Setting Boundaries

This post is all Gretchen's fault. Just so you all know.

And before I get to the meat of it, I need to explain a few things.

First, my wife is a closet Trekkie. Well, not much of a closet one, as she will talk about it at times but, by and large, her love for many things Star Trek is kept pretty quiet. She is quite open about her desire to acquire all of Star Trek Voyager on DVD, though, but that's about it.

Second, my best friends way back when I was in fourth and fifth grade were huge Trekkies. I pretended to be one, but inasmuch as Star Trek always aired (and still does, actually), late at night, I never watched the show much. I knew about all the various versions (Star Trek, ST: The Next Generation, ST: Deep Space Nine, ST: Voyager, and the way-awesome-but-ill-fated Enterprise). I have never seen a single one of the TNG movies. I have seen a couple of the Original Series movies. And I have seen the newest installment. So I am a wannabe Trekkie. Which is, now that I think about it, kind of lame. But, hey, that's me.

Third, Gretch has insomnia. Kind of. Her sleep cycle is all sorts of crazy, so she'll be awake until 1 or 2 in the morning, and then get up around 10 or 11 am. She has tried to go to bed earlier, and she finds herself lying there not sleeping. So, in an effort to be productive in her sleeplessness, Gretch will go downstairs and watch late-night TV while working on various art projects.

All of these things came together last night when, for various reasons, mostly relating to our business, I actually stayed up and watched TV with her. And, of course, her closet Trekkie comes out at late night, so we were watching Star Trek: The Next Generation. More specifically, we watched the episode called "Imaginary Friend" that originally aired in 1992. I know this because we looked it up. And we looked it up because, for all of its shortcomings (if any there be), TNG stars Patrick Stewart, and he is full of awesomeness. And the writers gave him an awesome monologue. A monologue, in fact, that I am going to quote here in its entirety, thanks to the wonders of the Internet Movie Database (IMDb for those wishing to know).
As adults we don't always stop to consider how everything we say and do shapes the impressions of young people. But if you're judging us, as a people, by the way we treat our children - and I think there can be no better criterion - then you must understand how deeply we care for them. When our children are young, they don't understand what might be dangerous. Our rules are to keep them from harm, real or imagined. And that's part of the continuity of our human species. When [our children grow] up [they] will make rules for [their] children, to protect them - as we protect [ours].
I found this to be an excellent way to explain why we set boundaries and have rules. And I love that it points out that harm can be real or imagined. Imaginary or not, harm still hurts. Finally, I appreciate that implicit in this statement is the thought that as we grow and mature, we are able to set boundaries for ourselves. Do we, and should we, allow children to start making the rules, or do we try to maintain iron-fisted control of their lives for as long as possible? I try to take the former approach whenever possible. I am not perfect in this, and I have a lot to learn about setting boundaries, but I think that this will help me in the process.

Comments

I have two thoughts. First, there is clearly a shift in rules from generation to generation. It's a glacial shift sometimes, but in moments of considerable change, it can get quite edgy and, it appears, there is generally a downward spiralling tendency toward destructiveness, as old codes of behavior are misinterpreted, forgotten, rejected, or lost within a society. Second, ironically, as these codes become blurred and diminished, the value we place on children is also eroded and even totally corrupted. In the paper the other day there was a story about a 15 year old running around to parties prostituting herself, who sold her 7 year old sister to be gang raped by a bunch of men and boys, some as young as 13. Juxtapose that horror with an article in an earlier edition of the paper about the UIUC biology prof back in 1960 who wrote and letter to the editor saying that free love was the way to go, and who was then drummed out of the university and disappeared, and perhaps we hold in one hand the root and fruit of value shift.

Those individuals who hope to maintain constancy in their value systems must adhere to some kind of external system for guidance, whether it be humanism or religion of some sort or another. Lehi, by sending his sons back to get the brass plates, teaches us that passing on values requires text. If we don't familiarize ourselves with a text that contains values, we stand a better chance of experiencing value shift.

I, personally, prefer to rely more on text than role models. I distrust example because there are too many variables involved. Text, at least, is more subject to rigorous interpretation, and can be referred to again and again, without fear of misinterpretation.

My children, one of whom is the sleepless artist in your basement, were taught not to write on the walls of our home. They were taught by precept and by example, and yet they ignored both. One of them even went so far as to paint a large creature right on the wall of her room. I see this as an example of how some values trump others, and how example does not work. I could refer to other instances of this from family history, but I shall refrain.

My point is, that if you seek to diminish a shift in values and worthy codes of behavior between your generation and that of your children, get them to read and love a worthy canon of texts, including, but not limited, the scriptures, fine literature, and other cultural products of worth.

Just my opinion.
I don't see anything in your comment with which I disagree. Clearly, there is much to be considered in the nuanced realm of setting boundaries. I think that Captain Picard gives us a nice overview of why we set boundaries, though.

Also, I think that your example illustrates my point of allowing children to set boundaries as they mature. I am fairly confident you would not have cheerfully let a two-year-old child scribble on the walls. However, as your child grew older and matured, you allowed her to set the boundaries of what is and is not acceptable use of her personal space. I would even go so far as to suggest that the example both you and your wife have set in how you use your personal space has taught, by example, how your children should make their space more personal and unique to their individual selves.

Popular posts from this blog

Crafty Craftiness

Who Are You?

Is Civil Discourse Too Much To Ask For?