastes; but will, an all-dominant idea of simplicity, convenience, refinement, and elegance, without luxury. Girls need to go away from home a good part of every year to escape the indiscretion and often the coddling of parents and to learn self-reliance; and a family dormitory system, with but few, twelve to twenty, in each building, to escape nervous wear and distraction, to secure intimacy and acquaintance with one or more matrons or teachers and to ensure the most pedagogic dietetics, is suggested.

    Exercise comes after regimen, of which it is a special reform. Swedish gymnastics should be abandoned or reduced to a minimum of best points, because it is too severe and, in forbidding music, lays too little stress upon the rhythm element. Out-of-door walks and games should have precedence over all else. The principle sometimes advocated, that methods of physical training should apply to both boys and girls without regard to sex, and with all the ordinary appliances found in the men’s gymnasia introduced, should be reversed and every possible adjustment made to sex. Free plays and games should always have precedence over indoor or uniform commando exercises. Boating and basket-ball should be allowed, but with the competition element sedulously reduced, and with dancing of many kinds and forms the most prominent of indoor exercises. The dance cadences the soul; the stately minuet gives poise; the figure dances train the mind; and pantomime and dramatic features should be introduced and even specialties, if there are strong individual predispositions. The history of the dance, which has often been a mode of worship, a school of morals, and which is the root of the best that is in the drama, the best of all exercises and that could be again the heart of our whole educational system, should be exploited, and the dancing school and class rescued from its present degradation. No girl is educated who can not dance, although she need not know the ballroom in its modern form.[10]

    Manners, a word too often relegated to the past as savoring of the primness of the ancient dame school or female seminary, are really minor or sometimes major morals. They can express everything in the whole range of the impulsive or emotional life. Now that we understand the primacy of movement over feeling, we can appreciate what a school of bearing and repose in daily converse with others means. I would revive some of the ancient casuistry of details, but less the rules of the drawing-room, call and party, although these should not be neglected, than the deeper expressions of true ladyhood seen in an exquisite, tender and unselfish regard for the feelings of others. Women’s ideal of compelling every one whom they meet to like them is a noble one, and the control of every automatism is not only a part of good breeding, but nervous health.

    Regularity should be another all-pervading norm. In the main, even though he may have “played his sex symphony too harshly,” E.H. Clark was right. Periodicity, perhaps the deepest law of the cosmos, celebrates its highest triumphs in woman’s life. For years everything must give way to its thorough and settled establishment. In the monthly Sabbaths of rest, the ideal school should revert to the meaning of the word leisure. The paradise of stated rest should be revisited, idleness be actively cultivated; reverie, in which the soul, which needs these seasons of withdrawal for its own development, expatiates over the whole life of the race, should be provided for and encouraged in every legitimate way, for, in rest, the whole momentum of heredity is felt in ways most favorable to full and complete development. Then woman should realize that to be is greater than to do; should step reverently aside from her daily routine and let Lord Nature work. In this time of sensitiveness and perturbation, when anemia and chlorosis are so peculiarly immanent to her sex, remission of toil should not only be permitted, but required; and yet the greatest individual liberty should be allowed to adjust itself to the vast diversities of individual constitutional needs. (See Chapter VII on this point.) The cottage home, which should take the place of the dormitory, should always have special interest and attractions for these seasons.

    There should always be some personal instruction at these seasons during earlier adolescent years. I have glanced over nearly a score of books and pamphlets that are especially written for girls; while all are well meant and far better than the ordinary modes by which girls acquire knowledge of their own nature if left to themselves, they are, like books for boys, far too prolix, and most are too scientific and plain and direct. Moreover, no two girls need just the same instruction, and to leave it to reading is too indirect and causes the mind to dwell on it for too long periods. Best of all is individual instruction at the time, concise, practical, and never, especially in the early years, without a certain mystic and religious tone which should pervade all and make everything sacred. This should not be given by male physicians—and indeed most female doctors would make it too professional, and the maiden teacher must forever lack reverence for it—but it should come from one whose soul and body are full of wifehood and motherhood and who is old enough to know and is not without the necessary technical knowledge.

    Another principle should be to broaden by retarding; to keep the purely mental back and by every method to bring the intuitions to the front; appeals to tact and taste should be incessant; a purely intellectual man is no doubt biologically a deformity, but a purely intellectual woman is far more so. Bookishness is probably a bad sign in a girl; it suggests artificiality, pedantry, the lugging of dead knowledge. Mere learning is not the ideal, and prodigies of scholarship are always morbid. The rule should be to keep nothing that is not to become practical; to open no brain tracts which are not to be highways for the daily traffic of thought and conduct; not to overburden the soul with the impedimenta of libraries and records of what is afar off in time or zest, and always to follow truly the guidance of normal and spontaneous interests wisely interpreted.

    Religion will always bold as prominent a place in woman’s life as politics does in man’s, and adolescence is still more its seedtime with girls than with boys. Its roots are the sentiment of awe and reverence, and it is the great agent in the world for transforming life from its earlier selfish to its only really mature form of altruism. The tales of the heroes of virtue, duty, devotion, and self-sacrifice from the Old Testament come naturally first; then perhaps the prophets paraphrased as in the pedagogic triumph of Kent and Saunders’s little series; and when adolescence is at its height then the chief stress of religious instruction should be laid upon Jesus’s life and work. He should be taught first humanly, and only later when the limitations of manhood seem exhausted should His Deity be adduced as welcome surplusage. The supernatural is a reflex of the heart; each sustains and neither can exist without the other. If the transcendent and supernal had no objective existence, we should have to invent and teach it or dwarf the life of feeling and sentiment. Whatever else religion is, therefore, it is the supremest poetry of the soul, reflecting like nothing else all that is deepest, most generic and racial in it. Theology should be reduced to a minimum, but nothing denied where wanted. Paul and his works and ways should be for the most part deferred until after eighteen. The juvenile well as the cyclone revivalist should be very carefully excluded; and yet in every springtime, when nature is recreated, service and teaching should gently encourage the revival and even the regeneration of all the religious instincts. The mission recruiter should be allowed to do his work outside these halls, and everything in the way of infection and all that brings religion into conflict with good taste and good sense should be excluded, while esthetics should supplement, reënforce, and go hand in hand with piety. Religion is in its infancy; and woman, who has sustained it in the past, must be the chief agent in its further and higher development. Orthodoxies and all narrowness should forever give place to cordial hospitality toward every serious view, which should be met by the method of greater sympathy rather than by that of criticism.

    Nature in her many phases should, of course, make up a large part of the entire curriculum, but here again the methods of the sexes should differ somewhat after puberty. The poetic and mythic factors and some glimpses of the history of science should be given more prominence; the field naturalist rather than the laboratory man of technic should be the ideal especially at first; nature should be taught as God’s first revelation, as an Old Testament related to the Bible as a primordial dispensation to a later and clearer and more special one. Reverence and love should be the motive powers, and no aspect should be studied without beginning and culminating in interests akin to devotion. Mathematics should be taught only in its rudiments, and those with special talents or tastes for it should go to agamic schools. Chemistry, too, although not excluded, should have a subordinate place. The average girl has little love of sozzling and mussing with the elements, and cooking involves problems in organic chemistry too complex to be understood very profoundly, but the rudiments of household chemistry should be taught. Physics, too, should be kept to elementary stages. Meteorology should have a larger, and geology and astronomy increasingly larger places, and are especially valuable because, and largely in proportion as, they are taught out of doors, but the general principles and the untechnical and practical aspects should be kept in the foreground. With botany more serious work should be done. Plant-lore and the poetic aspect, as in astronomy, should have attention throughout, while Latin nomenclature and microscopic technic should come late if at all, and vulgar names should have precedence over Latin terminology. Flowers, gardening, and excursions should never be wanting. Economic and even medical aspects should appear, and prominent and early should come the whole matter of self cross-fertilization and that by insects. The moral value of this subject will never be fully understood till we have what might almost be called a woman’s botany, constructed on lines different from any of the text-books I have glanced at. Here much knowledge interesting in itself can be early taught, which will spring up into a world of serviceable insights as adolescence develops and the great law of sex unfolds.

    Zoology should always be taught with plenty of pets, menagerie resources, and with aquaria, aviaries, apiaries, formicaries, etc., as adjuncts. It should start in the environment like everything else. Bird and animal lore, books, and pictures should abound in the early stages, and the very prolific chapter of instincts should have ample illustration, while the morphological nomenclature and details of structure should be less essential. Woman has domesticated nearly all the animals, and is so superior to man in insight into their modes of life and psychoses that many of them are almost exemplifications of moral qualities to her even more than to man. The peacock is an embodied expression of pride; the pig, of filth; the fox, of cunning; the serpent, of subtle danger; the eagle, of sublimity; the goose, of stupidity; and so on through all the range of human qualities, as we have seen. At bottom, however, the study of animal life is coming to be more and more a problem of heredity, and its problems should have dominant position and to them the other matter should grade up.

    This shades over into and prepares for the study of the primitive man and child so closely related to each other. The myth, custom, belief, domestic practises of savages, vegetative and animal traits in infancy and childhood, the development of which is a priceless boon for the higher education of women, open of themselves a great field of human interest where she needs to know the great results, the striking details, the salient illustrations, the basal principles rather than to be entangled in the details of anthropometry, craniometry, philology, etc.

    All this lays the basis for a larger study of modern man—history, with the biographical element very prominent throughout, with plenty of stories of heroes of virtue, acts of valor, tales of saintly lives and the personal element more prominent, and specialization in the study of dynasties, wars, authorities, and controversies relegated to a very subordinate place. Sociology, undeveloped, rudimentary, and in some places suspected as it is, should have in the curriculum of her higher education a place above political economy. The stories of the great reforms, and accounts of the constitution of society, of the home, church, state, and school, and philanthropies and ideals, should to the fore.

    Art in all its forms should be opened at least in a propædeutic way and individual tastes amply and judiciously fed, but there should be no special training in music without some taste and gift, and the aim should be to develop critical and discriminative appreciation and the good taste that sees the vast superiority of all that is good and classic over what is cheap and fustian.

    In literature, myth, poetry, and drama should perhaps lead, and the knowledge of the great authors in the vernacular be fostered. Greek, Hebrew, and perhaps Latin languages should be entirely excluded, not but that they are of great value and have their place, but because a smattering knowledge is bought at too high a price of ignorance of more valuable things. German, French, and Italian should be allowed and provided for by native teachers and by conversational methods if desired, and in their proper season.

    In the studies of the soul of man, generally called the philosophic branches, metaphysics and epistemology should have the smallest, and logic the next least place. Psychology should be taught on the genetic basis of animals and children, and one of its tap-roots should be developed from the love of infancy and youth, than which nothing in all the world is more worthy. If a woman Descartes ever arises, she will put life before theory, and her watchword will be not cogito, ergo sum, [I think, therefore I am] but sum, ergo cogito [I am, therefore I think]. The psychology of sentiments and feelings and intuitions will take precedence of that of pure intellect; ethics will be taught on the basis of the whole series of practical duties and problems, and the theories of the ultimate nature of right or the constitution of conscience will have small place.

    Domesticity will be taught by example in some ideal home building by a kind of laboratory method. A nursery with all carefully selected appliances and adjuncts, a dining-room, a kitchen, bedroom, closets, cellars, outhouses, building, its material, the grounds, lawn, shrubbery, hothouse, library, and all the other adjuncts of the hearth will be both exemplified and taught. A general course in pedagogy, especially its history and ideals, another in child study, and finally a course in maternity the last year taught broadly, and not without practical details of nursing, should be comprehensive and culminating. In its largest sense maternity might be the heart of all the higher training of young women.

    Applied knowledge will thus be brought to a focus in a department of teaching as one of the specialties of motherhood and not as a vocation apart. The training should aim to develop power of maternity in soul as well as in body, so that home influence may extend on and up through the plastic years of pubescence, and future generations shall not rebel against these influences until they have wrought their perfect work.

    The methods throughout should be objective, with copious illustrations by way of object-lessons, apparatus, charts, pictures, diagrams, and lectures, far less book work and recitation, only a limited amount of room study, the function of examination reduced to a minimum, and everything as suggestive and germinal as possible. Hints that are not followed up; information not elaborated into a thin pedagogic sillabub or froth; seed that is sown on the waters with no thought of reaping; faith in a God who does not pay at the end of each week, month, or year, but who always pays abundantly some time; training which does not develop hypertrophied memory-pouches that carry, or creative powers that discover and produce—these are lines on which such an institution should develop. Specialization has its place, but it always hurts a woman’s soul more than a man’s, should always come later, and if there is special capacity it should be trained elsewhere. Unconscious education is a power of which we have yet to learn the full ranges.

    In most groups in this series of ideal departments there should be at least one healthful, wise, large-souled, honorable, married and attractive man, and, if possible, several of them. His very presence in an institution for young women gives poise, polarizes the soul, and gives wholesome but long-circuited tension at root no doubt sexual, but all unconsciously so. This mentor should not be more father than brother, though he should combine the best of each, but should add another element. He need not be a doctor, a clergyman, or even a great scholar, but should be accessible for confidential conferences even though intimate. He should know the soul of the adolescent girl and how to prescribe; he should be wise and fruitful in advice, but especially should be to all a source of contagion and inspiration for poise and courage even though religious or medical problems be involved. But even if he lack all these latter qualities, though he so poised that impulsive girls can turn their hearts inside out in his presence and perhaps even weep on his shoulder, the presence of such a being, though a complete realization of this ideal could be only remotely approximated, would be the center of an atmosphere most wholesomely tonic.

    In these all too meager outlines I have sketched a humanistic and liberal education and have refrained from all details and special curriculization. Many of the above features I believe would be as helpful for boys as for girls, but woman has here an opportunity to resume her exalted and supreme position, to be the first in this higher field, to lead man and pay her debt to his educational institutions, by resuming her crown. The ideal institutions, however, for the two will always be radically and probably always increasingly divergent.

    As a psychologist, penetrated with the growing sense of the predominance of the heart over the mere intellect, I believe myself not alone in desiring to make a tender declaration of being more and more passionately in love with woman as I conceive she came from the hand of God. I keenly envy my Catholic friends their Maryolatry. Who ever asked if the Holy Mother, whom the wise men adored, knew the astronomy of the Chaldees or had studied Egyptian or Babylonian, or even whether she knew how to read or write her own tongue, and who has ever thought of caring? We can not conceive that she bemoaned any limitations of her sex, but she has been an object of adoration all these centuries because she glorified womanhood by being more generic, nearer the race, and richer in love, pity, unselfish devotion and intuition than man. The glorified madonna ideal shows us how much more whole and holy it is to be a woman than to be artist, orator, professor, or expert, and suggests to our own sex that to be a man is larger than to be gentleman, philosopher, general, president, or millionaire.

    But with all this love and hunger in my heart, I can not help sharing in the growing fear that modern woman, at least in more ways and places than one, is in danger of declining from her orbit; that she is coming to lack just confidence and pride in her sex as such, and is just now in danger of lapsing to mannish ways, methods, and ideals, until her original divinity may become obscured. But, if our worship at her shrine is with a love and adoration a little qualified and unsteady, we have a fixed and abiding faith without which we should have no resource against pessimism for the future of our race, that she will ere long evolve a sphere of life and even education which fits her needs as well as, if not better than those of man fit his.

    Meanwhile, if the eternally womanly seems somewhat less divine, we can turn with unabated faith to the eternally childish, the best of which in each are so closely related. The oracles of infancy and childhood will never fail. Distracted as we are in the maze of new sciences, skills, ideals, knowledges that we can not fully coördinate by our logic or curriculize by our pedagogy; confused between the claims of old and new methods; needing desperately, for survival as a nation and a race, some clue to thrid the mazes of the manifold modern cultures, we have now at least one source to which we can turn—we have found the only magnet in all the universe that points steadfastly to the undiscovered pole of human destiny. We know what can and will ultimately coördinate in the generic, which is larger than the logical order, all that is worth knowing, teaching, or doing by the best methods, that will save us from misfits and the waste ineffable of premature and belated knowledge, and that is in the interests and line of normal development in the child in our midst that must henceforth ever lead us which epitomizes in its development all the stages, human and prehuman; that is the proper object of all that strange new love of everything that is naive, spontaneous, and unsophisticated in human nature. The heart and soul of growing childhood is the criterion by which we judge the larger heart and soul of mature womanhood; and these are ultimately the only guide into the heart of the new education which is to be, when the school becomes what Melanchthon said it must be—a true workshop of the Holy Ghost—and what the new psychology, when it rises to the heights of prophecy, foresees as the true paradise of restored intuitive human nature.

    [Footnote 1: David Starr Jordan: The Higher Education of Women.
    Popular Science Monthly, December, 1902, vol. 62, pp. 97-107. See also
    my article on this subject in Munsey’s Magazine, February, 1906, and
    President Jordan’s reply in the March number, 1906.]

    [Footnote 2: Coeducation. A series of essays by various authors, edited by Alice Woods, with an introduction by M.E. Sadler. Longmans, Green and Co., London 1903, p. 148 et seq.]

    [Footnote 3: The Evolution of Ideals. W.G. Chambers, Pedagogical
    Seminary, March, 1903, vol. 10, pp. 101-143. Also, B.E. Warner: The
    Young Woman in Modern Life. Dodd, Mead & Co., New York, 1903, p. 218.]

    [Footnote 4: The Psychology of Woman. Translated by G.A. Etchison.
    Richards, London, 1899.]

    [Footnote 5: Physical Development of Women and Children. By Miss M.E.
    Allen. American Association for Physical Education., April, 1890.]

    [Footnote 6: A Review of the Higher Education of Women. Forum, September, 1891, vol. 12, pp 25-40. See also G. von Bunge: Die zunehmende Unfähigkeit der Frauen ihre Kinder zu stillen. München Reinhardt, 1903, 3d ed. Also President Harper’s Decennial Report, pp. xciv-cxi.]

    [Footnote 7: Physical Hindrances to Teaching Girls, by Charlotte W.
    Porter. Forum, September, 1891, vol. 12, pp. 41-49.]

    [Footnote 8: Abbotsholme, 1889-1899: or Ten Years’ Work in an
    Educational Laboratory, by Cecil Reddie, G. Allen London, 1900.]

    [Footnote 9: See L’Ecole des Roches, a school of the Twentieth Century, by T.R. Croswell. Pedagogical Seminary, December, 1900, vol. 7, pp. 479-491.]

    [Footnote 10: See Chapter VI.]

    Extract from Youth: Its Education, Regimen, and Hygiene, by G. Stanley Hall

    Views: 0

  • YOUTH INTELLECTUAL EDUCATION AND SCHOOL WORK

    YOUTH INTELLECTUAL EDUCATION AND SCHOOL WORK

    INTELLECTUAL EDUCATION AND SCHOOL WORK

    The general change and plasticity at puberty—English teaching—Causes of its failure: (1) too much time to other languages, (2) subordination of literary content to form, (3) too early stress on eye and hand instead of ear and mouth, (4) excessive use of concrete words—Children’s interest in words—Their favorites—Slang—Story telling—Age of reading crazes—What to read—The historic sense—Growth of memory span.

    Just as about the only duty of young children is implicit obedience, so the chief mental training from about eight to twelve is arbitrary memorization, drill, habituation, with only limited appeal to the understanding. After the critical transition age of six or seven, when the brain has achieved its adult size and weight, and teething has reduced the chewing surface to its least extent, begins a unique stage of life marked by reduced growth and increased activity and power to resist both disease and fatigue, which suggests what was, in some just post-simian age of our race, its period of maturity. Here belong discipline in writing, reading, spelling, verbal memory, manual training, practise of instrumental technic, proper names, drawing, drill in arithmetic, foreign languages by oral methods, the correct pronunciation of which is far harder if acquired later, etc. The hand is never so near the brain. Most of the content of the mind has entered it through the senses, and the eye-and ear-gates should be open at their widest. Authority should now take precedence of reason. Children comprehend much and very rapidly if we can only refrain from explaining, but this slows down intuition, tends to make casuists and prigs and to enfeeble the ultimate vigor of reason. It is the age of little method and much matter. The good teacher is now a pedotrieb, or boy-driver. Boys of this age at now not very affectionate. They take pleasure in obliging and imitating those they like and perhaps in disobliging those they dislike. They have much selfishness and little sentiment. As this period draws to a close and the teens begin, the average normal child will not be bookish but should read and write well, know a few dozen well-chosen books, play several dozen games, be well started in one or more ancient and modern languages—if these must be studied at all, should know something of several industries and how to make many things he is interested in, belong to a few teams and societies, know much about nature in his environment, be able to sing and draw, should have memorized much more than he now does, and be acquainted, at least in story form, with the outlines of many of the best works in literature and the epochs and persons in history.[1] Morally he should have been through many if not most forms of what parents and teachers commonly call “badness,” and Professor Yoder even calls “meanness”. He should have fought, whipped and been whipped, used language offensive to the prude and to the prim precisian, been in some scrapes, had something to do with bad, if more with good, associates, and been exposed to and already recovering from as many forms of ethical mumps and measles as, by having in mild form now he can be rendered immune to later when they become far more dangerous, because his moral and religious as well as his rational nature is normally rudimentary. He is not depraved, but only in a savage or half-animal stage, although to a large-brained, large-hearted and truly parental soul that does not call what causes it inconvenience by opprobrious names, an altogether lovable and even fascinating stage. The more we know of boyhood the more narrow and often selfish do adult ideals of it appear. Something is amiss with the lad of ten who is very good, studious, industrious, thoughtful, altruistic, quiet, polite, respectful, obedient, gentlemanly, orderly, always in good toilet, docile to reason, who turns away from stories that reek with gore, prefers adult companionship to that of his mates, refuses all low associates, speaks standard English, or is as pious and deeply in love with religious services as the typical maiden teacher or the à la modeparent wishes. Such a boy is either under-vitalized and anemic and precocious by nature, a repressed, overtrained, conventionalized manikin, a hypocrite, as some can become under pressure thus early in life, or else a genius of some kind with a little of all these.

    But with the teens all this begins to be changed and many of these precepts must be gradually reversed. There is an outburst of growth that needs a large part of the total kinetic energy of the body. There is a new interest in adults, a passion to be treated like one’s elders, to make plans for the future, a new sensitiveness to adult praise or blame. The large muscles have their innings and there is a new clumsiness of body and mind. The blood-vessels expand and blushing is increased, new sensations and feelings arise, the imagination blossoms, love of nature is born, music is felt in a new, more inward way, fatigue comes easier and sooner; and if heredity and environment enable the individual to cross this bridge successfully there is sometimes almost a break of continuity, and a new being emerges. The drill methods of the preceding period must be slowly relaxed and new appeals made to freedom and interest. We can no longer coerce a break, but must lead and inspire if we would avoid arrest. Individuality must have a longer tether. Never is the power to appreciate so far ahead of the power to express, and never does understanding so outstrip ability to explain. Overaccuracy is atrophy. Both mental and moral acquisition sink at once too deep to be reproduced by examination without injury both to intellect and will. There is nothing in the environment to which the adolescent nature does not keenly respond. With pedagogic tact we can teach about everything we know that is really worth knowing; but if we amplify and morselize instead of giving great wholes, if we let the hammer that strikes the bell rest too long against it and deaden the sound, and if we wait before each methodic step till the pupil has reproduced all the last, we starve and retard the soul, which is now all insight and receptivity. Plasticity is at its maximum, utterance at its minimum. The inward traffic obstructs the outer currents. Boys especially are often dumb-bound, monophrastic, inarticulate, and semi-aphasic save in their own vigorous and inelegant way. Nature prompts to a modest reticence for which the deflowerers of all ephebic naiveté should have some respect. Deep interests arise which are almost as sacred as is the hour of visitation of the Holy Ghost to the religious teacher. The mind at times grows in leaps and bounds in a way that seems to defy the great enemy, fatigue; and yet when the teacher grows a little tiresome the pupil is tired in a moment. Thus we have the converse danger of forcing knowledge upon unwilling and unripe minds that have no love for it, which is in many ways psychologically akin to a nameless crime that in some parts of the country meets summary vengeance.

    (A) The heart of education as well as its phyletic root is the vernacular literature and language. These are the chief instruments of the social as well as of the ethnic and patriotic instinct. The prime place of the former we saw in the last chapter, and we now pass to the latter, the uniqueness of which should first be considered.

    The Century, the largest complete dictionary of English, claims to have 250,000 words, as against 55,000 in the old Webster’s Unabridged. Worcester’s Unabridged of 1860 has 105,000; Murray’s, now in L, it is said, will contain 240,000 principal and 140,000 compound words, or 380,000 words in all. The dictionary of the French Academy has 33,000; that of the Royal Spanish Academy, 50,000; the Dutch dictionary of Van Dale, 86,000; the Italian and Portuguese, each about 50,000 literary, or 150,000 encyclopedic words. Of course, words can really be counted hardly more than ideas or impressions, and compounds, dialects, obsolete terms, localisms, and especially technical terms, swell the number indefinitely. A competent philologist[2] says, if given large liberty, he “will undertake to supply 1,000,000 English words for 1,000,000 American dollars.” Chamberlain[3] estimates that our language contains more than two score as many words as all those left us from the Latin. Many savage languages contain only a very few thousand, and some but a few hundred, words. Our tongue is essentially Saxon in its vocabulary and its spirit and, from the time when it was despised and vulgar, has followed an expansion policy, swallowing with little modification terms not only from classical antiquity, but from all modern languages—Indian, African, Chinese, Mongolian—according to its needs, its adopted children far outnumbering those of its own blood. It absorbs at its will the slang of the street gamin, the cant of thieves and beggars; is actually creative in the baby talk of mothers and nurses; drops, forgets, and actually invents new words with no pedigree like those of Lear, Carrol, and many others.[4]

    In this vast field the mind of the child early begins to take flight. Here his soul finds its native breath and vital air. He may live as a peasant, using, as Max Müller says many do, but a few hundred words during his lifetime; or he may need 8,000, like Milton, 15,000, like Shakespeare, 20,000 or 30,000, like Huxley, who commanded both literary and technical terms; while in understanding, which far outstrips, use, a philologist may master perhaps 100,000 or 200,000 words. The content of a tongue may contain only folk-lore and terms for immediate practical life, or this content may be indefinitely elaborated in a rich literature and science. The former is generally well on in its development before speech itself becomes an abject of study. Greek literature was fully grown when the Sophists, and finally Aristotle, developed the rudiments of grammar, the parts of speech being at first closely related with his ten metaphysical categories. Our modern tongue had the fortune, unknown to those of antiquity, when it was crude and despised, to be patronized and regulated by Latin grammarians, and has had a long experience, both for good and evil, with their conserving and uniformitizing instincts. It has, too, a long history of resistance to this control. Once spelling was a matter of fashion or even individual taste; and as the constraint grew, two pedagogues in the thirteenth century fought a duel for the right spelling of the word, and that maintained by the survivor prevailed. Phonic and economic influences are now again making some headway against orthographic orthodoxy here; so with definitions. In the days of Johnson’s dictionary, individuality still had wide range in determining meanings. In pronunciation, too: we may now pronounce the word tomato in six ways, all sanctioned by dictionaries. Of our tongue in particular it is true, as Tylor says in general, condensing a longer passage, “take language all in all, it is the product of a rough-and-ready ingenuity and of the great rule of thumb. It is an old barbaric engine, which in its highest development is altered, patched, and tinkered into capability. It is originally and naturally a product of low culture, developed by ages of conscious and unconscious improvement to answer more or less perfectly the requirements of modern civilization.”

    It is plain, therefore, that no grammar, and least of all that derived from the prim, meager Latin contingent of it, is adequate to legislate for the free spirit of our magnificent tongue. Again, if this is ever done and English ever has a grammar that is to it what Latin grammar is to that language, it will only be when the psychology of speech represented, e.g., in Wundt’s Psychologie der Sprache,[5] which is now compiling and organizing the best elements from all grammars, is complete. The reason why English speakers find such difficulty in learning other languages is because ours has so far outgrown them by throwing off not only inflections but many old rules of syntax, that we have had to go backward to an earlier and more obsolescent stage of human development. In 1414, at the Council of Constance, when Emperor Sigismund was rebuked for a wrong gender, he replied, “I am King of the Romans and above grammar.” Thomas Jefferson later wrote, “Where strictures of grammar does not weaken expression it should be attended to; but where by a small grammatical negligence the energy of an idea is condensed or a word stands for a sentence, I hold grammatical rigor in contempt.” Browning, Whitman, and Kipling deliberately violate grammar and secure thereby unique effects neither asking nor needing excuse.

    By general consent both high school and college youth in this country are in an advanced stage of degeneration in the command of this the world’s greatest organ of the intellect; and that, despite the fact that the study of English often continues from primary into college grades, that no topic counts for more, and that marked deficiency here often debars from all other courses. Every careful study of the subject for nearly twenty years shows deterioration, and Professor Shurman, of Nebraska, thinks it now worse than at any time for forty years. We are in the case of many Christians described by Dante, who strove by prayers to get nearer to God when in fact with every petition they were departing farther from him. Such a comprehensive fact must have many causes.

    I. One of these is the excessive time given to other languages just at the psychological period of greatest linguistic plasticity and capacity for growth. School invention and tradition is so inveterate that it is hard for us to understand that there is little educational value—and perhaps it is deëducational—to learn to tell the time of day or name a spade in several different tongues or to learn to say the Lord’s Prayer in many different languages, any one of which the Lord only can understand. The polyglot people that one meets on great international highways of travel are linguists only in the sense that the moke on the variety stage who plays a dozen instruments equally badly is a musician. It is a psychological impossibility to pass through the apprenticeship stage of learning foreign languages at the age when the vernacular is setting without crippling it. The extremes are the youth in ancient Greece studying his own language only and the modern high school boy and girl dabbling in three or perhaps four languages. Latin, which in the eight years preceding 1898 increased one hundred and seventy-four per cent. in American high schools, while the proportion entering college in the country and even in Massachusetts steadily declined, is the chief offender. In the day of its pedagogical glory Latin was the universal tongue of the learned. Sturm’s idea was to train boys so that if suddenly transported to ancient Rome or Greece they would be at home there. Language, it was said, was the chief instrument of culture; Latin, the chief language and therefore a better drill in the vernacular than the vernacular itself. Its rules were wholesome swathing bands for the modern languages when in their infancy. Boys must speak only Latin on the playground. They thought, felt, and developed an intellectual life in and with that tongue.[6] But how changed all this is now. Statistical studies show that five hours a week for a year gives command of but a few hundred words, that two years does not double this number, and that command of the language and its resources in the original is almost never attained, but that it is abandoned not only by the increasing percentage that do not go to college but also by the increasing percentage who drop it forever at the college door. Its enormous numerical increase due to high school requirements, the increasing percentage of girl pupils more ready to follow the teacher’s advice, in connection with the deteriorating quality of the girls—inevitable with their increasing numbers, the sense that Latin means entering upon a higher education, the special reverence for it by Catholic children, the overcrowded market for Latin teachers whom a recent writer says can be procured by the score at less rates than in almost any other subject, the modern methods of teaching it which work well with less knowledge of it by the teacher than in the case of other school topics, have been attended perhaps inevitably by steady pedagogic decline despite the vaunted new methods; until now the baby Latin in the average high school class is a kind of sanctified relic, a ghost of a ghost, suggesting Swift’s Struldbrugs, doomed to physical immortality but shriveling and with increasing horror of all things new. In 1892 the German emperor declared it a shame for a boy to excel in Latin composition, and in the high schools of Sweden and Norway it has been practically abandoned. In the present stage of its educational decadence the power of the dead hand is strongly illustrated by the new installation of the old Roman pronunciation with which our tongue has only remote analogies, which makes havoc with proper names which is unknown and unrecognized in the schools of the European continent, and which makes a pedantic affectation out of more vocalism. I do not know nor care whether the old Romans pronounced thus or not, but if historic fidelity in this sense has pedagogic justification, why still teach a text like the Viri Romae, which is not a classic but a modern pedagogue’s composition?

    I believe profoundly in the Latin both as a university specialty and for all students who even approach mastery, but for the vast numbers who stop in the early stages of proficiency it is disastrous to the vernacular. Compare the evils of translation English, which not even the most competent and laborious teaching can wholly prevent and which careless mechanical instruction directly fosters, with the vigorous fresh productions of a boy or girl writing or speaking of something of vital present interest. The psychology of translation shows that it gives the novice a consciousness of etymologies which rather impedes than helps the free movement of the mind. Jowett said in substance that it is almost impossible to render either of the great dead languages into English without compromise, and this tends to injure the idiomatic mastery of one’s own tongue, which can be got only by much hard experience in uttering our own thoughts before trying to shape the dead thoughts of others into our language. We confound the little knowledge of word-histories which Latin gives with the far higher and subtler sentence-sense which makes the soul of one language so different from that of another, and training in which ought not to end until one has become more or less of a stylist and knows how to hew out modes of expressing his own individuality in great language. There is a sense in which Macaulay was not an Englishman at all, but a Ciceronian Latinist who foisted an alien style upon our tongue; and even Addison is a foreigner compared to the virile Kipling. The nature and needs of the adolescent mind demand bread and meat, while Latin rudiments are husks. In his autobiography, Booker Washington says that for ten years after their emancipation, the two chief ambitions of the young negro of the South were to hold office and to study Latin, and he adds that the chief endeavor of his life has been against these tendencies. For the American boy and girl, high school too often means Latin. This gives at first a pleasing sense of exaltation to a higher stage of life, but after from one to three years the great majority who enter the high school drop out limp and discouraged for many reasons, largely, however, because they are not fed. Defective nutrition of the mind also causes a restlessness, which enhances all the influences which make boys and girls leave school.

    II. The second cause of this degeneration is the subordination of literature and content to language study. Grammar arises in the old age of language. As once applied to our relatively grammarless tongue it always was more or less of a school-made artifact and an alien yoke, and has become increasingly so as English has grown great and free. Its ghost, in the many textbooks devoted to it, lacks just the quality of logic which made and besouled it. Philology, too, with all its magnificence, is not a product of the nascent stages of speech. In the college, which is its stronghold, it has so inspired professors of English that their ideal is to be critical rather than creative till they prefer the minute reading of a few masterpieces to a wide general knowledge, and a typical university announces that “in every case the examiners will treat mere knowledge of books as less important than the ability to write good English” that will parse and that is spelled, punctuated, capitalized, and paragraphed aright. Good professors of English literature are hard to find, and upon them philologists, who are plentiful, look with a certain condescension. Many academic chairs of English are filled by men whose acquaintance of our literature is very narrow, who wish to be linguistic and not literary, and this is true even in ancient tongues.

    At a brilliant examination, a candidate for the doctor’s degree who had answered many questions concerning the forms of Lucretius, when asked whether he was a dramatist, historian, poet, or philosopher, did not know, and his professor deemed the question improper. I visited the eleventh recitation in Othello in a high school class of nineteen pupils, not one of whom knew how the story ended, so intent had they been kept on its verbiage. Hence, too, has come the twelve feet of text-books on English on my shelves with many standard works, edited for schools, with more notes than text. Fashion that works from above down the grades and college entrance requirements are in large measure responsible for this, perhaps now the worst case of the prostitution of content to form.

    Long exposure to this method of linguistic manicuring tends to make students who try to write ultra-fastidiously, seeking an over-refined elaboration of petty trifles, as if the less the content the greater the triumph of form alone could be. These petty but pretty nothings are like German confectionery, that appeals to the eye but has little for taste and is worse than nothing for the digestion. It is like straining work on an empty stomach. For youth this embroidery of details is the precocious senescence that Nordau has so copiously illustrated as literary decadence. Language is vastly larger than all its content, and the way to teach it is to focus the mind upon story, history, oratory, drama, Bible, for their esthetic, mental, and above all, moral content, as shown in the last chapter. The more unconscious processes that reflect imitatively the linguistic environment and that strike out intuitively oral and written vents for interests so intense that they must be told and shared, are what teach us how to command the resources of our mother tongue. These prescriptions and corrections and consciousness of the manifold ways of error are never so peculiarly liable to hinder rather than to help as in early adolescence, when the soul has a new content and a new sense for it, and so abhors and is so incapable of precision and propriety of diction. To hold up the flights of exuberant youth by forever being on the hunt for errors is, to borrow the language of the gridiron, low tackle, and I would rather be convicted of many errors by such methods than use them. Of course this has its place, but it must always be subordinated to a larger view, as in one of the newly discovered logia ascribed to Jesus, who, when he found a man gathering sticks on Sunday, said to him, “If you understand what you are doing, it is well, but if not, thou shalt be damned.” The great teacher who, when asked how he obtained such rare results in expression, answered, “By carefully neglecting it and seeking utter absorption in subject-matter,” was also a good practical psychologist. This is the inveterate tendency that in other ages has made pedagogic scribes, Talmudists, epigoni, and sophists, who have magnified the letter and lost the spirit. But there are yet other seats of difficulty.

    III. It is hard and, in the history of the race, a late change, to receive language through the eye which reads instead of through the ear which hears. Not only is perception measurably quite distinctly slower, but book language is related to oral speech somewhat as an herbarium is to a garden, or a museum of stuffed specimens to a menagerie. The invention of letters is a novelty in the history of the race that spoke for countless ages before it wrote. The winged word of mouth is saturated with color, perhaps hot with feeling, musical with inflection, is the utterance of a living present personality, the consummation of man’s gregarious instincts. The book is dead and more or less impersonal, best apprehended in solitude, its matter more intellectualized; it deals in remoter second-hand knowledge so that Plato reproached Aristotle as being a reader, one remove from the first spontaneous source of original impressions and ideas, and the doughty medieval knights scorned reading as a mere clerk’s trick, not wishing to muddle their wits with other people’s ideas when their own were good enough for them. But although some of the great men in history could not read, and though some of the illiterate were often morally and intellectually above some of the literate, the argument here is that the printed page must not be too suddenly or too early thrust between the child and life. The plea is for moral and objective work, more stories, narratives, and even vivid readings, as is now done statedly in more than a dozen of the public libraries of the country, not so often by teachers as by librarians, all to the end that the ear, the chief receptacle of language, be maintained in its dominance, that the fine sense of sound, rhythm, cadence, pronunciation, and speech-music generally be not atrophied, that the eye which normally ranges freely from far to near be not injured by the confined treadmill and zigzag of the printed page.

    Closely connected with this, and perhaps psychologically worse, is the substitution of the pen and the scribbling fingers for the mouth and tongue. Speech is directly to and from the soul. Writing, the deliberation of which fits age better than youth, slows down its impetuosity many fold, and is in every way farther removed from vocal utterance than is the eye from the ear. Never have there been so many pounds of paper, so many pencils, and such excessive scribbling as in the calamopapyrus [Pen-paper] pedagogy of to-day and in this country. Not only has the daily theme spread as infection, but the daily lesson is now extracted through the point of a pencil instead of from the mouth. The tongue rests and the curve of writer’s cramp takes a sharp turn upward, as if we were making scribes, reporters, and proof-readers. In some schools, teachers seem to be conducting correspondence classes with their own pupils. It all makes excellent busy work, keeps the pupils quiet and orderly, and allows the school output to be quantified, and some of it gives time for more care in the choice of words. But is it a gain to substitute a letter for a visit, to try to give written precedence over spoken forms? Here again we violate the great law that the child repeats the history of the race, and that, from the larger historic standpoint, writing as a mode of utterance is only the latest fashion.

    Of course the pupils must write, and write well, just as they must read, and read much; but that English suffers from insisting upon this double long circuit too early and cultivates it to excess, devitalizes school language and makes it a little unreal, like other affectations of adult ways, so that on escaping from its thraldom the child and youth slump back to the language of the street as never before. This is a false application of the principle of learning to do by doing. The young do not learn to write by writing, but by reading and hearing. To become a good writer one must read, feel, think, experience, until he has something to say that others want to hear. The golden age of French literature, as Gaston Deschamps and Brunetière have lately told us, was that of the salon, when conversation dominated letters, set fashions, and made the charm of French style. Its lowest ebb was when bookishness led and people began to talk as they wrote.

    IV. The fourth cause of degeneration of school English is the growing preponderance of concrete words for designating things of sense and physical acts, over the higher element of language that names and deals with concepts, ideas, and non-material things. The object-lesson came in as a reaction against the danger of merely verbal and definition knowledge and word memory. Now it has gone so far that not only things but even languages, vernacular and foreign, are taught by appeals to the eye. More lately, elementary science has introduced another area of pictures and things while industrial education has still further greatly enlarged the material sensori-motor element of training. Geography is taught with artifacts, globes, maps, sand boxes, drawing. Miss Margaret Smith[7] counted two hundred and eighty objects that must be distributed and gathered for forty pupils in a single art lesson. Instruction, moreover, is more and more busied upon parts and details rather than wholes, upon analysis rather than synthesis. Thus in modern pedagogy there is an increased tyranny of things, a growing neglect or exclusion of all that is unseen.

    The first result of this is that the modern school child is more and more mentally helpless without objects of sense. Conversation is increasingly concrete, if not of material things and persons present in time and even place. Instead of dealing with thoughts and ideas, speech and writing is close to sense and the words used are names for images and acts. But there is another higher part of language that is not so abjectly tied down to perception, but that lives, moves, and has its being in the field of concepts rather than percepts, which, to use Earle’s distinction, is symbolic and not presentative, that describes thinking that is not mere contiguity in space or sequence in time but that is best in the far higher and more mental associations of likeness, that is more remote from activity, that, to use logical terminology, is connotative and not merely denotative, that has extension as well as intension, that requires abstraction and generalization. Without this latter element higher mental development is lacking because this means more than word-painting the material world.

    Our school youth today suffer from just this defect. If their psychic operations can be called thought it is of that elementary and half animal kind that consists imagery. Their talk with each other is of things of present and immediate interest. They lack even the elements of imagination, which makes new combinations and is creative, because they are dominated by mental pictures of the sensory. Large views that take them afield away from the persons and things and acts they know do not appeal to them. Attempts to think rigorously are too hard. The teacher feels that all the content of mind must come in through the senses, and that if these are well fed, inferences and generalizations will come of themselves later. Many pupils have never in their lives talked five minutes before others on any subject whatever that can properly be called intellectual. It irks them to occupy themselves with purely mental processes, so enslaved are they by what is near and personal, and thus they are impoverished in the best elements of language. It is as if what are sometimes called the associative fibers, both ends of which are in the brain, were dwarfed in comparison with the afferent and efferent fibers that mediate sense and motion.

    That the soul of language as an instrument of thought consists in this non-presentative element, so often lacking, is conclusively shown in the facts of speech diseases. In the slowly progressive aphasias, of late so carefully studied, the words first lost are those of things and acts most familiar to the patient, while the words that persist longest in the wreckage of the speech-centers are generally words that do not designate the things of sense. A tailor loses the power to name his chalk, measure, shears, although he can long talk fluently of what little he may chance to know of God, beauty, truth, virtue, happiness, prosperity, etc. The farmer is unable to name the cattle in his yard or his own occupations, although he can reason as well as ever about politics; can not discuss coin or bills, but can talk of financial policies and securities, or about health and wealth generally. The reason obvious. It is because concrete thinking has two forms, the word and the image, and the latter so tends to take the place of the former that it can be lost to both sense and articulation without great impairment, whereas conceptual thinking lacks imagery and depends upon words alone, and hence these must persist because they have no alternate form which vicariates for them.

    In its lower stages, speech is necessarily closely bound up with the concrete world; but its real glory appears in its later stages and its higher forms, because there the soul takes flight in the intellectual world, learns to live amidst its more spiritual realities, to put names to thoughts, which is far higher than to put names to things. It is in this world that the best things in the best books live; and the modern school-bred distaste for them, the low-ranged mental action that hovers near the coastline of matter and can not launch out with zest into the open sea of thoughts, holding communion with the great dead of the past or the great living of the distant present, seems almost like a slow progressive abandonment of the high attribute of speech and the lapse toward infantile or animal picture-thinking. If the school is slowly becoming speechless in this sense, if it is lapsing in all departments toward busy work and losing silence, repose, the power of logical thought, and even that of meditation, which is the muse of originality, this is perhaps the gravest of all these types of decay. If the child has no resources in solitude, can not think without the visual provocation, is losing subjective life, enthusiasm for public, social, ethical questions, is crippled for intellectual pursuits, cares only in a languid way for literary prose and poetry, responds only to sensuous stimuli and events at short range, and is indifferent to all wide relations and moral responsibility, cares only for commercial self-interest, the tactics of field sport, laboratory occupations and things which call be illustrated from a pedagogic museum, then the school is dwarfing, in dawning maturity, the higher powers that belong to this stage of development and is responsible for mental arrest.

    In this deplorable condition, if we turn to the child study of speech for help, we find that, although it has been chiefly occupied with infant vocabularies, there are already a very few and confessedly crude and feeble beginnings, but even these shed more light on the lost pathway than all other sources combined. The child once set in their midst again corrects the wise men. We will first briefly recapitulate these and then state and apply their lessons.

    Miss Williams[8] found that out of 253 young ladies only 133 did not have favorite sounds, [long “a”] and a leading among the vowels, and l, r and m among the constants. Eighty-five had favorite words often lugged in, 329 being good. Two hundred and twenty-one, as children, had favorite proper names in geography, and also for boys, but especially for girls. The order of a few of the latter is as follows: Helen, 36; Bessie, 25; Violet and Lilly, 20; Elsie and Beatrice, 18; Dorothy and Alice, 17; Ethel, 15; Myrtle, 14; Mabel, Marguerite, Pearl, and Rose, 13; May, 12; Margaret, Daisy, and Grace, 11; Ruth and Florence, 9; Gladys, 8; Maud, Nellie, and Gertrude, 7; Blanche and Mary, 6; Eveline and Pansy, 5; Belle, Beulah, Constance, Eleanor, Elizabeth, Eve, Laura, Lulu, Pauline, Virginia, and Vivian, 4 each, etc.

    Of ten words found interesting to adolescents, murmur was the favorite, most enjoying its sound. Lullaby, supreme, annannamannannaharoumlemay, immemorial, lillibulero, burbled, and incarnadine were liked by most, while zigzag and shigsback were not liked. This writer says that adolescence is marked by some increased love of words for motor activity and in interest in words as things in themselves, but shows a still greater rise of interest in new words and pronunciations; “above all, there is a tremendous rise in interest in words as instruments of thought.” The flood of new experiences, feelings, and views finds the old vocabulary inadequate, hence “the dumb, bound feeling of which most adolescents at one time or another complain and also I suspect from this study in the case of girls, we have an explanation of the rise of interest in slang.” “The second idea suggested by our study is the tremendous importance of hearing in the affective side of language.”

    Conradi[9] found that of 273 returns concerning children’s pleasure in knowing or using new words, ninety-two per cent were affirmative, eight per cent negative, and fifty per cent gave words especially “liked.” Some were partial to big words, some for those with z in them. Some found most pleasure in saying them to themselves and some in using them with others. In all there were nearly three hundred such words, very few of which were artificial. As to words pretty or queer in form or sound, his list was nearly as large, but the greater part of the words were different. Sixty per cent of all had had periods of spontaneously trying to select their vocabulary by making lists, studying the dictionary, etc. The age of those who did so would seem to average not far from early puberty, but the data are too meager for conclusion. A few started to go through the dictionary, some wished to astonish their companions or used large new words to themselves or their dolls. Seventy percent had had a passion for affecting foreign words when English would do as well. Conradi says “the age varies from twelve to eighteen, most being fourteen to sixteen.” Some indulge this tendency in letters, and would like to do so in conversation, but fear ridicule. Fifty-six per cent reported cases of superfine elegance or affected primness or precision in the use of words. Some had spells of effort in this direction, some belabor compositions to get a style that suits them, some memorise fine passages to this end, or modulate their voices to aid them, affect elegance with a chosen mate by agreement soliloquize before a glass with poses. According to his curve this tendency culminates at fourteen.

    Adjectivism, adverbism, and nounism, or marked disposition to multiply one or more of the above classes of words, and in the above order, also occur near the early teens. Adjectives are often used as adverbial prefixes to other adjectives, and here favorite words are marked. Nearly half of Conradi’s reports show it, but the list of words so used is small.

    [Illustration: Graph showing Slang, Reading Craze, and Precision by
    Age.]

    Miss Williams presents on interesting curve of slang confessed as being both attractive and used by 226 out of 251. From this it appears that early adolescence is the curve of greatest pleasure in its use, fourteen being the culminating year. There is very little until eleven, when the curve for girls rises very rapidly, to fall nearly us rapidly from fifteen to seventeen. Ninety-three out of 104 who used it did so despite criticism.

    Conradi, who collected and prints a long list of current slang words and phrases, found that of 295 young boys and girls not one failed to confess their use, and eighty-five per cent of all gave the age at which they thought it most common. On this basis he constructs the above curve, comparing with this the curve of a craze for reading and for precision in speech.

    The reasons given are, in order of frequency, that slang was more emphatic, more exact, more concise, convenient, sounded pretty, relieved formality, was natural, manly, appropriate, etc. Only a very few thought it was vulgar, limited the vocabulary, led to or was a substitute for swearing, destroyed exactness, etc. This writer attempts a provisional classification of slang expressions under the suggestive heads of rebukes to pride, boasting and loquacity, hypocrisy, quaint and emphatic negatives, exaggerations, exclamations, mild oaths, attending to one’s own business and not meddling or interfering, names for money, absurdity, neurotic effects of surprise or shock, honesty and lying, getting confused, fine appearance and dress, words for intoxication which Partridge has collected,[10]for anger collated by Chamberlain,[11] crudeness or innocent naïveté, love and sentimentality, etc. Slang is also rich in describing conflicts of all kinds, praising courage, censuring inquisitiveness, and as a school of moral discipline, but he finds, however, a very large number unclassified; and while he maintains throughout a distinction between that used by boys and by girls, sex differences are not very marked. The great majority of terms are mentioned but once, and a few under nearly all of the above heads have great numerical precedence. A somewhat striking fact is the manifold variations of a pet typical form. Twenty-three shock expletives, e.g., are, “Wouldn’t that —— you?” the blank being filled by jar, choke, cook, rattle, scorch, get, start, etc., or instead of you adjectives are devised. Feeling is so intense and massive, and psychic processes are so rapid, forcible, and undeveloped that the pithiness of some of those expressions makes them brilliant and creative works of genius, and after securing an apprenticeship are sure of adoption. Their very lawlessness helps to keep speech from rigidity and desiccation, and they hit off nearly every essential phrase of adolescent life and experience.

    Conventional modes of speech do not satisfy the adolescent, so that he is often either reticent or slangy. Walt Whitman[12] says that slang is “an attempt of common humanity to escape from bald literalism and to express itself illimitably, which in the highest walks produces poets and poems”; and again, “Daring as it is to say so, in the growth of language it is certain that the retrospect of slang from the start would be the recalling from their nebulous condition of all that is poetical in the stores of human utterance.” Lowell[13] says, “There is death in the dictionary, and where language is too strictly limited by convention, the ground for expression to grow in is limited also, and we get a potted literature, Chinese dwarfs instead of healthy trees.” Lounsbury asserts that “slang is an effort on the part of the users of language to say something more vividly, strongly, concisely than the language existing permits it to be said. It is the source from which the decaying energies of speech are constantly refreshed.” Conradi adds in substance that weak or vicious slang is too feeble to survive, and what is vital enough to live fills a need. The final authority is the people, and it is better to teach youth to discriminate between good and bad slang rather than to forbid it entirely. Emerson calls it language in the making, its crude, vital, material. It is often an effective school of moral description, a palliative for profanity, and expresses the natural craving for superlatives. Faults are hit off and condemned with the curtness sententiousness of proverbs devised by youth to sanctify itself and correct its own faults. The pedagogue objects that it violates good form and established usage, but why should the habits of hundreds of years ago control when they can not satisfy the needs of youth, which requires a lingua franca of its own, often called “slanguage”? Most high school and college youth of both sexes have two distinct styles, that of the classroom which is as unnatural as the etiquette of a royal drawing-room reception or a formal call, and the other, that of their own breezy, free, natural life. Often these two have no relation to or effect upon each other, and often the latter is at times put by with good resolves to speak as purely and therefore as self-consciously as they knew, with petty fines for every slang expression. But very few, and these generally husky boys, boldly try to assert their own rude but vigorous vernacular in the field of school requirements.

    These simple studies in this vast field demonstrate little or nothing, but they suggest very much. Slang commonly expresses a moral judgment and falls into ethical categories. It usually concerns ideas, sentiment, and will, has a psychic content, and is never, like the language of the school, a mere picture of objects of sense or a description of acts. To restate it in correct English would be a course in ethics, courtesy, taste, logical predication and opposition, honesty, self-possession, modesty, and just the ideal and non-presentative mental content that youth most needs, and which the sensuous presentation methods of teaching have neglected. Those who see in speech nothing but form condemn it because it is vulgar. Youth has been left to meet these high needs alone, and the prevalence of these crude forms is an indictment of the delinquency of pedagogues in not teaching their pupils to develop and use their intellect properly. Their pith and meatiness are a standing illustration of the need of condensation for intellectual objects that later growth analyzes. These expressions also illustrate the law that the higher and larger the spiritual content, the grosser must be the illustration in which it is first couched. Further studies now in progress will, I believe, make this still clearer.

    Again, we see in the above, outcrops of the strong pubescent instinct to enlarge the vocabulary in two ways. One is to affect foreign equivalents. This at first suggests an appetency for another language like the dog-Latin gibberish of children. It is one of the motives that prompts many to study Latin or French, but it has little depth, for it turns out, on closer study, to be only the affectation of superiority and the love of mystifying others. The other is a very different impulse to widen the vernacular. To pause to learn several foreign equivalents of things of sense may be anti-educational if it limits the expansion of thought in our own tongue. The two are, in fact, often inversely related to each other. In giving a foreign synonym when the mind seeks a new native word, the pedagogue does not deal fairly. In this irradiation into the mother tongue, sometimes experience with the sentiment or feeling, act, fact, or object precedes, and then a name for it is demanded, or conversely the sound, size, oddness or jingle of the word is first attractive and the meaning comes later. The latter needs the recognition and utilization which the former already has. Lists of favorite words should be wrought out for spelling and writing and their meanings illustrated, for these have often the charm of novelty as on the frontier of knowledge and enlarge the mental horizon like new discoveries. We must not starve this voracious new appetite “for words as instruments of thought.”

    Interest in story-telling rises till twelve or thirteen, and thereafter falls off perhaps rather suddenly, partly because youth is now more interested in receiving than in giving. As in the drawing curve we saw a characteristic age when the child loses pleasure in creating as its power of appreciating pictures rapidly arises, so now, as the reading curve rises, auditory receptivity makes way for the visual method shown in the rise of the reading curve with augmented zest for book-method of acquisition. Darkness or twilight enhances the story interest in children, for it eliminates the distraction of sense and encourages the imagination to unfold its pinions, but the youthful fancy is less bat-like and can take its boldest flights in broad daylight. A camp-fire, or an open hearth with tales of animals, ghosts, heroism, and adventure can teach virtue, and vocabulary, style, and substance in their native unity.

    The pubescent reading passion is partly the cause and partly an effect of the new zest in and docility to the adult world and also of the fact that the receptive are now and here so immeasurably in advance of the creative powers. Now the individual transcends his own experience and learns to profit by that of others. There is now evolved a penumbral region in the soul more or less beyond the reach of all school methods, a world of glimpses and hints, and the work here is that of the prospector and not of the careful miner. It is the age of skipping and sampling, of pressing the keys lightly. What is acquired is not examinable but only suggestive. Perhaps nothing read now fails to leave its mark. It can not be orally reproduced at call, but on emergency it is at hand for use. As Augustine said of God, so the child might say of most of his mental content in these psychic areas, “If you ask me, I do not know; but if you do not ask me, I know very well”—a case analogous to the typical girl who exclaimed to her teacher, “I can do and understand this perfectly if you only won’t explain it.” That is why examinations in English, if not impossible, as Goldwin Smith and Oxford hold, are very liable to be harmful, and recitations and critical notes an impertinence, and always in danger of causing arrest of this exquisite romantic function in which literature comes in the closest relation to life, keeping the heart warm, reënforcing all its good motives, preforming choices, and universalizing its sympathies.

    R. W. Bullock[14] classified and tabulated 2,000 returns from school-children from the third to the twelfth grade, both inclusive, concerning their reading. From this it appeared that the average boy of the third grade “read 4.9 books in six months; that the average falls to 3.6 in the fourth and fifth grades and rises to a maximum of 6.5 at the seventh grade, then drops quite regularly to 3 in the twelfth grade at the end of the high school course.” The independent tabulation of returns from other cities showed little variation. “Grade for grade, the girls read more than the boys, and as a rule they reach their maximum a year sooner, and from a general maximum of 5.9 books there is a drop to 3.3 at the end of the course.” The age of reading may be postponed or accelerated perhaps nearly a year by the absence or presence of library facilities. Tabulating the short stories read per week, it was found that these averaged 2.1 in the third grade, rose to 7.7 per week in the seventh grade, and in the twelfth had fallen to 2.3, showing the same general tendency.

    The percentage tables for boys’ preference for eight classes of stories are here only suggestive. “War stories seem popular with third grade boys, and that liking seems well marked through the sixth, seventh, and eighth grades. Stories of adventure are popular all through the heroic period, reaching their maximum in the eighth and ninth grades. The liking for biography and travel or exploration grows gradually to a climax in the ninth grade, and remains well up through the course. The tender sentiment has little charm for the average grade boy, and only in the high school course does he acknowledge any considerable use of love stories. In the sixth grade he is fond of detective stories, but they lose their charm for him as he grows older.” For girls, “stories of adventure are popular in the sixth grade, and stories of travel are always enjoyed. The girl likes biography, but in the high school, true to her sex, she prefers stories of great women rather than great men, but because she can not get them reads those of men. Pity it is that the biographies of so few of the world’s many great women are written. The taste for love stories increases steadily to the end of the high school course. Beyond that we have no record.” Thus “the maximum amount of reading is done in every instance between the sixth and eighth grades, the average being in the seventh grade at an average age of fourteen and one-tenth years.” Seventy-five per cent of all discuss their reading with some one, and the writer urges that “when ninety-five per cent of the boys prefer adventure or seventy-five per cent of the girls prefer love stories, that is what they are going to read,” and the duty of the teacher or librarian is to see that they have both in the highest, purest form.

    Henderson[15] found that of 2,989 children from nine to fifteen, least books were read at the age of nine and most at the age of fifteen, and that there was “a gradual rise in amount throughout, the only break being in the case of girls at the age of fourteen and the boys at the age of twelve.” For fiction the high-water mark was reached for both sexes at eleven, and the subsequent fall is far less rapid for girls than for boys. “At the age of thirteen the record for travel and adventure stands highest in the case of the boys, phenomenally so. There is a gradual rise in history with age, and a corresponding decline in fiction.”

    Kirkpatrick[16] classified returns from 5,000 children from the fourth to the ninth grade in answer to questions that concerned their reading. He found a sudden increase in the sixth grade, when children are about twelve, when there is often a veritable, reading craze. Dolls are abandoned and “plays, games, and companionship of others are less attractive, and the reading hunger in many children becomes insatiable and is often quite indiscriminate.” It seems to “most frequently begin at about twelve years of age and continue at least three or four years,” after which increased home duties, social responsibilities, and school requirements reduce it and make it more discriminating in quality. “The fact that boys read about twice, as much history and travel as girls and only about two-thirds as much poetry and stories shows beyond question that the emotional and intellectual wants of boys and girls are essentially different before sexual maturity.”

    Miss Vostrovsky[17] found that among 1,269 children there was a great increase of taste for reading as shown by the number of books taken from the library, which began with a sharp rise at eleven and increased steadily to nineteen, when her survey ended; that boys read most till seventeen, and then girls took the precedence. The taste for juvenile stories was declining and that for fiction and general literature was rapidly increased. At about the sixteenth year a change took place in both sexes, “showing then the beginning of a greater interest in works of a more general character.” Girls read more fiction than boys at every age, but the interest in it begins to be very decided at adolescence. With girls it appears to come a little earlier and with greater suddenness, while the juvenile story maintains a strong hold upon boys even after the fifteenth year. The curve of decline in juvenile stories is much more pronounced in both sexes than the rise of fiction. Through the teens there is a great increase in the definiteness of answers to the questions why books were chosen. Instead of being read because they were “good” or “nice,” they were read because recommended, and later because of some special interest. Girls relied on recommendations more than boys. The latter were more guided by reason the former by sentiment. Nearly three times as many boys in the early teens chose books because they were exciting or venturesome. Even the stories which girls called exciting were tame compared with those chosen by boys. Girls chose books more than four times as often because of children in them, and more often because they ware funny. Boys care very little for style, but must have incidents and heroes. The author says “the special interest that girls have in fiction begins about the age of adolescence. After the sixteenth year the extreme delight in stories fades,” or school demands become more imperative and uniform. Girls prefer domestic stories and those with characters like themselves and scenes like those with which they are familiar. “No boy confesses to a purely girl’s story, while girls frankly do to an interesting story about boys. Women writers seem to appeal more to girls, men writers to boys. Hence, the authors named by each sex are almost entirely different. In fiction more standard works, were drawn by boys than by girls.” “When left to develop according to chance, the tendency is often toward a selection of books which unfit one for every-day living, either by presenting, on the one hand, too many scenes of delicious excitement or, on the other, by narrowing the vision to the wider possibilities of life.”

    Out of 523 full answers, Lancaster found that 453 “had what might be called a craze for reading at some time in the adolescent period,” and thinks parents little realize the intensity of the desire to read or how this nascent period is the golden age to cultivate taste and inoculate against reading what is bad. The curve rises rapidly from eleven to fourteen, culminates at fifteen, after which it falls rapidly. Some become omnivorous readers of everything in their way; others are profoundly, and perhaps for life, impressed with some single book; others have now crazes for history, now for novels, now for dramas or for poetry; some devour encyclopedias; some imagine themselves destined to be great novelists and compose long romances; some can give the dates with accuracy of the different periods of the development of their tastes from the fairy tales of early childhood to the travels and adventures of boyhood and then to romance, poetry, history, etc; and some give the order of their development of taste for the great poets.

    The careful statistics of Dr. Reyer show that the greatest greed of reading is from the age of fifteen to twenty-two, and is on the average greatest of all at twenty. He finds that ten per cent of the young people of this age do forty per cent of all the reading. Before twenty the curve ascends very rapidly, to fall afterward yet more rapidly as the need of bread-winning becomes imperative. After thirty-five the great public reads but little. Every youth should have his or her own library, which, however small, should be select. To seal some knowledge of their content with the delightful sense of ownership helps to preserve the apparatus of culture, keeps green early memories, or makes one of the best tangible mementoes of parental care and love. For the young especially, the only ark of safety in the dark and rapidly rising flood of printer’s ink is to turn resolutely away from the ideal of quantity to that of quality. While literature rescues youth from individual limitations and enables it to act and think more as spectators of all time, and sharers of all existence, the passion for reading may be excessive, and books which from the silent alcoves of our nearly 5,500 American libraries rule the world more now than ever before, may cause the young to neglect the oracles within, weaken them by too wide reading, make conversation bookish, and overwhelm spontaneity and originality with a superfetation of alien ideas.

    The reading passion may rage with great intensity when the soul takes its first long flight in the world of books, and ninety per cent of all Conradi’s cases showed it. Of these, thirty-two per cent read to have the feelings stirred and the desire of knowledge was a far less frequent motive. Some read to pass idle time, others to appear learned or to acquire a style or a vocabulary. Romance led. Some specialized, and with some the appetite was omnivorous. Some preferred books about or addressed to children, some fairy tales, and some sought only those for adults. The night is often invaded and some become “perfectly wild” over exciting adventures or the dangers and hardships of true lovers, laughing and crying as the story turns from grave to gay, and a few read several books a week. Some were forbidden and read by stealth alone, or with books hidden in their desks or under school books. Some few live thus for years in an atmosphere highly charged with romance, and burn out their fires wickedly early with a sudden and extreme expansiveness that makes life about them uninteresting and unreal, and that reacts to commonplace later. Conradi prints some two or three hundred favorite books and authors of early and of later adolescence. The natural reading of early youth is not classic nor blighted by compulsion or uniformity for all. This age seeks to express originality and personality in individual choices and tastes.

    Suggestive and briefly descriptive lists of best books and authors by authorities in different fields on which some time is spent in making selection, talks about books, pooling knowledge of them, with no course of reading even advised and much less prescribed, is the best guidance for developing the habit of rapid cursory reading. Others before professor De Long, of Colorado, have held that the power of reading a page in moment, as a mathematician sums up a column of figures and as the artist Doré was able to read a book by turning the leaves, can be attained by training and practise. School pressure should not suppress this instinct of omnivorous reading, which at this age sometimes prompts the resolve to read encyclopedias, and even libraries, or to sample everything to be found in books at home. Along with, but never suppressing, it there should be some stated reading, but this should lay down only kinds of reading like the four emphasized in the last chapter or offer a goodly number of large alternative groups of books and authors, like the five of the Leland Stanford University, and permit wide liberty of choice to both teacher and pupil. Few triumphs of the uniformitarians, who sacrifice individual needs to mechanical convenience in dealing with youth in masses, have been so sad as marking off and standardizing a definite quantum of requirements here. Instead of irrigating a wide field, the well-springs of literary interest are forced to cut a deep canyon and leave wide desert plains of ignorance on either side. Besides imitation, which reads what others do, is the desire to read something no one else does, and this is a palladium of individuality. Bad as is the principle, the selections are worse, including the saccharinity ineffable of Tennyson’s Princess (a strange expression of the progressive feminization of the high school and yet satirizing the scholastic aspiration of girls) which the virile boy abhors, books about books which are two removes from life, and ponderous Latinity authors which for the Saxon boy suggest David fighting in Saul’s armor, and which warp and pervert the nascent sentence-sense on a foreign model. Worst of all, the prime moral purpose of youthful reading is ignored in choices based on form and style; and a growing profusion of notes that distract from content to language, the study of which belongs in the college if not in the university, develops the tendencies of criticism before the higher powers of sympathetic appreciation have done their work.[18]

    (B) Other new mental powers and aptitudes are as yet too little studied. Very slight are the observations so far made, of children’s historic, which is so clearly akin to literary, interest and capacity. With regard to this and several other subjects in the curriculum we are in the state of Watts when he gazed at the tea-kettle and began to dream of the steam-engine; we are just recognizing a new power and method destined to reconstruct and increase the efficiency of education, but only after a long and toilsome period of limited successes.

    Mrs. Barnes[19], told a story without date, place, name, or moral and compared the questions which 1,250 children would like to have answered about it. She found that the interest of girls in persons, or the number who asked the question “who,” culminated at twelve, when it coincided with that of boys, but that the latter continued to rise to fifteen. The interest to know “place where” events occurred culminated at eleven with girls, and at fifteen, and at a far higher point, with boys. The questions “how” and “why,” calling for the method and reason, both culminated at twelve for girls and fifteen for boys, but were more infrequent and showed less age differences than the preceding question. Interest in the results of the action was most pronounced of all, culminating at twelve in girls and fifteen in boys. Details and time excited far less interest, the former jointly culminating for both sexes at eleven. Interest in the truth of the narrative was extremely slight, although it became manifest at fifteen, and was growing at sixteen. The number of inferences drawn steadily increased with age, although the increase was very slight after thirteen. Both legitimate and critical inferences increased after eleven, while imaginative inferences at that age had nearly reached their maximum. Interest in names was very strong throughout, as in primitive people. Boys were more curious concerning “who,” “where,” and “how”; girls as to “why.” In general, the historic curiosity of boys was greater than that of girls, and culminated later. The inferences drawn from an imagined finding of a log-house, boat, and arrows on a lonely island indicate that the power of inference, both legitimate and imaginative, develops strongly at twelve and thirteen, after which doubt and the critical faculties are apparent; which coincides with Mr. M.A. Tucker’s conclusion, that doubt develops at thirteen and that personal inference diminishes about that age.

    The children were given two accounts of the fall of Fort Sumter, one in the terms of a school history and the other a despatch of equal length from Major Anderson, and asked which was best, should be kept, and why. Choice of the narrative steadily declined after eleven and that of the despatch increased, the former reaching its lowest, the latter its highest, point at fifteen, indicating a preference for the first-hand record. The number of those whose choice was affected by style showed no great change, from twelve to fifteen, but rose very rapidly for the nest two years. Those who chose the despatch because it was true, signed, etc., increased rapidly in girls and boys throughout the teens, and the preference for the telegram as a more direct source increased very rapidly from thirteen to seventeen.

    Other studies of this kind led Mrs. Barnes to conclude that children remembered items by groups; that whole groups were often omitted; that those containing most action were best remembered; that what is remembered is remembered with great accuracy; that generalities are often made more specific; that the number of details a child carries away from a connected narrative is not much above fifty, so that their numbers should be limited; and from it all was inferred the necessity of accuracy, of massing details about central characters or incidents, letting action dominate, omitting all that is aside from the main line of the story, of bringing out cause and effect and dramatizing where possible.

    Miss Patterson[20] collated the answers of 2,237 children to the question “What does 1895 mean?” The blanks “Don’t know” decreased very rapidly from six to eight, and thereafter maintained a slight but constant percentage. Those who expanded the phase a little without intelligence were most numerous from eight to ten, while the proportion who gave a correct explanation rose quite steadily for both sexes and culminated at fourteen for girls and fifteen for boys. The latter only indicates the pupils of real historic knowledge. The writer concludes that “the sense of historical time is altogether lacking with children of seven, and may be described as slight up to the age of twelve.” History, it is thought, should be introduced early with no difference between boys and girls, but “up to the age of twelve or thirteen it should be presented in a series of striking biographies and events, appearing if possible in contemporary ballads and chronicles, and illustrated by maps, chronological charts, and as richly as possible by pictures of contemporary objects, buildings, and people.” At the age of fourteen or fifteen, another sort of work should appear. Original sources should still be used, but they should illustrate not “the picture of human society moving before us in a long panorama, but should give us the opportunity to study the organization, thought, feeling, of a time as seen in its concrete embodiments, its documents, monuments, men, and books.” The statesmen, thinkers, poets, should now exceed explorers and fighters; reflection and interpretation, discrimination of the true from the false, comparison, etc., are now first in order; while later yet, perhaps in college, should come severer methods and special monographic study.

    Studies of mentality, so well advanced for infants and so well begun for lower grades, are still very meager for adolescent stages so far as they bear on growth in the power to deal with arithmetic, drawing and pictures, puzzles, superstitions, collections, attention, reason, etc. Enough has been done to show that with authority to collect data on plans and by methods that can now be operated and with aid which should now be appropriated by school boards and teachers’ associations, incalculable pedagogic economy could be secured and the scientific and professional character of teaching every topic in upper grammar and high school and even in the early college grades be greatly enhanced. To enter upon this laborious task in every branch of study is perhaps our chief present need and duty to our youth in school, although individual studies like that of Binet[21] belong elsewhere.

    (C) The studies of memory up the grades show characteristic adolescent changes, and some of these results are directly usable in school.

    Bolton[22] tested the power of 1,500 children to remember and write dictated digits, and found, of course, increasing accuracy with the older pupils. He also found that the memory span increased with age rather than with the growth of intelligence as determined by grade. The pupils depended largely upon visualisation, and this and concentrated attention suggested that growth of memory did not necessarily accompany intellectual advancement. Girls generally surpassed boys, and as with clicks too rapid to be counted, it was found that when the pupils reached the limits of their span, the number of digits was overestimated. The power of concentrated and prolonged attention was tested. The probability of error for the larger number of digits, 7 and 8, decreased in a marked way with the development of pubescence, at least up to fourteen years, with the suggestion of a slight rise again at fifteen.

    In comprehensive tests of the ability of Chicago children to remember figures seen, heard, or repeated by them, it was found that, from seven to nine, auditory were slightly better remembered than visual impressions. From that age the latter steadily increased over the former. After thirteen, auditory memory increased but little, and was already about ten per cent behind visual, which continued to increase at least till seventeen. Audiovisual memory was better than either alone, and the span of even this was improved when articulatory memory was added. When the tests were made upon pupils of the same age in different grades it was found in Chicago that memory power, whether tested by sight, hearing, or articulation, was best in those pupils whose school standing was highest, and least where standing was lowest.

    When a series of digits was immediately repeated orally and a record made, it was found[23] that while from the age of eight to twelve the memory span increased only eight points, from fourteen to eighteen it increased thirteen points. The number of correct reproductions of numbers of seven places increased during the teens, although this class of children remain about one digit behind normal children of corresponding age. In general, though not without exceptions, it was found that intelligence grew with memory span, although the former is far more inferior to that of the normal child than the latter, and also that weakness of this kind of memory is not an especially prominent factor of weak-mindedness.

    Shaw[24] tested memory in 700 school children by dividing a story of 324 words into 152 phrases, having it read and immediately reproduced by them, and selecting alternate grades from the third grammar to the end of the high school, with a few college students. The maximum power of this kind of memory was attained by boys in the high school period. Girls remembered forty-three per cent in the seventh grade, and in the high school forty-seven per cent. The increase by two-year periods was most rapid between the third and fifth grades. Four terms were remembered on the average by at least ninety per cent of the pupils, 41 by fifty per cent, and 130 by ten per cent. The story written out in the terms remembered by each percentage from ten to ninety affords a most interesting picture of the growth of memory, and even its errors of omission, insertion, substitution and displacement. “The growth of memory is more rapid in the case of girls than boys, and the figures suggest a coincidence with the general law, that the rapid development incident to puberty occurs earlier in girls than in boys.”

    In a careful study of children’s memory, Kemsies[25] concludes that the quality of memory improves with age more rapidly than the quantity.

    W.G. Monroe tested 275 boys and 293 girls, well distributed, from seven to seventeen years of age, and found a marked rise for both visual and auditory memory at fifteen for both sexes. For both sexes, also, auditory memory was best at sixteen and visual at fifteen.

    When accuracy in remembering the length of tone was used as a test, it was found there was loss from six to seven and gain from seven to eight for both sexes. From eight to nine girls lost rapidly for one and gained rapidly for the following year, while boys were nearly stationary till ten, after which both sexes gained to their maximum at fourteen years of age and declined for the two subsequent years, both gaining power from sixteen to seventeen, but neither attaining the accuracy they had at fourteen.[26]

    [Illustration: Girls and Boys at Memory Reproductions compared.]

    Netschajeff[27] subjected 637 school children, well distributed between the ages of nine and eighteen, to the following tests. Twelve very distinct objects were shown them, each for two seconds, which must them be immediately written down. Twelve very distinct noises were made out of sight; numbers of two figures each were read; three-syllable words, which were names of familiar objects, objects that suggested noises, words designating touch, temperature, and muscle sensations, words describing states of feeling, and names of abstract ideas also were given them. The above eight series of twelve each were all reproduced in writing, and showed that each kind of memory here tested increased with age, with some slight tendency to decline at or just before puberty, then to rise and to slightly decline after the sixteenth or seventeenth year. Memory for objects showed the greatest amount of increase during the year studied, and works for feeling next, although at all ages the latter was considerably below the former. Boys showed stronger memory for real impressions, and girls excelled for numbers and words. The difference of these two kinds of memory was less with girls than with boys. The greatest difference between the sexes lay between eleven and fourteen years. This seems, at eighteen or nineteen, to be slightly increased. “This is especially great at the age of puberty.” Children from nine to eleven have but slight power of reproducing emotions, but this increases in the next few years very rapidly, as does that of the abstract words. Girls from nine to eleven deal better with words than with objects; boys slightly excel with objects. Illusions in reproducing words which mistake sense, sound, and rhythm, which is not infrequent with younger children, decline with age especially at puberty. Up to this period girls are most subject to these illusions, and afterward boys. The preceding tables, in which the ordinates represent the number of correct reproductions and the abscissas the age, are interesting.

    Lobsien made tests similar to those of Netschajeff,[28] with modifications for greater accuracy, upon 238 boys and 224 girls from nine to fourteen and a half years of age. The preceding tables show the development of the various kinds of memory for boys and girls:

    BOYS.

    Age. Objects Noises Number Visual Acoustic Touch Feeling Sounds
    Concepts Concepts Concepts Concepts

    13-14-1/2 92.56 71.89 80.67 73.00 74.78 75.33 75.44 40.56 12-13 76.45 57.38 72.33 69.67 64.89 73.67 58.67 37.87 11-12 89.78 57.19 70.22 59.67 63.00 73.33 55.33 19.99 10-11 87.12 55.33 49.33 55.11 48.44 57.11 38.33 12.44 9-10 64.00 53.33 49.09 46.58 43.78 43.67 27.22 7.22

    Normal 82.2 59.02 64.8 60.6 59.4 64.2 31.2 24.0 value.

    GIRLS.

    13-14-1/2 99.56 82.67 87.22 96.67 71.44 82.00 70.22 41.33 12-13 92.89 75.56 74.89 77.22 63.11 74.67 67.33 34.89 11-12 94.00 56.00 73.56 72.78 72.11 70.89 73.33 28.22 10-11 75.78 46.22 62.44 56.22 54.78 58.78 43.22 10.44 9-10 89.33 46.22 50.44 54.22 38.22 51.11 32.89 6.89

    Normal 91.4 62.2 71.8 71.0 60.2 67.2 59.4 23.8 value.

    The table for boys shows in the fourteenth year a marked increase of memory for objects, noises, and feelings, especially as compared with the marked relative decline the preceding year, when there was a decided increase in visual concepts and senseless sounds. The twelfth year shows the greatest increase in number memory, acoustic impressions, touch, and feeling. The tenth and eleventh years show marked increase of memory for objects and their names. Thus the increase in the strength of memory is by no means the same year by year, but progress focuses on some forms and others are neglected. Hence each type of memory shows an almost regular increase and decrease in relative strength.

    The table for girls shown marked increase of all memory forms about the twelfth year. This relative increase is exceeded only in the fourteenth year for visual concepts. The thirteenth year shows the greatest increase for sounds and a remarkable regression for objects in passing from the lowest to the next grade above.

    In the accuracy of reproducing the order of impressions, girls much exceeded boys at all ages. For seen object, their accuracy was twice that of boys, the boys excelling in order only in number. In general, ability to reproduce a series of impressions increases and decreases with the power to reproduce in any order, but by no means in direct proportion to it. The effect of the last member in a series by a purely mechanical reproduction is best in boys. The range and energy of reproduction is far higher than ordered sequence. In general girls slightly exceed boys in recalling numbers, touch concepts, and sounds, and largely exceed in recalling feeling concepts, real things and visual concept.

    Colegrove[29] tabulated returns from the early memories of 1,658 correspondents with 6,069 memories, from which he reached the conclusions, represented in the following curves, for the earliest three memories of white males and females.

    In the cuts on the following page, the heavy line represents the first memory, the broken the second, and the dotted the third. Age at the time of reporting is represented in distance to the right, and the age of the person at the time of the occurrence remembered is represented by the distance upward. “There is a rise in all the curves at adolescence. This shows that, from the age of twelve to fifteen, boys do not recall so early memories as they do both before and after this period.” This Colegrove ascribes to the fact that the present seems so large and rich. At any rate, “the earliest memories of boys at the age of fourteen average almost four years.” His curves for girls show that the age of all the first three memories which they are able to recall is higher at fourteen than at any period before or after; that at seven and eight the average age of the first things recalled is nearly a year earlier than it is at fourteen. This means that at puberty there is a marked and characteristic obliteration of infantile memories which lapse to oblivion with augmented absorption in the present.

    [Illustration: Untitled Graph.]

    It was found that males have the greatest number of memories for protracted or repeated occurrences, for people, and clothing, topographical and logical matters; that females have better memories for novel occurrences or single impressions. Already at ten and eleven motor memories begin to decrease for females and increase for males. At fourteen and fifteen, motor memories nearly culminate for males, but still further decline for females. The former show a marked decrease in memory for relatives and playmates and an increase for other persons. Sickness and accidents to self are remembered less by males and better by females, as are memories of fears. At eighteen and nineteen there is a marked and continued increase in the visual memories of each sex and the auditory memory of females. Memory for the activity of others increases for both, but far more strongly for males. Colegrove concludes from his data that “the period of adolescence is one of great psychical awaking. A wide range of memories is found at this time. From the fourteenth year with girls and the fifteenth with boys the auditory memories are strongly developed. At the dawn of adolescence the motor memory of voice nearly culminates, and they have fewer memories of sickness and accidents to self. During this time the memory of other persons and the activity of others is emphasized in case of both boys and girls. In general, at this period the special sensory memories are numerous, and it is the golden age for motor memories. Now, too, the memories of high ideals, self-sacrifice, and self-forgetfulness are cherished. Wider interests than self and immediate friends become the objects of reflection and recollection.”

    After twenty there is marked change in the memory content. The male acquires more and the female less visual and auditory memories. The memories of the female are more logical, and topographical features increase. Memories of sickness and accidents to self decrease with the males and increase with the females, while in the case of both there is relative decline in the memories of sickness and accident to others. From all this it would appear that different memories culminate at different periods, and bear immediate relation to the whole mental life of the period. While perhaps some of the finer analyses of Colegrove may invite further confirmation, his main results given above are not only suggestive, but rendered very plausible by his evidence.

    Statistics based upon replies to the question as to whether pleasant or unpleasant experiences were best remembered, show that the former increase at eleven, rise rapidly at fourteen, and culminate at eighteen for males, and that the curve of painful memories follows the same course, although for both there is a drop at fifteen. For females, the pleasant memories increase rapidly from eleven to thirteen, decline a little at fourteen, rise again at sixteen, and culminate at seventeen, and the painful memories follow nearly the same course, only with a slight drop at fifteen. Thus, up to twenty-two for males, there is a marked preponderance of pleasant over painful memories, although the two rise and fall together. After thirty, unpleasant memories are but little recalled. For the Indians and negroes in this census, unpleasant memories play a far more and often preponderating rôle suggesting persecution and sad experiences. Different elements of the total content of memory come to prominence at different ages. He also found that the best remembered years of life are sixteen to seventeen for males and fifteen for females, and that in general the adolescent period has more to do than any other in forming and furnishing the memory plexus, while the seventh and eighth year are most poorly remembered.

    It is also known that many false memories insert themselves into the texture of remembered experiences. One dreams a friend is dead and thinks she is till she is met one day in the street; or dreams of a fire and inquires about it in the morning; dreams of a present and searches the house for it next day; delays breakfast for a friend, who arrived the night before in a dream, to come down to breakfast; a child hunts for a bushel of pennies dreamed of, etc. These phantoms falsify our memory most often, according to Dr. Colegrove, between sixteen and nineteen.

    Mnemonic devices prompt children to change rings to keep appointments, tie knots in the handkerchief, put shoes on the dressing-table, hide garments, associate faces with hoods, names with acts, things, or qualities they suggest; visualize, connect figures, letters with colors, etc. From a scrutiny of the original material, which I was kindly allowed to make, this appears to rise rapidly at puberty.

    [Footnote 1: See my Ideal School as Based on Child Study. Proceedings of the National Educational Association, 1901, pp. 470-490.]

    [Footnote 2: Charles P.G. Scott: The Number of Words in the English and Other Languages. Princeton University Bulletin, May, 1902, vol. 13, pp. 106-111.]

    [Footnote 3: The Teaching of English. Pedagogical Seminary, June, 1902, vol. 9, pp. 161-168.]

    [Footnote 4: See my Some Aspects of the Early Sense of Self. American
    Journal of Psychology, April, 1898, vol. 9, pp. 351-395.]

    [Footnote 5: Sprachgeschichte und Sprachpsychologie, mit Rucksicht auf
    B. Delbrück’s “Grundfragen der Sprachforschung.” Leipzig, W.
    Engelmann, 1901]

    [Footnote 6: Latin in the High School. By Edward Conradi. Pedagogical
    Seminary, March, 1905, vol. 12, pp. 1-26.]

    [Footnote 7: The Psychological and Pedagogical Aspect of Language.
    Pedagogical Seminary, December, 1903, vol. 10, pp. 438-458.]

    [Footnote 8: Children’s Interest in Words. Pedagogical Seminary,
    September, 1902, vol. 9, pp. 274-295.]

    [Footnote 9: Children’s Interests in Words, Slang, Stories, etc.
    Pedagogical Seminary, October, 1903, vol. 10, pp. 359-404.]

    [Footnote 10: American Journal of Psychology, April, 1900, vol. 11, p. 345 et seq.]

    [Footnote 11: American Journal of Psychology, January, 1895, vol. 6, pp. 585-592. See also vol. 10, p. 517 et seq.]

    [Footnote 12: North American Review, November, 1885, vol. 141, pp. 431-435.]

    [Footnote 13: Introduction to the Biglow Papers, series ii.]

    [Footnote 14: Some Observations on Children’s Reading. Proceedings of the National Educational Association, 1897, pp. 1015-102l.]

    [Footnote 15: Report on Child Reading. New York Report of State
    Superintendent, 1897, vol. 2, p. 979.]

    [Footnote 16: Children’s reading. North-Western Monthly, December, 1898, vol. 9, pp. 188-191, and January, 1899, vol. 9, pp. 229-233.]

    [Footnote 17: A study of Children’s Reading Tastes. Pedagogical
    Seminary, December, 1899, vol. 6, pp. 523-535.]

    [Footnote 18: Perhaps the best and most notable school reader is Das Deutsche Lesebuch, begun nearly fifty years ago by Hopf and Paulsiek, and lately supplemented by a corps of writers headed by Döbeln, all in ten volumes of over 3,500 pages and containing nearly six times as much matter as the largest American series. Many men for years went over the history of German literature, from the Eddas and Nibelungenlied down, including a few living writers, carefully selecting saga, legends, Märchen, fables, proverbs, hymns, a few prayers, Bible tales, conundrums, jests, and humorous tales, with many digests, epitomes and condensation of great standards, quotations, epic, lyric, dramatic poetry, adventure, exploration, biography, with sketches of the life of each writer quoted, with a large final volume on the history of German literature. All this, it is explained, is “stataric” or required to be read between Octava[A] and Obersecunda. It is no aimless anthology or chrestomathy like Chambers’s Encyclopedia, but it is perhaps the best product of prolonged concerted study to select from a vast field the best to feed each nascent stage of later childhood and early youth, and to secure the maximum of pleasure and profit. The ethical end is dominant throughout this pedagogic canon.]

    [Footnote A: The Prussian gymnasium, whose course is classical and fits for the University, has nine classes in three divisions of three classes each. The lower classes are Octava, Septa, Sexta, Quinta, and Quarta; the middle classes, Untertertia, Obertertia, and Untersecunda; the higher classes, Obersecunda, Unterprima, and Oberprima. Pupils must be at least nine years of age and have done three years preparatory work before entrance.]

    [Footnote 19: The Historic Sense among Children. In her Studies in
    Historical Method. D. C. Heath and Co., Boston, 1896, p. 57.]

    [Footnote 20: Special Study on Children’s Sense of Historical Time.
    Mrs. Barnes’s Studies in Historical Method, D.C. Heath and Co.,
    Boston, 1896, p. 94.]

    [Footnote 21: L’Etude expérimentale de l’intelligence. Schleicher
    Frères, Paris, 1903.]

    [Footnote 22: The Growth of Memory in School Children. American
    Journal of Psychology, April, 1892, vol. 9, pp. 362-380.]

    [Footnote 23: Contribution to the Psychology and Pedagogy of
    Feeble-minded Children. By G.E. Johnson. Pedagogical Seminary,
    October, 1895, vol. 3, p. 270.]

    [Footnote 24: A Test of Memory in School Children. Pedagogical
    Seminary, October, 1898, vol. 4, pp. 61-78.]

    [Footnote 25: Zeitschrift für pädagogische Psychologie, Pathologie und
    Hygiene. February, 1900. Jahrgang II, Heft 1, pp. 21-30.]

    [Footnote 26: See Scripture: Scientific Child Study. Transactions of the Illinois Society for Child Study, May, 1895, vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 32-37.]

    [Footnote 27: Experimentelle Untersuchungen über die
    Gedächtnissentwickelung bei Schulkindern. Zeits. f. Psychologie, u.
    Physiologie der Sinnes-organe, November, 1900. Bd. 24. Heft 5, pp.
    321-351.]

    [Footnote 28: See Note 4, p. 270.]

    [Footnote 29: Memory: An Inductive Study. By F.W. Colegrove. Henry
    Holt and Co., New York, 1900, p. 229. See also Individual Memories.
    American Journal of Psychology, January, 1899, vol. 10, pp 228-255.]

    Extract from Youth: Its Education, Regimen, and Hygiene, by G. Stanley Hall

    Views: 0

  • Women in the New Age

    Women in the New Age

    42. The Transvaluation of Values

    The gradual emancipation of ladies that has been happening for the final century has nonetheless a protracted technique to proceed earlier than they’re wholly delivered from their conventional burdens and so stand away from the oppressions of males. But already, it should be plain, they’ve made monumental progress—maybe greater than they made within the ten thousand years previous. The rise of the commercial system, which has borne so harshly upon the race normally, has introduced them sure unmistakable advantages. Their financial dependence, although nonetheless adequate to make marriage extremely enticing to them, is nonetheless thus far damaged down that giant lessons of ladies are actually virtually free brokers, and fairly impartial of the favour of males. Most of those girls, responding to concepts which can be nonetheless highly effective, are but intrigued, after all, by marriage, and like it to the autonomy that’s coming in, however the truth stays that they now have a free alternative within the matter, and that dire necessity now not controls them. After all, they needn’t marry if they do not need to; it’s doable to get their bread by their very own labour within the workshops of the world. Their grandmothers had been in a much more troublesome place. Failing marriage, they not solely suffered a merciless ignominy, however in lots of instances confronted the menace of precise hunger. There was merely no respectable place within the economic system of these occasions for the free girl. She both needed to enter a nunnery or settle for a disdainful patronage that was as galling as charity.

    Nothing might be plainer than the impact that the rising financial safety of ladies is having upon their entire behavior of life and thoughts. The diminishing marriage fee and the much more quickly diminishing delivery charges present which manner the wind is blowing. It is frequent for male statisticians, with attribute imbecility, to ascribe the autumn within the marriage fee to a rising disinclination on the male aspect. This rising disinclination is definitely on the feminine aspect. Even although no appreciable physique of ladies has but reached the particular doctrine that marriage is much less fascinating than freedom, it should be plain that giant numbers of them now method the enterprise with far better fastidiousness than their grandmothers and even their moms exhibited. They are tougher to please, and therefore happy much less usually. The girl of a century in the past may think about nothing extra beneficial to her than marriage; even marriage with a fifth fee man was higher than no marriage in any respect. This notion is progressively feeling the opposition of a opposite notion. Women normally should desire marriage to work, however there may be an rising minority which begins to understand that work could supply the better contentment, notably if it’s mellowed by a certain quantity of philandering.

    There already seems on the planet, certainly, a category of ladies, who, whereas nonetheless not genuinely averse to marriage, are but free from any idea that it’s needed, and even invariably fascinating. Among these girls are an excellent many considerably vociferous propagandists, virtually male of their violent earnestness; they vary from the man-eating suffragettes to such preachers of free motherhood as Ellen Key and such skilled shockers of the bourgeoisie because the American prophetess of birth-control, Margaret Sanger. But amongst them are many extra who wake the world with no such noisy eloquence, however content material themselves with finishing up their concepts in a quiet and respectable method. The variety of such girls is way bigger than is usually imagined, and that quantity tends to extend steadily. They are girls who, with their financial independence assured, both by inheritance or by their very own efforts, mainly within the arts and professions, do precisely as they please, and make no pother about it. Naturally sufficient, their superiority to conference and the frequent frenzy makes them extraordinarily enticing to the higher form of males, and so it isn’t unusual for certainly one of them to seek out herself voluntarily sought in marriage, with none preliminary scheming by herself—certainly an expertise that only a few odd girls ever get pleasure from, save maybe in desires or delirium.

    The previous order changeth and giveth place to the brand new. Among the ladies’s golf equipment and within the girls’s faculties, I’ve little doubt, there may be nonetheless a lot debate of the previous and foolish query: Are platonic relations doable between the sexes? In different phrases, is friendship doable with out intercourse? Many a girl of the brand new order dismisses the issue with one other query: Why with out intercourse? With the decay of the traditional idea of ladies as property there should come inevitably a reconsideration of the entire intercourse query, and out of that reconsideration there should come a revision of the mediaeval penalties which now punish the slightest frivolity within the feminine. The notion that honour in girls is completely a bodily matter, {that a} single aberrance could convert a girl of the best deserves into a girl of none in any respect, that the only real invaluable factor a girl can convey to marriage is virginity—this notion is so preposterous that no clever particular person, male or feminine, truly cherishes it. It survives as one of many hole conventions of Christianity; nay, of the levantine barbarism that preceded Christianity. As girls throw off the opposite conventions which now bind them they are going to throw off this one, too, and so their advantage, grounded upon fastidiousness and self-respect as an alternative of upon mere concern and conformity, will grow to be afar extra laudable factor than it ever may be below the current system. And for its absence, in the event that they see match to get rid of it, they are going to no extra apologize than a person apologizes immediately.

    43. The Lady of Joy

    Even prostitution, in the long term, could grow to be a roughly respectable occupation, because it was within the nice days of the Greeks. That high quality will certainly connect to it if ever it grows fairly pointless; no matter is pointless is at all times respectable, for instance, faith, modern clothes, and a information of Latin grammar. The prostitute is disesteemed immediately, not as a result of her commerce entails something intrinsically degrading and even unpleasant, however as a result of she is presently assumed to have been pushed into it by dire necessity, towards her dignity and inclination. That this assumption is normally unsound is not any objection to it; practically all of the pondering of the world, notably within the area of morals, is predicated upon unsound assumption, e.g., that God observes the autumn of a sparrow and is shocked by the autumn of a Sunday-school superintendent. The fact is that prostitution is without doubt one of the most tasty of the occupations virtually open to the form of girls who have interaction in it, and that the prostitute generally likes her work, and wouldn’t trade locations with a shop-girl or a waitress for something on the planet. The notion on the contrary is propagated by unsuccessful prostitutes who fall into the fingers {of professional} reformers, and who assent to the imbecile theories of the latter as a way to domesticate their good will, simply as convicts in jail, questioned by tee-totalers, at all times ascribe their rascality to alcohol. No prostitute of something resembling regular intelligence is below the slightest duress; she is completely free to desert her commerce and go into a store or manufacturing facility or into home service each time the impulse strikes her; all of the prevailing gabble about white slave jails and kidnappers comes from pious rogues who make a dwelling by feeding such nonsense to the credulous. So lengthy as the common prostitute is ready to make an excellent dwelling, she is sort of content material together with her lot, and disposed to distinction it egotistically with the slavery of her virtuous sisters. If she complains of it, then you might ensure that her success is under her expectations. A ravenous lawyer at all times sees injustice, within the courts. A nasty doctor is a bitter critic of Ehrlich and Pasteur. And when a suburban clergyman is pressured out of his treatment by a vestry-room revolution he virtually invariably concludes that the sinfulness of man is incurable, and typically he even begins to doubt among the typographical errors in Holy Writ.

    The excessive worth set upon virginity by males, whose esteem of it’s primarily based upon a mix of vainness and voluptuousness, causes many ladies to protect it in their very own individuals with a jealousy far past their non-public inclinations and pursuits. It is their idea that the lack of it could materially impair their probabilities of marriage. This idea isn’t supported by the information. The fact is that the girl who sacrifices her chastity, all the pieces else being equal, stands a significantly better probability of creating a creditable marriage than the girl who stays chaste. This is very true of ladies of the decrease financial lessons. At as soon as they arrive into contact, hitherto socially troublesome and typically virtually unimaginable, with males of upper lessons, and start to tackle, with the curious facility of their intercourse, the refinements and tastes and factors of view of these lessons. The mistress thus gathers allure, and what has begun as a sordid sale of amiability not uncommonly ends with formal marriage. The variety of such marriages is enormously better than seems superficially, for each events clearly make each effort to hide the information. Within the circle of my essentially restricted private acquaintance I do know of scores of males, a few of them of wealth and place, who’ve made such marriages, and who don’t appear to remorse it. It is an previous commentary, certainly, {that a} girl who has beforehand disposed of her advantage makes an excellent spouse. The frequent idea is that it’s because she is grateful to her husband for rescuing her from social outlawry; the reality is that she makes an excellent spouse as a result of she is a shrewd girl, and has specialised professionally in masculine weak spot, and is thus extra-competent on the conventional enterprise of her intercourse. Such a girl usually reveals a really magnificent sagacity. It could be very troublesome to deceive her logically, and it’s unimaginable to disarm her emotionally. Her revolt towards the pruderies and sentimentalities of the world was proof, to start with, of her mental enterprise and braveness, and her success as a insurgent is proof of her extraordinary pertinacity, resourcefulness and acumen.

    Even probably the most lowly prostitute is healthier off, in all worldly methods, than the virtuous girl of her personal station in life. She has much less work to do, it’s much less monotonous and dispiriting, she meets a far better number of males, and they’re of lessons distinctly past her personal. Nor is her occupation hazardous and her final destiny tragic. A dozen or extra years in the past I noticed a considerably amusing proof of this final. At that point sure sentimental busybodies of the American metropolis during which I lived undertook an elaborate inquiry into prostitution therein, and a few of them got here to me prematurely, as a sensible journalist, for recommendation as to the way to proceed. I discovered that each one of them shared the frequent superstition that the skilled lifetime of the common prostitute is simply 5 years lengthy, and that she invariably ends within the gutter. They had been enormously amazed after they unearthed the reality. This fact was to the impact that the common prostitute of that city ended her profession, not within the morgue however on the altar of God, and that those that remained single usually continued in follow for ten, fifteen and even twenty years, after which retired on competences. It was established, certainly, that absolutely eighty per cent married, and that they virtually at all times obtained husbands who would have been far past their attain had they remained virtuous. For one who married a cabman or petty pugilist there have been a dozen who married respectable mechanics, policemen, small shopkeepers and minor officers, and a minimum of two or three who married well-to-do tradesmen {and professional} males. Among the 1000’s whose careers had been studied there was truly one who ended because the spouse of the city’s richest banker—that’s, one who bagged the perfect catch in the entire group. This girl had begun as a home servant, and deserted that harsh and dreary life to enter a brothel. Her experiences there polished and civilized her, and in her previous age she was a grande dame of nice dignity. Much of the sympathy wasted upon girls of the traditional occupation is grounded upon an error as to their very own angle towards it. An educated girl, listening to {that a} frail sister in a public stew is anticipated to be amiable to all kinds of bounders, thinks of how she would shrink from such contacts, and so concludes that the precise prostitute suffers acutely. What she overlooks is that these males, nonetheless gross and repulsive they could seem to her, are measurably superior to males of the prostitute’s personal class—say her father and brothers—and that communion with them, removed from being disgusting, is usually relatively romantic. I effectively keep in mind observing, throughout my collaboration with the vice-crusaders aforesaid, the delight of a girl of pleasure who had attracted the discover of a police lieutenant; she was intensely happy by the concept of getting a consumer of such haughty manners, such sensible costume, and what appeared to her to be so dignified a occupation. It is at all times forgotten that this weak spot isn’t confined to prostitutes, however run by the entire feminine intercourse. The girl who couldn’t think about a bootleg affair with a rich cleaning soap producer and even with a lawyer finds it fairly simple to think about herself succumbing to an envoy or a duke. There are only a few exceptions to this rule. In probably the most reserved of recent societies the ladies who characterize their highest flower are notoriously complaisant to royalty. And royal girls, to finish the circuit, not sometimes yield to actors and musicians, i.e., to males radiating a glamour not encountered even in princes.

    44. The Future of Marriage

    The transvaluation of values that’s now in progress will go on slowly and for a really lengthy whereas. That it’s going to ever be fairly full is, after all, unimaginable. There are inherent variations will proceed to point out themselves till the top of time. As girl progressively turns into satisfied, not solely of the potential for financial independence, but in addition of its worth, she’s going to in all probability lose her current overmastering need for marriage, and tackle herself to assembly males in free financial competitors. That is to say, she’s going to tackle herself to buying that sensible competence, that prime expertise for puerile and mainly mechanical expertness, which now units man forward of her within the labour market of the world. To do that she must sacrifice a few of her current intelligence; it’s unimaginable to think about a genuinely clever human being turning into a reliable trial lawyer, or buttonhole employee, or newspaper sub-editor, or piano tuner, or home painter. Women, to get upon all fours with males in such silly occupations, must commit non secular suicide, which might be a lot additional than they are going to ever truly go. Thus a shade of their current superiority to males will at all times stay, and with it a shade of their relative inefficiency, and so marriage will stay enticing to them, or in any respect occasions to most of them, and its overthrow might be prevented. To abolish it completely, as sure fevered reformers suggest, can be as troublesome as to abolish the precession of the equinoxes.

    At the current time girls vacillate considerably absurdly between two schemes of life, the previous and the brand new. On the one hand, their financial independence continues to be stuffed with circumstances, and however they’re in revolt towards the immemorial conventions. The result’s a normal unrest, with many signs of extravagant and unintelligent revolt. One of these signs is the looks of mental striving in girls—not a striving, alas, towards the real pearls and rubies of the thoughts, however one merely towards the acquirement of the rubber stamps that males make use of of their so-called pondering. Thus we’ve girls who launch themselves into get together politics, and fill their heads with an enormous mass of ineffective information about political methods, customs, theories and personalities. Thus, too, we’ve the girl social reformer, trailing alongside ridiculously behind a tatterdemalion posse of male utopians, every with one thing to promote. And thus we’ve the girl who goes in for superior knowledge of the kind on draught in girls’s golf equipment—in short, the form of knowledge which consists completely of a physique of beliefs and propositions which can be ignorant, unimportant and unfaithful. Such banal striving is most prodigally on show within the United States, the place superficiality quantities to a nationwide illness. Its reputation is because of the comparatively better leisure of the American individuals, who work lower than another individuals on the planet, and, above all, to the comparatively better leisure of American girls. Thousands of them have been emancipated from any compulsion to productive labour with out having acquired any compensatory mental or creative curiosity or social obligation. The result’s that they swarm within the girls’s golf equipment, and waste their time, listening to dangerous poetry, worse music, and nonetheless worse lectures on Maeterlinck, Balkan politics and the unconscious. It is amongst such girls that one observes the periodic rages for Bergsonism, the Montessori methodology, the twilight sleep and different such follies, so pathetically attribute of American tradition.

    One of the evil results of this tendency I’ve hitherto descanted upon, to wit, the rising disposition of American girls to treat all routine labour, notably within the residence, as infra dignitatem and therefore insupportable. Out of that notion come up many lamentable phenomena. On the one hand, we’ve the spectacle of a large number of wholesome and well-fed girls engaged in public actions that, 9 occasions out of ten, are meaningless, mischievous and a nuisance, and however we behold such a decay within the home arts that, on the first onslaught of the late conflict, the nationwide authorities needed to import a overseas professional to show the housewives of the nation the veriest components of thrift. No such instruction was wanted by the housewives of the Continent. They had been merely informed how a lot meals they may have, and their pure competence did the remainder. There is rarely any avoidable waste there, both in peace or in conflict. A French housewife has little use for a rubbish can, save as a depository for uplifting literature. She does her finest with the means at her disposal, not solely in conflict time however always.

    As I’ve stated over and over on this inquiry, a girl’s disinclination to accumulate the intricate expertness that lies on the backside of fine housekeeping is due primarily to her lively intelligence; it’s troublesome for her to pay attention her thoughts upon such silly and meticulous enterprises. But whether or not troublesome or simple, it’s clearly vital for the common girl to make some effort in that course, for if she fails to take action there may be chaos. That chaos is duly seen within the United States. Here girls reveal certainly one of their subterranean qualities: their deficiency in conscientiousness. They are fairly with out that dog-like constancy to obligation which is without doubt one of the shining marks of males. They by no means summon up a excessive pleasure in doing what’s inherently unpleasant; they at all times go to the galleys below protest, and with vows of sabotage; their basic philosophy is nearly that of the syndicalists. The sentimentality of males connives at this, and is thus largely accountable for it. Before the common puella, apprenticed within the kitchen, can choose up a fourth of the culinary subtleties which can be commonplace even to the cooks on eating vehicles, she has caught a person and want concern herself about them no extra, for he has to eat, within the final evaluation, no matter she units earlier than him, and his lack of intelligence makes it simple for her to close off his tutorial criticisms by bald appeals to his feelings. By a straightforward course of he lastly attaches a optimistic worth to her indolence. It is a proof, he concludes, of her fineness of soul. In the presence of her lofty incompetence he’s abashed.

    But as girls, gaining financial autonomy, meet males in progressively bitterer competitors, the rising masculine mistrust and concern of them might be mirrored even within the enchanted area of marriage, and the husband, having yielded up most of his previous rights, will start to disclose a brand new jealousy of those who stay, and notably of the fitting to a good quid professional quo for his personal docile trade. In transient, as girls shake off their historic disabilities they will even shake off a few of their historic immunities, and their doings will come to be regarded with a soberer and extra exigent scrutiny than now prevails. The extension of the suffrage, I consider, will encourage this awakening; in wresting it from the reluctant male the ladies of the western world have planted dragons’ tooth, the which can presently leap up and gnaw them. Now that girls have the political energy to acquire their simply rights, they are going to start to lose their previous energy to acquire particular privileges by sentimental appeals. Men, going through them squarely, will think about them anew, not as romantic political and social invalids, to be coddled and caressed, however as free opponents in a harsh world. When that reconsideration will get below manner there might be a normal overhauling of the relations between the sexes, and among the truthful ones, I believe, will start to marvel why they did not let effectively sufficient alone.

    45. Effects of the War

    The current sequence of wars, it appears seemingly, will proceed for twenty or thirty years, and maybe longer. That the primary conflict was inconclusive was proven brilliantly by the preposterous nature of the peace lastly reached—a peace so synthetic and dishonest that the signing of it was virtually equal to a brand new declaration of conflict. At least three new contests within the grand method are plainly perception—one between Germany and France to rectify the unnatural tyranny of a weak and incompetent nation over a powerful and enterprising nation, one between Japan and the United States for the mastery of the Pacific, and one between England and the United States for the management of the ocean. To these should be added numerous minor struggles, and maybe one or two of just about main character: the trouble of Russia to regain her previous unity and energy, the trouble of the Turks to place down the slave rise up (of Greeks, Armenians, Arabs, and so on.)which now menaces them, the trouble of the Latin-Americans to throw off the galling Yankee yoke, and the joint effort of Russia and Germany (maybe with England and Italy aiding) to do away with such worldwide nuisances because the insane Polish republic, the petty states of the Baltic, and maybe additionally many of the Balkan states. I cross over the chance of a brand new mutiny in India, of the rising of China towards the Japanese, and of a normal battle for a brand new alignment of boundaries in South America. All of those wars, nice and small, are possible; most of them are humanly sure. They might be fought ferociously, and with assistance from harmful engines of the utmost effectivity. They will result in an unparalleled butchery of males, and a big proportion of those males might be below forty years of age.

    As a consequence there might be a scarcity of husbands in Christendom, and as a second consequence the survivors might be appreciably tougher to snare than the lads of immediately. Every man of agreeable exterior and straightforward means might be pursued, not merely by just a few dozen or rating of ladies, as now, however by entire battalions and brigades of them, and he might be pushed in sheer self-defence into very sharp bargaining. Perhaps in the long run the state must intervene within the enterprise, to forestall the potential husband going to waste within the turmoil of alternative.

    Just what kind this interference is prone to take has not but appeared clearly. In France there may be already a wholesale legitimization of kids born out of wedlock and in Eastern Europe there was a clamour for the legalization of polygamy, however these gadgets don’t meet the principle downside, which is the encouragement of monogamy to the utmost. A plan that means itself is the amelioration of the place of the monogamous husband, now rendered more and more uncomfortable by the legal guidelines of most Christian states. I don’t assume that the extra clever form of girls, confronted by a deadly scarcity of males, would object severely to that amelioration. They should see plainly that the current system, whether it is carried a lot additional, will start to work powerfully towards their finest pursuits, if solely by significantly reinforcing the disinclination to marriage that already exists among the many higher form of males. The girl of true discretion, I’m satisfied, would a lot relatively marry a superior man, even on unfavourable phrases, than make John Smith her husband, serf and prisoner at one stroke.

    The legislation should finally acknowledge this truth and make provision for it. The common husband, maybe, deserves little succour. The girl who pursues and marries him, although she could also be moved by egocentric goals, needs to be correctly rewarded by the state for her service to it—a service certainly to not be flippantly estimated in a navy age. And that reward could conveniently take the shape, as within the United States, of statutes giving her title to a big share of his actual property and requiring him to give up most of his revenue to her, and releasing her from all obedience to him and from all obligation to maintain his home so as. But the girl who aspires to increased sport needs to be fairly prepared, it appears to me, to resign a few of these benefits in compensation for the better honour and satisfaction of being spouse to a person of benefit, and mom to his kids. All that’s wanted is legal guidelines permitting her, if she’s going to, to resign her proper of dower, her proper to upkeep and her immunity from self-discipline, and to make another phrases that she could also be led to treat as equitable. At current girls are unable to make most of those concessions even when they might: the legal guidelines of nearly all of western nations are rigid. If, for instance, an Englishwoman ought to agree, by an ante-nuptial contract, to submit herself to the self-discipline, not of the present statutes, however of the elder frequent legislation, which allowed a husband to right his spouse corporally with a stick no thicker than his thumb, it could be competent for any sentimental neighbour to set the settlement at naught by haling her husband earlier than a Justice of the Peace for carrying it out, and it’s a secure wager that the Justice of the Peace would jail him.

    This plan, nonetheless novel it might appear, is definitely already in operation. Many a married girl, as a way to maintain her husband from revolt, makes roughly disguised surrenders of sure of the rights and immunities that she has below current legal guidelines. There are, for instance, even in America, girls who practise the home arts with competence and diligence, regardless of the plain indisputable fact that no authorized penalty can be visited upon them in the event that they failed to take action. There are girls who comply with exterior trades and professions, contributing a share to the household exchequer. There are girls who obey their husbands, even towards their finest judgments. There are, most quite a few of all, girls who wink discreetly at husbandly departures, overt or in mere intent, from the oath of chemical purity taken on the altar. It is a commonplace, certainly, that many completely happy marriages admit a celebration of the third half. There can be extra of them if there have been extra girls with sufficient serenity of thoughts to see the sensible benefit of the association. The hassle with such triangulations isn’t primarily that they contain perjury or that they provide any basic offence to the spouse; if she avoids banal theatricals, in truth, they generally have the impact of augmenting the husband’s devotion to her and respect for her, if solely because the fruit of comparability. The hassle with them is that only a few males amongst us have sense sufficient to handle them intelligently. The masculine thoughts is instantly taken in by specious values; the common married man of Protestant Christendom, if he succumbs in any respect, succumbs to some meretricious and flamboyant creature, bent solely upon fleecing him. Here is the place the cruel realism of the Frenchman reveals its superiority to the sentimentality of the lads of the Teutonic races. A Frenchman would no extra consider taking a mistress with out consulting his spouse than he would consider standing for workplace with out consulting his spouse. The result’s that he’s seldom victimized. For one Frenchman ruined by girls there are a minimum of 100 Englishmen and Americans, even supposing 100 occasions as many Frenchmen have interaction in that form of recreation. The case of Zola is typical. As is well-known, his amours had been rigorously supervised by Mme. Zola from the primary days of their marriage, and in consequence his life was wholly free from scandals and his thoughts was by no means distracted from his work.

    46. The Eternal Romance

    But no matter the way forward for monogamous marriage, there’ll by no means be any decay of that agreeable adventurousness which now lies on the backside of all transactions between the sexes. Women could emancipate themselves, they could borrow the entire bag of masculine methods, they usually could treatment themselves of their current need for the vegetable safety of marriage, however they are going to by no means stop to be girls, and as long as they’re girls they are going to stay provocative to males. Their chief allure immediately lies exactly in the truth that they’re harmful, that they threaten masculine liberty and autonomy, that their sharp minds current a menace vastly better than that of acts of God and the general public enemy—and they are going to be harmful for ever. Men concern them, and are fascinated by them. They know the way to present their tooth charmingly; the extra enlightened of them have perfected an outstanding strategy of fascination. It was Nietzsche who known as them the recreation of the warrior—not of the poltroon, keep in mind, however of the warrior. A profound saying. They have an infinite capability for rewarding masculine trade and enterprise with small and irresistible flatteries; their acute understanding combines with their capability for evoking concepts of magnificence to make them incomparable companions when the intense enterprise of the day is finished, and the time has come to increase comfortably within the interstellar ether.

    Every man, I daresay, has his personal notion of what constitutes good peace and contentment, however all of these notions, regardless of the elemental battle of the sexes, revolve round girls. As for me—and I hope I could also be pardoned, at this late stage in my inquiry, for intruding my very own persona—I reject the 2 commonest of them: ardour, a minimum of in its extra adventurous and melodramatic features, is just too thrilling and alarming for therefore indolent a person, and I’m too egoistic to have a lot need to be mothered. What, then, stays for me? Let me attempt to describe it to you.

    It is the shut of a busy and vexatious day—say half previous 5 – 6 o’clock of a winter afternoon. I’ve had a cocktail or two, and am stretched out on a divan in entrance of a fireplace, smoking. At the sting of the divan, shut sufficient for me to succeed in her with my hand, sits a girl not too younger, however nonetheless handsome and well-dressed—above all, a girl with a delicate, low-pitched, agreeable voice. As I snooze she talks—of something, all the pieces, all of the issues that girls speak of: books, music, the play, males, different girls. No politics. No enterprise. No faith. No metaphysics. Nothing difficult and vexatious—however keep in mind, she is clever; what she says is clearly expressed, and sometimes picturesquely. I observe the positive sheen of her hair, the gorgeous lower of her frock, the glint of her white tooth, the arch of her eye-brow, the sleek curve of her arm. I take heed to the beautiful murmur of her voice. Gradually I go to sleep—however just for an immediate. At as soon as, observing it, she raises her voice ever so little, and I’m awake. Then to sleep once more—slowly and charmingly down that slippery hill of desires. And then awake once more, after which asleep once more, and so forth.

    I ask you severely: may something be extra unutterably stunning? The sensation of falling asleep is to me probably the most beautiful on the planet. I enjoyment of it a lot that I even stay up for demise itself with a sneaking marvel and need. Well, right here is sleep poetized and made doubly candy. Here is sleep set to the best music on the planet. I match this example towards any that you just ran consider. It isn’t solely enchanting; additionally it is, in a really true sense, ennobling. In the top, when the woman grows prettily miffed and throws me out, I return to my sorrows one way or the other purged and glorified. I’m a greater man in my very own sight. I’ve grazed upon the fields of asphodel. I’ve been genuinely, utterly and unregrettably completely happy.

    47. Apologia in Conclusion

    At the top I crave the indulgence of the aesthetic reader for the imperfections essentially seen in all that I’ve right here set down—imperfections not solely resulting from incomplete data and fallible logic, but in addition, and maybe extra importantly, to sure basic weaknesses of the intercourse to which I’ve the honour to belong. A person is inseparable from his congenital vanities and stupidities, as a canine is inseparable from its fleas. They reveal themselves in all the pieces he says and does, however they reveal themselves most of all when he discusses the majestic thriller of girl. Just as he smirks and rolls his eyes in her precise presence, so he places on apathetic and unescapable clownishness when he essays to dissect her within the privateness of the laboratory. There is not any e book on girl by a person that’s not a stupendous compendium of posturings and imbecilities. There are however two books that present even a superficial need to be trustworthy—”The Unexpurgated Case Against Woman Suffrage,” by Sir Almroth Wright, and this one. Wright made a gallant try to inform the reality, however earlier than he obtained half manner by his job his ineradicable donkeyishness as a male overcame his scientific frenzy as a psychologist, and so he swiftly washed his fingers of the enterprise, and affronted the even handed with a half baked and preposterous e book. Perhaps I’ve failed too, and much more ingloriously. If so, I’m stuffed with honest and indescribable remorse.

    Extract from IN DEFENSE OF WOMEN by H. L. Mencken

    Views: 0

  • Woman Suffrage

    Woman Suffrage

    31. The Crowning Victory

    It is my honest hope that nothing I’ve right here exhibited can be mistaken by the the Aristocracy and gentry for ethical indignation. No such feeling, in fact, is in my coronary heart. Moral judgments, as outdated Friedrich used to say, are international to my nature. Setting apart the huge herd which exhibits no definable character in any respect, it appears to me that the minority distinguished by what is often thought to be an extra of sin could be very far more admirable than the minority distinguished by an extra of advantage. My expertise of the world has taught me that the typical wine-bibber is a much better fellow than the typical prohibitionist, and that the typical rogue is healthier firm than the typical poor drudge, and that the worst white, slave dealer of my acquaintance is a decenter man than the very best vice crusader. In the identical manner I’m satisfied that the typical lady, no matter her deficiencies, is tremendously superior to the typical man. The very ease with which she defies and swindles him in a number of capital conditions of life is the clearest of proofs of her normal superiority. She didn’t receive her current excessive immunities as a present from the gods, however solely after a protracted and sometimes bitter combat, and in that combat she exhibited forensic and tactical skills of a really admirable order. There was no weak point of man that she didn’t penetrate and make the most of. There was no trick that she didn’t put to efficient use. There was no system so daring and inordinate that it daunted her.

    The newest and biggest fruit of this female expertise for fight is the extension of the suffrage, now common within the Protestant international locations, and even advancing in these of the Greek and Latin rites. This fruit was garnered, not by an assault en masse, however by a mere foray. I imagine that almost all of ladies, for causes that I shall presently expose, weren’t anticipating the extension, and regard it as of small worth at the moment. They know that they will get what they need with out going to the precise polls for it; furthermore, they’re out of sympathy with many of the brummagem reforms advocated by the skilled suffragists, female and male. The mere assertion of the present suffragist platform, with its lengthy listing of quack sure-cures for all of the sorrows of the world, is sufficient to make them smile sadly. In specific, they’re sceptical of all reforms that rely on the mass motion of immense numbers of voters, massive sections of whom are wholly devoid of sense. A standard lady, certainly, no extra believes in democracy within the nation than she believes in democracy at her personal fireplace; she is aware of that there should be a category to order and a category to obey, and that the 2 can by no means coalesce. Nor is she vulnerable to the inventory sentimentalities upon which the entire democratic course of is predicated. This was proven very dramatically within the United States on the nationwide election of 1920, during which the late Woodrow Wilson was introduced all the way down to colossal and ignominious defeat—the primary normal election during which all American ladies might vote. All the sentimentality of the state of affairs was on the facet of Wilson, and but absolutely three-fourths of the newly-enfranchised ladies voters voted in opposition to him. He is, regardless of his skills for deception, a poor well-liked psychologist, and so he made a clumsy effort to fetch the women by tear-squeezing: each connoisseur will keep in mind his bathos about breaking the center of the world. Well, only a few ladies imagine in damaged hearts, and the trigger isn’t far to hunt: virtually each lady above the age of twenty-five has a damaged coronary heart. That is to say, she has been vastly upset, both by failing to nab some fairly fellow that her coronary heart was set on, or, worse, by truly nabbing him, after which discovering him to be a bounder or an imbecile, or each. Thus strolling the world with damaged hearts, ladies know that the harm isn’t critical. When he pulled out the Vox angelica cease and commenced sobbing and snuffling and blowing his nostril tragically, the discovered physician merely drove all the ladies voters into the arms of the Hon. Warren Gamaliel Harding, who was too silly to invent any points in any respect, however merely took detrimental benefit of the mistrust aroused by his opponent.

    Once the ladies of Christendom grow to be comfortable in using the poll, and eliminate the preposterous harridans who obtained it for them and who now search to inform them what to do with it, they’ll proceed to a scotching of lots of the sentimentalities which at the moment corrupt politics. For one factor, I imagine that they’ll provoke measures in opposition to democracy—the worst evil of the present-day world. When they arrive to the matter, they’ll actually not ordain the extension of the suffrage to youngsters, criminals and the insane briefly, to these ever extra inflammable and knavish than the male hinds who’ve loved it for therefore lengthy; they’ll attempt to result in its restriction, little by little, to the small minority that’s clever, agnostic and self-possessed—say six ladies to at least one man. Thus, out of their larger intuition for actuality, they’ll make democracy protected for a democracy.

    The curse of man, and the reason for almost all his woes, is his stupendous capability for believing the unbelievable. He is endlessly embracing delusions, and every new one is worse than all which have gone earlier than. But the place is the delusion that ladies cherish—I imply habitually, firmly, passionately? Who will draw up an inventory of propositions, held and maintained by them in sober earnest, which are clearly not true? (I allude right here, in fact, to real ladies, to not suffragettes and different such pseudo-males). As for me, I mustn’t prefer to undertake such an inventory. I do know of nothing, the truth is, that correctly belongs to it. Women, as a category, imagine in not one of the ludicrous rights, duties and pious obligations that males are endlessly gabbling about. Their superior intelligence is on no account extra eloquently demonstrated than by their ironical view of all such phantasmagoria. Their recurring angle towards males is considered one of aloof disdain, and their recurring angle towards what males imagine in, and get into sweats about, and bellow for, is considerably the identical. It takes twice as lengthy to transform a physique of ladies to some new fallacy because it takes to transform a physique of males, and even then they halt, hesitate and are filled with mordant criticisms. The ladies of Colorado had been voting for 21 years earlier than they succumbed to prohibition sufficiently to permit the person voters of the state to undertake it; their very own majority voice was in opposition to it to the top. During the interval the boys voters of a dozen non-suffrage American states had gone shrieking to the mourners’ bench. In California, enfranchised in 1911, the ladies rejected the dry revelation in 1914. National prohibition was adopted throughout the struggle with out their votes—they didn’t get the franchise all through the nation till it was within the Constitution—and it’s with out their assist at the moment. The American man, regardless of his status for lawlessness, is definitely very a lot afraid of the police, and in all of the areas the place prohibition is now truly enforced he makes excuses for his poltroonish acceptance of it by arguing that it’ll do him good in the long term, or that he must sacrifice his personal needs to the widespread weal. But it’s virtually unattainable to search out an American lady of any tradition who’s in favour of it. One and all, they’re against the turmoil and corruption that it entails, and resentful of the invasion of liberty underlying it. Being realists, they haven’t any perception in any program which proposes to remedy the pure swinishness of males by laws. Every regular lady believes, and fairly precisely, that the typical man could be very very like her husband, John, and he or she is aware of very properly that John is a weak, foolish and knavish fellow, and that any effort to transform him into an archangel in a single day is certain to come back to grief. As for her view of the typical creature of her personal intercourse, it’s marked by a cynicism so penetrating and so damaging {that a} clear assertion of it might shock past endurance.

    32. The Woman Voter

    Thus there’s not the slightest likelihood that the enfranchised ladies of Protestantdom, as soon as they grow to be comfortable in using the poll, will give any heed to the ex-suffragettes who now presume to guide and instruct them in politics. Years in the past I predicted that these suffragettes, tried out by victory, would grow to be idiots. They are actually onerous at work proving it. Half of them dedicate themselves to advocating reforms, mainly of a sexual character, so totally preposterous that even male politicians and newspaper editors snort at them; the opposite half succumb absurdly to the blandishments of the old-time male politicians, and so enroll themselves within the nice political events. A lady who joins considered one of these events merely turns into an imitation man, which is to say, a donkey. Thereafter she is nothing however an obscure cog in an historical and creaking machine, the only intelligible function of which is to keep up a horde of scoundrels in public workplace. Her vote is immediately set off by the vote of some sister who joins the opposite camorra. Parenthetically, I could add that all the girls to take to this political immolation appear to me to be frightfully plain. I do know these of England, Germany and Scandinavia solely by their portraits within the illustrated papers, however these of the United States I’ve studied at shut vary at numerous massive political gatherings, together with the 2 nationwide conventions first following the extension of the suffrage. I’m certainly no fastidious fellow—the truth is, I choose a sure melancholy decay in ladies to the loud, circus-wagon brilliance of youth—however I provide you with my phrase that there have been not 5 ladies at both nationwide conference who might have embraced me in digital camera with out first giving me chloral. Some of the chief stateswomen on present, the truth is, had been so downright hideous that I felt faint each time I had to have a look at them.

    The reform-monging suffragists appear to be equally devoid of the extra caressing items. They could also be full of altruistic ardour, however they actually have dangerous complexions, and never a lot of them know costume their hair. Nine-tenths of them advocate reforms aimed on the alleged lubricity of the male-the single normal, medical certificates for bridegrooms, birth-control, and so forth. The motive right here, I imagine, is mere rage and jealousy. The lady who isn’t pursued units up the doctrine that pursuit is offensive to her intercourse, and needs to make it a felony. No genuinely engaging lady has any such want. She likes masculine admiration, nevertheless violently expressed, and is kind of capable of maintain herself. More, she is properly conscious that only a few males are daring sufficient to supply it and not using a plain invitation, and this consciousness makes her extraordinarily cynical of all ladies who complain of being harassed, beset, storied, and seduced. All the extra clever ladies that I do know, certainly, are unanimously of the opinion that no woman in her proper senses has ever been truly seduced for the reason that world started; at any time when they hear of a case, they sympathize with the person. Yet extra, the traditional lady of vigorous charms, roving about amongst males, all the time tries to attract the admiration of those that have beforehand admired elsewhere; she prefers the skilled to the novice, and estimates her talent by the attractiveness of the huntresses who’ve hitherto stalked it. The iron-faced suffragist propagandist, if she will get a person in any respect, should get one wholly with out sentimental expertise. If he has any, her crude manoeuvres make him snort and he’s repelled by her lack of pulchritude and amiability. All such suffragists (save a couple of miraculous beauties) marry ninth-rate males after they marry in any respect. They need to put up with the kind of castoffs who’re virtually able to fall in love with girl physicists, embryologists, and embalmers.

    Fortunately for the human race, the campaigns of those indignant viragoes will come to naught. Men will carry on pursuing ladies till hell freezes over, and ladies will hold luring them on. If the latter enterprise had been deserted, the truth is, the entire recreation of affection would play out, for not many males take any discover of ladies spontaneously. Nine males out of ten can be fairly glad, I imagine, if there have been no ladies on the planet, as soon as they’d grown accustomed to the quiet. Practically all males are their happiest when they’re engaged upon actions—for instance, consuming, playing, looking, enterprise, journey—to which ladies usually are not ordinarily admitted. It is ladies who seduce them from such celibate doings. The hare postures and gyrates in entrance of the hound. The strategy to put an finish to the gaudy crimes that the suffragist alarmists speak about is to shave the heads of all the gorgeous ladies on the planet, and pluck out their eyebrows, and pull their enamel, and put them in khaki, and forbid them to wriggle on dance-floors, or to put on scents, or to make use of lip-sticks, or to roll their eyes. Reform, as ordinary, errors the fish for the fly.

    33. A Glance Into the Future

    The current public prosperity of the ex-suffragettes is mainly as a consequence of the truth that the old-time male politicians, being naturally very silly, mistake them for spokesmen for the entire physique of ladies, and so present them politeness. But quickly or late—and possibly disconcertingly quickly—the good mass of smart and agnostic ladies will flip upon them and depose them, and thereafter the girl vote can be now not on the disposal of bogus Great Thinkers and messiahs. If the suffragettes proceed to fill the newspapers with nonsense, as soon as that change has been effected, will probably be solely as a minority sect of tolerated idiots, just like the Swedenborgians, Christian Scientists, Seventh Day Adventists and different such fanatics of at the moment. This was the historical past of the extension of the suffrage in all the American states that made it earlier than the nationwide enfranchisement of ladies and will probably be repeated within the nation at massive, and in Great Britain and on the Continent. Women usually are not taken in by quackery as readily as males are; the hardness of their shell of logic makes it troublesome to penetrate to their feelings. For one lady who testifies publicly that she has been cured of most cancers by some swindling patent drugs, there are no less than twenty masculine witnesses. Even such frauds because the favorite American elixir, Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound, that are ostensibly treatments for particularly female ills, anatomically unattainable within the male, are mainly swallowed, so an clever druggist tells me, by males.

    My personal perception, based mostly on elaborate inquiries and lengthy meditation, is that the grant of the poll to ladies marks the hid however none the much less actual starting of an enchancment in our politics, and, in the long run, in our complete idea of presidency. As issues stand, an clever grappling with a few of the capital issues of the commonwealth is nearly unattainable. A politician usually prospers underneath democracy, not in proportion as his rules are sound and his honour incorruptible, however in proportion as she excels within the manufacture of sonorous phrases, and the invention of imaginary perils and imaginary defences in opposition to them. Our politics thus degenerates right into a mere pursuit of hobgoblins; the male voter, a coward in addition to an ass, is endlessly taking fright at a brand new one and electing some mountebank to put it. For 100 years previous the folks of the United States, probably the most horrible current democratic state, have scarcely had a political marketing campaign that was not based mostly upon some preposterous concern—first of slavery after which of the manumitted slave, first of capitalism after which of communism, first of the outdated after which of the novel. It is a peculiarity of ladies that they don’t seem to be simply set off by such alarms, that they don’t fall readily into such facile tumults and phobias. What begins a male assembly to snuffling and trembling most violently is exactly the factor that may trigger a feminine assembly to smell. What we’d like, to beat back mobocracy and safeguard a civilized type of authorities, is extra of this sniffing. What we’d like—and in the long run it should come—is a sniff so highly effective that it’ll name a halt upon the navigation of the ship from the forecastle, and put a reliable employees on the bridge, and lay a course that’s describable in intelligible phrases.

    The officers nominated by the male citizens in fashionable democracies earlier than the extension of the suffrage had been normally chosen, not for his or her competence however for his or her mere expertise for idiocy; they mirrored precisely the male weak point for no matter is rhetorical and mawkish and feeble and unfaithful. Consider, for instance, what occurred in a salient case. Every 4 years the male voters of the United States selected from amongst themselves one who was put ahead as the person most match, of all resident males, to be the primary citizen of the commonwealth. He was chosen after interminable dialogue; his {qualifications} had been totally canvassed; very massive powers and dignities had been put into his arms. Well, what did we generally discover after we examined this gentleman? We discovered, not a profound thinker, not a frontrunner of sound opinion, not a person of notable sense, however merely a wholesaler of notions so childish that they need to wants disgust a sentient suckling—briefly, a spouting geyser of fallacies and sentimentalities, a cataract of unsupported assumptions and hole moralizings, a tedious phrase-merchant and platitudinarian, a fellow whose noblest flights of thought had been flattered after they had been known as understandable—particularly, a Wilson, a Taft, a Roosevelt, or a Harding.

    This was the male champion. I don’t enterprise upon the cruelty of evaluating his bombastic flummeries to the clear reasoning of a lady of like fame and place; all I ask of you is that you simply weigh them, for sense, for shrewdness, for clever grasp of obscure relations, for mental honesty and braveness, with the concepts of the typical midwife.

    34. The Suffragette

    I’ve spoken with some disdain of the suffragette. What is the matter along with her, essentially, is straightforward: she is a lady who has stupidly carried her envy of sure of the superficial privileges of males to such a degree that it takes on the character of an obsession, and makes her blind to their worthless and sometimes mainly imaginary character. In specific, she centres this frenzy of hers upon one particular privilege, to wit, the alleged privilege of promiscuity in amour, the trendy droit du seigneur. Read the books of the chief girl Savonarolas, and you can find working by means of them an hysterical denunciation of what’s known as the double normal of morality; there’s, certainly, a complete literature devoted completely to it. The existence of this double normal appears to drive the poor ladies half frantic. They bellow raucously for its abrogation, and demand that the frivolous male be visited with much more idiotic penalties than these which now go to the aberrant feminine; some even advocate gravely his mutilation by surgical procedure, that he could also be pressured into rectitude by a bodily incapacity for sin.

    All this, in fact, is hocus-pocus, and the considered usually are not deceived by it for an immediate. What these virtuous bel dames truly want of their hearts isn’t that the male be decreased to chemical purity, however that the franchise of dalliance be prolonged to themselves. The most basic acquaintance with Freudian psychology exposes their secret animus. Unable to ensnare males underneath the current system, or in any respect occasions, unable to ensnare males sufficiently appetizing to arouse the envy of different ladies, they leap to the idea that it might be simpler if the foundations had been much less exacting. This idea exposes their deficiency within the chief character of their intercourse: correct statement. The reality is that, even when they possessed the liberty that males are supposed to own, they might nonetheless discover it troublesome to attain their ambition, for the typical man, no matter his stupidity, is no less than eager sufficient in judgment to choose a single wink from a genuinely engaging lady to the final delirious favours of the everyday suffragette. Thus the idea of the whoopers and snorters of the trigger, in its esoteric in addition to in its public side, is unsound. They are merely ladies who, of their tastes and processes of thoughts, are two-thirds males, and the actual fact explains their failure to attain presentable husbands, and even consolatory betrayal, fairly as successfully because it explains the prepared credence they offer to political and philosophical absurdities.

    35. A Mythical Dare-Devil

    The reality is that the image of male carnality that such ladies conjure up belongs virtually wholly to fable, as I’ve already noticed in coping with the sophistries of Dr. Eliza Burt Gamble, a paralogist on a considerably increased airplane. As they depict him of their fevered treatises on illegitimacy, white-slave buying and selling and ophthalmia neonatorum, the typical male grownup of the Christian and cultured international locations leads a lifetime of gaudy lubricity, rolling magnificently from one liaison to a different, and with an virtually limitless queue of ruined milliners, dancers, charwomen, parlour-maids and waitresses behind him, all dying of poison and despair. The lifetime of man, as these furiously envious ones see it, is the lifetime of a number one actor in a boulevard revue. He is a polygamous, multigamous, myriadigamous; an insatiable and unconscionable debauche, a monster of promiscuity; prodigiously untrue to his spouse, and even to his associates’ wives; fathomlessly libidinous and fantastically glad.

    Needless to say, this image bears no extra relation to the information than a dissertation on main technique by a navy “expert” promoted from dramatic critic. If the chief suffragette scare mongers (I communicate with none embarrassing naming of names) had been engaging sufficient to males to get close to sufficient to sufficient males to know sufficient about them for his or her function they might paralyze the Dorcas societies with no such cajoling libels. As a matter of sober reality, the typical man of our time and race is kind of incapable of all these incandescent and intriguing divertisements. He is way extra virtuous than they make him out, far much less schooled in sin, far much less enterprising and ruthless. I don’t say, in fact, that he’s pure in coronary heart, for the possibilities are that he is not; what I do say is that, within the overwhelming majority of instances, he’s pure in act, even within the face of temptation. And why? For a number of major causes, not to enter minor ones. One is that he lacks the braveness. Another is that he lacks the cash. Another is that he’s essentially ethical, and has a conscience. It takes extra sinful initiative than he has in him to plunge into any affair save probably the most informal and sordid; it takes extra ingenuity and intrepidity than he has in him to hold it off; it takes extra money than he can conceal from his consort to finance it. A person might power his precise spouse to share the direst poverty, however even the least vampirish lady of the third half calls for to be courted in what, contemplating his station in life, is the grand method, and the bills of that grand method scare off all save a small minority of specialists in deception. So lengthy, certainly, as a spouse is aware of her husband’s revenue precisely, she has a positive technique of holding him to his oaths.

    Even more practical than the fiscal barrier is the barrier of poltroonery. The one character that distinguishes man from the opposite increased vertebrate, certainly, is his extreme timorousness, his simple yielding to alarms, his incapacity for journey and not using a crowd behind him. In his regular incarnation he’s no extra able to initiating an extra-legal affair—in any respect occasions, above the mawkish harmlessness of a flirting match with a cigar woman in a cafe-than he’s of scaling the battlements of hell. He likes to consider himself doing it, simply as he likes to consider himself main a cavalry cost or climbing the Matterhorn. Often, certainly, his self-importance leads him to think about the factor carried out, and he admits by winks and blushes that he’s a nasty one. But on the backside of all that tawdry pretence there’s normally nothing extra materials than an oafish smirk at some disgusted shop-girl, or a scraping of shins underneath the desk. Let any lady who’s disquieted by stories of her husband’s derelictions determine to herself how lengthy it might have taken him to suggest to her if left to his personal enterprise, after which let her ask herself if that’s the case pusillanimous a creature may very well be imaged within the position of Don Giovanni.

    Finally, there’s his conscience—the amassed sediment of ancestral faintheartedness in numerous generations, with imprecise spiritual fears and superstitions to leaven and mellow it. What! a conscience? Yes, expensive associates, a conscience. That conscience could also be imperfect, inept, unintelligent, brummagem. It could also be indistinguishable, at instances, from the mere concern that somebody could also be wanting. It could also be shot by means of with hypocrisy, stupidity, play-acting. But nonetheless, as consciences go in Christendom, it’s genuinely entitled to the identify—and it’s all the time in motion. A person, keep in mind, isn’t a being in vacuo; he’s the fruit and slave of the atmosphere that bathes him. One can not enter the House of Commons, the United States Senate, or a jail for felons with out changing into, in some measure, a rascal. One can not fall overboard with out transport water. One can not cross by means of a contemporary college with out carrying away scars. And by the identical token one can not dwell and have one’s being in a contemporary democratic state, 12 months in and 12 months out, with out falling, to some extent no less than, underneath that ethical obsession which is the hall-mark of the mob-man let out. A citizen of such a state, his nostril buried in Nietzsche, “Man and Superman,” and different such superior literature, might caress himself with the notion that he’s an immoralist, that his soul is stuffed with soothing sin, that he has reduce himself free from the revelation of God. But all of the whereas there is part of him that continues to be a sound Christian, a moralist, a proper considering and forward-looking man. And that half, in instances of stress, asserts itself. It might not fear him on unusual events. It might not cease him when he swears, or takes a nip of whiskey behind the door, or goes motoring on Sunday; it might even let him alone when he goes to a leg-show. But the second a concrete Temptress rises earlier than him, her nostril snow-white, her lips rouged, her eyelashes drooping provokingly—the second such an deserted wench has at him, and his lack of prepared funds begins to conspire together with his lack of braveness to assault and wobble him—at that exact second his conscience flares into operate, and so finishes his enterprise. First he sees problem, then he sees the hazard, then he sees improper. The result’s that he slinks off in trepidation, and one other vampire is baffled of her prey.

    It is, certainly, the key scandal of Christendom, no less than within the Protestant areas, that almost all males are trustworthy to their wives. You will a journey a great distance earlier than you discover a married man who will admit that he’s, however the information are the information, and I’m certainly not one to flout them.

    36. The Origin of a Delusion

    The origin of the delusion that the typical man is a Leopold II or Augustus the Strong, with the amorous expertise of a guinea pig, isn’t far to hunt. It lies in three elements, the which I rehearse briefly:

    1. The idiotic self-importance of males, resulting in their everlasting boasting, both by open mendacity or sinister hints.

    2. The notions of vice crusaders, nonconformist divines, Y. M. C. A. secretaries, and different such libidinous poltroons as to what they might do themselves if they’d the braveness.

    3. The ditto of sure suffragettes as to ditto.

    Here you may have the genesis of a generalization that offers the much less vital kind of ladies a substantial amount of pointless uneasiness and vastly augments the pure conceit of males. Some pornographic outdated fellow, within the discharge of his duties as director of an anti-vice society, places in a night ploughing by means of such books as “The Memoirs of Fanny Hill,” Casanova’s Confessions, the Cena Trimalchionis of Gaius Petronius, and II Samuel. From this perusal he arises with the conviction that life amid the purple lights should be one stupendous whirl of deviltry, that the clerks he sees in Broadway or Piccadilly at evening are out for revels that may have brought about protests in Sodom and Nineveh, that the typical man who chooses hell leads an existence akin to that of a Mormon bishop, that the world outdoors the Bible class is packed like a sardine-can with betrayed salesgirls, that each man who would not imagine that Jonah swallowed the whale spends his complete leisure leaping by means of the seventh hoop of the Decalogue. “If I were not saved and anointed of God,” whispers the vice director into his personal ear, “that is what I, the Rev. Dr. Jasper Barebones, would be doing. The late King David did it; he was human, and hence immoral. The late King Edward VII was not beyond suspicion: the very numeral in his name has its suggestions. Millions of others go the same route…. Ergo, Up, guards, and at ’em! Bring me the pad of blank warrants! Order out the seachlights and scaling-ladders! Swear in four hundred more policemen! Let us chase these hell-hounds out of Christendom, and make the world safe for monogamy, poor working girls, and infant damnation!”

    Thus the hound of heaven, arguing fallaciously from his personal secret aspirations. Where he makes his mistake is in assuming that the unconsecrated, whereas sharing his longing to debauch and betray, are free from his different weaknesses, e.g., his timidity, his lack of resourcefulness, his conscience. As I’ve mentioned, they don’t seem to be. The overwhelming majority of those that seem within the public haunts of sin are there, to not interact in overt acts of ribaldry, however merely to tremble agreeably upon the sting of the abyss. They are the identical skittish experimentalists, exactly, who throng the halfway at a world’s honest, and go to smutty exhibits, and soak up intercourse magazines, and browse the kind of books that our vice crusading pal reads. They prefer to conjure up the charms of carnality, and to assist out their considerably sluggish imaginations by precise peeps at it, however with regards to taking a forthright header into the sulphur they normally fail to muster up the braveness. For one clerk who succumbs to the houris of the pave, there are 5 hundred who succumb to lack of means, the warnings of the intercourse hygienists, and their very own miserable consciences. For one “clubman”—i.e., bagman or suburban vestryman—who invades the ladies’s outlets, engages the love of some harmless miss, lures her into infamy after which sells her to the Italians, there are one thousand who by no means get any additional than asking the worth of cologne water and discharging a couple of furtive winks. And for one husband of the Nordic race who maintains a blonde refrain woman in oriental luxurious across the nook, there are ten thousand who’re as true to their wives, 12 months in and 12 months out, as so many convicts within the death-house, and can be no extra able to any such loathsome malpractice, even within the face of free alternative, than they might be of slicing off the ears of their younger.

    I’m sorry to explode a lot romance. In specific, I’m sorry for the suffragettes who specialize within the double normal, for after they get into pantaloons eventually, and have the brand new freedom, they’ll uncover to their sorrow that they’ve been pursuing a chimera—that there’s actually no such animal because the male anarchist they’ve been denouncing and envying—that the wholesale fornication of man, no less than underneath Christian democracy, has little extra precise existence than trustworthy promoting or sound cooking. They have adopted the porno maniacs in embracing a bit of buncombe, and when the day of deliverance comes it is going to flip to ashes of their arms.

    Their error, as I say, lies in overestimating the braveness and enterprise of man. They themselves, barring mere bodily valour, a top quality during which the typical man is way exceeded by the typical jackal or wolf, have extra of each. If the implications, to a person, of the slightest descent from virginity had been one-tenth as swift and barbarous as the implications to a younger woman in like case, it might take a division of infantry to dredge up a single male flouter of that lex talionis in the entire western world. As issues stand at the moment, even with the percentages so tremendously in his favour, the typical male hesitates and is thus not misplaced. Turn to the statistics of the vice crusaders should you doubt it. They present that the weekly receipts of feminine recruits upon the wharves of sin are all the time greater than the demand; that extra younger ladies enter upon the vermilion profession than could make respectable livings at it; that the stress of the temptation they maintain out is the chief consider corrupting our undergraduates. What was the primary act of the American Army when it started summoning its younger clerks and faculty boys and plough arms to conscription camps? Its first act was to mark off a so-called ethical zone round every camp, and to safe it with trenches and machine weapons, and to place a variety of volunteer termagants to patrolling it, that the assembled jeunesse is likely to be protected of their rectitude from the immoral advances of the adjoining milkmaids and poor working ladies.

    37. Women as Martyrs

    I’ve given three causes for the prosperity of the notion that man is a pure polygamist, bent eternally upon recent dives into Lake of Brimstone No. 7. To these one other must be added: the thirst for martyrdom which exhibits itself in so many ladies, significantly underneath the upper types of civilization. This unhealthy urge for food, the truth is, could also be described as considered one of civilization’s ailments; it’s virtually exceptional in additional primitive societies. The savage lady, unprotected by her impolite tradition and compelled to heavy and relentless labour, has retained her bodily power and with it her honesty and self-respect. The civilized lady, steadily degenerated by a larger ease, and helped down that hill by the pretensions of civilized man, has turned her infirmity right into a advantage, and so impacts a feebleness that’s truly far past the truth. It is by this route that she will be able to most successfully disarm masculine mistrust, and get what she desires. Man is flattered by any acknowledgment, nevertheless insincere, of his superior power and capability. He likes to be leaned upon, appealed to, adopted docilely. And this tribute to his would possibly caresses him on the psychic airplane in addition to on the airplane of the clearly bodily. He not solely enjoys serving to a lady over a gutter; he additionally enjoys serving to her dry her tears. The result’s the huge pretence that characterizes the relations of the sexes underneath civilization—the double pretence of man’s crafty and autonomy and of lady’s dependence and deference. Man is all the time in search of somebody to boast to; lady is all the time in search of a shoulder to place her head on.

    This female affectation, in fact, has steadily taken on the power of a hard and fast behavior, and so it’s got a sure assist, by a well-recognized technique of self-delusion, in actuality. The civilized lady inherits that behavior as she inherits her crafty. She is born half satisfied that she is actually as weak and helpless as she later pretends to be, and the prevailing folklore gives her limitless corroboration. One of the resultant phenomena is the enjoyment of martyrdom that one so usually finds in ladies, and significantly within the least alert and introspective of them. They take a heavy, unhealthy pleasure in struggling; it subtly pleases them to be onerous put upon; they prefer to image themselves as slaughtered saints. Thus they all the time discover one thing to complain of; the very situations of home life give them a superabundance of medical materials. And if, by any likelihood, such materials exhibits a falling off, they’re uneasy and sad. Let a lady have a husband whose conduct isn’t moderately open to query, and she’s going to invent legendary offences to make him bearable. And if her invention fails she can be plunged into the utmost distress and humiliation. This reality most likely explains many mysterious divorces: the husband was not too dangerous, however too good. For public opinion amongst ladies, keep in mind, doesn’t favour the girl who is stuffed with a placid contentment and has no masculine torts to report; if she says that her husband is wholly passable she is seemed upon as a numskull much more dense that he’s himself. A person, talking of his spouse to different males, all the time praises her extravagantly. Boasting about her soothes his self-importance; he likes to fire up the envy of his fellows. But when two ladies speak of their husbands it’s primarily atrocities that they describe. The most esteemed lady gossip is the one with the longest and most numerous repertoire of complaints.

    This craving for martyrdom explains one of many generally famous characters of ladies: their keen aptitude for bearing bodily ache. As now we have seen, they’ve truly a very good deal much less endurance than males; large accidents shock them extra severely and kill them extra rapidly. But when acute algesia is unaccompanied by any profounder phenomena they’re undoubtedly capable of bear it with a far larger present of resignation. The motive isn’t far to hunt. In ache a person sees solely an invasion of his liberty, power and shallowness. It flooring him, masters him, and makes him ridiculous. But a lady, extra refined and devious in her processes of thoughts, senses the dramatic impact that the spectacle of her struggling makes upon the spectators, already full of compassion for her feebleness. She would thus a lot somewhat be praised for dealing with ache with a martyr’s fortitude than for devising some technique of eliminating it–the first considered a person. No lady might have invented chloroform, nor, for that matter, alcohol. Both medicine supply an escape from conditions and experiences that, even in aggravated kinds, ladies relish. The lady who drinks as males drink—that’s, to boost her threshold of sensation and ease the agony of dwelling—almost all the time exhibits a deficiency in female characters and an undue preponderance of masculine characters. Almost invariably you can find her useless and boastful, and filled with different marks of that bombastic exhibitionism which is so sterlingly male.

    38. Pathological Effects

    This female yearning for martyrdom, in fact, usually takes on a downright pathological character, and so engages the psychiatrist. Women present many different traits of the identical type. To be a lady underneath our Christian civilization, certainly, means to dwell a life that’s heavy with repression and dissimulation, and this repression and dissimulation, in the long term, can not fail to provide results which are indistinguishable from illness. You will discover a few of them described at size in any handbook on psychoanalysis. The Viennese, Adler, and the Dane, Poul Bjerre, argue, certainly, that womanliness itself, as it’s encountered underneath Christianity, is a illness. All ladies endure from a suppressed revolt in opposition to the inhibitions pressured upon them by our synthetic tradition, and this suppressed revolt, by well-known Freudian means, produces a posh of psychological signs that’s acquainted to all of us. At one finish of the size we observe the suffragette, along with her grotesque adoption of the male perception in legal guidelines, phrases and talismans, and her hysterical demand for a sexual libertarianism that she couldn’t put to make use of if she had it. And on the different finish we discover the snuffling and neurotic lady, along with her bogus martyrdom, her extravagant pruderies and her pathological delusions. As Ibsen noticed way back, it is a man’s world. Women have damaged a lot of their outdated chains, however they’re nonetheless enmeshed in a formidable community of artificial taboos and sentimentalities, and it’ll take them one other era, no less than, to get real freedom. That that is true is proven by the deep unrest that but marks the intercourse, regardless of its latest progress towards social, political and financial equality. It is nearly unattainable to discover a man who actually needs that he had been a lady, however virtually each lady, at a while or different in her life, is gnawed by a remorse that she isn’t a person.

    Two of the toughest issues that ladies need to bear are (a) the silly masculine disinclination to confess their mental superiority, and even their equality, and even their possession of a standard human gear for thought, and (b) the equally silly masculine doctrine that they represent a particular and ineffable species of vertebrate, with out the pure instincts and appetites of the order—to adapt a phrase from Hackle, that they’re transcendental and virtually gaseous mammals, and marked by a whole lack of sure salient mammalian characters. The first imbecility has already involved us at size. One finds traces of it even in works professedly dedicated to disposing of it. In one such guide, for instance, I come across this: “What all the skill and constructive capacity of the physicians in the Crimean War failed to accomplish Florence Nightingale accomplished by her beautiful femininity and nobility of soul.” In different phrases, by her possession of some recondite and indescribable magic, sharply separated from the unusual psychological processes of man. The idea is unsound and preposterous. Miss Nightingale completed her helpful work, not by magic, however by onerous widespread sense. The drawback earlier than her was merely considered one of group. Many males had tackled it, and all of them had failed stupendously. What she did was to convey her female sharpness of wit, her female clear-thinking, to bear upon it. Thus attacked, it yielded rapidly, and as soon as it had been dropped at order it was simple for different individuals to hold on what she had begun. But the opinion of a person’s world nonetheless prefers to credit score her success to some mysterious angelical high quality, unstatable in lucid phrases and having no extra actuality than the divine inspiration of an archbishop. Her terribly acute and correct intelligence is thus conveniently put upon the desk, and the amour propre of man is stored inviolate. To confess frankly that she had extra sense than any male Englishman of her era can be to utter a reality too harsh to be bearable.

    The second delusion generally exhibits itself within the idea, already mentioned, that ladies are devoid of any intercourse intuition—that they undergo the odious caresses of the lubricious male solely by a strong effort of the need, and with the only object of discharging their responsibility to posterity. It can be unattainable to enter this delusion with correct candour and at due size in a piece designed for studying aloud within the home circle; all I can do is to refer the scholar to the books of any competent authority on the psychology of intercourse, say Ellis, or to the confidences (if they’re obtainable) of any complaisant bachelor of his acquaintance.

    39. Women as Christians

    The glad tidings preached by Christ had been clearly extremely beneficial to ladies. He lifted them to equality earlier than the Lord when their very possession of souls was nonetheless doubted by the vast majority of rival theologians. Moreover, He esteemed them socially and set worth upon their sagacity, and one of the crucial disdained of their intercourse, a girl previously in public life, was amongst His common advisers. Mariolatry is thus on no account the invention of the mediaeval popes, as Protestant theologians would have us imagine. On the opposite, it’s plainly discernible within the Four Gospels. What the mediaeval popes truly invented (or, to be exact, reinvented, for they merely borrowed the weather of it from St. Paul) was the doctrine of ladies’s inferiority, the exact reverse of the factor credited to them. Committed, for sound causes of self-discipline, to the celibacy of the clergy, they needed to assist it by depicting all visitors with ladies within the mild of a hazardous and ignominious enterprise. The consequence was the deliberate group and improvement of the idea of feminine triviality, lack of duty and normal looseness of thoughts. Woman turned a kind of satan, however with out the admired intelligence of the common demons. The look of ladies saints, nevertheless, provided a continuing and embarrassing criticism of this idiotic doctrine. If occasional ladies had been match to take a seat upon the appropriate hand of God—and so they had been usually proving it, and forcing the church to acknowledge it—then certainly all ladies couldn’t be as dangerous because the books made them out. There thus arose the idea of the angelic lady, the pure vestal; we see her at full size within the romances of mediaeval chivalry. What emerged in the long run was a kind of double doctrine, first that ladies had been devils and secondly that they had been angels. This preposterous dualism has merged, as now we have seen, right into a compromise dogma in fashionable instances. By that dogma it’s held, on the one hand, that ladies are unintelligent and immoral, and alternatively, that they’re free from all these weaknesses of the flesh which distinguish males. This, roughly talking, is the notion of the typical male numskull at the moment.

    Christianity has thus each libelled ladies and flattered them, however with the load all the time on the facet of the libel. It is subsequently, at backside, their enemy, as the faith of Christ, now wholly extinct, was their pal. And as they steadily throw off the shackles which have certain them for a thousand years they present appreciation of the actual fact. Women, certainly, usually are not naturally spiritual, and they’re rising much less and fewer spiritual as 12 months chases 12 months. Their unusual devotion has little if any pious exaltation in it; it’s a routine apply, power on them by the masculine notion that an look of holiness is correct to their lowly station, and a masculine feeling that church-going in some way retains them so as, and out of doings that may be much less reassuring. When they exhibit any real spiritual fervour, its sexual character is normally so apparent that even the vast majority of males are cognizant of it. Women by no means go flocking ecstatically to a church during which the agent of God within the pulpit is an aged asthmatic with a watchful spouse. When one finds them pushed to frenzies by the deserves of the saints, and weeping over the sorrows of the heathen, and dashing out to haul the entire vicinage as much as grace, and spending hours on their knees in hysterical abasement earlier than the heavenly throne, it’s fairly protected to imagine, even with out an precise go to, that the ecclesiastic who has labored the miracle is a good and toothsome fellow, and a very good deal extra aphrodisiacal than discovered. All the good preachers to ladies in fashionable instances have been males of suave and ingratiating behavior, and the good majority of them, from Henry Ward Beecher up and down, have been taken, quickly or late, in transactions way more appropriate to the boudoir than to the footstool of the Almighty. Their well-known killings have all the time been made among the many silliest kind of ladies—the type, briefly, who fall so wanting the traditional acumen of their intercourse that they’re bemused by mere magnificence in males.

    Such ladies are in a minority, and so the intercourse exhibits a very good deal fewer spiritual lovers per mille than the intercourse of sentiment and perception. Attending, a number of years in the past, the gladiatorial exhibits of the Rev. Dr. Billy Sunday, the celebrated American pulpit-clown, I used to be always struck by the good preponderance of males within the pen dedicated to the saved. Men of all ages and in monumental numbers got here swarming to the altar, loudly bawling for assist in opposition to their sins, however the ladies had been something however quite a few, and the few who appeared had been mainly both chlorotic adolescents or pathetic outdated Saufschwestern. For six nights working I sat straight beneath the gifted exhorter with out seeing a single feminine convert of what statisticians name the child-bearing age—that’s, the age of most intelligence and attraction. Among the male simpletons bagged by his yells throughout this time had been the president of a railroad, half a dozen wealthy bankers and retailers, and the previous governor of an American state. But not a lady of comparable place or dignity. Not a lady that any self-respecting bachelor would care to chuck underneath the chin.

    This cynical view of non secular emotionalism, and with it of the entire inventory of ecclesiastical balderdash, might be accountable, no less than partially, for the reluctance of ladies to enter upon the sacerdotal profession. In these Christian sects which nonetheless bar them from the pulpit—normally on the imperfectly hid floor that they don’t seem to be equal to its alleged calls for upon the morals and the mind—one by no means hears of them protesting in opposition to the prohibition; they’re fairly content material to depart the degrading imposture to males, who’re higher fitted for it by expertise and conscience. And in these baroque sects, mainly American, which admit them they present no eagerness to placed on the stole and chasuble. When the primary clergywoman appeared within the United States, it was predicted by alarmists that males can be pushed out of the pulpit by the brand new competitors. Nothing of the type has occurred, neither is it in prospect. The complete corps of feminine divines within the nation is likely to be herded into one small room. Women, when literate in any respect, are far too clever to make efficient ecclesiastics. Their sharp sense of actuality is in limitless opposition to the entire sacerdotal masquerade, and their cynical humour stands in opposition to the snorting that’s inseparable from pulpit oratory.

    Those ladies who enter upon the spiritual life are virtually invariably moved by some motive distinct from mere pious irritation. It is a commonplace, certainly, that, in Catholic international locations, ladies are pushed into convents by financial concerns or by disasters of amour far oftener than they’re drawn there by the hope of heaven. Read the lives of the feminine saints, and you will notice what number of of them tried marriage and failed at it earlier than ever they turned to faith. In Protestant lands only a few ladies undertake it as a occupation in any respect, and among the many few a secular impulse is nearly all the time seen. The woman who’s out of the blue overcome by a want to minister to the heathen in international lands is almost invariably discovered, on inspection, to be a woman harbouring a idea that it might be agreeable to marry some heroic missionary. In level of reality, she duly marries him. At house, maybe, she has discovered it unattainable to get a husband, however within the remoter marches of China, Senegal and Somaliland, with no white competitors current, it’s equally unattainable to fail.

    40. Piety as a Social Habit

    What stays of the alleged piety of ladies is little greater than a social behavior, bolstered in most communities by a paucity of different and extra inviting divertissements. If you may have ever noticed the ladies of Spain and Italy at their devotions you needn’t be advised how a lot the worship of God could also be a mere excuse for rest and gossip. These ladies, of their each day lives, are surrounded by a formidable community of mediaeval taboos; their regular human want for ease and freedom in intercourse is opposed by masculine mistrust and superstition; they meet no strangers; they see and listen to nothing new. In the home of the Most High they escape from that vexing routine. Here they might brush shoulders with a crowd. Here, so to talk, they might crane their psychological necks and stretch their non secular legs. Here, above all, they might come into some kind of contact with males comparatively extra affable, cultured and charming than their husbands and fathers—to wit, with the rev. clergy.

    Elsewhere in Christendom, although ladies usually are not fairly so relentlessly watched and penned up, they really feel a lot the identical want of selection and pleasure, and each are likewise on faucet within the temples of the Lord. No one, I’m positive, want be advised that the typical missionary society or church stitching circle isn’t primarily a non secular group. Its precise function is exactly that of the absurd golf equipment and secret orders to which the decrease and least resourceful lessons of males belong: it gives a way of refreshment, of self-expression, of non-public show, of political manipulation and boasting, and, if the pastor occurs to be attention-grabbing, of discreet and virtually lawful intrigue. In the course of a life largely dedicated to the research of pietistic phenomena, I’ve by no means met a single lady who cared an genuine rattling for the precise heathen. The attraction of their salvation is all the time virtually purely social. Women go to church for a similar motive that farmers and convicts go to church.

    Finally, there’s the aesthetic lure. Religion, in most components of Christendom, holds out the one bait of magnificence that the inhabitants are ever cognizant of. It gives music, dim lights, comparatively formidable structure, eloquence, formality and thriller, the caressing meaninglessness that’s on the coronary heart of poetry. Women are way more conscious of such issues than males, who’re ordinarily fairly as devoid of aesthetic sensitiveness as so many oxen. The angle of the everyday man towards magnificence in its numerous kinds is, the truth is, an angle of suspicion and hostility. He doesn’t regard a murals as merely inert and silly; he regards it as, in some indefinable manner, positively offensive. He sees the artist as knowledgeable voluptuary and scoundrel, and would no extra belief him in his family than he would belief a colored clergyman in his hen-yard. It was males, and never ladies, who invented such sordid and literal faiths as these of the Mennonites, Dunkards, Wesleyans and Scotch Presbyterians, with their antipathy to stunning ritual, their obscene buttonholing of God, their nice expertise for decreasing the ineffable thriller of faith to a mere bawling of idiots. The regular lady, in as far as she has any faith in any respect, strikes irresistibly towards Catholicism, with its poetical obscurantism. The evangelical Protestant sects have a tough time holding her. She can no extra be an precise Methodist than a gentleman is usually a Methodist.

    This inclination towards magnificence, in fact, is dismissed by the typical male blockhead as not more than a feeble sentimentality. The reality is that it’s exactly the other. It is definitely not sentimentality to be moved by the stately and mysterious ceremony of the mass, and even, say, by these timid imitations of it which one observes in sure Protestant church buildings. Such proceedings, no matter their defects from the standpoint of a pure aesthetic, are in any respect occasions vastly extra stunning than any of the personal acts of the people who participate in them. They raise themselves above the barren utilitarianism of on a regular basis life, and no much less above the maudlin sentimentalities that males search pleasure in. They supply a way of escape, handy and alluring, from that sordid routine of thought and occupation which ladies revolt in opposition to so pertinaciously.

    41. The Ethics of Women

    I’ve mentioned that the faith preached by Jesus (now wholly extinct on the planet) was extremely beneficial to ladies. This was not saying, in fact, that ladies have repaid the praise by adopting it. They are, the truth is, detached Christians within the primitive sense, simply as they’re dangerous Christians within the antagonistic fashionable sense, and significantly on the facet of ethics. If they really settle for the renunciations commanded by the Sermon on the Mount, it’s only in an effort to flout their substance underneath cowl of their look. No lady is actually humble; she is merely politic. No lady, with a free selection earlier than her, chooses self-immolation; probably the most she genuinely needs in that route is a spectacular martyrdom. No lady delights in poverty. No lady yields when she will be able to prevail. No lady is actually meek.

    In their sensible ethics, certainly, ladies pay little heed to the precepts of the Founder of Christianity, and the actual fact has handed into proverb. Their gentleness, just like the so-called honour of males, is seen solely in conditions which provide them no menace. The second a lady finds herself confronted by an antagonist genuinely harmful, both to her personal safety or to the well-being of these underneath her safety—say a baby or a husband—she shows a bellicosity which stops at nothing, nevertheless outrageous. In the courts of legislation one sometimes encounters a male extremist who tells the reality, the entire reality and nothing however the reality, even when it’s in opposition to his trigger, however no such lady has ever been on view for the reason that days of Justinian. It is, certainly, an axiom of the bar that ladies invariably lie upon the stand, and the entire effort of a barrister who has one for a shopper is dedicated to protecting her inside bounds, that the obtuse suspicions of the male jury is probably not unduly aroused. Women litigants virtually all the time win their instances, not, as is often assumed, as a result of the jurymen fall in love with them, however merely and solely as a result of they’re clear-headed, resourceful, implacable and with out qualms.

    What is right here seen within the halls of justice, within the face of an unlimited technical gear for combating lying, is ten instances extra apparent in freer fields. Any man who’s so unlucky as to have a critical controversy with a lady, say within the departments of finance, theology or amour, should inevitably carry away from it a way of getting handed by means of a harmful and virtually ugly expertise. Women not solely chew within the clinches; they chew even in open combating; they’ve a dental attain, so to talk, of fantastic size. No assault is so determined that they won’t undertake it, as soon as they’re aroused; no system is so unfair and horrifying that it stays them. In my early days, needing to enhance my prose, I served for a 12 months or in order reporter for a newspaper in a police courtroom, and through that point I heard maybe 4 hundred instances of so-called wife-beating. The husbands, of their defence, virtually invariably pleaded justification, and a few of them advised such tales of studied atrocity on the home fireplace, each psychic and bodily, that the discovered Justice of the Peace discharged them with tears in his eyes and the very catchpolls within the courtroom needed to blow their noses. Many extra males than ladies go insane, and lots of extra married males than single males. The reality puzzles nobody who has had the identical alternative that I needed to discover out what goes on, 12 months in and 12 months out, behind the doorways of apparently glad properties. A lady, if she hates her husband (and lots of of them do), could make life so bitter and obnoxious to him that even loss of life upon the gallows appears candy by comparability. This hatred, in fact, is usually, and maybe virtually invariably, fairly justified. To be the spouse of an unusual man, certainly, is an expertise that should be very onerous to bear. The hollowness and self-importance of the guy, his petty meanness and stupidity, his puling sentimentality and credulity, his bombastic air of a cock on a dunghill, his anaesthesia to all whispers and summonings of the spirit, above all, his loathsome clumsiness in amour—all these items should revolt any lady above the bottom. To be the article of the oafish affections of such a creature, even when they’re trustworthy and profound, can’t be anticipated to present any real pleasure to a lady of sense and refinement. His efficiency as a gallant, as Honor de Balzac way back noticed, unescapably suggests a gorilla’s efforts to play the violin. Women survive the tragicomedy solely by dint of their nice capability for play-acting. They are capable of act so realistically that always they deceive even themselves; the typical lady’s contentment, certainly, is not more than a tribute to her histrionism. But there should be innumerable revolts in secret, even so, and one generally wonders that so few ladies, with the factor so facile and so protected, poison their husbands. Perhaps it’s not fairly as uncommon as important statistics make it out; the deathrate amongst husbands could be very a lot increased than amongst wives. More than as soon as, certainly, I’ve gone to the funeral of an acquaintance who died out of the blue, and noticed a curious glitter within the eyes of the inconsolable widow.

    Even on this age of emancipation, regular ladies have few critical transactions in life save with their husbands and potential husbands; the enterprise of marriage is their dominant concern from adolescence to senility. When they step outdoors their recurring circle they present the identical alert and keen wariness that they exhibit inside it. A person who has dealings with them should hold his wits about him, and even when he’s most cautious he’s usually flabbergasted by their sudden and unconscionable forays. Whenever lady goes into commerce she rapidly will get a status as a pointy dealer. Every little city in America has its Hetty Green, every sweating blood from turnips, every the phobia of all of the male usurers of the neighbourhood. The man who tackles such an amazon of barter takes his fortune into his arms; he has little extra likelihood of success in opposition to the female approach in enterprise than he has in opposition to the female approach in marriage. In each arenas the benefit of ladies lies of their freedom from sentimentality. In enterprise they deal with themselves wholly to their very own revenue, and provides no thought no matter to the hopes, aspirations and amour propre of their antagonists. And within the duel of intercourse they fence, to not make factors, however to disable and disarm. A person, when he succeeds in throwing off a lady who has tried to marry him, all the time carries away a maudlin sympathy for her in her defeat and dismay. But nobody ever heard of a lady who pitied the poor fellow whose trustworthy ardour she had discovered it expedient to spurn. On the opposite, ladies take enjoyment of such clownish agonies, and exhibit them proudly, and boast about them to different ladies.

    Views: 0

  • The Political Economy Of Coronavirus By Kunle Wizeman Ajayi

    The Political Economy Of Coronavirus By Kunle Wizeman Ajayi

    The Political Economy Of Coronavirus By Kunle Wizeman Ajayi 1

    The Political Economy Of Coronavirus By Kunle Wizeman Ajayi 2


     

    The most powerful person in Aso Rock, Abba Kyari; who is the chief of staff to the president, has tested positive to Covid19. No government official can reach President Buhari without him. There is a ripe suspicion that the kitchen cabinet might have been infected. Likewise in Europe, the most powerful person, Angela Merkel the chancellor of Germany, has been quarantined. While Trump and Boris Johnson took the same path in trying to ignore the pandemic, their governments are in deep crises of the damages and exposures their neglect has caused the citizens.

    As I type, the fear of corona virus is the beginning of real wisdom as governments are now banning even churches and mosques from gathering. The Nigerian federal ministry of health has announced 42 cases so far. And even the mass of working people who have hitherto doubted our thieving class so far, are now more wary and precautionary over their immediate safety without relying on the failed health institutions. People seldom shake hands now. Corona waves na the way to greet now! That corona virus has turned a corruption racket is what will be duly discussed another day. 

    Industries are closing down as Wall Street falls like pack of cards. US President Donald Trump is shouting “cuts” for the working class and bail-outs for industries and big business. Whereas, Socialist presidential aspirant Bernie Sanders is calling for “healthcare for all” as well as pay for all US citizens staying at home during the pandemic days. The globalised trend of the corona virus needs a global understanding and lessons of how the world is being ruled everywhere. The way US rulers have failed to care for the poor and invest in proper and compulsory healthcare for all but private pharmaceutical companies who make healthcare a commercial quantity that only the rich can afford, is the same way Nigerian rulers failed to build hospitals and kept allocating between 4 to 6% budgetary spending on education while them and their children spend billions on medical tourism. Also, Boris Johnson’s UK government is renting “beds at hospitals.” This is unlike Spain that has nationalized its healthcare!

    The price of crude oil has fallen globally. The global stock exchange has crashed as workers can no longer go to work and make great wealth for their casino. Coronavirus has superceded SARS with its speedy spread and effects globally. So the world economic crises have been, for the first time, propelled by a health crisis. What can the Left and the revolutionaries in Nigeria make out of this global crises that could leave no island untouched? 

    Naomi Klein, the author of the classic ‘The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism’ has come up to warn that “if you’re a hard-core free-market economist, you understand that when market fails it lends itself to progressive change much more organically, than it does (when) the kind of deregulatory policies emerge. Political and economic elites understand that moment of crises is their chance to push through their wish list of unpopular policies that further polarize wealth…”

    I argue that while the government in Nigeria has reduced the cruelly expensive cost of petrol by just #20, and there is lipservice to building new hospitals, there is a larger probability of massive corruption as the federal government has already declared #2trillion intervention fund. Why we the working people have to very much care is because the same elements who created the crises (whichever ways) would end up profiting largely from the crises. This just as many military officers and politicians are billionaires courtesy the Boko Haram war.

    The interplay of methods of these corruptive accumulations on one hand, and the trajectory of working class resistances is critically assessed weighing up why and how the working people were at the loosing ends at the 2008/9 global economic crises that made the Central Bank under the Soludo/Sanusi bail-outs policies made the criminal banks even richer than before. Though a few bank MDs and top officers were detained on “hospital beds” and such other “ajebutter” prisons; no bank owner was even questioned. 

    The fact that both the US and Nigeria are rich governments that have bad healthcare policies, discussing social infrastructures as class struggle under this system of “primitive accumulation” needs to be knocked up as perspectives to guide millions who want an end to crises and build another world that would be for all and not a tiny thieving few.    

    A CLASSLESS PANDEMIC

    The corona virus has shown that the gap between the rich and the poor is just an artificial creation. The nature of humans is more communal than competitive. Plenty of the rich mouth the fact that we are all equal, but some are more equal than others. This virus is a threat to all and shows that the world can organize together and defeat any virus that attacks it. Crises like this shows that there is no policy that is pro-rich that can save society. Most of the capitalists who rule our world have been saying that government cannot help all and cater for the needs of majority. They tend to tell us that getting “healthcare for all” is rocket science. Corona virus has proved that all that is wrong!

    Meanwhile, many Nigerians are debating as to the cause of corona virus, and why it has drawn more attentions than malaria that kills about 800 everyday and child mortality that murders about 300 women daily. These debates became rife when Ibrahim Magu; head of the Economic Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) asserted that “corona virus is caused by corruption.” His position, while quite misleading, is correct to the point that the virus is actually caused by the greed of man in unsettling the animal and forest lives. Most of the viruses live in the wildest of forests but humans go in and destroy their habitats. These make the virus homeless and have to migrate to live with humans. 

    The corona virus has also made the Nigerian politicians to have no escapist lives again. Most of them used to go abroad for medical tourism. But there is nowhere to run to now! This is why revolutionaries must use this chance to support striking doctors and demand for free, functionally standard and compulsory healthcare for all. We do not want a situation where the ruling class would use state wealth to build defence and cure for corona virus, only for the rich, instead for all. We must avoid repeating case of the last economic meltdown where what we could see is socialism for the rich and leave the poor uncatered for. This is why we must all reject the paltry #20 that was reduced from oil price as well as condemn the full devaluation of the naira. These policies will make the rich eat their cake and have it. Petrol price should be reduced to at least #45 while naira should be strengthened. The time to consider the #RevolutionNow demands of an “economy for the majority” is now! 

    2008/9: A FLASHBACK 

    When the 2008 global economic meltdown stormed Nigeria, the rulers ordered “technocrats” to adopt the Obama measures in bailing out the banks and their thieving managers. After prosecuting five CEOs of Afribank, Oceanic, Finbank, Intercontinental, and Union bank, The CBN went ahead to put #460bn as bail-outs for the banks after recovering just #70bn. The CEOs lost their posts for giving out #700bn loans without collateral. The loans portfolio of the bank, according to CBN, is #2.8tn. The richest guys in the country were involved in this public racket and were never touched. A good instance is Aliko Dangote who had a loan worth $15m with Oceanic Bank but got elected to replace Ndi OKereke as Nigerian Stock Exchange president. The same person has the monopoly of trading in rice, salt, sugar, textiles, and vegetable oil. The same persons who created the crises in the same place got rewarded after the crises. This is what Naomi Klein is warning about. For the rich, socialism is never good for the majority. The rich, in the time of corona virus and other disasters, want bail-outs but never for the working people. Just as Omoyele Sowore noted; “when crises arises, capitalism retires and socialism becomes the messiah!  

    We must start asking for Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) from the federal government. Every Nigerian must each be paid at least #100,000 monthly as the corona virus effect billing. We should also demand a standard hospital per 5 streets with the doctors and nurses paid appropriately! 

    THE TRUMP/BUHARI DISORDER

    President Buhari’s address to Nigerians has failed to address the pandemic. Trump’s tweets are of the same mental disorders like those of the ministers and officials of Buhari’s government.  Trump boasted that the “virus is under total control…The market will take care of itself,” he had to recant after the Dow Jones Industrial closed with its worst one-day decline since 1987; “The market will be very strong as soon as we get rid of the virus.”

    “But even as he was doing so, Trump maintained that he hadn’t said the virus was “under control,” which is something he has most definitely said on many occasions — along with other attempts to play down fears” CNN noted.

    Garba Shehu and other spokespersons of President Buhari have also been speaking from all sides of their mouths. They first downplayed the effect of the virus by revealing that malaria has been killing hundreds…Until they made some allocations of about $1.2trillion to the virus effects. The question remains the goals of the government. Many Nigerians do not trust the same government that has never given as much as 8% budgetary allocation to healthcare since the Buhari regime came into place, just like the PDP governments before it. While the president is one of the most sick, he prefers to betray electoral promises and visit private hospitals in the UK for months instead of building standard public health care. 

    Working people in US,UK, and Nigeria should look beyond their reactionary rulers and make real political demands that will make sure the same rogues who cause the crises don’t come back to claim to be the super heroes of the same crises. The case of Ebola and Lassa in Nigeria are classics in this regard. While Nigeria was lucky to get over the Ebola case with the sacrifice of health officials; Lassa fever has killed thousands so far loosely tackled because rodents most likely cannot enter luxury houses.

    Nigerians should be aware that both Buhari and Trump are exponents of crazy capitalism and prefers to give false answers to real threats and would only be falsely apologetic later. We must understand that the rulers are neither interested in our well being nor our future. Their fear is that the virus should never become for all. They prefer crises for just the masses. But oga corona no mind. This is why despite Trump trying to call it Chinese virus or Buhari trying to boycott addressing the country, nothing matters to the working people than having a healthy society. Arms in arms, we will have to care for one another and defeat the most dangerous virus ever in the history of the world! 

    OPIUMS ON THE CROSS

    Pastors in Nigeria, aside the ban on public and mass gatherings, are seriously on trial! Many a youths are asking what their “God” would do in this time of corona virus to save the followers from untimely deaths. The first pastor to become so fearless had predicted that he would go to China to cure the virus. But by the time the Italian became the first case in view; the pastor got admitted in a hospital for unknown reasons.

    Also, the mosques are closing shop. Even many are contemplating drinking alcohol to help in preventing corona virus. Despite the fact that many a churches and mosques become well attended public places, the belief in better life and a prosperous world without danger have been the egg tacts around the building of these beliefs. Saudi Arabia has stopped religious visitations. Government everywhere is banning all worshipping junctures. If these bans have been summoned by political demands of the left, it couldn’t have sailed through but the struggle is being marshaled by a pandemic. Bernie Sanders was seen as too extreme but most of those pro-establishment strollers must be shitting in their yanshes now!

    Karl Marx was very clear that “religion is the opium of the masses, the soul of the soulless.” The realizations of the fact that the immediacy of the problems of society can only be derailed if the people think that there is an umbrella or belief that can make some magic. With corona now, even the state that employs religion is not apologetic in banning its public activities. Sadly, many priests still in shock as to a possible demarketing have kept on lying to their congregations. A viral video shows a pastor saying “coronavirus cannot enter Nigeria where there is corrosive anointing;” so cocky in ignorance.  Such public ranting must be condemned.

    CONFUSION BREAK BONE; NAIJA HEALTH IN CRISES

    When the deposed emir of Kano, former CBN governor Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, was banned to Awe in Nassarawa State; the town has two (2) doctors to two hundred thousand (200,000) people. Such is the metaphor of health care in Nigeria.  Most doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel have migrated to other climes in an unprecedented brain drain. As Yusuf posited “7 out of 10 Nigerians live on less than $1.25 (~500 Naira) a day and they also live in a country where 70% of health expenditures are out-of-pocket payments. Nineteen years after the Abuja Declaration where African Union states pledged to allocate at least 15% of their annual budget to health, Nigeria continues to default. With over 23,584 public primary health care facilities, 8,290 private primary health care facilities and 200,000 patent and proprietary medicine vendors (PPMVs) in Nigeria, yet the country’s health indices and other health indicators continue to remain abysmal without any significant improvement compared to other countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.

    Citizens are condemned to self-care using several unregulated drugs and African raw herbs. The yearly allocations to health care in the budget never rise beyond 6 and 8%. This is despite the fact that Aisha, wife of President Buhari once publicly complained that Aso rock clinic has no syringe! At the Teaching hospitals, one has to pay heavily to get health care as the state has been practicing health care commercialization. The medical equipments are really not there while there are so poor remunerations of medical personnel. Yet, when Ebola came knocking in 2014, the health workers paid the sacrifices. 

    Corona virus is global and has now halted the medical tourism of the rich class of whom President Buhari is the chief. If not for Covid-19, he would have gone visiting his London doctors for the umpteenth time!  

    The health workers’ unions have been fighting for a better system for years. This has been led by the Joint Health Staffs Union (JOHESU) and the Nigeria Medical Associations (NMA.) JOHESU has led enormous strikes and pickets but the neo-liberal policies of the ruling class keep ignoring these strikes. As I write, doctors in Abuja are on strike. The rulers are now in a quagmire. This is the time for the unions to collaborate with the civil society and revolutionary movements to take up the state and fight for “free health care for all.”

    THE EXAMPLE OF CUBA

    Fidel Castro’s people are the certified global doctors today! 

    A small island at the backyard of the United States of North America; Cuba is a state-capitalist economy led by revolutionary socialists. While the state have yet boomed since 1959 as a result of the prevailing capitalist globe, it has been vociferous on social welfarism especially education, food, health, and housing. This has been the minimum with which the Communist Party has been working on since the revolution. With its third president in charge now; Cuba is the country that is now rescuing the world from the genocide of corona virus. The vessel that is wholly affected by the virus has been shipped to the Cuban shore and Cuba has been treating the patients on board. Italy is receiving about 200 Cuban doctors and nurses as the catholic country leads the population of casualties. The Cuban health statistics shows that 98% is living healthily just as education is 98.5%. 

    Cuba stood by the world on hurricane Katrina; by South Africa against apartheid; by Angola against imperialist Portugal, and now that “God-forsaken communist country” stands by the world with the best of its great medical care against corona virus. This is a lesson that we need to abide by and make the world a socialist island. The current system of “greed and power” is a pandemic. It is ruled by political viruses that live mainly on primitive accumulations of the sweat and blood of the majority. The working class of all lands should unite and fight capitalism to the ruins and replace it with a world led by the people who make the wealth, not those who do nothing but steal the wealth.  

    IN ALL; THIS PANDEMIC WILL FALL

    The struggle for a safer world is in danger of that “common ruins of the contending classes.” Italy, Nigeria, Spain, China, US, and some others have recorded deaths through corona virus. It is currently rumoured that some senators and members of the House of Representatives have contracted the deadly virus. We have 582 deaths in US and 46,145 cases with only 295 recoveries. One death has been recorded in Nigeria with 46 cases recorded. 6,777 are dead out of 63,927 cases in Italy. China has 16,578 dead in 382,570 incidents. Germany has 29,056 with 123 people dead. German chancellor, Angela Merkel has been quarantined. India with over 1 billion population has about 500 cases with no deaths. 

    The Indian case is very peculiar in lessons for Nigeria. Public health care in all tiers is free and subsidized for those below the poverty line. The Indian health sector encompasses 18% of total outpatient care and 44% of total impatient care. Middle and upper class use public health care less than those with a lower standard of living

    The Covid19 pandemic has exposed big countries like Britain, US, China, Nigeria, and others. The pandemic have also exposed capitalism as an idea that is deficient to the mass of working people. The idea does not care for the majority but the thieving minority. The rich continue to be richer while the poor becomes poorer. We need labour and civil society to work together and reconstitute revolutionary relationships to make sure that working people does not be at the receiving end of this pandemic. We must remember that those who destroy the country must not be allowed to continue with their madness after the covid19. We must demand for #FreeHealthCareForAll!

    We must also demand that world-class hospitals are built massively all over the country and we leave the madness of neo-liberalism in the dustbin of ruins. To do these works, we need a movement of the working people dedicated to the revolution that will build a country for all like the Take It Back movement and the Coalition for Revolution (CORE). Socialist organizations like the Socialist Workers and Youth League (SWL) serve as the political tribunes that remind us all on the ideal and alternatives to the rot that is causing pandemics and wars to the world today.

    Capitalist presidents that combine neo-liberalism and fascism are in deep shit today as the covid19 has exposed their inefficiencies and monumental social infrastructural dangers. The health of the world is the safety net to our wealth. Why would we allow those who care about the wealth alone to continue to rule us? Why should we continue to allow those who think of only the individual and never the collective to continue to rule us? When Greta Thunberg was leading the climate change campaigns, Donald Trump was scolding her. Bernie Sanders, Jeremyn Corbyn, Omoyele Sowore, Elvo Morales, Bobbi Wine and other revolutionary change-seeking eggheads have all campaigned for another world; the point is for we the working people and all oppressed, in unity and action, lead #RevolutionNow to get a life warranty of #FreeHealthCareForAll!

    Nigerians should demand for Cost of living allowance (COLA) of at least #100,000 in order to survive as the country is being locked down. We all must observe hand washing regularly; social distancing; avoid touching of faces, and other sophisticated parts of the body. Government should provide water, gloves and hands sanitizers to all. There is no electricity just as there is very poor housing for the majority of the people. We need the majority of empty house in cities and towns to be massively redistributed. Electricity must be renationalized.

    With all unity and actions, we will defeat the yet another genocidal virus. This also tells us that we must choose to build the world for all and not for the few as the threat of grand barbarism stares us all in the face once again. Rosa Luxembourg would be rolling and smiling in her grave as we are condemned to learn from her battle cry: “socialism or barbarism!” 

    Opinion

    AddThis

    : 

    Original Author

    : 

    Kunle Wizeman Ajayi

    Disable advertisements

    : 
    The Political Economy Of Coronavirus By Kunle Wizeman Ajayi
    Read More
    http://saharareporters.com/2020/03/24/political-economy-coronavirus-kunle-wizeman-ajayi

    Views: 0

  • Three Reasons Why Money Was The Worst Invention Of All Time

    [ad_1]

    Who invented money? Ask any number of people and they couldn’t tell you who it was that actually invented money or where the idea came from. History has given us some bad ideas, but money has to be the worst and here are my top three reasons why.

    1. Something Invented By Man Should Not Have Power Over Him.

      If I think really hard and try to imagine a time without money, before it was invented and used on a daily basis, I tend to imagine that the world was a completely different place. People most likely had a barter type society where goods and services were exchanged and that is how one survived. If I had a particular skill, say hunting, and you were hungry you could come to me for food. The idea would be that if you could make fire, and I could provide the food, then we could exchange our skills or abilities and everyone got what was good for them. I assume, for the sake of argument, that if someone possessed absolutely no skills whatsoever, that person was still allowed to eat. I can’t imagine that I would loan the helpless soul some meat, only if it could be paid back somehow. Before helpless soul could blink, he might owe me for five dinners and then I have to send out the collection agents to call in his debts. Money provides control, in both a positive and negative control. Although it is man made, and essentially just a piece of paper or a mixture of cheap metals, money has power, and is power. I can just imagine Mr. Helpless Soul explaining to his wife that he can’t repay the hunter and doesn’t know what to do. So Mr. Hunter decides to enslave the Helpless Soul family until the debt is repaid. It is unfathomable to me that so many people in my country, and the world go hungry every day. Those who possess the money have the power to deny the needs of those that don’t have means. Where have the humanitarians gone? I’ve seen a business owner kick out a person who was homeless and starving, and then half an hour later deal with a complaining customer as he shouted that his food was not hot enough. Money only has the power that we give it. If we choose to see it as just a means to an end, or just some silly paper we have been told to obey our whole lives, then one can focus on what really matters. I am not advocating not paying debts, or shucking responsibilities. This is the world we live in, and norms must be followed…until the laws change again to suit what the politicians want on any particular whim of a day.

    2. Money Shifts Focus From Helping One Another To Arbitrary “Worth” Of Mere Things.

      Why should I do anything to help anyone else, unless they can pay for it? If my entire focus in life is to obtain material things, then I should only be motivated by money, or obtaining it, to do anything. What is anything really worth? Marketing companies have defined worth for me since I was a child, and it was beaten into me during commercial breaks of GI Joe. What is the value of all of the things you want in comparison to something that really matters? Imagine what the worth is of spending one more hour with a loved one before they pass away and are gone forever. The worth of teaching your children that there is more to life than money and obtaining things. The worth of feeding a homeless man, and helping him have at least one night’s sleep where his stomach doesn’t keep him awake. The value of reaching out a hand and helping someone else in this world is worth more than the largest diamond, the heaviest gold, and the purest oil. Now, I am the biggest hypocrite on this topic, because I love things! It has been programmed in me for so long, it is hard to shake the desire to obtain things. Imagine a life in which people helped each other because it is the right thing to do, and not just for what they could get in return. The argument is, well, that things can’t just be free. You have to pay something to get something. How would the world work if everyone was just giving away everything for free and everyone just had everything they needed and didn’t have to be slave to credit card companies anymore or to a job that they dislike? How would we survive? My answer to those questions is, famously! I would be free to learn a trade that benefits others and could use that ability to provide for my family and to help others. I have wanted to help by donating or giving my entire life, but never had the means. I’ve donated a little time here and there, and not near as much as I should or would have liked to, but at least it was something. But because I like things, and those things have cost me money, I have to continue in my job, and repeat the same cycle my father did.

    3. Money Makes You Question If People Really Care About You, Or Just Your Money.

      I try to envision the end of my life surrounded by those that have made my journey with me, who love and care for me because of the enrichment I gave to them through my friendship and dedication. In my latter years, enjoying my days with my wife, and talking to my grown children and my grand children. I want to soak up every single minute of my life between here and there. I want to feel and love and enjoy all that there is to offer. I have seen families destroyed, fighting over the money left behind after a loved one passes. Some of those grudges are held for the rest of their lives. They lose a relationship and also a loved one, and the only thing they can think about, is how much money they will be getting. More than likely, Mr. Entitlement as we will call him, won’t even miss the loved one that was lost. How many brilliant individuals never get the chance to succeed because of lack of means, and how many elite are given free passes because their pile of paper is bigger than yours. Do the people closest to you care about you or your money? Does the girlfriend only love you because of what you can buy her? Do your children only listen to you in order to get something they want? Take the money away, and would they abandon you? Such a great idea, this money.

    My answer to all of this is that I don’t have an answer. My two year old daughter asked me about money and loves putting money in her piggy bank. It made me start to consider all the reasons I worry about money, and fight about money, and read books about money. Nothing like the honesty of a child, to make you sit and think.

    [ad_2]

    Source by Mitchell Pierce

    Views: 0