Peter Pan's NeverWorld

[AlexanderDavid]

Found something on it. Doesn't seem quite as anti-Barrie as what I remember, but this might not be the same exact quote.

From: http://www.kidsreads.com/authors/au-mccaughrean-geraldine.asp

"What was your inspiration for the story of PETER PAN IN SCARLET?"

"I badly wanted to be true to Barrie's original book. Not to the cartoon version or the pantomime or the last movie, but to the 1911 book. So I read and reread PETER PAN AND WENDY, and tried to soak up something of Barrie's style and sense of humor and quirky style. I also wanted to create something distinctly my own. So what I went for was a literary counterpart --- the matching bookend --- same world, but somewhat altered. You see, I don't really share Barrie's gloomy take on life: That we are born happy and dwindle down to unhappiness as we get older, and that life is perfect at three, but sadder with each passing year. Nor do I think grown-ups are an altogether bad thing."

Sounds at least a little bit like McCaughrean should've been writing Hook & Jane. When I read "Literary counterpart", I somehow keep seeing "Counterpoint."

Do you mean Hook & Jill?  If so, I hope you mean that she should have been writing something more along those lines than what she actually wrote, because she doesn't strike me as being even a very good writer--I spent a LONG time wondering what happened to Michael Darling before they finally said he died in World War I....     I certainly DON'T think Hook & Jill specifically should have been written by her....

[Peter Pan]

Found something on it. Doesn't seem quite as anti-Barrie as what I remember, but this might not be the same exact quote.

From: http://www.kidsreads.com/authors/au-mccaughrean-geraldine.asp

"What was your inspiration for the story of PETER PAN IN SCARLET?"

"I badly wanted to be true to Barrie's original book. Not to the cartoon version or the pantomime or the last movie, but to the 1911 book. So I read and reread PETER PAN AND WENDY, and tried to soak up something of Barrie's style and sense of humor and quirky style. I also wanted to create something distinctly my own. So what I went for was a literary counterpart --- the matching bookend --- same world, but somewhat altered. You see, I don't really share Barrie's gloomy take on life: That we are born happy and dwindle down to unhappiness as we get older, and that life is perfect at three, but sadder with each passing year. Nor do I think grown-ups are an altogether bad thing."

Sounds at least a little bit like McCaughrean should've been writing Hook & Jane. When I read "Literary counterpart", I somehow keep seeing "Counterpoint."

Do you mean Hook & Jill?  If so, I hope you mean that she should have been writing something more along those lines than what she actually wrote, because she doesn't strike me as being even a very good writer--I spent a LONG time wondering what happened to Michael Darling before they finally said he died in World War I....     I certainly DON'T think Hook & Jill specifically should have been written by her....

Yeah, sorry, brain fart on the title. I'm not saying literally that story, but her intent seems much more along those lines, than a sequel. Frankly, I really wouldn't mind if there were official novels that show the flip-side of Barrie's Peter Pan perspective, but that should be a spinoff rather than the sequel.

Being able to remain true to Barrie's writing style to do a sequel is meaningless unless you can also remain true to his heart.

McCaughrean might've done better with it if she'd thought not only about Barrie's outlook on life, but more importantly why he saw it that way. It seems she failed to acknowledge that Barrie, as an adult was a one-of-a-kind creature, and as such, was burdened with a form of loneliness that very few ever experience.

[AlexanderDavid]

It doesn't help that "Peter Pan" means something entirely different for most people....  I don't think Barrie DID idealize childhood--I think he was as Peter Pan himself, a "Betwixt-and-Between," a child among adults but an adult among children.  That's the sense I got from The Lost Boys.  And who else could have written a story that on the surface appears to be a fantastic children's story but hides deeper, more adult themes beneath the surface, and marries the two so deftly that it doesn't come across forced or sledgehammered?

That's why I love Ian Holm's line as JMB in the docudrama: "All children grow up--that is their tragedy--except one.  That is his."

[TheWendybird]

It doesn't help that "Peter Pan" means something entirely different for most people....  I don't think Barrie DID idealize childhood--I think he was as Peter Pan himself, a "Betwixt-and-Between," a child among adults but an adult among children.  That's the sense I got from The Lost Boys.  And who else could have written a story that on the surface appears to be a fantastic children's story but hides deeper, more adult themes beneath the surface, and marries the two so deftly that it doesn't come across forced or sledgehammered?

That's why I love Ian Holm's line as JMB in the docudrama: "All children grow up--that is their tragedy--except one.  That is his."

I dunno if betwixt & between necessarily means he doesn't idealize childhood. I idealize it but i'm 26 and quite the big kid Not sure hrmm I think he idealized it but it was hard on him because he was in a grown up world. But I can tell you how that is...but i still idealize so i dunno heh

[Peter Pan]

It doesn't help that "Peter Pan" means something entirely different for most people....  I don't think Barrie DID idealize childhood--I think he was as Peter Pan himself, a "Betwixt-and-Between," a child among adults but an adult among children.  That's the sense I got from The Lost Boys.  And who else could have written a story that on the surface appears to be a fantastic children's story but hides deeper, more adult themes beneath the surface, and marries the two so deftly that it doesn't come across forced or sledgehammered?

That's why I love Ian Holm's line as JMB in the docudrama: "All children grow up--that is their tragedy--except one.  That is his."

"I wish that the universe were radically different, since the world as it is is not just tragic, it is for me an impossibility. To be completely human--with its full range of both practical and imaginative potentialities--and to grow up; these are in a sense contradictories. By growing up, by co-operating in social order, living, one has to curtail the imagination; by doing this one is obliged to give up so much that one becomes an inacceptably diminished person."

I think this sums up Barrie's feelings about growing up. He clearly doesn't see it as an even trade by any stretch of the imagination, almost as if growing up were a form of de-evolution.

He also identifies growing up with conformity. Once we enter the adult world, we are more or less forced to conform on greater and greater levels. In childhood, the worst punishment for non-conformity is usually bullying. Big deal. Name-calling. In adulthood, it influences everything. Careers and jobs are the biggest control-mechanism. Step out of line with the social norm then, and you may not know how you're going to afford your next meal. This absurdity is exemplified in the first nursery scene in which preventing the entire Darling Family from falling into poverty seems to be riding on George's ability to get a tie, a meaningless fashion trend, to fit properly around his neck.

Even without this threat, the older we get, the more concerned we become with what everyone else's opinion of us is.

Peter Pan's tragedy, isn't that he can't grow up. It's that nobody else "can't" grow up. The tragedy isn't eternal childhood itself, but the byproduct of loneliness that it creates.

[TheWendybird]

It doesn't help that "Peter Pan" means something entirely different for most people....  I don't think Barrie DID idealize childhood--I think he was as Peter Pan himself, a "Betwixt-and-Between," a child among adults but an adult among children.  That's the sense I got from The Lost Boys.  And who else could have written a story that on the surface appears to be a fantastic children's story but hides deeper, more adult themes beneath the surface, and marries the two so deftly that it doesn't come across forced or sledgehammered?

That's why I love Ian Holm's line as JMB in the docudrama: "All children grow up--that is their tragedy--except one.  That is his."

"I wish that the universe were radically different, since the world as it is is not just tragic, it is for me an impossibility. To be completely human--with its full range of both practical and imaginative potentialities--and to grow up; these are in a sense contradictories. By growing up, by co-operating in social order, living, one has to curtail the imagination; by doing this one is obliged to give up so much that one becomes an inacceptably diminished person."

I think this sums up Barrie's feelings about growing up. He clearly doesn't see it as an even trade by any stretch of the imagination, almost as if growing up were a form of de-evolution.

Peter Pan's tragedy, isn't that he can't grow up. It's that nobody else "can't" grow up. The tragedy isn't eternal childhood itself, but the byproduct of loneliness that it creates.

Yeah! What you said

[AlexanderDavid]

It doesn't help that "Peter Pan" means something entirely different for most people....  I don't think Barrie DID idealize childhood--I think he was as Peter Pan himself, a "Betwixt-and-Between," a child among adults but an adult among children.  That's the sense I got from The Lost Boys.  And who else could have written a story that on the surface appears to be a fantastic children's story but hides deeper, more adult themes beneath the surface, and marries the two so deftly that it doesn't come across forced or sledgehammered?

That's why I love Ian Holm's line as JMB in the docudrama: "All children grow up--that is their tragedy--except one.  That is his."

"I wish that the universe were radically different, since the world as it is is not just tragic, it is for me an impossibility. To be completely human--with its full range of both practical and imaginative potentialities--and to grow up; these are in a sense contradictories. By growing up, by co-operating in social order, living, one has to curtail the imagination; by doing this one is obliged to give up so much that one becomes an inacceptably diminished person."

I think this sums up Barrie's feelings about growing up. He clearly doesn't see it as an even trade by any stretch of the imagination, almost as if growing up were a form of de-evolution.

Peter Pan's tragedy, isn't that he can't grow up. It's that nobody else "can't" grow up. The tragedy isn't eternal childhood itself, but the byproduct of loneliness that it creates.

Yeah! What you said

I don't agree, though.  Yes, a large part of the tragedy is that Peter Pan is alone, but even just in general he's unable to progress--he can't even learn from his own mistakes because he can't even REMEMBER them.  He just keeps doing the same things over and over again--and clearly he needs stimulation, since he'll often switch sides for a lark if victory seems too easy.  He's trapped in childhood, and I think that on some level he knows it--his desire never to grow up is only his greatest pretend.  It's sour grapes.

I think the real ideal as I understand Barrie's words isn't to stay a child, but to keep the well of potential and the view of the world and the hopes, dreams, and wishes that COME with childhood and never lose them even as you DO grow up.  Then you can combine the best of both worlds and be better than either a child or a conforming adult.

Anyway, I very much doubt that Peter Pan would have been so popular if he'd merely followed the trend of idealizing childhood begun in the Victorian age....

[Peter Pan]

I don't agree, though.  Yes, a large part of the tragedy is that Peter Pan is alone, but even just in general he's unable to progress--he can't even learn from his own mistakes because he can't even REMEMBER them.  He just keeps doing the same things over and over again--and clearly he needs stimulation, since he'll often switch sides for a lark if victory seems too easy.  He's trapped in childhood, and I think that on some level he knows it--his desire never to grow up is only his greatest pretend.  It's sour grapes.

I think the real ideal as I understand Barrie's words isn't to stay a child, but to keep the well of potential and the view of the world and the hopes, dreams, and wishes that COME with childhood and never lose them even as you DO grow up.  Then you can combine the best of both worlds and be better than either a child or a conforming adult.

Anyway, I very much doubt that Peter Pan would have been so popular if he'd merely followed the trend of idealizing childhood begun in the Victorian age....

That would even be more of a curse than just staying a child though. The loss of memory thing is almost more like being unaffected by change at all. But I don't think the lack of growing up is what causes Peter's memory loss. As for the anti-grownup sentiment being a pretend, are you saying that Barrie was also just playing make-believe, pretending to despise adulthood but deep down is wishing to embrace it?

Anyway, your interpretation of his quote, does seem right, but in most cases, to let go of those things, are so often the definition of growing up. This is why the phrase "grow up!" is used against people who continue to embrace crazy dreams, imagination, and eccentricities beyond teenagehood.

I don't know too much about the "Cult of Childhood" though I've heard of it. But I also don't think it ever actually became that widespread. At the very least, it was certainly never big enough to the point that remaining child-like was more socially-acceptable than growing up.

[TheWendybird]

I would like to point out that with "The Nutcracker and the Mouse King" E.T.A. Hoffman seemed to believe the same things as Barrie.....just a thought....I don't think it really means anything if idealizing childhood was popular or not. Perhaps idealizing it was but actually living it out was not. Cause otherwise I don't see why people would have found Barrie to be an odd character.

[AlexanderDavid]

I don't agree, though.  Yes, a large part of the tragedy is that Peter Pan is alone, but even just in general he's unable to progress--he can't even learn from his own mistakes because he can't even REMEMBER them.  He just keeps doing the same things over and over again--and clearly he needs stimulation, since he'll often switch sides for a lark if victory seems too easy.  He's trapped in childhood, and I think that on some level he knows it--his desire never to grow up is only his greatest pretend.  It's sour grapes.

I think the real ideal as I understand Barrie's words isn't to stay a child, but to keep the well of potential and the view of the world and the hopes, dreams, and wishes that COME with childhood and never lose them even as you DO grow up.  Then you can combine the best of both worlds and be better than either a child or a conforming adult.

Anyway, I very much doubt that Peter Pan would have been so popular if he'd merely followed the trend of idealizing childhood begun in the Victorian age....

That would even be more of a curse than just staying a child though. The loss of memory thing is almost more like being unaffected by change at all. But I don't think the lack of growing up is what causes Peter's memory loss. As for the anti-grownup sentiment being a pretend, are you saying that Barrie was also just playing make-believe, pretending to despise adulthood but deep down is wishing to embrace it?

Anyway, your interpretation of his quote, does seem right, but in most cases, to let go of those things, are so often the definition of growing up. This is why the phrase "grow up!" is used against people who continue to embrace crazy dreams, imagination, and eccentricities beyond teenagehood.

I don't know too much about the "Cult of Childhood" though I've heard of it. But I also don't think it ever actually became that widespread. At the very least, it was certainly never big enough to the point that remaining child-like was more socially-acceptable than growing up.

I think it couldn't be more obvious from his life--Andrew even pointed out as much in J. M. Barrie and the Lost Boys.  Writing for Barrie was an acceptable outlet for his fantasies that he wished were realities--and his frustrations that they weren't real.  But I wonder what you think is responsible for those things if NOT the fact that Peter Pan is stuck in childhood....  I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm enjoying the conversation--I'm just curious....

As for the "grow up" stuff--that's just the point, it SHOULDN'T have to be that way.  People should NOT have to give up their identities just to be accepted as "grown up," even if physcially, growing up is inevitable.  I think Barrie didn't think the kind of "growing up" that meant leaving childhood things behind WAS inevitable, just prevalent (and tragically so).

And I suppose you're right, although my point is that it was a trend in children's literature, as I think TheWendybird was trying to say.  It really started as long ago as Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland in 1865.

And Wendybird, I'm not as familiar with that story as I might be, but what you've said has got me curious.  Could you enlighten me? 

[Peter Pan]

I think it couldn't be more obvious from his life--Andrew even pointed out as much in J. M. Barrie and the Lost Boys.  Writing for Barrie was an acceptable outlet for his fantasies that he wished were realities--and his frustrations that they weren't real.  But I wonder what you think is responsible for those things if NOT the fact that Peter Pan is stuck in childhood....  I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm enjoying the conversation--I'm just curious....

As for the "grow up" stuff--that's just the point, it SHOULDN'T have to be that way.  People should NOT have to give up their identities just to be accepted as "grown up," even if physcially, growing up is inevitable.  I think Barrie didn't think the kind of "growing up" that meant leaving childhood things behind WAS inevitable, just prevalent (and tragically so).

And I suppose you're right, although my point is that it was a trend in children's literature, as I think TheWendybird was trying to say.  It really started as long ago as Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland in 1865.

And Wendybird, I'm not as familiar with that story as I might be, but what you've said has got me curious.  Could you enlighten me? 

Memory has always been a pretty tricky thing, and not just for mysterious immortal little boys. In Peter's case though, it seems more like a defense mechanism. Particularly surrounding death, the mind has a tendency to switch things off. It has been said that aged people who have had depressing lives are much more likely to develop altzheimer's than people who have had happy ones. One of the most obvious ways in which a life would be more depressing is by the loss of numerous friends to death (and even growing up would be viewed by Peter as "dying"). Add to that the fact that no child could ever mentally handle murdering potentially hundreds of people. When he says "I forget them after I kill them", doesn't seem like an accident to me, but an intentional forgetting. It is perhaps the only way he can live with things that he's done. Nobody would have more experience with loss than an immortal. Every single Lost Boy who had ever grown up would be eating away at him, along with the loss of Tink. And keep in mind this memory loss isn't complete. Wendy always stood out in his mind, even if only at certain times. He also obviously CAN remember things. He learns skills and those skills stay with him (I certainly wouldn't think he became a swordmaster BEFORE he went to Neverland).

I think we're on the same page with the grownup argument. You're saying the definition of growing up should be different, and I'm saying that growing up is the wrong route to take, but both are saying the exact same thing. I just tend to think that it would be easier for one to say "I'm against growing up" than try to convince society to change the definition of "growing up." One might as well try and tell the world that rainbows aren't gay (which they aren't, but you'll never get anyone to accept that).

Regarding Children's Literature, I think it may be more widespread in terms of art in general. Anti-establishment is somehow VERY common in the artistic world, because art is the very embodiment of self-expression. True artists aren't afraid to say what they really think. And because the social norm is to keep your mouth shut and get in line with everyone else, art almost automatically encourages these radical kinds of messages. Many aren't Barrie's form of rebellion, but are still similar, because they all represent some kind of internal struggle against "the system".

[TheWendybird]

I don't agree, though.  Yes, a large part of the tragedy is that Peter Pan is alone, but even just in general he's unable to progress--he can't even learn from his own mistakes because he can't even REMEMBER them.  He just keeps doing the same things over and over again--and clearly he needs stimulation, since he'll often switch sides for a lark if victory seems too easy.  He's trapped in childhood, and I think that on some level he knows it--his desire never to grow up is only his greatest pretend.  It's sour grapes.

I think the real ideal as I understand Barrie's words isn't to stay a child, but to keep the well of potential and the view of the world and the hopes, dreams, and wishes that COME with childhood and never lose them even as you DO grow up.  Then you can combine the best of both worlds and be better than either a child or a conforming adult.

Anyway, I very much doubt that Peter Pan would have been so popular if he'd merely followed the trend of idealizing childhood begun in the Victorian age....

That would even be more of a curse than just staying a child though. The loss of memory thing is almost more like being unaffected by change at all. But I don't think the lack of growing up is what causes Peter's memory loss. As for the anti-grownup sentiment being a pretend, are you saying that Barrie was also just playing make-believe, pretending to despise adulthood but deep down is wishing to embrace it?

Anyway, your interpretation of his quote, does seem right, but in most cases, to let go of those things, are so often the definition of growing up. This is why the phrase "grow up!" is used against people who continue to embrace crazy dreams, imagination, and eccentricities beyond teenagehood.

I don't know too much about the "Cult of Childhood" though I've heard of it. But I also don't think it ever actually became that widespread. At the very least, it was certainly never big enough to the point that remaining child-like was more socially-acceptable than growing up.

I think it couldn't be more obvious from his life--Andrew even pointed out as much in J. M. Barrie and the Lost Boys.  Writing for Barrie was an acceptable outlet for his fantasies that he wished were realities--and his frustrations that they weren't real.  But I wonder what you think is responsible for those things if NOT the fact that Peter Pan is stuck in childhood....  I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm enjoying the conversation--I'm just curious....

As for the "grow up" stuff--that's just the point, it SHOULDN'T have to be that way.  People should NOT have to give up their identities just to be accepted as "grown up," even if physcially, growing up is inevitable.  I think Barrie didn't think the kind of "growing up" that meant leaving childhood things behind WAS inevitable, just prevalent (and tragically so).

And I suppose you're right, although my point is that it was a trend in children's literature, as I think TheWendybird was trying to say.  It really started as long ago as Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland in 1865.

And Wendybird, I'm not as familiar with that story as I might be, but what you've said has got me curious.  Could you enlighten me? 

Well about Alice in Wonderland..one thing we've noticed about her is ...she complains and picks apart everything about that realm...(probably a faerie realm as well)...she doesn't seem to quite ever enjoy it so i'm not sure i'd really use it as so much the same thing but I do get what you are saying...

As for the Nutcracker...
Well first of all do you know the ballet version of the nutcracker at all? Because a lot...kind of like with our dear Peter Pan....has been lost in the various versions of the story. Marie (Clara in the ballet) is a girl living in a time and household that is very....non childhood i guess you could say. Hoffman believed strongly in keeping with our youth..

Actually I will type up something from the forward of my novel on the matter to give you an idea..
I'll write out a couple different parts..

"A gifted musician and writer, Hoffmann certainly woul dhave been pleased by Tchaikovsky's music, but he might have also been disappointed if not upset by the libretto and choreography. Hoffmann sought to revolutionize the fairy-tale genre and wanted his readers to envision the world in a different light from how they normally saw it. His fairy tale was a provocation and a radical attempt to change the genre for children."

"Though most of his life Hoffmann endeavored to break with the propriety and custom of a pretentious class society."

"He was a profound thinker, avant-garde in all that he attempted, and hence suspect in the eyes of the establishment, and especially in the eyes of the "phillistines". That was a common term that Hoffmann and many others at that time used to describe those people who approached life with a utilitarian and rationalistic mentality, who followed life according to arbitrary precepts, and who had a narrow if not uninformed appreciation of the arts. In short, they were superficial and pretentious people who lacked any true appreciation of the imagination and the arts. Hoffmann detested the utilitarian nature of the philistines and mocked them in his tales whenever he could. His concepts of insanity, genius, music, hypnotism, dream, and reality formed a modern aesthetic theory, and he explored his unique ideas in other worlds that, he insisted, could be found in everyone's imagination."

Like Barrie it says he became easily infatuated with young innocent women...but that's just a side note i read in my book I thought I'd mention haha

"Hoffmann was not all that conversant with children's literature at the beginning of the nineteenth century, but he knew from his own experience and from observing the children of proper and decent bourgeois families that their lives were overly regulated, and in keeping with the rationalism of the times, they were "drilled" to behave according to the moral and ethical principles that were to curb their imaginations."

In the ballet Drosselmeier...has been turned for instance..into a character who in the end takes Marie (Clara in the ballet) out of her imagination and sets her feet squarely on the ground again instead of living in the clouds...but the book is much different..here is what the forward has to say about this:

" 'Nutcracker and the Mouse King; is all about igniting the imagination of Marie so that she can act and realize her inner dreams and desires in opposition to a conventional and prescriptive upbringing. It is not by chance the the household in which most of the action takes place is called Stahlbaum, or "Steel Tree". The parents of Marie and Fritz are truly solid and made of steel, and they are somwhat anxious that Drosselmeier, even though a friend, might contaminate Marie's mettle with his toys and foolish stories. He might even break the "steel encasement" in which Marie is placed to learn about proper manners and good behavior. The question that Hoffmann asks in this tale-and also in 'The Strange Child'-is how to infiltrate a good and proper bourgeois home to free the children's imaginations so that they can recognize and fulfill their desires. In this regard, the title of Hoffmann's fairy tale is misleading. The story is not about the nutcracker and mouse king;rather, it is about the curious child Marie and the ambivalent artist and teacher. Hoffmann positions Marie as the learner, who grasps that she must use her imagination to see the world as it really is. Drosselmeier provides the spark for her imagination and tests her through his remarks and stories to see whether she will remain true to her inner desires and imagination before he will help her reconcile what she sees inside herself and around her. From the point of view of Marie's parents and her brother Fritz, and sister Luise, she is delirious and talks nonsense. But Drosselmeier sees Marie differently: he is struck by the way that she associates her visions and imaginings with the world around her and how she combines them to enrich her daily existance."

It goes on to say how the ballet has only faint echoes of the original Hoffmann tale...that it is more or less destroyed after the battle scene.

"Marie is made into a mere spectator, just as children today are more and more expected to remain spectators and consumers of spectacles. Hoffmann's tale has been made into a candy-coated entertainment that wraps up the imagination instead of setting the imagination of audiences free to lead the lives of their dreams."

It also says his tale was looked on in suspcion because it might cause children to think the "wrong" way. It actually has "wrong" in quotes there that wasn't me lol

Likewise I think both Barrie and Hoffmann would agree..this is not only done with children...to think outside the box in the way of imagination and not growing up etc...is to think the "wrong" way by societies standards. I have a 12 year old cousin at the moment who thinks I should stop wearing Tinkerbell t-shirts and wearing even low piggy tails....where are the children today? Not there anymore from what I can see....quite sad.

[Peter Pan]

Likewise I think both Barrie and Hoffmann would agree..this is not only done with children...to think outside the box in the way of imagination and not growing up etc...is to think the "wrong" way by societies standards. I have a 12 year old cousin at the moment who thinks I should stop wearing Tinkerbell t-shirts and wearing even low piggy tails....where are the children today? Not there anymore from what I can see....quite sad.

You know you belong in Neverland when...

Even the children are telling you to grow up.

[ecb]

I might add with all due respect, that children - real chronological children - tend to want adults to act like adults - in other words: responsible, in control of themselves, taking care of the child.  They want to be children themselves, but they don't necessarily want adults joining in.  Too many adults today are not responsible, indulge themselves constantly and worst of all in a child's eyes, do not put taking care of the child first.  Children are forced to grow up too fast these days partly because adults refuse to accept the boring responsibilities part of adulthood.

I am not here accusing anyone on this board of being like this by the way.  However I do know that it was when I became a parent that I realized that growing up and putting someone else first was my adult responsibility.  My child had to have  the freedom to have her own childhood.

[TheWendybird]

I might add with all due respect, that children - real chronological children - tend to want adults to act like adults - in other words: responsible, in control of themselves, taking care of the child.  They want to be children themselves, but they don't necessarily want adults joining in.  Too many adults today are not responsible, indulge themselves constantly and worst of all in a child's eyes, do not put taking care of the child first.  Children are forced to grow up too fast these days partly because adults refuse to accept the boring responsibilities part of adulthood.

I am not here accusing anyone on this board of being like this by the way.  However I do know that it was when I became a parent that I realized that growing up and putting someone else first was my adult responsibility.  My child had to have  the freedom to have her own childhood.

That's if one wants children of their own at all..but that being said..if i had a child I would not neglect that responsibility. But I don't divide the two personally..responsible and childhood..i think one can be both. I think growing up and being adult are different..there is no doubt technically i am an adult for instance but i dont think i'm grown up. (not saying you were saying anything about us just an example) I won't neglect responsibilities but in every other respect I'll be a child...in the way of playing and what not. What my cousin said was based purely on the superficial...it was kind of insulting and I don't know why she did it. Many adults wear disney characters...she never stated anything ironically about how i "act"....I'm not sure why the other thing upsets her. It makes no sense especially when only two weeks ago she got all upset because I wouldn't be here for Christmas and saying how boring and not fun all the other adults are..go figure. But to me all these "children" who are acting older than their age..I mean a lot of them anyhow..are not doing it out of necessity but rather a pressure put on them by grown ups to "grow up" earlier...not necessarily because the parents don't look after them. This cousin of mine is only 12 and has a thing for Edward from twilight , reads the books watches the movies and is a complete conformist with her friends. Then again maybe it is about the parents for allowing such books around in the first place i dunno. I was disturbed to see a picture of her on facebook (something she shouldnt be on at her age anyhow) wearing corona hats with a friend of hers....i dunno if you know what corona is but its a beer. Not saying she drinks beer i was just a little taken aback at this image. It looked like a friggin ad lol