In the last two weeks my older daughter was away on a school travel with her class leaving only one daughter at home. I thought I would put my ideas down on how having one child around the house stacks up against two.
Positives.
A. A lot easier to concentrate on "this project"
Basically you can concentrate on this and only this "project". Its like the opposite of multitasking. To go off on a tangent, everyone is so arrogant these days about multitasking. Doing two or three things at once. On one gadget talking to one person and working on a report on another. Or whatever. Big deal. People talk to me saying that honing the multitask skill is necessary. I say, go to hell. Concentrating on one thing at a time makes for a better product.
That is what it was like with one child. I could channel all my time and love into one child. Doing and planning things is a lot easier. Dinner: no conflicts.
Dynamics: no conflicts. This is important because with two or more there is always dynamics, lets say a yin and yang of doing anything, which you have to be aware of and balance. Two or more kids, you have to compromise and remember who got what last time and whose turn it is this time etc etc. And not upset ANYONE.
B. A lot quieter
Since my older daughter is the whirlwind of eye and sound entropy , it was a lot more peaceful in the house. I hope I have this meaning correct.
C. Time easier to allocate
Along with A, time was easier to plan. Ping pong on Sunday or some outing on Sunday if my daugther was home. If not, then my time was for me. Simple. She was satisfied with my pancakes. My other daughter never is.
D. More relaxed and less tension in the house
I mean, there wasnt much reason to yell or nag. The wind was taken out of my sails if I said for the second time, "time for bed", and she said, "ok". Cant argue with that. With two and more. Its like logisitics. "But she was in the bathroom (or toilet) the whole time and I couldnt get in." "It wasnt my fault." "How come she gets to stay up later than I do?" None of that.
To sum, there is much more energy for creating ONE GREAT product and not be diverted or diversified. Both are bad in this case.
Negatives.
A. You just dont learn as much
Having just one of anything is like looking at ONE cell under the microscope. Its great for looking at that one specimen, but it really doesnt tell you much. How it interacts, what to do when it does interact? Is it violent or peaceful? You can get no information on how you are doing with this product because you dont really know how it will interact when it comes to society. Interacting is two or more and when you see how someone acts in the presence of others, then you get a much better idea of what needs to be done and what teaching is necessary. One... is misleading to say the least.
B. It is bad for the ONE
Granted this was only two weeks, but even so, an only child, I have always maintained, is unhealthy for that one child. Maybe they dont learn how to interact either and since they get the full attention they think they always should. Sometimes they demand it. In other words they can get very spoiled. I wonder how all the one child children grew up in China under the one child policy? Do they have a nation of spoiled adults there now? I would be afraid.
C. No dynamics.
And again, without "others" you dont learn how to balance and compromise and share. You the parent dont realize that you are lacking on learning dynamics. If I might go off on a pet peeve of mine and compare it with silicon valley. None of those people really know how the rest of the world operates. They only know what they make and assume that if the whole world adopted their products everyone would be better. They dont realize that all over the world people move at different paces. In fact they are a community of spoiled brats and they lord it over the rest of society in that "if you dont adopt our technology you will lose out and drop behind, and that is your fault, not ours".
On a small level, dynamics in the household is important. Things can break down when there is a dictator that doesnt understand that compromise and give and take is a full community action and reaction.
Dynamics, even though they are frustrating and sometimes head scratching, are important to get your head around and adopt. Otherwise it just becomes "me over you".
So I guess in conclusion, it was a nice time and somewhat of a breather, but to live with this situation the whole time might even be harmful and counterproductive. I sometimes wonder how it would have been with three kids. What I am missing out on. But I guess the major difference is between one and more and after that it is just a matter of making smaller portions to accommodate the whole family. What would four have been like over three? And on and on. Enough to have the difference between one and more. That is the important thing. And I have that. And I think it was important that my daughters had the dynamic they had between each other and they will grow up stronger because of it.
Please leave a message for me if you would like to use any part of this or the whole or any other of my writings. I will send you my email.
Thanks for reading otherwise.
I didnt listen to anything while writing this, but I was impressed to learn that James McBride went to my college and I have an album of his.
No comments:
Post a Comment