First of all, I love some things about Mason’s overall educational philosophy. Namely the emphasis on living books, nature study, and narration. This book is a series of excerpts specifically on the topic of habit formation, so is not a comprehensive look at Mason’s theology or philosophy. Nevertheless, at least in the quotes used in this book, I find Mason to have mistaken views on human nature and to advocate for borderline abusive parenting.
Mason denies sin nature in practice if not in words, which comes out in a multitude of ways. To train an “infant to instant obedience...is no difficult task; the child is still trailing clouds of glory...from God, who is his home; the principle of obedience is within him.” (p. 65).” She blames circumstances and other people for children’s bad behaviors, advocating that parents and teachers simply change the environment or activity when a child misbehaves. She denies human agency and responsibility, insisting that “whatever seed of thought or feeling you implant in a child...grows, completes itself, and begets it’s kind” (p. 11). She claims that “every act of disobedience in the child is a direct condemnation of the parent” (p. 65). I wonder how she would explain that God “parented” Israel perfectly and they still rebelled against him.
Much of what she says on the topic of habits is manipulative. “Lay down lines so invitingly smooth and easy that the little traveler is going upon them at full speed without stopping to consider whether or not he chooses to go that way” (p. 13). She demands that parents control their children even down to their thoughts and feelings (“Let her change the child’s thoughts before ever the bad temper has had time to develop into conscious feeling.” p.71)
Her insistence on requiring immediate, unquestioning obedience is the kind of philosophy that leads to abuse and neglect in many fundamental homes. She claims obedience must start in infancy: “A good deal of nonsense is talked about the reasons of the child’s cries—he is supposed to want his mother, or his nurse, or his bottle, or the light... The fact is, the child has already formed a habit of wakefulness or of feeding at improper times.” Therefore, a mother should leave him to cry so that “for the rest of his baby life, he may put himself sweetly to sleep in the dark without protest.” “Nothing tends more to generate a habit of self-indulgence than to feed a child...at unreasonable times, merely because it cries” (p. 34).
This philosophy truly makes me feel sick to my stomach. Yes, there are times an older child must learn to go to bed. It’s not necessarily abusive to let your child cry, or do gentle sleep training. But telling parents that a baby’s cry is manipulative rebellion that they need to deal with is a lie that can definitely lead to frustration, neglect, and abuse (the real life examples of this are out there, and they are heart breaking). To deny an INFANT’S need of comfort, milk, and a parent’s presence is to deny them some of the most crucial neurological development of their lifetime. Much research has shown that children who don’t experience this connection develop attachment disorders that can never be healed. It is heart breaking how far some parenting philosophies take this insistence on obedience and breaking a child’s supposed willfulness. I doubt that was Mason’s intent, but ideas have consequences that need to be acknowledged.
Much of what Mason says is impractical. Apparently, all a mother must do to get her children to obey is require it! “To avoid these displays of willfulness, the mother will insist from the first on an obedience which is prompt, cheerful, and lasting” (p. 67). It is not possible to control a child’s attitude. You can control their outward displays through punishment or manipulation, but you cannot control their hearts. Mason doesn’t say how, but claims that magically at some point a child “obeys because his sense of right makes him desire to obey in spite of temptations to disobedience—not of constraint, but willingly” (p. 65). That is certainly the goal, but (at least in this small book), Mason never explains how this happens—especially if a parent has habitually required instant obedience without explaining why or addressing sin and the need for God’s transforming grace.
She says children should be made to be truthful by not ever being allowed to tell anything in an exaggerated or humorous way. The mother must “ruthlessly strip the tale of everything over and above the naked truth.” Children shouldn’t be allowed to tell stories in funny ways, but only the bare truth. This squashing of imagination, humor, and the God-given gift for telling engaging stories is appalling.
I could go on, but suffice to say that I filled the margins with “?!”
To be fair, there were things I underlined because I appreciated.
“The biggest intellectual gifts depend for their value upon the measure in which their owner has cultivated the habit of attention.” (p. 41).
“Good marks should be given for conduct rather than for cleverness—that is, they should be within everybody’s reach. Every child may get his mark for punctuality, order, attention, diligence, obedience, gentleness.” (p. 47)
“Whatever the natural gifts of the child, it is only so far as the habit of attention is cultivated in him that he is able to make use of them.” (p. 49)
“One of the most fertile causes of an overdone brain is a failure in the habit of attention. I suppose we are all ready to admit that it is not the things we do, but the things we fail to do, which fatigue us, with the sense of omission, with the worry of hurry in overtaking our tasks.” (p. 49)
Parenting “requires patient consideration and steady determination on the mother’s part. She must consider with herself what fault of disposition the child’s misbehavior springs from; she must aim her punishment at that fault, and must brace herself to see her child suffer present loss for his lasting gain.” (p. 51)
There are two more books in this series, one on books and one on nature study. I suspect I’d enjoy either of those more than this one, so I’ll probably give them a try. But I don’t recommend this book. Considering the time Mason lived in and the prevalent views on children/education/parenting, I think Mason came very far in the right direction, but not always enough. I’m sure most parents are discerning enough to take Mason’s thoughts with a grain of salt and not become abusive (I know many wonderful Charlotte Mason homeschoolers), but too many of the ideas in here ARE abusive, misleading, and manipulative if taken at face value. And I am aware of groups that treat Miss Mason’s words like gospel, which is concerning.
Overall, there are SUCH better books on parenting and teaching that I see no need to read this one.