Farmer Boy, Tiger Mothers, and me

Of all the Laura Ingalls Wilder books, Farmer Boy was my favorite as a kid. I know now that much of the appeal of Farmer Boy was how closely it mirrored my own Montessori education in important ways.

I can't briefly sketch the whole philosophy! But for our purposes: Montessori education intentionally honors a child's natural curiosity, initiative, and desire for competence. Students are responsible for their own learning, and allowed to pursue their own interests and manage their time, at a very early age. It's important for a child to develop the ability to evaluate their own work. Montessori directors (teachers) won't praise a child, because it's considered demeaning to the child if they come to work for others' praise; or in more recent pop psychobabble, their natural internal rewards must not be replaced by social or external rewards. More controversially, students are seldom required to do a project individually or in group work; it's a choice they negotiate with other students. The goal is to become competent in their own environment, by exploration, instruction, and real responsibilities.

So Farmer Boy appealed to me very much: Almanzo's a child with real responsibilities, becoming competent in his environment, well on his way to acquiring the skills he needs as an adult. His interest in horses is respected by his father. Almanzo is learning the skills and the virtues when he's 8 yrs. old that will make him an independent adult. Very Montessori.

Which brings me to the current controversy surrounding "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother." No, I haven't read it, but it's hard to avoid the interviews, summaries, and the backlash online. And I've known several people who were raised that way, Eastern European and Japanese. Several were young professional musicians having international careers; one was a roommate we had a suicide watch for because she was failing a class. This doesn't make me an expert by any means, but I've seen extreme positive and negative results of Tiger Mothering up close and personal.

And I admire one thing about Tiger Mothering: at least the things the child makes steep sacrifices for are things of lasting value. Diligent study habits have long term positive benefits. Playing piano or violin well is a lifetime skill--and the grown child can make that as social or private, festive or meditative, as they choose. It might not justify the rigor of this form of child rearing -that's certainly debatable- but I admire that the goals are not trivial nor transient. The musicians I've known who were forced to practice for hours from the time they were 3 (and sometimes beaten for failure) have international careers, are extraordinary musicians, and did not resent or regret the cost of their proficiency.

What upsets me a lot more is the pseudo-Chinese Mothers. They are the mothers who are shocked and puzzled that I didn't automatically put my 4 yr. old in soccer. Then when I tell them he wasn't interested, they are shocked and puzzled I didn't sign him up anyway. I've had mothers tell me point blank I am wrong not to force him into soccer (and sometimes other sports as well), and that respecting his wishes is no way to raise him. And to be clear, this is soccer 10+ hrs. a week for 4 yr. olds; they're "behind" and need remedial tutoring if they start at age 6. To me, this is worse than "Battle Hymn", because these kids make most of the same sacrifices but gain something trivial. They work harder than Almanzo did at harvest, and gain no skills that make them adults or competent in any meaningful way.

When women have told me I'm crazy not to force my kids into the sports mania and it's inevitable (yes, women have told me this to my face), I don't whack them with Montessori's theory. I tell them, as politely and gently as I can, that leadership and service are central to my family, and to develop my son's initiative and judgement I have to honor them first. That's usually the end of the conversation.