Remix.run Logo
HenrikPontoppid 4 hours ago

I remember reading once about how Astrid Lindgren's children's books were supreme exactly because she - contrary to many others - remembers what it is like to be a child. Not just what you did or thought when you were a child - how it felt. The endless curiosity and appreciation for what in an adult's eyes is trivial is really a special thing I hope most people carry throughout their lives. On the other hand, children also understand more than one would normally think, essentially a Moravec's paradox but in relation to adults.

"Children heal the soul" - Dostoevsky

317070 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Overestimate their understanding, underestimate their vocabulary.

laurieg 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Learning a second language is a fantastic way to feel many aspects of being a child again. Having to deal with frustration. Understanding a situation but not be able to fully take part. Being able to communicate but only with the blunt instrument of the words you know.

veltas 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That's how I feel right now talking in my only language of English.

wartywhoa23 an hour ago | parent [-]

Yep. So many people have been drifting away into some kind of parallel reality where language is seemingly the same, yet transmits no meaning between our diverging realities.

Terr_ 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm not sure whether to interpret this as a statement about what we currently over/under-estimate, or as command that we should try what feels like over/under-estimation in order to counter our own biases.

imawakegnxoxo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Kids are so much smarter and more capable than adults give them credit for, and it is stunting society as a whole

I think infantilisation is a huge part of the reason we're where we are today - kids 100 years ago were working harder jobs than most adults today (not implying child slave labour is a good thing, just making a point)

Kids today, though, are given exactly 0 responsibility and treated like babies the whole way through their prime learning years

I feel so sorry for the next generation

ErroneousBosh 2 hours ago | parent [-]

One of the first emails from the school when my small son was in Primary 1 was that they'd been making some pancakes in class and he'd picked up a Big Sharp Knife and began slicing some strawberries to put on them, and this was Very Much Not Allowed!

Children should not be touching the Big Sharp Knives!

Yeah, did he cut himself? No? Was he holding the knife and the strawberries carefully, so he didn't cut himself? Yes?

Want to take a guess as to why?

He's five. He knows how to chop vegetables. My parents taught me how to cook from a young age, I am teaching him how to cook from a young age. I'm raising a *man* here, not a perma-infant.

Although, between you and me, I think he could stand to use a bit less oregano in his pizza sauce. I'd never criticise his choices, I think he'll figure it out in time.

ErroneousBosh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"But it's okay if a battery goes on fire daddy, I'll put carbon dioxide on it!" - EBv2.0, aged 3 and a half

red_admiral 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

More people should read Oliver Sacks' book Uncle Tungsten. As a kid he was allowed to buy real chemicals for his chemistry set and was told things like "can you make slightly less hydrogen peroxide next time". Minors buying pitchblende (Uranium ore) at the local drugstore for experiments? Sure, might encourage them to be scientists.

BLKNSLVR 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think the first time my son said the 'f' word, he got the tone and the body language exactly right for the context in which he used it (a frustrated/resigned "fuck's sake", with roll-eyes and throw-head-back, look up to the sky). He might have been five years old at the time. And back then, I really didn't say it around them very much (out of an attempt to be somewhat responsible).

They're absorbing everything. They're scraping the entirety of your personality to build their own.

worthless-trash 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Tiny language models.

wizzwizz4 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I like Lemony Snicket's approach: he gives (obviously) wrong, but technically correct, definitions for hard words. These definitions are usually hyper-specific, or satirical. Children, who are still very familiar with learning vocabulary from context, can find this much more amusing than adults who have given up on learning new words except via dictionaries.

> The word “briskly” here means “quickly, so as to get the Baudelaire children to leave the house.”

> “Wipi!” Sunny shrieked, which meant “I’d much prefer gardening to sitting around watching my siblings struggle through law books.”

Claudus 43 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Dear little Krumalura, I don't want to grow up, never ever.

Markoff 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I like some of her books, but I am quite annoyed with kids most of the time coming from poor families with missing father/mother, it's like she couldn't write a book without some tragedy, of course the most famous Emil of Lönneberga and The Six Bullerby Children are from normal families (there is probably reason why these are the most famous and beloved), but already Pippi Longstocking is pretty F-ed up and don't get me started on The Brothers Lionheart, which is glorifying suicide and should be really banned for kids under 15, certainly not appropriate for 9yo, though I read it to my younger kid with appropriate commentary.

vintermann 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Remember that Astrid Lindgren was born in 1907, got pregnant at 18 and had to give up her son to a foster home for the first few years. She grew up in a completely different world, and it's no coincidence that a lot of her stories are basically about consoling traumatized children.

Terr_ 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> She grew up in a completely different world,

Also, back then in 1925 infant mortality was probably ~10x worse [0], which adds to how we (today) might underestimate the prevalence of parent-child traumas.

[0] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.IMRT.IN?location...

rapsey 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't know why you are down voted. Death was so much more present in kids lives back then. Death from diseases and injuries so common. Kids having dead siblings entirely normal.

le-mark an hour ago | parent [-]

The writing of Charles Dickens support this thesis strongly!

Markoff an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I am familiar with her background she was sadly later projecting into many/most of her books. I am pretty sure vast majority of Swedish kids was growing back then in complete families without dead mother/father, same as they do nowadays regardless of marriage or divorce status.

Emil of Lönneberga and The Six Bullerby Children are great books, the rest about traumatized kids/orphans not so much as kid books.

watwut 43 minutes ago | parent [-]

You are sure wast majority of kids had both parents same as today after WWI when childbirth was way more dangerous then today?

One of parents being dead was way more commom situation then it is today.

hodgesrm 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I didn't appreciate Pippi Longstocking fully until I read Stieg Larsson's "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo." Occasionally covers are better than the original song.

It's perhaps no coincidence that the opening theme song of the Fincher (Mara/Craig) version of the movie is an outstanding cover of "The Immigrant Song" by Led Zeppelin.

rapsey 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Kids do think about death. Hiding or avoiding the discussion does nothing. My kids absolutely adored Brothers Lionheart.

Markoff an hour ago | parent [-]

Have you read the book or your kids just read it without you knowing what is it about?

This book says basically - no biggie, there is no death, you commit suicide to move to another level to be with your brother, you can't lose him, you have infinite lives in this videogame called Life. And what if I F up the next level? no biggie, you just commit suicide again to be with him, there is no such thing as permanent death/separation from your loved ones, after each death you just move to another level. That's really F up thing to teach small kids, who should know death is permanent.

rapsey 9 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yes I have read it. Kids are not retarded.

gambiting 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>>which is glorifying suicide

I've literally re-read it this year again and I couldn't disagree more, like, to a point where I wonder if we even read the same book. That book made me scared of dying when I was a child, and it made me appreciate the finality of death again now that I'm a grown up. There's nothing there that "glorifies" suicide - we could have a meta 2026 conversation about whether it's trying to say that yes, terminally ill people _should_ be able to decide what they want to do with their own lives, but that's not the message the book is going for(imho) - it's about bravery and loyalty even through the darkest of times, and about sacrifice(not suicide!!!) that comes from standing up for what you believe for. I don't personally believe in afterlife, but just as much as I loved the idea of naningalia when I was a child I still love it now - it gives children hope that even in the darkest moments of despair, there is something better waiting for them. The main character literally dies of ilness at the start, being bed bound for a long time without his loving brother and mother who doesn't know how to help him. The fact that he chooses to join Johnatan at the end in the trip to the "next" level of afterlife couldn't be further from glorifying suicide.

Markoff 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I read it this year to kids and the book says basically - no biggie, there is no death, you commit suicide to move to another level to be with your brother, you can't lose him, you have infinite lives in this videogame called Life.

And what if I F up the next level? no biggie, you just commit suicide again to be with him, there is no such thing as death, after each death you just move to another level.

So there is no risk at all you will lose your brother/relative, very F up thing to teach the kids, exactly opposite from what should make them scared of dying which is PERMANENT and there is no next level, where you can be with your family again.

mmoll an hour ago | parent | next [-]

”…the book says basically - no biggie, there is no death“

So does the Bible.

an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
gambiting an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

That's such a dishonest read of the book I don't actually know what to say. To me, joining Johnathan at the end is the conclusion of the entire book of love, loyalty and bravery. Nowhere does it say "meh, no biggie just kill yourself". If that's the message you took from it then I strongly encourage you to sit down one evening and read it again. The biggest "proof" of it not being treated lightly is obviously all the inhabitants of the valley of cherries enduring, surviving and fighting against oppression instead of as "just killing themselves" to go to the next level. Even at the end Johnathan makes it sound like it's a rumour and maybe there is something there, but no one knows for sure, same as naningalia was at the beginning - people hope there is a better afterlife, but that's all it is - hope.