Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother - new book about Chinese parenting

Parents Forum
1621

<p>Any culture that values education is going to do well. When Jews came to this country from Eastern Europe, most of them had only the clothes on their backs and their brains. They insisted their children do well in school, and in many cases the only acceptable career paths were doctor or lawyer. </p>

<p>Many Americans, on the other hand, have embraced the culture of letting kids do whatever they want, doing “well enough.” Perhaps they got their jobs through connections and figure the kids will do the same. Or they’ve gotten blase about education, and are not as “driven” as the new (Asian) immigrant families. American kids, even from well educated families, watch more TV these days and read fewer books than before. (My daughter noticed this when babysitting. She said “Mom, I can’t believe these people don’t have any BOOKS!”) I really believe the parents are making a mistake by being too relaxed and thinking good enough is good enough.</p>

<p>A recent survey on education indicated that most parents lamented the state of education in schools, but thought THEIR school system was good enough (it was the others that had problems.) So maybe we could all use a little Tiger Mom attentiveness (not her methods.)</p>

1622

<p>Well, few parents will admit that there’s anything seriously wrong with their own child’s school. If they did, then they’d have to also explain why the kid is still attending said school, or why the parent is tolerating the deficiencies, or else what the parent is doing to correct said deficiencies. And therein lies a major part of the problem, IMO. Have you noticed that the American culture has produced entire generations of people who can’t take criticism? Criticism in the US is met with name-calling and accusations. People are called political “bad” names or are given labels which insult their intentions or integrity. Our society no longer truly believes in the value of criticism. We only see the negatives–it’s demoralizing and self-esteem damaging. </p>

<p>If there’s one area in which I lean more toward tiger momness, it’s in that I tell my kids like it is. If they’ve done well, I tell them so. If they haven’t, I also tell them. I don’t overlook or excuse laziness or poor effort. I doubt I’d throw my child’s handmade birthday card back in her face, however, and I try not to be mean or nasty. All the same, I find that many Americans believe you should never tell your child anything but “good job!” I don’t agree.</p>

<p>The last two sporting events in which my D participated, she was unfocused and did not give it her best effort. I did not praise her on the spot, and privately afterward I told her that her effort was disappointing and that I expected better next time if she wanted to be permitted to continue in this endeavor. Her performance was much improved the next outing. (Note: my evaluation was based on what D personally is capable of, not on any relative measure. She still didn’t win. We don’t disregard relative measures either, since they can help form long-term goals.) However, the other kids on D’s team who were also unfocused and lackluster when D was, but whose parents praised them up the wazoo regardless, were still unfocused and lacklaster the subsequent time too. </p>

<p>I think most parents have a much higher tolerance for mediocrity than I do. So I agree with mommusic that the “good enough” syndrome has gone too far.</p>

1623

<p>

</p>

<p>I think the book hit a nerve because the concept of hard-a** parenting is foreign for a lot of parents. I don’t think the general American public understands the culture that Chua, and millions of other kids like her and before her, were born into. They don’t understand the cultural values, the filial piety, etc. When it is revealed that the kids don’t have “playdates” some “western” parents equate that with abuse because it is such a foreign concept. A lot of “Western” parents are anxious about their parenting techniques. They are constantly second-guessing and agonizing over their parenting. They read about Chua’s kids and secretly wonder if they are doing enough. And, the USA’s ranking in global education doesn’t help to easy anxieties. </p>

<p>I’m a white, middle-class, American parent. I read the book the first week it came out. A lot of white, middle-class, American people become very defensive when they are compared to other countries and cultures. It’s anxiety-producing and we have always been drilled that we are the USA is the “best”. We have an inflated sense of ability and superiority. (Don’t get me wrong, I think American optimism is a wonderful thing and I am not knocking my country.) </p>

<p>I do think it’s quite telling when surveyed, American parents think their kids are reading enough for pleasure, a higher percentage of parents are “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with their kid’s grades compared to Chinese parents. American parents and students think they are above-average in math when they are mediocre when compared to some Asian countries like China and South Korea. There is a book that studied that attitudes and satisfaction rates of Chinese and Japanese parents compared to parents in Minneapolis and Chicago. Basically, Americans are much easier to satisfy when it comes to education and grades. [Amazon.com:</a> Learning Gap: Why Our Schools Are Failing and What We Can Learn from Japanese and Chinese Education (9780671880767): Harold Stevenson: Books](<a href=“http://■■■■■■■.com/4gvpfpg]Amazon.com:”>http://■■■■■■■.com/4gvpfpg)</p>

<p>For the first few chapters of Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother I found myself laughing and thinking “what is the big deal?” </p>

<p>The middle and last half of the book reveal the dark side of the dynamic in the household. What upset me most is that Chua allowed her children very little autonomy. My heart broke when Sophie was exhausted after a day of traveling to upstate NY, practicing and rehearsing all day for the fancy violin teacher, and then pressured to practice more that evening before a 9 o’clock dinner. This is the part where I think Chua was a lunatic. I also think Chua is obsessed with status, prestige, and fame. She name-drops at every opportunity. It was sad when Chua could not back off and allow Sophie to play tennis for fun. Instead, Chua spouted her opinions and talked to coaches when she promised she wouldn’t interfere. Chua’s obsession for being number one is exhausting. </p>

<p>I do think some parents can take something from this book. For me, it compelled me to take a closer look at my parenting practices. Am I expecting enough from my kids? Am I working enough with them at home? Am I ensuring that they are fully understanding concepts or am I just hoping they are? My husband and I have always valued education: We are involved at school, always present for open-house and teacher-conferences, very present during homework time, have high-expectations, etc. We could be doing more. There are many times when we have let sloppy work and Bs slide. I have tightened up since reading the book. I am not going to berate and put undue pressure on my kids but I will expect their very best work and effort all of the time. The book also reminds me to continue having my own life and hobbies (not that Chua doesn’t have her own life) and not be so overbearing which I am occasionally guilty of.</p>

1624

<p>^I agree with everything the above poster said, but I think there is still more…</p>

<p>There has always been a double standard at play. I first became aware of it here when Adrienne Clarkson, a Chinese Canadian was appointed Governor General and was accused of trying to erase any doubt of legitimacy when she rushed to legally marry her long time partner before she took office, yet not a word was uttered when Romeo LeBlanc, a French Canadian whom she succeeded, did exactly the same thing a couple of years earlier.</p>

<p>Another incident that came immediately to mind was the Beijing Olympics. What a huge story it was when it was discovered that the Chinese girl lip-sang a pre-recorded song, but not a word was murmured when the Sydney Symphony did the same in 2000. </p>

<p>It seems to me that fear play a major role here. Visible minorities are not supposed to over-achieve like this. The pseudo-liberals don’t like it because it challenges their pre-conceptions; the conservatives don’t like it because it may affect generational transfer of privilege. </p>

<p>After all that is said and done, we still are very tribal.</p>

1625

<p>Hang on a second, Canuckguy. As I recalled it, the issue about the Chinese girl lip-synching the pre-recorded song was that a <em>different</em> girl was singing it, one who was not deemed telegenic enough to be shown on TV. I assume that the Sydney Symphony had a recording of themselves, and not the Berlin Philharmonic, the Chicago Symphony, or the Amsterdam Concertgebouw.</p>

1626

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree that many upper/middle class American parents* tend to avoid any criticism of their kids…but having grown up in an Asian-American immigrant household and having attended high school with many of them, adopting the “Chinese parenting” model a la Chua is going too much to the other extreme IMHO. </p>

<p>Plenty of overachieving Asian-American and other classmates at my urban public magnet high school are currently undergoing therapy, attempted suicides, or otherwise completely lost in their lives because they were browbeaten into submission by parents who have iron-clad lofty expectations and fail to account for the extremely rigorous standards of our school. </p>

<p>Consequently, many have had an extreme inferiority complex of feeling “dumb” despite gaining admission to elite universities/LACs or finding that their parent-chosen career of medicine, engineering, pharmacy, law, etc wasn’t really for them after going through the education and hard work for an ostensibly successful career. What’s more pathetic is most are at a loss to define their new career paths because they were never allowed to even explore…much less find what they actually liked careerwise. </p>

<p>Ironically, being an underachieving mediocre student at this high school shielded me from the worst effects of this as it ended up giving me more freedom and flexibility to pursue what I wanted in college because of “lowered expectations”. :D</p>

<p>IMHO, a balance between these two extremes would be far better than to uncritically follow one or the other. Chua’s parenting style would be considered on the more extreme side of what my classmates and I experienced…except most of our parents weren’t narrow-minded to her extremes about hobbies or ECs. </p>

<ul>
<li>I don’t see this nearly to the same degree in lower-middle class and working-class American families. If anything, they’re much more like the immigrant parents…though not necessarily with the single-minded focus on education.</li>
</ul>

1627

<p>

</p>

<p>But that is not even the type of culture Chua is supporting, is it? According to her, it’s the most important for an individual to be the best in everything, and I can’t see anything group/conformity based at all in that. Are we talking about the book Battle Hymn at the moment, or the actual traditional Chinese culture? The two overlaps of course, but they are not exactly the same.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I never knew exactness and precision to be traits directly related to the Asian culture, but instead always thought of these as products of Western, industrial nations that value efficiency and precision. Also, in response to one of the previous comments and adding to what cbreeze said, it’s unreasonable to use the lack of Asian Nobel Prize winners as the support for a lack of creativity, because it has only been for a very short period of time that immigrants have been coming from China into the United States and places where genuine research and innovation is being conducted, and even now Asians exist as a very small percentage of the country’s population. Moreover, as recent as fifty years ago China would not even have had the means to invest in any meaningful innovation, when there were so many other pressing political and economic problems raging inside the country.</p>

<p>Just to elaborate on my comment about creativity and innovation in China, the main problem, IMO, is not the lack of creative and innovative people at all but rather the frequent mismanagement of resources in a country that is still developing and progressing. Funds are spent on research and innovation, but they almost never get to the right people at the right place. In the U.S., obtaining research grants is still a process of meritocracy based on who has the best proposals, and in the typical capitalist style, if you don’t produce, you eventually stop getting funding, and that money go to someone else. Same with technology and businesses: keep up with the innovations, or else the market will be taken over by a competitor company. There is absolutely a love for science and innovation mixed in that as well, but the system itself is unforgiving of people who cannot get their job down productively.</p>

<p>In China for the past couple decades it’s been done in the more socialist style where whoever gets the money and the market is given the right to keep that market, no matter whether they’re doing any innovating or efficiently using the resources. So people who have ideas never get the opportunity to emerge in prominence. There is a indeed certain degree of stress on conformity and obedience to authority in the traditional Chinese culture, but there is also much more emphasis on community ties. Of course, much of that is changing, due to the influx of Western ideas and practices. So back to the argument about Chua: I somehow always felt that the U.S. capitalist model of competition is more like what she’s advocating as a model for life, mixed in with some of the Asian values of respect for parents and authority. I don’t find it inherently Chinese, but rather Chinese tinged with Western ideals. Many of the values she’s advocating like dedication and perseverance are essential, positive traits to encourage in children, but IMO, she’s taking it a little too much to the extreme.</p>

1628

<p>Here we are criticizing the over emphasis on strict rules and guidelines that people believe are the problems in China, but I personally always saw it as the opposite, that the problems are in fact all the loopholes in regulation as result of the rapidity with which the country is changing and the lack of an adherence to laws and ethical standards in business and other practices. China is modernizing and changing fast, but its enforcements of regulations are not keeping up. What it needs is exactly the strict enforcement of fair practice in all different aspects of the country. Someone mentioned before that the supposed “Chinese parenting” as depicted by Chua deprives an individual of social skills essential for success in the workplace, which I don’t necessarily disagree, but then people go on to imply that having social skills isn’t important in Asian countries or in China in particular, which it’s pretty bogus. In China you won’t get things done without making the right connections with the right people in charge or if you don’t have good “people skills”, whereas in the U.S., things tend to more often play by the rules. Take shopping for a pair of sunglasses, for a well known example. Here, you’re used to going to a mall or store then paying for whatever the price listed, but in China, how much you end up paying depends on your familiarity with the value of that object and more importantly, your bargaining skills. It’s almost the same with finding jobs, or ascending the workplace hierarchy----or a lot of other things, really. Not that that’s necessarily a good thing.</p>

<p>What I’m trying to say is, there is a difference among what Chua is preaching as inherently “Chinese”, what the reality is for Asian Americans, what the reality is for people currently living in a China that had been absorbing Western values and practices, and what traditional Chinese values have been in the past. Sometimes it’s easy to slump it all together, but the reality isn’t so straightforward.</p>

1629

<p>I assume that the Sydney Symphony had a recording of themselves, and not the Berlin Philharmonic, the Chicago Symphony, or the Amsterdam Concertgebouw.</p>

<p>The Sydney Symphony not only faked its own music, it also faked that of the Melbourne Symphony, and signed an agreement to hide the fact. This is on top of the bribing scandal to get the 2000 Games. The Chinese, at least, openly admitted to the “lip-singing”, and both girls’ names were on the program, the singer ahead of the performer. It was not discovered by “investigative journalists” as some seems to believe.</p>

<p>I think the best opinion piece written on the incident was this one, by Canadian journalist Andrew Potter:</p>

<p>[The</a> West, mad at China for being fake: that’s rich | Macleans.ca - Canada - Opinions](<a href=“Macleans.ca - Canada’s magazine”>Macleans.ca - Canada’s magazine)</p>

<p>Here are a few quotes:</p>

<p>*Digital manipulation of images? Lip-synching? Exploitation of barely pubescent girls? There’s nothing going on in Beijing that you won’t find in the first 15 minutes of a Hannah Montana concert…</p>

<p>…accusing another country of being mean by privileging beauty over talent — even as China’s manipulations are reported by news anchors who are themselves pumped so full of Botox they look lobotomized. </p>

<p>…what seems to be really bothering most people about the Chinese is not that they fake stuff, but how unapologetic they are about faking stuff…Here in the West, we like our fakery conducted a little more fakely, thank you very much.</p>

<p>The official logo for the Vancouver Olympics features an inukshuk, the humanoid stone figures used by the Inuit as navigation markers and by white people as talismans of liberal guilt. Vancouver is, unfortunately, 3,600 km from Iqaluit, and if the VOCOG was really keen on saluting our First Nations, they might have looked closer to home for inspiration: the slum of the Downtown Eastside, for instance. </p>

<p>Yes, we do phoniness different here. We bury fakeness behind a mask of authenticity, and racism under a thick layer of sanctimony. No wonder the Chinese are confused. *</p>

<p>Brutal but true.</p>

1630

<p>I don’t think anyone would have objected if the girl singing at the Olympics had pre-recorded her own music–it was the fact that the vocalist was a different person.</p>

<p>I wouldn’t describe the Sydney Symphony as “faking” music that they had pre-recorded themselves. The involvement of Melbourne does strike me as questionable, though.</p>

1631

<p>^It is important to remember the Beijing organizers openly admitted this, but the Sydney organizers did everything to hide it. IOW, the former did not think they did anything wrong, while the latter knew it was wrong. Why then did reporters gave Sydney a free pass but not Beijing?</p>

<p>Together with the Adrienne Clarkson incident, Potter’s brilliant conclusion, that “we bury fakeness behind a mask of authenticity, and racism under a thick layer of sanctimony”, seems inescapable. </p>

<p>BTW, “faking it” was a term used by the Australians themselves. I did not coin it.</p>

<p>[Revealed:</a> Sydney Olympics faked it too - Arts - Entertainment - smh.com.au](<a href=“http://www.smh.com.au/news/music/sydney-olympics-faked-opening-too/2008/08/26/1219516425771.html]Revealed:”>Revealed: Sydney Olympics faked it too)</p>

1632

<p>The headline of the article you’ve linked says “faking,” but none of the people affiliated with the orchestra used that term.</p>

<p>In my assessment of the two situations, in which there are certainly some parallels, I take motive to matter. The real Chinese vocalist was not shown, because she was not thought to be cute enough. (She was plenty cute.) This is a bad motive. This would be analogous to having the Melbourne orchestra pre-record everything, but then have the Sydney orchestra play, because the Melbourne orchestra did not seem “good-looking” enough in some sense.</p>

<p>If the singer being televised had pre-recorded her own voice singing the song, in case she got a cold, sore throat, or cough on the performance day, I don’t think there would have been an issue–at any rate, I would see that as a good motive. The person apparently singing would have deserved the honor of it.</p>

<p>There are other ways around the issue of potential “glitches” in live events. For example, the Christmas Eve service in King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, traditionally opens with a single chorister singing the opening of “Once in Royal David’s City.” The choir-master usually has four boys who have been told they may be singing this. Just before the service begins, he picks one of them (so no issues with colds–unless all four had one).</p>

<p>So, did Australia have another orchestra that could play all of the music that was called for, live, without fear of a snafu? Apparently not. Given the time scale to performance, I am uncertain whether any orchestra could handle it to the standard required–musicians would know that, though.</p>

<p>I think this is a diversion from the Chua issue, in multiple ways, and want to return to that shortly.</p>

1633

<p>I wanted to comment on LoriFLA’s statement in #1623, “When it is revealed that the kids don’t have ‘playdates’ some ‘western’ parents equate that with abuse because it is such a foreign concept.”</p>

<p>I can’t speak for everyone, but I will say that I do not consider forbidding playdates to be abusive. It is a bit weird, in my opinion, but I could accept that it’s just a different culture. </p>

<p>But I think this is shifting the grounds of the argument.</p>

<p>What I really object to in her parenting is the requirement that a child sit at a piano for hours, without food or bathroom breaks, to perfect what is an admittedly tricky piece. I think this is wrong–I won’t label it beyond that. When this issue was raised, people quickly shifted to discussing cases where a child wanted a bathroom break 5 or 15 minutes into practicing. I think that is not the same at all. Nor would delaying dinner by half an hour be a big issue. It’s the time span involved. I am interested in the time estimates of this incident, by those who have read the book. “Into the night” past dinner (skipped) sounds like many hours to me.</p>

<p>I also think that threatening to burn a child’s stuffed animal collection is wrong. I think that carting a dollhouse piece by piece out to the car, to donate to charity, is wrong (if done as punishment–it would be different if the child were ready to make the donation). I don’t want to drag the children into this discussion excessively, but I think that any parent who is enforcing practicing so hard that a young child becomes enraged to the point of leaving tooth-marks on the piano–well, the parent has really done something wrong in my opinion, even when I allow for wide variations in the natural temperaments of children. Calling a child “garbage” and addressing a child as “fatty”? Also wrong, in my opinion. Not because I think the child is frail, but because this is inconsistent with the polite treatment of any human being, in my view.</p>

<p>Chua states that “Western” parents assume weakness in their children–because they avoid criticizing them directly–while she assumes that the children are strong. On the other hand, she also seems to assume that the children, if not directed into hours and hours of practicing on instruments, would simply fritter away the time. I think that a child who is undirected for multi-hour periods of time will discover interesting and creative things to do, on his/her own. At least, that has been my observation.</p>

<p>In the interests of not limiting my criticisms to people from other cultures: In my opinion, Joan Crawford (aka “Mommie Dearest”) was wrong to shred her daughter Christina’s dresses, when Christina left them on the wire hangers, as returned from the dry cleaner’s.</p>

1634

<p>I have neither read the book nor most of this thread. However, that won’t keep me from adding my 2 cents :)</p>

<p>In discussing some of the tenets of high expectations etc, my 12 year old 1/2 Asian daughter commented that she much prefers “Chinese” teachers who don’t “care,” which she defines as the ones that don’t cater to you but just expects you to do good work. Her current favorite one is famous for being ‘mean’ and telling students they should know this or that. He gives them a project and says “do it,” which she finds liberating. Most of her classmates apparently complain that he is not helpful. Her least favorite one is one who spends time trying to make sure everyone understands what she is saying. Clarify that these all white teachers, not Chinese.</p>

1635

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s very clear from the book that we’re talking well into the night, not delaying dinner a bit til the kid was done. And we’re absolutely not talking about the kid-wanting-a-bathroom-break-15-minutes-in procrastinating type of scenario. </p>

<p>Frankly, my reaction was - if she valued piano/violin proficiency that highly, why didn’t she take it up herself and see how difficult it was?</p>

1636

<p>QuantMech, I agree wholeheartedly. The teeth marks on the piano were heartbreaking as well as the threats. Obviously this child was experiencing a great deal of stress. I know that Chua left her husband out of the book for the most part on purpose. When I heard the husband on a morning talk show discuss how we agreed with his wife’s tactics and that “he had wished someone made his pursue and instrument”. At what cost? </p>

<p>Pizzagirl, good point about Chua taking up an instrument herself. If I’m remembering correctly, Chua said in the book that she received piano lessons as a child but stopped because it wasn’t affordable. I have two young children and most of time I can remain calm and adult-like and allow them do their thing. Sometimes I grow impatient and anxious and criticize their playing above and beyond constructive criticism. (Wrong dynamic! Wrong note! Wrong! Start again! Slow down! That sounds bad!, etc.) My sons put me in my place by saying, “Hey mom, why don’t you try playing?” or, “Go away, please.” It reminds me not to lord over them and shout corrections when I can’t play. I know that behaving this way only stresses them out and turns them off from the piano. </p>

<p>For many, the reason why I believe this book is so compelling is because there are many anxious parents that are looking for the magic formula to create “successful” kids. I’m generalizing but I think it is especially true for people with blue-collar backgrounds – we think that there is a method that we are not privy to.</p>

1637

<p>The headline of the article you’ve linked says “faking,” but none of the people affiliated with the orchestra used that term.</p>

<p>Of course not. No one would likely admit he did something wrong, but that he “just made a mistake”. The orchestra’s managing director choose to use the term “mimed” instead, but WSJ also called it “faking”.</p>

<p>[Faking</a> It: An Olympics Tradition? - China Real Time Report - WSJ](<a href=“Faking It: An Olympics Tradition? - WSJ”>Faking It: An Olympics Tradition? - WSJ)</p>

<p>In my assessment of the two situations, in which there are certainly some parallels, I take motive to matter. The real Chinese vocalist was not shown, because she was not thought to be cute enough. (She was plenty cute.) This is a bad motive. This would be analogous to having the Melbourne orchestra pre-record everything, but then have the Sydney orchestra play, because the Melbourne orchestra did not seem “good-looking” enough in some sense.</p>

<p>If substituting a prettier girl for the vocalist but let the world know about it is a bad motive, then miming another orchestra and having the performers signed an agreement to maintain silence must be a worse motive, and making a fuss over the former and say nothing about the latter is the worst of motives. </p>

<p>I am sorry. No amount of white-washing can alter the truth; a double-standard exists. Until we recognize this, there is no way we can understand the hopes and fears, and thus, the behaviours of Amy Chua.</p>

1638

<p>“Motive” means the reason for doing something, not the action itself.</p>

1639

<p>Action is “motive” in motion.</p>

1640

<p>Well, that is a genuine philosophical difference between our ways of thinking.</p>