Gopnik argues that, in many respects, babies are more conscious than adults. She compares the experience of being a baby with that of watching a riveting movie, or being a tourist in a foreign city, where even the most mundane activities seem new and exciting. "For a baby, every day is like going to Paris for the first time," Gopnik says. "Just go for a walk with a 2-year-old. You'll quickly realize that they're seeing things you don't even notice."
One thought I had on it is that this confirms my thought that my children shouldn't watch TV at all before age 2 at the earliest, if possible. The whole world should be interesting to them before that time -- I don't want them getting "bored" without TV stimulation too early. I know there are neat little baby videos out there, but I am just going to avoid all of that early on. Too much other stuff for babies to be looking at and absorbing!
4 comments:
I read that article as well and also found it fascinating.
If you can manage not to give MtB TV prior to 2, more power to you! When Caetlin was a small baby, it was easy to keep her away from television, but as she got older, it was much more difficult. There were also times when TV provided 15 extremely needed minutes of sanity, particularly in the toddler phase! Make sure to stress the "no TV" rule to your nanny, if it is something you feel strongly about.
Well, we'll see how reality matches up to the ideal here -- I don't promise I won't give in to needing that 15 minutes of sanity sometimes :) I just do feel strongly about it at this point, though, so we'll see.
see you soon! :)
Just to play Devil's Advocate (you know how I like to :)), doesn't it seem that, given what's said in this article, the under-2 phase would be the time in which a person is *least* likely to become a TV addict? I mean, babies like to see what adults are doing, so looking at the TV might be sort of interesting for a little, but it pretty much ranks on a par with watching mom cook dinner, watching the squirrels in the yard, playing with water in the sink (actually, well below that probably), etc. So, while I agree that it would be bad to plunk your child down in front of the TV set several times a day just to get him out of your hair (which will condition him to think that one *ought* to be spending lots of time there), I don't really see any reason to be hyper about it. Babies are, it seems to me, semi-immune to the things that make TV so unhealthily addictive in older people.
Television is addictive for adults (and sometimes older children) because it provides 1) low-level entertainment that doesn't exhaust much mental energy, 2) the comfort of familiar characters/settings, and on a related note to those 3) escapism. I don't think those things are evil in small doses, but in large ones they can become problematic. Babies, however, aren't likely to get any of those comforts out of TV. And at their stage in life, they may well not want them.
So anyway, I agree that TV should not be the most fun thing in your child's life, and I'm totally with you in banning some of the more irksome innovations in children's television (not least because they're incredibly annoying to adults... my parents banned cartoons in our house, supposedly because they were too violent, but I think also because they themselves just couldn't stand to have them on. The result was that I never learned to enjoy them even when I did see them at other kids' houses. I don't really think that's been a major loss in my life.) But on the other hand, do you care about this to the point where *you* would stop watching TV (except maybe after their bedtime) just so the kids don't see it? I've known parents who did that too, but it seems unnecessary to me. For example, I knew one couple who stopped watching football (which they love) because they wanted so much to keep their kids away from the TV set. I don't know about the Lawler household, but in *this* household, I fully intend that football Saturdays shall remain a festive family affair for years to come, and that our offspring will grow to appreciate it for the sport as well as the yummy food. :)
Anyway... we should talk soon! Call me sometime when you're free!
Rachel, you crack me up. And are you challenging the Lawler household's devotion to football?! I would think you know us better than that :p
No full rebuttal for me, but a few points: one, you're right that based on *this* article, under two might actually not be such a bad time to be watching snippets of TV, if it is just one among many things to catch their attention momentarily. To that end, no, I don't mind having the TV on in general when the baby happens to be in the room. Two, I've read other articles, however, that suggest that watching too much TV as babies is actually bad for them because (and this is the third point) have you ever seen small children staring slack-jawed at the screen in reality? The truth is, they may be semi-immune to the reasons that older people find TV addictive, but they sure seem to find it addictive on its own for other reasons. I hate seeing small children just stop whatever they're doing and stare for extended periods at TV, and they really do -- it's slightly disturbing. They stop playing, they're hard to distract or pull away, and I think it leads to greater boredom with reality. I'm sticking to my theory it creates unhealthy habits if used too often.
I'll give you a call sometime soon! :)
Post a Comment