01-22-2017, 12:01 PM
Edit 1;
Inheritance
When he was five, young Gerald’s father spanked
him angrily for playing near the edge,
tormenting animals, and most of all
for toying with himself. Young Gerald learned
what things were right and wrong, and soon forgot
those loving pains and terrors that had taught
him which was which. At thirty-three his shrink
recovered memories that showed his angst was caused
by rage and anger, violent abuse
his father had inflicted on a son
he hated. Gerald took it all to heart
and never punished his son Ted except
with smiling time-outs. No-one could explain
why Ted turned out sadistic and depraved,
thrill-seeking and amoral - unafraid
of playing near the edge. Old Gerald thought
this vicious streak must be inherited:
Ted’s grandfather, he told himself, was mad.
Sincere thanks to all the critics without exception. Oddly, considering my low commitment to this one, had to beat down my defensive reactions to the criticism.
@Carrie Birdsong - "no real rhythm," with @River Notch's on the successfully unobtrusive meter, counts as a compliment. Thanks!
@BecktheDog - tried to modulate the first line with a comma; hope that helps.
@River Notch - have addressed your critiques, particularly "fear of heights" and "somehow" which were, indeed, weak. Likewise some other elements.
On two points, "angrily" and "loving pains and terrors," it seems to me your critique is saying I should express them differently because I couldn't have meant what they say now. But I *do* mean that, specifically (though it could no doubt be expressed better): a parent can respond angrily to a child's actions without being a monster, and a child afraid - even irrationally afraid - of that anger (not, really, the associated pain) is not necessarily ruined by it for life. I know this from my own, not recovered, just memories. The parent doesn't lose self-control but exercises it to stop before seizing a tool (belt, stick, etc.) and the child acquires a moral sense without remembering every incident in which it was formed (for later deconstruction).
So, I may be wrong, but that really was what I was trying to say - and that the meaning there was taken, though disapproved, indicates that those expressions work to that extent. Sure, there are bad parents - but displaying controlled anger not only teaches the lesson of what is not to be done, but the further lesson of self-control under stress. Not going apeshit is a lesson, too.
Inheritance
When he was five, young Gerald’s father spanked
him angrily for playing near the edge,
tormenting animals, and most of all
for toying with himself. Young Gerald learned
what things were right and wrong, and soon forgot
those loving pains and terrors that had taught
him which was which. At thirty-three his shrink
recovered memories that showed his angst was caused
by rage and anger, violent abuse
his father had inflicted on a son
he hated. Gerald took it all to heart
and never punished his son Ted except
with smiling time-outs. No-one could explain
why Ted turned out sadistic and depraved,
thrill-seeking and amoral - unafraid
of playing near the edge. Old Gerald thought
this vicious streak must be inherited:
Ted’s grandfather, he told himself, was mad.
Sincere thanks to all the critics without exception. Oddly, considering my low commitment to this one, had to beat down my defensive reactions to the criticism.
@Carrie Birdsong - "no real rhythm," with @River Notch's on the successfully unobtrusive meter, counts as a compliment. Thanks!
@BecktheDog - tried to modulate the first line with a comma; hope that helps.
@River Notch - have addressed your critiques, particularly "fear of heights" and "somehow" which were, indeed, weak. Likewise some other elements.
On two points, "angrily" and "loving pains and terrors," it seems to me your critique is saying I should express them differently because I couldn't have meant what they say now. But I *do* mean that, specifically (though it could no doubt be expressed better): a parent can respond angrily to a child's actions without being a monster, and a child afraid - even irrationally afraid - of that anger (not, really, the associated pain) is not necessarily ruined by it for life. I know this from my own, not recovered, just memories. The parent doesn't lose self-control but exercises it to stop before seizing a tool (belt, stick, etc.) and the child acquires a moral sense without remembering every incident in which it was formed (for later deconstruction).
So, I may be wrong, but that really was what I was trying to say - and that the meaning there was taken, though disapproved, indicates that those expressions work to that extent. Sure, there are bad parents - but displaying controlled anger not only teaches the lesson of what is not to be done, but the further lesson of self-control under stress. Not going apeshit is a lesson, too.
Non-practicing atheist