Eh?

>>Is that positive enough Pericles?<<

I'm not sure what I said to cause you to ask the question, keith, but I'll have a go at answering anyway.

>>kids today know that a fear of failure pervades all their endeavours to the point where innovation and independence of thought are stiffled.<<

Possibly even stifled.

But what exactly is causing the stiffling - er, stifling?

>>What is needed is an active campaign by parents and teachers to overcome their own fears of failure, needs of security, safety and inadequacy in an endeavour to stop passing those attitudes onto their students and youngsters.<<

And what exactly is the question, to which this is an answer?

Anyhow, who is going to provide the parents and teachers with the tools with which to achieve this - thoroughly worthy, but totally impractical - goal?

The entire litany is emotional. Fear. Security. Safety. Inadequacy. Sounds like a couple of years on the psychiatrist's couch might just about start to make a dent in it.

>>The attributes of courage, fearlessness and boldness need to be encouraged and returned to a venerated status within our educational systems and more importantly to parental attitudes.<<

Sounds more like Tom Brown's Schooldays than a modern education plan. But again, it falls flat on its face when you ask the question "how?"

I know, it is very warm and fuzzy to imagine that we can all suddenly turn all new-age and in-touch-with-our-inner-lion, but where on earth do you start? And simply saying "well, you have to start somewhere" doesn't help either.

Look keith, "being positive" is all very worthy, but as my white-haired old granny used to say, it don't butter no parsnips.

On the one hand we have a long whinge of an article, full of disparaging comments but totally short on focus. Now we have a suggestion that we put the entire country's parents on the couch, to teach them courage.

No wonder the education system is in a mess.

Pericles,

Thank you for the spelling correction.

The stifling of our youngsters is occurring precisely because the attitudes exhibited and once taught through the literature of the likes of Tom Browns Schooldays is seen as repugnant. I guess you think it just doesn't cut it in the modern 'safety first' era of todays education.

I don't think in terms of 'inner lion'. I think in terms of natural inquisitiveness and a quest for adventure. When I grew up such things were quite normal and your post merely re-inforces the general down-grading and our loss of those values.

I didn't suggest anyone consult a psychiatrist. That is entirely consistant with the 'safety first' modern attitude you exhibit. I'd prefer to think a little more concentration on the 'older out of date' attitudes you dismiss as 'Tom Browns' stuff might do the trick. ie Turn out students who are not 'safety first' focused sausage machine morons.

Recently one of my son's friends visited and was shocked to hear I had done a solo coastal passage to Hervey Bay among the migrating whales. 'That's dangerous and you could have been killed by a whale' she said. I dryly asked when was the last time she'd heard of someone being killed by a whale and why she dared drive her car. She is a professional pharmacist and in my opinion is one of those many kids who has had the stuffing knocked out of her.

That puts it all in perspective, keith, thanks.

>>I'd prefer to think a little more concentration on the 'older out of date' attitudes you dismiss as 'Tom Browns' stuff might do the trick.<<

Have you actually read the book in question?

"Tom Brown's Schooldays" is about as relevant to education in the twentyfirst century as the abacus.

Here's an excerpt from that book.

"Tom, as a new boy, was of right excused fagging for the first month, but in his enthusiasm for his new life this privilege hardly pleased him; and East and others of his young friends, discovering this, kindly allowed him to indulge his fancy, and take their turns at night fagging and cleaning studies. These were the principal duties of the fags in the house. From supper until nine o'clock three fags taken in order stood in the passages, and answered any prepostor who called "Fag," racing to the door, the last comer having to do the work. This consisted generally of going to the buttery for beer and bread and cheese (for the great men did not sup with the rest, but had each his own allowance in his study or the fifth-form room), cleaning candlesticks and putting in new candles, toasting cheese, bottling beer, and carrying messages about the house; and Tom, in the first blush of his hero-worship, felt it a high privilege to receive orders from and be the bearer of the supper of old Brooke."

This would provide some insight into why today...

>>the attitudes exhibited and once taught through the literature of the likes of Tom Browns Schooldays is seen as repugnant<<

But perhaps I'm reading the wrong bits.

What did you have in mind?

Oh dear oh dear Pericles,

'>>The attributes of courage, fearlessness and boldness need to be encouraged and returned to a venerated status within our educational systems and more importantly to parental attitudes.<<

Sounds more like Tom Brown's Schooldays than a modern education plan.'

Then you replace this bold assertion with your facile quote from the Tom's book which sets out to totally reject your original assertion.

What's it to be Pericles ... consistancy or crass opportunism?

I don't know that you are reading the wrong bits ... simply because your statements and positions are so conflicting. I think your initial assertions showed you understand my what I had in mind and your second opportunistic quote shows you'd go to any crass lenghts to undermine those ideas.

As you would of course.

You let your assumptions override your ability to follow the bouncing ball, keith.

When I said "sounds more like Tom Brown's Schooldays than a modern education plan", that did not for a moment suggest that there was any merit in the TBS approach.

Or even that the TBS system did, in fact, encourage "attributes of courage, fearlessness and boldness"

It only believed that it did. What it was, as depicted so graphically in the book, was a repressive, depersonalizing and corrupt system that lived for bullying and mindless conformism.

Which was why I quoted that - highly typical - paragraph.

If you would like me to quote the bits where it believed it was - quite literally - God's gift to the world, I'd be happy to do so. But only so long as you don't jump to the erroneous conclusion that this reflects my own beliefs.

Deal?

I never quoted anything and have no intention of doing so. You made two references to Tom Brown's school days ... with the impact of your two references totally contradicting the other.

The starkness of your contradiction remains despite your wordy justification.

And your 'explaining', sounding very much like K. Rudd babblespeak, indicates you're leaning towards crass opportunism..

Fact is fact you've been caught out in wanting to keep your cake and eating it.

Stop twisting and answer my question: What's it to be consistancy or crass opportunism?