How We Invented Childhood

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
By Callie Stewart | Checked By John Kuroski


Published September 10, 2015

Updated December 17, 2015





Kids Playing Outside

Image Source: www.familybydesign.com
Think of childhood. Not necessarily your childhood, but the idea of being a kid in general. What comes to mind? Playing? Curiosity? Imagination? Innocence?

These are all common, if not cliché, notions of what it means to be a child. You play, you learn, you imagine and you are kept sheltered from the dangers of the world for as long as possible. The adults in your life don’t want to rip you from that childhood naiveté; in fact, they love keeping you there. They want you to remain sweet and to remain untainted—to simply be a child.

That notion of childhood, however, is one we completely and utterly made up. French historian Philippe Ariès wrote perhaps the most widely read book on this very subject, Centuries of Childhood. Though much of the book is now criticized–in part, because some of his evidence was anchored in the adult clothing children wore in medieval portraiture–Ariès was the first to present childhood as a modern social construction, rather than a biological right.

Today, while distancing themselves from Ariès’ logic, many academics agree that the last few centuries of history have seen a major shift in how children are treated and how childhood itself is regarded.
Centuries Of Childhood

Image Source: Amazon
The Routledge History of Childhood in the Western World, a recent compilation of essays from a range of scholars, presents a vast and detailed evolution of what we consider to be childhood–and, as the book is eager to point out, it seeks to finally put Ariès’ text to rest. Editor Paula S. Fass, a historian at UC Berkeley, notes the following in her introduction to the book:

“These essays clearly show that the ‘modern’ perspective on children as sexually innocent, economically dependent, and emotionally fragile whose lives are supposed to be dominated by play, school and family nurture, provides a very limited view of children’s lives in the modern western past. While some children did experience this kind of childhood, for the vast majority, it is quite literally only in the twentieth century that these have been enforced as both preferred and dominant.”
Fass continues to assert that our modern notion of childhood was forged during the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment, or The Age of Reason, spanned from about the 1620s to about the 1780s, and did a good job of shaking up the traditional, and often irrational, ideologies of the Middle Ages. Over the 17th and 18th centuries, the public made a relatively sharp turn toward scientific reason and advanced philosophical thought. As the products of a generation now enamored with reason, children were a big focal point for the many new forms of societal change.
Age Of Innocence

Joshua Reynolds’ popular 18th century painting, “The Age of Innocence,” speaks to the emerging ideals about childhood. Image Source: Tate

English philosopher and father of the Enlightenment John Locke published strong, controversial pieces on politics, religion, education, and liberty. An opponent of England’s entrenched, tyrannical monarchy, Locke quickly became famous among great thinkers with his 1689 publication of An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, in which he urged people to use reason as their guide, to think for themselves, and to understand their world via observation rather than religious dogma.
John Locke

John Locke, Image Source: skepticism.org
By the time he published Some Thoughts Concerning Education in 1693, Locke’s ideas were highly regarded in educated circles. Flipping conventional wisdom about education on its head, Locke states that authoritarian teaching is counterproductive, suggesting, of children, that “all their innocent folly, playing, and childish actions are to be left perfectly free.” The goal was to make moral children, not scholars. Education should be enjoyable and sculpted around the needs of the individual child in order to make a productive, positive member of society.

To understand just how revolutionary Locke’s ideology on education and children was, it needs to be put into context. In Locke’s time, forms of unstructured play or entertainment were considered a waste of time. As a result, throughout Locke’s life, the only “book” and learning tool specifically for children was the hornbook.
With a history that traces back to the 15th century, this “book” was actually a wooden paddle, traditionally inscribed with the alphabet, numbers from zero to nine, and a passage of scripture. And if that wasn’t fun enough, it had the dual purpose of being both a learning tool and a form of punishment if the child did something awful, like recite the alphabet incorrectly.
Hornbook Paddle 1630

A hornbook from approximately 1630. Image Source: Pinterest

Childrens Horn Book

A woman holding a hornbook. Image Source: Wikimedia Commons
Furthermore, in Locke’s time, very little thought was given to a child’s rights. Especially if you didn’t have the money to care for a child, that child was simply a functional object, an extra worker. If the child wasn’t an extra hand, then they were an extra mouth to feed.
Perhaps nowhere is this more acutely evident than in the 200-year-long English tradition of child chimney sweeps, which really took off in the 1660s. Small boys between 4 and 10 years old from families of poverty were sold to master sweeps. Using their elbows, back and knees, the boys would climb up and down narrow chimneys to clean out the soot. These children were severely beaten, starved, disfigured, prone to serious health complications, and even liable to die as a result of getting permanently lodged in chimneys.

However, this “business model” remained popular because most were unsympathetic and no one bothered to create large brushes or rods until they were forced to, in 1875, when it finally became illegal to use children as chimney sweeps.
Children Chimney Sweep

A master and apprentice chimney sweep. Image Source: Wikimedia Commons
Child Chimney Sweep Face

A child chimney sweep, Image Source: Western Civilization

Blake The Chimney Sweeper

William Blake’s 1789 poem, “The Chimney Sweeper,” from his book, Songs of Innocence. Image Source: Answers
Locke died in 1704 (long before the practice of using children as chimney sweeps), but in the following decades, the Enlightenment movement he helped create continued to move forward. Those he influenced continued to popularize his ideas. Literacy was also steadily on the rise (by 1800, 60-70 percent of adult men in England would be able to read, in comparison to 25 percent in 1600), and with literacy came both the ability to spread ideas more quickly and the demand for new publications. In 1620s, about 6,000 titles appeared. By 1710s, that number rose to nearly 21,000 and by the end of the century, it was over 56,000. As a result, religious texts and their medieval philosophies started to lose their monopoly over the written word and public mind.
At this time, the next influential player in the creation of modern childhood stepped up. Greatly inspired by Locke, French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote a number of extremely popular works that had a profound influence on the continuation of the Enlightenment. In particular, Émile confronts the nature of education and man. It is from this writing that most of our modern notions surrounding the innate purity of children emerge. In contrast to the church’s views, Rousseau writes, “nature made me happy and good, and if I am otherwise, it is society’s fault.” Nature is, Rousseau believed, our greatest moral educator and children should focus on their bond with it.

Emile

Image Source: www.heritagebookshop.com
Whether from Locke, Rousseau or elsewhere in the Enlightenment, these notions of childhood largely go unquestioned today. Émile was published in 1762. Just over 250 years later, most of us adamantly believe that children have the right and freedom to be wild (within reason), explore nature, and enjoy a life unaffected by societal corruption. However, a century after Émile, we were still shoving sooty children down chimneys. And it wasn’t even a century ago that the United States fully put a stop to child labor, in 1938.

By that point, the Enlightenment had long come and gone. See, it takes time for these ideas we take for granted to spread through the classes and generations to be made “real.” As a result, today we sit secure in a concrete concept that separates us and our children from those of the Dark Ages, scarcely realizing that that concept is only as old as our grandparents.

 
Article would be more interesting if it commented on how rich or middle class kids were typically raised. Being poor sucks and it seems like over time society collectively decided it wanted a taste of what the rich were enjoying.

One of my favorite stories is how classical concerts used to be done. All these various rich people coming into concert halls where this music was being played and they'd be eating, chatting with friends over the music, or just generally be barely paying attention. You'd also have these private shows done by guys like Chopin where people would be shouting out numbers they wanted played as everyone was having a blast.

But then as the middle class started growing last century you had changes to the whole atmosphere of the concert halls, where people started feeling it was very important to dress as respectably as possible and sit in absolute silence paying as much attention to the music as they could. A possible reason for this being that this growing middle class wanted to imitate the way they thought the rich lived.

I figure it's a similar phenomena with childhood where you have people wanting their children to be able to grow up in a nice safe bubble the way they imagine rich kids do. Which at the same time annoys some people that feel they've discovered something with realizing that children are small people rather than creatures that have yet to metamorphosize into adults. Feels a bit like the dunning kruger effect in action, with people becoming so ignorant of why we raise kids the way we do that they think they're more enlightened on the subject than most others.

And of course the reason we raise kids the way we do is because on some level we want to brainwash them into being better people as they become adults. It's easy enough to traumatize a kid or help them become an asshole, but having them develop into nice or successful people is a challenge.
 
We didn't invent childhood. We learned that many things children did back then were in fact bad for them.

Also, as life has become better for most of the world, young people don't need to grow up faster and rather enjoy being kids.

This is the kind of articles that a pedophile would share, but I think the real intention is to turn children into consoomers of either products or propaganda and as the parents are on the way, they need to advocate for kids being independent and having capacity of consent. Useful idiots for Nambla.
 
Childhood was a good invention but I'm not sure adolescence was. Bunch of animals sitting around in a prison all day "learning" useless shit. Ought to be learning trades.
 
You can see evidence of childhood in all mammalian species. Their young play to learn skills and gain strength and agility. The adults mostly leave the children alone in a sexual sense (there's maybe some humping but not coitus).

There was a bleak period in human history, especially in the early industrial period, where we didn't allow children sufficient time to play and learn, and I'll bet we collectively suffered because of it. Giving children a childhood is good for their development and for our society's success overall. I don't think it's a coincidence that societies that put children to work immediately have average IQs in the room temperature range.
I had a horrible feeling opening this, knowing the freaks we share articles from, that this would be an apologetic treatise in favor of pedophillia.

I'm not convinced it isn't.
Now, now, it's also an apologetic treatise in favor of re-enslaving the proles and putting their children to work in factories.
 
Childhood was a good invention but I'm not sure adolescence was. Bunch of animals sitting around in a prison all day "learning" useless shit. Ought to be learning trades.
I can't tell if you're being serious, but it's kinda true. Similar to the evolution of concert going, we've developed a way of educating kids in schools that relies on everything being very rigid and not necessarily helpful (with concerts it's not helpful to having a good time and with schools for educating).

Had to spend a year in a public American high school and it was plain weird how they required everyone to go through the exact same classes. There was only some variation with doing AP classes or not rather than choices such as different countries' history. Kids seem to get treated as though it's unnecessary to give them choices, like they're too stupid to be able to make even minor choices about their own interests. So as a social construct it does seem like there are flaws with what we imagine to be 'childhood'.

Topic also reminded me of an old video David Mitchell did.
 
There was a bleak period in human history, especially in the early industrial period, where we didn't allow children sufficient time to play and learn, and I'll bet we collectively suffered because of it. Giving children a childhood is good for their development and for our society's success overall. I don't think it's a coincidence that societies that put children to work immediately have average IQs in the room temperature range.
Correct. Plebs like this writer don't look back further in history, but even the ancient Egyptians already recognised childhood. The rich and middle class tried to educate and endulge their kids just like we do today. It's just that in the past the majority of families were rather poor and children were forced to start work early so they and their families could stay alive. That doesn't mean those people wouldn't have let their kids just play and be kids if they had the option.

But we all know the real purpose of this article, so why even get mad.
 
Is this supposed to be news to anyone? Your likely commoner class ancestors 500 years ago, when he or she was past infant age they were put to work doing menial labor. They picked vegetables for hours at end, immediately were taught by their parents how to sew, probably had to milk cows and sheer sheep.

Only the people who had wealth & power could give their children carefree lives, just as they largely lived carefree adulthoods.

Yeah we invented innocent childhoods to be expected, just as we only invented very recently that concept of 5 day work week, just as we invented the idea that women shouldn't be considered property.
 
This isn't just overly simplistic, this is straight-up false.
How so? It was the royals who lived in opulence with hundreds of servants along with a mistress because most never really cared for their wives & married to increase political strength. Those were the guys who could raise their children with opulence.

Until recent times the working class children worked. It didn't change until industrialization when kids started dying in factories.
 
At first this reeks of pedophile apologists.. its also reels of welcome to the great reset. Now enjoy child labor peasants
 
"Children are just a social construct and that's why its OK for me to exploit them both as both wage slaves and sex slaves, you unintellectual bigot."
 
Back
Top Bottom