The Difficult Choices of Parenting

A child cannot know all of her parents’ thoughts and emotions when they raise her. Dark nights of the soul visit every caretaker. The young one is often spared the pain of a parent’s uncertainty.

Even when that budding flower finds herself in the same role, her experience differs. The new Mama Bear is a different person, married to a man who is not a duplicate of her father. She cares for her pride and joy at a new time in history, perhaps in another part of the world.

The heads of the family must think about what is necessary to rear this fledgling. The juvenile can be unlike her siblings in appearance, intellect, emotionality, risk, attention, generosity, competitiveness, a desire for love, and a wish to give affection. Add a thousand other qualities, and perhaps one comes close to expressing the individualized nature of the ones you bring into the world.

No textbook provides sure-fire guidance. No one can tell you when to replenish yourself and when to lift the one-time infant above your head while you are drowning.

The moms and dads also make a living, try to find time for friends, and hope to enjoy hobbies that give them a measure of joy and relief.

They try and try again.

Or maybe they don’t have time or opportunity for any of these, except for putting food on the table and a roof over all the heads in their charge.

Solo parents play the role of a duet because it is needed. Yet even with a steadfast partner, the family’s finances or the job’s travel requirements can remove the adults from the home for days or weeks.

Here, then, is a story about our guardians’ decisions and choices. Remember that I listened to endless stories of both parental self-sacrifice and mistakes of those who brought new life into the world in the first place. It is a tale of fathers and sons.

The younger fellow (whom I will call Patrick) attended a major post-high school music conservatory on the East Coast. Such schools are competitive, and few of the many gifted students become full-time musicians. Indeed, reaching a level of expertise as a brain surgeon might be easier than achieving a soloist’s career or a more modest full-time role in an instrumental or vocal ensemble.

The Dad loved classical music and occasionally traveled across the country to concerts before the birth of his firstborn. Nonetheless, he and his spouse attended every one of Pat’s elementary and high school performances. 

For the proud father, this included sacrificing paid time at work to see him shine.

During the son’s conservatory education, the marital pair visited him, attended his performances, and drove back and forth to install the young man Patrick into his dorm. They picked him up and returned him for the holidays or summertime. Many parents follow the same unremarkable routine.

The story is only of interest by returning to the patriarch’s life before marriage. Forty years earlier, in college, the father witnessed the Prokofiev Symphony #2 in a stunning live performance. Most ensembles in the United States had never played it, and he didn’t expect to have the chance again.

To his surprise, however, it would be presented in the city where his boy now attended school.

The Dad put the event on his calendar and purchased tickets for himself and his wife. They anticipated seeing Pat for an unexpected visit and were happy about the coincidence of being able to encounter the Prokofiev as well. Indeed, it was the first U.S. performances of the piece since the one that Dad had enjoyed in college.

Fate had other ideas.

Weeks after plans were solidified, the conservatory scheduled students for a solo recital. Each student prepared short pieces lasting no more than 10 or 15 minutes. Patrick would take part.

As you have guessed, the two events were scheduled across town at the same time.

The progenitor was torn. He’d waited four decades without expecting the composition to be heard anywhere but on his stereo system, not in person. He’d witnessed his son’s efforts and would have more chances to do so, but not this time if he used the ticket. 

How would the offspring feel? How could the devoted Dad put his Pat second? Would his mother’s presence be enough? She’d decided to give up the ticket beside her husband in the concert hall to support her son.

Her mate chose the Prokofiev. His son did not object, but neither of his folks was a mind reader. Though he didn’t express unhappiness, who knew for sure? Judge them all as you wish.

The parents traveled to the city early to see the same orchestra in a different repertoire the day before the two competing events.

As the male parent sat in the auditorium listening to the first concert, his thoughts drifted to the next night and the conservatory. His wife and son would be without him in 24 hours. 

What would you do?

My patient did not follow his original plan, though aware he might never reencounter the masterpiece. Instead, he needed to cheer on someone dear who made him glad to be alive.

I listened to this story long after the event happened. It might not sound like much to you. Perhaps your choice would have been easy–maybe it would have been the same. Or different.

Was one path the right one and the other wrong? 

School tuition was expensive, and the father paid it, but he recognized something more on the day he missed the Prokofiev. The man remembered he was “all in” to give life to a boy’s dream so he would never wonder, “What if?”

His offspring received his chance, and the Dad gave up a different kind of dream: waiting for half a lifetime for a second chance, for the excitement and thrill of it. There were no regrets on either side.

The decision wasn’t a matter of life or death, but it is one of many we make, whether we produce kids or not. That said, the existence of our children alters our reasoning and priorities. Patrick’s career wouldn’t have been derailed if Dad were absent, but most other parents from out of town weren’t present.

Such is life, such are relationships, and such are the choices we must make, the ones that impact others even when those others are not our children.

Life presents possibilities beyond imagination. With children, we add more to the array of ways we influence the fortunes of those around us, whether we know the names, nationalities, and races of the strangers we have helped, harmed, seen, or dismissed from our sense of responsibility to love our neighbor.

Life is a bit like a TV game show. You face the choice of door one, two, or three. Unlike entertainment programs, however, you cannot guarantee a mindblowing prize by walking through the ideal entrance. Instead, there is another door and then another in perpetuity.

At least in the story you just read, the father’s love drew him to his son’s music-making rather than his intended destination. Many of the most meaningful choices have a cost one would rather not pay. In the worst cases, we shy away from those decisions and the fear they stir inside, or favor our self-interest and compromise ourselves. In the best circumstances, one pays the cost and doesn’t look back.

Pat’s Dad didn’t want to let down anyone he loved.

=============

The top photo is a Juvenile, Slender-billed Gull Calling For Food Gull by Ryzhof Sergey, sourced from Wikimedia Commons, 2017. Next comes If I Knew the World Ended Tomorrow, I Would Plant an Apple Tree Today, Street Art by Heraku in Berlin.

Finally, the photo of A Mama Elephant and Baby in Masai Mara, Kenya, November 2024 taken by Laura Hedien and used with her permission: Laura Hedien Official Website.

Fundamentalism Without the Fun

What is it like to be raised in a strict religious home? Fundamentalism without the fun, at least according to two memoirs.

Though the authors were raised in Pentecostal Christian and Orthodox Jewish faiths, respectively, there are more similarities to their experiences than differences.

These two stories suggest that Tolstoy was wrong when he wrote, “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way,” at least for the unhappy families named Winterson and Auslander.

Sounds grim, doesn’t it? But Jeanette Winterson (born in 1959) and Shalom Auslander (born in 1970) write so brilliantly, often with side-splitting humor, that you don’t come away darkened by their experience, though you enter their darkness.

Winterson’s memoir, Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal? takes place in northern England, mainly in the 1960s and ’70s, while Auslander’s 2007 Foreskin’s Lament is located in the New York City/New Jersey area of a more recent time, with a brief side-trip to Israel.

Both writers survived oppressive childhoods, although Auslander’s family might have been somewhat more loving. Physical abuse was present in both, with Winterson’s again more severe.

How did they survive? Winterson’s comments capture a possible answer:

The one good thing about being shut in a coal-hole is that it prompts reflection.

Read on its own that is an absurd sentence. But as I try and understand how life works — why some people cope better than others with adversity — I come back to something to do with saying yes to life, which is love of life, however inadequate, and love for the self, however found.

Not in the me-first way that is the opposite of life and love, but with a salmon-like determination to swim upstream, however choppy upstream is, because this is your stream…

“Mrs. Winterson,” as the author refers to her adoptive mother in the text, is described as “a flamboyant depressive; a woman who kept a revolver in the duster drawer, and the bullets in a tin of Pledge. A woman who stayed up all night baking cakes to avoid sleeping in the same bed as my father” and who expected Jeanette “to live out some of her unlived life.”

Mother was “out of scale, larger than life,” filling up a phone booth with her girth. As to the author’s father, Winterson recalls an earlier novel where she wrote, “My father liked to watch the wrestling, my mother liked to wrestle.”

When Jeanette disappointed them, her mother told this adopted only child that “The Devil led us to the wrong crib.”

Both Winterson’s and Auslander’s homes were full of carefully observed restrictions. For Auslander, the various Jewish dietary laws chafed (forbidding pork; not eating milk and meat products at the same time or on the same dishes).

All the while, God’s ominous presence loomed as large for Auslander as Mrs. Winterson did for Jeanette. According to Auslander, not only did the Jews have to deal with historical mistreatment by human enemies, but those disasters “were nothing compared to the punishments meted out to us by the man himself. Then there would be famines. Then there would be floods. Then there would be furious vengeance. Hitler might have killed the Jews, but this man (God) drowned the world,” recalling Noah and the story of his ark.

Unlike Winterson’s passive father, who struck Jeanette only upon instruction from his wife, Shalom’s dad could be violent after drinking too much wine.

Auslander’s family troubles didn’t end with their father. He compared his preoccupations with those of the Rabbi of his temple:

Rabbi Blonsky was forty years old, and he worried a lot about the Jewish people. I was nine years old, and it was the Jewish people in my house I was worried about.

As the boy saw it, “My mother had more pictures of the dead on our walls than she had of the living, and the dead seemed to be having a better time; my brother hated my mother and resented me; my mother loathed my brother and doted on me and my sister; my sister hated my brother and pitied my mother; my father hated us all; and my mother sighed, washed dishes, and sang mournful Yiddish songs about the miserable futility of life.”

That futility found a match in Jeanette’s Pentecostal Christian home, where mum prayed every day, “Lord, let me die:”

My mother, Mrs. Winterson, didn’t love life. She didn’t believe that anything would make life better. She once told me that the universe is a cosmic dustbin — and after I had thought about this for a bit, I asked her if the lid was on or off.

‘On,’ she said. ‘Nobody escapes.’

Winterson and Auslander rebelled, although, in her case, it was at the expense of a three-day church exorcism sans food and heat.

The church flock took mum’s lead in this ritual when Mrs. Winterson reported her daughter’s iniquity to them. They literally tried to purge the devil from her with the help of beatings, all while she was permitted little sleep. To their disappointment, the devil didn’t “pop out.”

Winterson, who lived in a family that forbade secular books other than Mrs. W.’s murder mysteries, found refuge in reading and hiding those she smuggled into the house until her mother discovered the cache and burned them all.

Auslander ate forbidden food, smoked marijuana, looked at pornographic magazines, shoplifted, and violated Sabbath restrictions, all surreptitiously. But for Shalom, the fear of a vengeful God never left him, as he remained “painfully, cripplingly, incurably, miserably, religious” at the same time that he gave God “the finger” by violating religious strictures, fearing the worst would follow.

Each story has an inevitable showdown between the young adult protagonist and the parents. For Winterson, it came in a confrontation with Mrs. W. about Jeanette’s lesbian relationship with another young woman and a daughter’s failure to please her mum:

“Jeanette, will you tell me why?”

“What why?

“You know what why.

“But I don’t know what why… what I am… why I don’t please her. What she wants. Why I am not what she wants. What I want or why. But there is something I know: When I am with her I am happy. Just happy).

“She nodded. She seemed to understand and I thought, really for that second, that she would change her mind, that we would talk, that we would be on the same side of the glass wall. I waited.

“She said, ‘Why be happy when you could be normal?'”

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Blake_ancient_of_days.jpg/256px-Blake_ancient_of_days.jpg

For Shalom Auslander, the crisis in his relationship with his parents and sister came over the question of the ritual circumcision of his newborn son. His religion required him to obtain this “mutilation” (removal of the foreskin on the baby’s penis) according to an ordained schedule and by the proper religiously anointed person, rather than in a hospital by a physician before discharge, as in fact happened:

Thousands of years ago, a terrified, half-mad old man genitally mutilated his son, hoping it would buy him some points with the Being he hoped was running the show. Over the years, equally terrified men wrote blessings and composed prayers and devised rituals (for this event).

Six thousand years later, a father will not look his grandson in the face, and a mother and sister will defend such behavior, because the child wasn’t mutilated in precisely the right fashion.

As you might guess, both writers struggled with creating loving and trusting relationships, but each seemed to have made significant progress by the end of their stories. Auslander’s is the more wildly irreverent book — both bitter and bitter-sweet. Winterson’s memoir is more knowingly psychological and sad.

Both will make you laugh out loud. Both will make you think about what our parents do to us and what we do to ourselves and our own kids.

Neither one will cause you to give up your faith, if you have one, or convert, for that matter. Their memoirs serve as a reminder of what long-reach parents can have and that religion, in the wrong hands, is something like Mrs. Winterson’s revolver.

A dangerous weapon indeed.

—–

The top image is the dust jacket of Jeanette Winterson’s Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal? sourced from her website where you can also hear her reading from the book. The second image is the front cover of the paperback version of Foreskin’s Lament.

Two videos that include Auslander’s voice-overs from his book can be found here: Auslander videos. The final picture shows God measuring the world in William Blake’s 1794 Ancient of Dayssourced from Wikimedia Commons.

Making Friends With Your Siblings

Parents often say they raised all their children the same way. This assumes the impossible. Since robots do not give birth, the couple changes with time. Moreover, successive little ones land on a transforming planet, often in a retrofitted country — their corner of a changing world.

The presence of a second or third child always impacts those who came before and vice versa. The wife and husband who meet the newest addition have already been reshaped by experience. The sight of a later cellophane-wrapped infant doesn’t usually produce the over-the-moon moment of the emergence of #1.

Catching lightning in a baby bottle happens but once for most marital pairs. Sorry to say, routine invades even Mother Nature’s magic.

Parents experiment when past child-rearing strategies fail, perhaps because their newly baked schemes must be done on the fly, when half-baked plans are created. Some realize the necessity of kindness and affection, while life drains others of their capacity for love and the energy for loving.

When the children are of different genders, a further complication occurs. The varieties of physical attractiveness, temperament, and intellect also stir the melting pot.

It is helpful if mom and dad recognize their little ones don’t all come from an assembly line in a widget factory. The adults’ task is to adapt to each new face and pint-sized brain, not to demand the child adjust to the adults.

The best of folks try to become the new and improved version of the guardian and guide each one needs. For Dancer E, the parents must twirl to the right, for Wordle Champion K to the left while jumping up to meet Studious G and stretching to reach Muscle Man S.

Fairness to Kiddie #2 feels like unfairness when defined by #3. In the end, the children often sense Mom or Dad playing favorites, though the basis for this can be natural affinity to a particular offspring, not something intentional. Yet, singling out individuals can happen, for worse or better, leaving an unseeing, well-treated witness in denial over the abuse the other reports.

As kids age, the weight of real or imagined unfairness accumulates. Periods of competition and dislike test the family’s adaptive ability and the wisdom of the adults. Friendship among the sibs isn’t guaranteed. Financial preference for one generates lifetime grudges.

Illness and health, accidents, and triumphs impact the group, sometimes in unpredictable ways. It should be no surprise that one teen sometimes perceives a different family from the rest. An insightful child in a troubled home tends to become an alienated outsider if she considers the time in their shelter unsheltered.

Even a person who remains close to longtime friends tends to find no one but sisters and brothers who recollect so much of her early experience. Moreover, the memory of those who brought them all into the world is unique because they lived under the same roof 24/7.

This is still true when living together doesn’t create togetherness. In such instances, something precious is lost.

Shared memories frequently provide the motivation to allow differences to be set aside in those relationships that have turned bitter. This is most true as former members of the same household move into and past middle age, all the more if their begetters are gone.

Often, at least one grown sib must apologize to make friendship possible, while the other accepts it with sincerity and gratitude. Making amends can come into play, as well. They both realize grudges should have an expiration date.

The wise among them recognize time is short, and they are bound together by their shared origin. No others carry within themselves the same set of memories, the jokes and idiosyncracies, the aroma of certain meals, the sound of departed voices, the games they played, and the winding way to school.

If they are lucky, get-togethers permit a unique source of happiness long set aside. As Rabbi Nachman of Breslau wrote, “Nothing is as liberating as joy. It frees the mind and fills it with tranquility.”*

If your sibs live, there is still time to create or recreate delight in the tie to brothers and sisters.

How do I know?

I am proud to be Eddie and Jack Stein’s brother; the Stein Boys have done it together.

==========

*Thanks to Micaela Bonetti for drawing my attention to Rabbi Nachman of Breslau’s quotation.

The first image is Irene and Her Sister,1925, by Tamara de Lempicka. It is followed by Picasso’s Two Brothers from 1906. Both of these were sourced from Wikiart.org/ Finally, Brother and Sister, an 1898 sculpture by Julien Dillens sourced from Wikimedia Commons.