|
Most parents of more than
one child will tell you that kids can be raised the same way, have the same
rules and advantages, even crawl from the same gene pool – and be nothing
alike.
When ours were toddlers I
considered our daughter a high maintenance tot. She loved to play, but never
alone. Mom or Dad had to be in the middle of everything, which was fun if a
little tiring; there is only so much “Candyland” an adult can take. When she
was a baby I thought I might become the first person in history to get a
repetitive motion injury from peek-a-boo.
Our son, on the other
hand, could amuse himself with a stick. It’d be a plane, a horse, an arrow, a
boat, a snake, and who knows what else, all in the course of a few minutes.
Throw in a couple of rocks and he’d be set for an hour.
We encourage about any
kind of play that piques the imagination, which partly explains why we have
never allowed video games or cable television in our home. (There is also the
matter of content: I once wrote that I’d no sooner install cable than an
in-pipe from the septic tank.) We do go to movies and have been known to play
games at arcades, but having them around 24/7 is too enervating.
So I believe in play. I
wish I had more time for it myself, but is it a right? Specifically, do
children have a right to play?
The “right to play”
movement thinks so. Denmark’s International Play Association, which touts its
work with the United Nations, may be the movement’s granddaddy, but they aren’t
alone. Associated Press reports that a conference at Hofstra University this
month hosted “play advocates” from over 40 countries, drawing professors,
recreation workers, playground designers, and others.
It sounds fun, and I
imagine it’s supposed to. The mention of folks that stand to make a buck –
playground designers and such – rose doubt that this is pure philanthropy, but
what the heck. People make a living selling ice cream and I’ve never begrudged
them a nickel.
“In the United States, we
obviously have the overscheduled child,” one physical education teacher said.
“Too much academics can be a problem.” We’ve all heard this, maybe even
experienced it in our own families. One has to wonder why we also hear so much
about lagging test scores, but maybe I’m just a grump.
Another attendee noted
that “Children in the third world, if they’re not working, may have more free
time to play, but they need a safe environment, one that’s not toxic.” Now that
doesn’t sound very fun, maybe even a little political. The clincher, though,
was the speaker from Yugoslavia whose topic was the effect of NATO bombing on
the play habits of 6- and 7-year-olds.
My bet is that it put a
real damper on them, along with everything else. I guess it’s hard to whip up
much sympathy for the guy who got knocked off his bar stool. And at this point
in the AP report it was hard to believe that the right to play movement is all
about hopscotch and stick ball.
This, as they say in the
Hokey Pokey, is what it’s all about: The International Play Association’s
recipe for better play includes “peace education,” clean air and water, an end
to “war toys,” opposition to high-rise buildings, and improved public
transportation. And, as everyone knows, the main obstacles to play are lack of
access for third world women to childcare training, overemphasis on competition,
war, and bad traffic management.
I for one have tired of
the exploitation of children for political ends. Organized support of play is
fine, but the right to play movement sounds a bit like Greenpeace in sheep’s
clothing.
© 1997- 2002 Brent Morrison
|
