It took me a long time to understand this story. I had to read this story twice to get a good grip on it. So from what I understand, somebody askes the mother of a child if she can sit down and talk to her about her child. that shounds very confusing but i hope you understand. the mother doesn't have anything to say to the person asking her because she thinks her daughter is a lost cause. then the story goes on to tell us how he thought of her daughter and how she felt about her.
This story really digs deep into how children of divorce deal with it. I beleive that children of divorce are much stronger than children with two parents. especially because they have had to deal with mommy or daddy leaving. so that means they had to go through a major shift at some point in their lives. Children that see divorce early I think, are least affected than children that deal with it late. the reason why is because younger children don't really know what is going on, plus they get acustomed to having one family homes so they make the transition early. older children understand more so they are able to choose which parent they want to grow up with, which parent they "side with", or which parent caused the whole turmoil. not saying there is a right or wrong answer but children that go through divoreces earlier in there lives are at an advantage.
then children that grow up in two parent homes tend to be more sheltered. they are allowed more and get more. They can run to either parent and ask for what they want. In a single parent home you are not able to do that because no means no.
I'm not sure that this is what the story is talking about becaus eit took me a while but i think i have some type of grip.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Hey Shakerrie
I think that what you have said here is pretty true. I agree with the fact that you said children can be stronger from divorced couples. I do however think that sometimes this is not true. I feel that there is a couple of outcomes for a child from a divorced couple. I feel that sometimes a child can go from being happy to playing the victim the rest of his life instead of attempting to move on. I also think that there are those children who are very strong and are able to move past their parents divorce. I also think it's true about what you said about the earlier ages. If a husband or a wife leaves their spouse when their kid is really young there is a chance that the child might not even remember their mother or father. there is a lot of truth to that.
I think that this whole story is being told from the point of view of the Mother while she is ironing. I got that she was going over a meeting with someone in her head and started to flash back through her daughters life that she was a part of.
hey!
So in the beginning i also got the sense that the mother thought the daughter was kind of a lost cause and she really knew nothing about her. But once the mother started to go into the story about there realtionship it seemed that they were pretty close. I dont think that divorce was much of a cause on the child. It seemed the parents were only together for a year after she was born? I'm pretty suer thats what it is. It seemed that the father was never a big part in the girls life, she lived with him family, im guessing his parents, but i dont think she lived with him? i might be mistaken though.
It seems you looked at the story more of a divorce issue, with the girl being split in two. I took the father pretty much out of the story when i analyzed it, i looked mostly at the mother and daughter realtionship.
Glad you read story more than once! This is always so important. Does the mother really think Emily is a lost cause? I'm not sure I agree. After all, in the last paragraph she says "Let her be. So all that is in her will not bloom...There is still enough left to live by." It is as if she's saying that if everything did bloom from her difficult childhood she would be in trouble, but there is hope. I didn't think about Emily as a child of divorce, but of course she is. Her father basically abandons her, and while a stepfather comes along, it's not the same.
I think I agree that children who experience divorce earlier may have an easier time of it. Still, is the issue of "siding" with one or the other parent bound to come out? This is such a painful aspect of divorce which I've seen in my own family.
I'm not sure that we should generalize about the two-parent home which can be just as dysfunctional, even more so because there can be unresolved conflicts that don't exist in a single parent household.
The story seems to go well beyond this idea to the particular relationship of mother and daughter. Is this relationship different that a father/son relationship or a father/daughter, mother/son relationship?
Shakerrie
I think that when the man coems to talk about Emily the mother is not saying that she is a lost cause, but more that she does not know her daughter and she regrets that. I am also greatly confused as to why this man is talking to the mother and what they are talking about. At first I thought it was a deliquent issue ,and that Emily was a bad teenager, but by reading the rest of the story you find out that Emily was not a bad child be any means.
I think that for Emily and them other it was a good thing that the father left when he did. It was probably so hard to deal with and who knows it could have turned out better, but if he did not want to be there he would have made it obvious and that wold have hurt Emiyl more in the long run.
I guess i didnt think she was saying she was a lost cause, but i did think the mom was kind of tired, and just didnt know what to do about her daughter anymore. she felt like she didnt know her anymoer i guess?
I agree with much of what you said. I think that this story is basically talking about a very young, depressed girl. Her young mother didn't know anything about parenting and the way in which the girl was raised didn't turn out the way it could have.
Post a Comment