Flirtiac, Gifted Education, LOTR

[Tabouli]

David:
> These usually mean something, don't they?  Everyone knows what lollipops are, or what a crab is.
> So what is a flirtiac?  answers on a postcard, please

_______________________________________
|    As the founder of FLIRTIAC, I regret that      |
|    I can only offer the most obvious answer      |
|    which is a "flirtation + maniac" portmante-    |
|    au word a la Lewis Carroll.                          |
|                                                                    |
|                                                                    |
|                                                                    |
|                                                                    |
|_______________________________________|



Barb:
> Both of our kids go once a week to the Mentally Gifted program; the 
MG teacher is sharp and imaginative and the MG classes are no more 
than 15 kids.  It is a great experience for them.

Hmm.  I realise I'm treading on dangerous ground here, but as a veteran of Gifted Children's programs myself I've begun to question them.  Certainly telling children they're simply brilliant at the age of 5 or 6, name up in lights, anything you want to do, etc.etc. puts an incredible amount of pressure on them: I've met several adults who have never quite gotten over their gifted childhood predictions of glory, and feel more and more of a failure every year they age without having achieved something Great.  A few are even totally paralysed by this, can't bring themselves to do anything in case they're not a genius at it, feel crushed if they are bad at anything at all, feel resentment and despair when the "less gifted" with more application overtake them in their 20s, and so on.

Of course, a MG class in itself won't do this, and insightful teaching and parenting should avoid it.  However, I'd be very very wary of telling *any* child at a very young age that s/he is an absolute gifted genius who will have the world on a plate when grown up.

Ebony:
> As a TAGged kid who struggled through major social angst from K-5, I 
am SO glad that my stay-at-home mom made the decision to send me to 
school anyway.  Even when things were the worst, she told me I had to 
tough it out... that "you just can't run away from a problematic 
situation, honey."  It was good for me. < 

How bad was the worst?  I'd like to believe in the power of good parenting giving children the self-esteem to cope with bullying, drugs, bad teachers, etc., but there are some situations I just don't think a child should have to deal with.  Having your self-concept annihilated in your teens can affect the rest of your life, and a heroin addiction can end or wreck your life.

Catherine:
> I agree with you about LOTR.  I always skip the 
songs, and the third book drives me nuts.  I've tried countless times 
to get through it, and always end up skipping to the end when they 
return to the Shire.


A rousing cry of agreement from me on this.  I've always doubted Tolkien's wisdom in splitting Book 3 into one half dealing with Merry and Pippin and one half dealing with Frodo and Sam.  I mean, surely any reader in their right mind is ***much*** more interested in hearing about Frodo and the Ring than any of this wishy-washy war and wizard waffle.  It wasn't until my fourth or fifth reading of LOTR that I could bring myself to do more than skim that stuff impatiently.  The last time I read it (couple of months ago) I finally made myself read the songs properly as well, and they're actually OK.  Tolkien (more so than JKR, alas) has a very good handle on scansion and rhythm and rhyme.  The actual content is a bit flowery and wafty, especially in the elfsong department (less so in poems in The Hobbit), but the craft is good.

One more LOTR musing: what's this "HP is derivative of LOTR because it uses the same creatures and characters" business?  Hardly.  (The house-elves in HP the same creatures as the elves in LOTR??  Yeah, right...)  As for Dumbledore and Gandalf, yes, same bearded wise old wizard archetype, but very different personalities.  JKR is much wittier and more accessible than Tolkien, and her setting, style, characters and plots are very different.  Frankly, I think even the "fantasy genre" argument for HP being derivative of LOTR is pretty tenuous.  JKR is drawing directly from much older sources than Tolkien, like Greek and Celtic mythology, and European folklore.  If anything, HP is a magical variation on the whole boarding school story genre, with its one book per school year, watching characters grow up, classroom antics and students having adventures and solving mysteries type theme.  Though I suppose being derivative of Billy Bunter and Enid Blyton is rather less dignified than being derivative of Tolkien...

Tabouli.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]