Gallery 104 Main Exhibition

History of American Childhoods, Part 1

Curated by: Carrie, Lizzie, Jack, Khadyajah, and Julia


“A Puritan childhood is as alien to twenty-first century Americans as an Indian childhood was to seventeenth-century New Englanders”- S. Mintz, Huck’s Raft: A History of American Childhood


Mintz, S. (2004). Huck’s Raft: A History of American Childhood. Chapters 1 – 9.

Lesiak, C. and Jones M. (Producers). (2007) In the white man’s image. United States: PBS Production.

In this week’s reading, we explored the history of American childhood. While reading the exhibit, think about how you answered your American Child Exercise. Specifically, think about how you perceived childhood from the Puritan Era to the Industrial Revolution. Mintz argues that a series of myths are prevalent when we think about American childhood:

  • The myth of the carefree childhood.
  • The myth of “home as a haven and bastion of stability in an ever-changing world.”
  • The myth that “childhood is the same for all children, a status transcending class, ethnicity,  and gender.”
  • The myth that the United States is a child-friendly society.
  • The myth of “progress, and its inverse, a myth of decline.” (Mintz, 2004, p. 2-3)

The myths listed above are important to think about as we follow the history of American childhood. Think about how these myths are perpetuated in your reading and Lesiak’s video or how they are contradicted. Do you find that these myths still hold true in today’s American society?

Chapter One: Children of the Covenant

Our reading this week challenges many of the myths listed above. For example, Mintz discusses the differences between the Native American childhood and the Puritan childhood:

Native American ChildhoodPuritan Childhood
·       More indulgent of children
·       Females were not inferior to males and played an important role in society and politics
·       Treated with great kindness
·       Children were often carried
·       Children did not have to work like colonial children
·       Boys hunted, fished, and gathered and were not obligated to chores
·       Girls planted, tended, and harvested crops and worked at their own pace
·       Childhood was not sentimental
·       Children (even newborns) were seen as sinners who need to be suppressed
·        Children were seen as adults in training
·       Fixated on childhood corruption, molding children, and schooling
·       Focused on piety, self-discipline, hard work, and household discipline
·       Heavily controlled and patriarchal society

As you can see in the chart above, the myth that childhood is the same for all children is debunked through the obvious differences for Native American children and Puritan children in the 17th century. Native American childhood was more carefree, and the Puritan childhood was strict and controlled. Even though the Puritan childhood seemed more restrictive, they were the first group to state, “entire communities were responsible for children’s moral development and to honor that commitment by requiring communities to establish schools and by criminalizing the physical abuse of children” (Mintz, 2004, p. 12).

Havasupai girl wearing beads and cape, half-length, seated
by Unknown

https://amcultlit.weebly.com/spring-blog-2017/day-5-after-class-message

Childhood for Native American children consisted of affection, closeness, play, and leisure. In the picture above, the mother carries her baby on her back, which shows how children were cherished by their mothers. Childhood for the Puritan child consisted of chores, lack of affection, schoolwork, and obedience to their father and God. In the picture above, we see Puritan children dressed as tiny adults.  What traits of American childhood do you think we inherited from Colonial America? Do you think they are good for our current society, or do you see a shift in these traits and ideas?

Fun Fact: “Puritan ministers developed a new literary form known as the ‘jeremiad.’ Named for the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah, who pointed out the ancient Hebrew’s evil ways, the jeremiad was a prolonged lamentation and complaint about the rising generation” (Mintz, 2004, p. 25).  This is a literary (and social media) form that still continues today!

Chapter Two: Red, White, and Black in Colonial America

In this chapter, Mintz discusses the different types of childhoods in Colonial America. The myths about childhood are again debunked in this chapter, which starts by discussing how children came to Colonial America by force through kidnapping and enslavement. In fact, different immigrant groups would sell their children into servitude in exchange for free passage to the Colonies. In these cases, homes were not the safe haven of childhood myth. Instead, children were sold, kidnapped, enslaved, and forever lost from their families. Many children were indentured servants or slaves who had no choice in who, how, or where they would be raised. Instead, they lived a life of toil, often leading to malnourishment and death. To truly understand childhood during early Colonial America, it is important to know that childhood “varied starkly by class, ethnicity, gender, geographic region, religion, and race” (Mintz, 2004, p. 33).

Differences in Childhood

In the map above, the white areas west of the colonies were labeled as Indian reservations. The map will help visualize where different groups lived and how they viewed childhood.

·   In the Middle Colonies, the Quakers treated children with affection, and they accepted childhood independence. Quaker parents built a strong emotional bond with their children as well.

·   Native American parents did not use physical abuse on children since they believed it would make children timid. They also visibly and emotionally mourned the loss of children.

·   In the Chesapeake Colonies, there was no stable family unit due to high death rates. Children were often exploited and used as servants once parents passed away. However, if families did stay intact, families in this area were much more relaxed when it came to their children’s upbringing.

·   In the New England Colonies, Puritan parents had large families, where “patriarchal fathers used their control of land to postpone the independence of sons well into their twenties or early thirties” (Mintz, 2004, p. 37).

·   African children had the harshest childhood since they started working very early in age, suffered from malnourishment, and were often separated from their parents. The mortality rate for African children was very high; however, African-American parents “instilled a strong sense of family identity in their children” (Mintz, 2004, p. 47).

Different Types of Families

During this time, four different types if families emerged leading up to the American Revolution:

1.  Gentry Family – Passed down estate from generation to generation through the oldest son. They later turned to large inheritances due to lack of land in the Southern Colonies.

2.  Artisanal Family – A unit of production, consisting of husband, wife, children, servants, apprentices, and laborers who all worked together. The masters of the family commanded this unit, and it was common in the New England Colonies.

3.  Clan Family – A group of interrelated families who lived in different households but depended on each other socially and economically. This family type was more common in the New England Colonies.

4.  Private Family – A nuclear family, husband, wife, and children, who had a strong emotional bond, wanted to shape a child’s character, set aside space for different activities, and prioritized family above all else. These families were mostly in the Middle Colonies. (Mintz, 2004, p. 48-49)

By listing the different types of childhood and families, it is easy to see how the myths of childhood do not hold up in comparison. What types of families are still prominent in today’s American society? How do you think childhood was affected by the type of family a child was born into?


Chapter 3: Sons & Daughters of Liberty

During the Revolutionary War, children and teenagers played a variety of roles. Many teenagers and children participated in the American Revolution much more actively than one may assume! Take Sybil Luddington for example- a sixteen year old girl known as the “female Paul Revere” for mobilizing the militia in her town of Danbury, Connecticut. Or consider Joseph Plumb Martin, a fifteen year old boy who enlisted in the Continental Army in 1776. Or another fifteen year old named James Forten- a Black teenager who worked as a powder handler on a ship. (Mintz (2004), page 53). 

Young people also played a big role in the circumstances that led up to the war. Many young girls boycotted British goods- ranging from tea to fabrics and other British items. Anna Winlow Green, an eleven year old girl in Boston wrote in a letter “I choose to wear as much of our own manufactory as possible” (Mintz (2004), page 61). There were also many examples of teenagers participating in much of the mob actions that led to the outbreak of war. The actions of a sixteen year old named Edward Garrick even triggered the Boston Massacre! Garrick taunted a British soldier, the British soldier assaulted the teen, and Garrick returned with a large angry crowd of mostly young boys. The rest is history. 

http://www.revolutionarycharacters.org/edward-garrick
Here is an excerpt of a card that is given to visitors of the Old State House in Massachusetts. The cards seek to tell the stories of the people who actually lived through the American Revolution. Edward Garrick is  featured on a card.

A paradox exists here, though. On one hand, there were many more opportunities for teens and kids to improve their lives and leave their mark on the country. Many of the children who enlisted or became involved in the revolution did so because they were poor and wanted to improve their station in life. They saw the war as a means to change their lot in life, and they viewed the war as a positive opportunity. During this time, American college education also changed. The curriculums became much broader- and notably included topics of independence and law. But on the other hand,  the Revolutionary War produced  massive numbers of refugees, massive numbers of orphans, and massive numbers of  widows. Civilians also found their lives turned upside down. This war brought danger and death to doorsteps. Many of their family members were gone, and those who stayed home often had to deal with looting and sexual assault at the hands of British Soldiers. The landscape of the country completely changed – in some ways the war created positive opportunities for folks, but in other ways it left destruction in its wake.

After the Revolutionary War, for the first time in history- the idea of childhood became a contentious political debate. Children garnered much more attention during (and immediately after) the revolution because the country now looked at children and considered them to be the country’s future. This attention and focus led to more emphasis on children’s character- and therefore more focus on the home lives and schooling of children.  During the Revolutionary War, two main ideologies on childhood emerged: Locke vs Filmer. 

John LockeSir Robert Filmer
Patriot- he wanted independence from Britain. Loyalist- he wanted the colonies to remain loyal to the British crown.
Believed that children are malleable and blank slates  that require adult supervision/guidanceBelieved in god-given authority- he believed that the purpose of children is to be obedient and loyal to their fathers.  
Oftentimes the Colonies and Britain are compared using a unruly child/authoritative parent analogy. How does this analogy apply to the differing philosophies of Locke and Filmer?

Locke disagreed so fundamentally with Filmer because he believed that childhood was a temporary state, so the purpose is not to impose obedience. As the country progressed, Locke’s ideology was embraced on the whole.  

Chapter 4: Inventing the Middle Class Child

Despite the increased focus and attention on childhood, after the war ended, the pathway from childhood to adulthood was more murky than ever before. But it was here in the early 19th century that modern childhood was invented. Modern Childhood begins at birth, and ends at about 13 or 14 years old. This time period would be free from labor and devoted to schooling and gaining an education. We also see this notion of a romantic childhood in this era- children were symbols of purity and emotional expressiveness. 

For the first time, during this era, there were also special developments meant for children- like children’s books and furniture. This is because for the first time, kids were thought of as special – and with their own needs and temperaments that differed from adults. The birth rate was also falling. Right around this time many families stopped reusing the same names for their kids. In the past, if children died, the next children to be born would often be given the same name as their deceased siblings. The death rate remained high, so there were just less children during this time. And in the early 19th century, more than ever in the past, families were becoming more clearly divided into two generations- parents and kids. 

The above is a collection of artifacts  from theHenryFord.org displaying some of the children’s furniture that became prevalent in this time. https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/expert-sets/105651/

Mandatory schooling laws and child labor restrictions marked this time period. Middle class kids were free from spending all their time working, opening up their childhood for education and social time. (Poor kids were not afforded this luxury). This prolonged childhood dependency, and it became widely understood that children were malleable- their character formed at this time for the better or for the worse. For this reason, intensive mothering marked this era. Oftentimes parenting practices were linked to theological beliefs- but how a child’s character developed for better or worse really fell on the mother. How do we see intensive parenting present in society today? How would you compare this emphasis on a mother’s role in the 19th century to today- do we see this same emphasis? Less? More?

Schooling also became more systemized here- because that was seen as another avenue to positively influence children’s character development. However- this is not to say that boys and girls experienced childhood in the same way. There were very rigid differences between boyhood and girlhood. Boys generally formed clubs and teams that were separated by age. Boyhood also ended fairly gradually as boys aged. Girlhood on the other hand ended much more abruptly. Girlhood ended with marriage. If marriage ended girlhood- what kinds of events could lead to the end boyhood? We know boyhood ended gradually, but what types of events or milestones could cause this?

We see this paradox emerge- children were idealized as special and pure, but there was also this increase of regulation over their lives. In the early 19th century the innocence of children was celebrated while also adding unprecedented levels of systemization in their upbringing. 

Chapter 5: Growing Up in Bondage

During the era of Slavery in the United States, enslaved Children faced traumas that significantly altered their psychological and emotional lives. Over the course of the semester, we have seen that idealizations of a pure and innocent childhood do not always meet reality, and that there is no one single and universal “childhood.” This is perhaps apparent nowhere more than in the lives of child slaves. It is estimated that on the eve of the Civil War, there were 2 million slaves under the United States under the age of 16. To deal with the inhumane realities of their lives, these children had to develop tactics to, in essence, create a childhood for themselves despite the fact that they had been forced into bondage and work their entire lives.

Material deprivation was the basic reality of the lives of childhood slaves. They were underfed, malnourished, and often lacked basic necessities like clothing or food. There was a high infant death rate, and it is a wonder that these children were ever able to survive into adolescence. One of the harshest aspects of their lives was separation from their family members. Often times they were separated from their mothers, and even more often their mothers. As a result, alternative family units often resulted.

Child slaves at times developed games to play, and in some cases were able to learn how to read and write despite the fact that they had little to no resources to allow them to do so. Their enslavers would create games to reinforce their subordinate status, while also forcing them to partake in brutal sports. After the Civil War, child labor of formerly enslaved individuals did not end, and they were often exploited for their labor.

Chapter 6: Childhood Battles of the Civil War

During the Civil War, children came up with creative ways to enlist in the war efforts. They would lie about their age, or develop other measures to take part in the fight. However, they quickly realized that the realities of war did not match up with romantic idealizations of the military. Children who joined the Civil War often wrote about their feelings of homesickness when the reality of their situation dawned on them. The horrors that they witnessed were traumatic psychologically, and seeing death had a lasting impact on the child soldiers. During the war, they had meager daily rations and were often effected by hunger during their military exploits.

Besides taking place in battles, children away from war also felt its effects. They often saw the towns they lived in burned or turned into battle fields. Many lost their fathers to the war as well as other family members. In the South and the North, there were residual responses to the culmination of the war. In the South, the Sons and Daughters of the Confederacy were established to ensure their parent’s sacrifices weren’t in vain. In the North, fathers took their children hunting, hiking, and camping to instill a “moral equivalent of war.”

Despite the harsh realities of the Civil War, the separation occasionally strengthened family bonds. Fathers often intensified their commitment to the family and children after the long period of separation. In the South, however, children often felt as though the war efforts were for nothing because of their losing efforts.


Chapter 7

Chapter 7 explored the diverse childhood experiences of children in the United States, highlighting a stark contrast between those who grew up in harsh poverty and were forced into labor-intensive jobs and those from middle-class families. Economic factors played a monumental role in shaping one’s childhood; whereas economic wealth protected a child’s innocence, children from impoverished families often had to contribute to the financial well-being and sustainability of their households.

The artifacts above paint a picture into the livelihood of children in poverty in America. Social and economic changes in the 19th century affecting childhood (growth of cities and industry, immigration, commercial agriculture.

Chapter 8: Save the Child

Chapter 8 delves deeply into the underbelly of child poverty, juvenile delinquency, and the exposure of child abuse that exists at every intersection of American cities. It highlights the growing concern for the well-being of children, especially those living in poverty. Furthermore, Chapter 8 reflects on the historical timeline from the early eighteenth century to the late nineteenth century, examining the complex interplay of social, economic, and ethical factors.

Early Observations and Reactions

In the 1790s, philanthropists and social reformers were perplexed by the atrocities faced by children in poverty, which ranged from children sleeping in alleyways and on the streets to wandering unclothed through American cities. Spanning the entire eighteenth century, this period exposed the destitution that children in both rural and urban environments were engulfed in. This in turn contributed to an extreme rise of child prostitution. In 1885 an estimated 5-10% of young women in their teenage or early twenties were involved in prostitution for a temporary period of their life. This was attributed to the fact that sex work offered a compensation that was double that of positions in labor-intensive factory work. Aside from the exploitative labor children had to endure during this time period, it led to the emergence of several child-saving movements and the establishment of their comprehensive initiatives in communities across the nation.

Child-Saving Movements

The philanthropists and reformers, who deemed themselves “child-savers,” were deeply rooted in biases and the various social phobias embedded in society. These self-proclaimed reformers justified their work and community initiatives as being for the “children’s own good.” However, in reality, they were eager to separate children from their families and place them in isolation. 

Institutionalization and its Impact

The massive isolation of children from their families extended into the Progressive Era, beginning to shape the institutions of education, foster care, boarding schools, and educational curricula. The purpose and intention behind these child-saving movements were founded on a utopian, faith-based structure. With the rapid expansion of orphanages (initially known as orphan asylums), the children occupying these spaces included those from impoverished two-parent households, children affected by severe diseases, and approximately 20-30% of all children who lost a parent by the age of 15. In 1800, there were only six orphan asylums in the United States; by 1850, New York alone had 100 orphanages run by private organizations. The children in these orphanages were criminalized, a practice that did not merely affect children in poverty but disproportionately impacted Black and Native American children. After the barbaric realities faced by children and families from lower socioeconomic and marginalized communities, a cultural shift began to occur in the mid to late 1990s. Native American children were no longer forced to attend boarding schools and were reunited with their families. Additionally, the widespread adoption of child-centered curriculum focusing on the advancement of a child’s well-being began to grow rapidly.

Children under the Magnifying Glass (Chapter 9):

©Bing 

“The period from 1865 to 1910 was the Golden Age of American Children’s Fiction” (Mintz, 2004, p.185). This was a time in history where children’s development and maturation needed to be stunted based upon age. Following age-appropriate protocol and monitoring child psyche and health arose. Medical establishments were created, and health officials were recruited. The concept of child/adolescent preservation became the running theme of this timeframe. Although, “in retrospect it is clear that adolescence is at once a stage of social, psychological, cognitive and physiological development and a structural status imposed on youth. Psychologists, educators, and youth workers invoked biology and psychology to promote their own middle-class notions of a proper adolescence” (Mintz,2004, p.197). This begs the question, how is adolescence seen today? The notion of helicopter parents and uninvolved guardians leads one to question how adolescence is censored or promoted today. What are your thoughts on children and how much control is too much?

In the white man’s image (Film):

*1990’s image of the Carlise School for Indians. ©Pinterest

As this video suggests, the idea behind this timeframe (1800s) revolved around the concept of blending separate races and converting them all to white. Black people were seen as slaves and Indians were not deemed worth living life itself. An educational experiment arose. The idea was to place Indians in a school that would reform them into white culture. This institution was deemed, the “Carlisle School for Indians”. General Richard Pratt (1875) sent Indian warriors to St. Augustine Florida where volunteers worked to teach them how to read, write, become fluent in English, and fully convert to Christianity. The mistreatment and harsh conditions led to a high death toll and eventually the Indians were let free.


Carlo Allegri / Reuters https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/make-the-sixties-great-again/481167/

After reading about American Childhood from Colonial America to the Industrial Revolution, which era do you believe was the best to be a child in and why? Does that era represent the myths about American Childhood? Childhoods varied vastly depending on the region lived in and the ethnicity of the child. Was there anything about American Childhood during the eras above that was particularly surprising? Please share your thoughts on American Childhood during the eras in our reading in the comments below.

References:

American Culture and Literature. https://amcultlit.weebly.com/spring-blog-2017/day-5-after-class-message

Children’s Furniture – The Henry Ford. https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/expert-sets/105651/. Accessed 8 Feb. 2024.

“Edward Garrick.” Revolutionary Characters, http://www.revolutionarycharacters.org/edward-garrick. Accessed 8 Feb. 2024.

“Havasupai girl wearing beads and cape.” https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/havasupai-girl-wearing-beads-and-cape.html?sortBy=relevant

Khan Academy. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/colonial-america/colonial-north-america/a/lesson-summary-new-england-and-middle-colonies

Mintz, S. (2004). Huck’s raft: A history of American childhood. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Chapter 9.

Lesiak, C. and Jones M. (Producers). (2007) In the white man’s image. [Video File]. United States: PBS Production. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUCIMqlztd0.

Bing. (2023). https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=aurj1rAN&id=CB6CFDAF5D72863E78AA720500A3AAE58748FBB7&thid=OIP.aurj1rANrqZb8__PAJXEaAHaEc&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fwww.fractuslearning.com%2fwp-content%

75 thoughts on “Gallery 104 Main Exhibition

  1. To me, the myth that all childhoods are the same is definitely very easily debunked by the various sources Mintz pulled together in this week’s readings. The white children of Puritan life were coddled in many ways, while Black and brown children of enslaved populations and, in the case of indigenous societies, sequestered in boarding schools, were subjected to violence and cruelty. I have always been astounded by the mental gymnastics bigotry has to do in order to justify treating children wildly different based just on the color of their skin. I suppose that’s what racism is, but I still find it to be confusing every time I encounter it. Based on some experiences from my own childhood and adolescence, I know discrimination from adults based on my Jewish heritage and queer identity. These were confusing for me even as a child too. I don’t understand how anyone can be cruel to children. It baffles me every time. I guess that’s why I am a teacher!

    1. In the guise of “educating” indigenous children taken to boarding schools and forced to learn English and not to speak in their native languages, black children enslaved and seen as “property”, while white children of Puritan life were coddled proves the myth that all childhoods are the same is indeed flawed. Having to have a talk with my nieces and nephews every time they leave the house just like my mom talked to me and like most black families is sadly our way of life but I agree, how can anyone be cruel to children?

    2. Rahel,

      I curated this week, and I found that the Puritan children weren’t treated with much affection by their parents during the Colonial Era. They were treated as almost animal-like (born of sin), and they were forced to grow up very quickly. They were controlled and taught to be submissive to their parents. Due to the high mortality rate in early Colonial times, parents didn’t really mourn their children either. It seemed like a bleak childhood full of discipline and high expectations. However, due to the treatment of early Africa-American slaves, they tended to cherish their children much more and tired to instill strong and loving family bonds. Unfortunately, children born into slavery were treated so poorly by their owners that they had an extremely high mortality rate (even higher than the mortality rate of Puritan children). It seemed the group who had the better childhoods during this era were Quaker children and Native American children, since affection and indulgence toward children was prevalent in their cultures.

      I will agree that it’s awful to watch teachers treat students differently based off the color of their skin. I was at a Veteran’s Day presentation at my son’s school, and I watched a teacher berate a black student in front of all of the parents for not speaking loud enough into the microphone–she did not do that to any of the white students who were quiet. I talked to to Principal the next day about her behavior. It was heartbreaking. We moved to a school district with more diversity the following year because I didn’t want my son to see that kind of behavior from adults.

      Thank you for sharing.

      Carrie

    3. Rahel. I agree with you when you said, “I have always been astounded by the mental gymnastics bigotry has to do in order to justify treating children wildly different based just on the color of their skin.” I simply do not understand it. My heart ached as I read the chapter on slavery and the section about Native American boarding schools. Interestingly, my daughter just read aloud to me a school-assigned (fiction) book called Two Roads by Joseph Bruchac–about these boarding schools. The story in this book really brought to life the challenges and sadness associated with the facts we read in Huck’s Raft.

      My daughter is Asian. Rahel, I am glad there are teachers like you who look beyond ethnicity and skin color.

  2. “If marriage ended girlhood- what kinds of events could lead to the end boyhood? We know boyhood ended gradually, but what types of events or milestones could cause this?” This question stood out to me – I can think of a few events/milestones that might bring about a transformation from a boy into a man. First is when a boy enters the workforce, especially one where he is surrounded by older males. Second is enlisting in military service, especially in wartime (such as in the Civil War you referenced). Finally, marriage would also end boyhood as much as it would girlhood – the man is now expected to take care of his family/house/livestock/etc.

    1. Those are the same responses that I came up with in response to that question. My younger cousin was like any high school boy, he played and joked around but after high school he enlisted in the army. When he came home after boot camp he was different. He didn’t have a playful voice and he was direct when he spoke, even his mannerism weren’t childlike.

    2. Through reading literature and viewing movies, we often see the distinct transformation of a girl to a woman as viewed in history. The girl becomes a woman as she bleeds and as she becomes ready for marriage, but that distinction of a boy to a man looks a little different. I agree that the transformation from a boy to a man was taking on a role of responsibility, whether that be for his family, his income, or protecting his nation. The trait of discipline has/had a heavy emphasis on this new era of life.

    3. These are all great examples of milestones that might signal the transition from boyhood to manhood. I also want to highlight the various cultural traditions from around the world that signal transition to adulthood, like my own Jewish experiences of bar & bat mitzvah!

    4. Hi Diane,

      Another trending factor for ending boyhood is becoming a father at a very early age. This change in life becomes very conflicting and stressful when there is no support and guidance. It is important to render support to children especially when they are entering a new stage of life.

    5. Another trending factor for ending boyhood is becoming a father at a very early age. This change in life becomes very conflicting and stressful when there is no support and guidance. It is important to render support to children especially when they are entering a new stage of life.

    6. Hi, Diane! I enjoyed reading your post! I also was taken by this posed question. I did not consider a boy joining the service when I reflected, although I definitely agree! Another example of a milestone that came to mind was when a boy moves out of his childhood house to begin living alone. The other thought I had was while marriage may end girlhood, some of the boyhood examples may happen at a big range of times. Some may experience these sooner than others, so it does beg the question if there is an “end-all-be-all milestone”.

    7. Hi Diane,

      I was a curator for this week’s gallery, and I wrote that question that you highlighted above. I’m really glad to see it stood out to you and that you thought through an answer!

      I thought of the same thing regarding military service. Especially when America relied on the draft. Which I believe was in 6 wars- the American Revolution, the Civil War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and Vietnam.

      I like your answer about marriage as well- girlhood was ended by marriage mostly because of motherhood and upkeeping the home, but some of those same expectations would end boyhood as well! Like we do often see more pressure for economic stability and prosperity for men than women. good examples.

    8. Hey Diane,

      I was one of the curators this week- and I actually wrote that discussion question- so I was excited to see a great discussion developing right here!

      I was also thinking enlisting in the military when I was considering what ended boyhood. Especially considering the duration of American history where the country relied on the draft- and it was less of a choice than a reality. I believe the draft was used during the American Revolution, the Civil War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and Vietnam.

      I really like your mention of how marriage would/could also end boyhood- in addition to it ending girlhood. I do think we often see a pressure for financial success/stability present more for men than women, which you highlight here. So while girlhood was ended perhaps more for motherhood or upkeeping a house, boyhood may have been ending for some of those same reasons. I hadn’t originally considered the similarities.

    9. Diana,

      I pondered this for quite some time – more time than I needed. I really was over thinking this question and laughed at myself. But in all actuality, I pondered this for so long, because it is not something that people really think about. It could also be because I am a female and have never really taken the time to think about it. I’m glad that you mentioned marriage is an equal ending of the “hoods” for both boys and girls. I think often times, everyone associates marriage with females and often forgets about the males getting married too. This is something that we learned about in chapter 7 about child labor. It discussed what type of jobs the boys did as well as the girls. When in reality, the jobs didn’t change for the genders regardless of how old they were – which left me feeling kind of sad for that era of children.

    10. This question stood out to me as well when helping curate this exhibit. The entire concept of boy to manhood is revolved around the workforce.

  3. The chapter on “The Childhood Battles of the Civil War” is very interesting. This is a typical example of how children are very inquisitive and excited about military events. Apparently, most fathers were absent from their homes due to recruitment. As a result, young boys had to step up to take care of the family. I have witnessed first-hand how young boys were removed from their homes and became child soldiers. Civil war has a long-term negative impact on children. It shapes their entire life structure and causes trauma that can be triggered down to generations.

    1. The movie The Patriot is about the Revolutionary War, not the Civil War, but I see similarities in how boys acted and were viewed. There’s one scene where Mel Gibson is recruiting soldiers and a little boy comes up and says “I’m gonna kill me some Redcoats” but he’s considered too young (at roughly 2:02 in the video). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtQgjyaJqkI

      There’s also a scene of recruitment in a church where some fathers and sons (appearing to be teenagers) both stand up willing to fight. (from roughly 1:15 to the end) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Rf1XG5rA-c

    2. Yassah, it’s powerful to read your story. Your insights bring to my mind Ishmael Beah’s A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier. This book has stayed with me, and I highly recommend it. Here’s a link to information about the book:

      http://alongwaygone.com/

      And here’s a quote that I think gives much to consider:

      “Some people tried to hurt us to protect themselves, their families and communities. Because of these things, we decided to bypass villages by walking through the nearby bushes. This way we could be safe and avoid causing chaos. This was one of the consequences of the civil war. People stopped trusting each other, and every stranger became an enemy. Even people who knew you became extremely careful about how they related or spoke to you” (37).

      Beah, Ishmael. A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier. New York, NY: Sarah Crichton Books-Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2007.

  4. Chapter 5: Growing up in Bondage stands out to me. I have often looked at these types of pictures and wondered about the children and how they felt. I found a picture of my grandmother and her face expression was the same as those slave children even though she was born in 1927. She never spoke about her childhood, she only spoke about her time as a young adult. To know what slave children went through and their facial expression shows there was no joy and to see my grandmother with that same face as a child is heartbreaking.

    1. I made a strong connection to what you mentioned about your grandmother. Even though my grandparents were born in 1935 they have never spoken about their childhood. Maybe I haven’t directly asked about their childhoods (which I now intend to do) but they only ever share of the times after college / early adult life. I am wondering how different childhood was in those years compared to now and what similarities carried over from the eras we read about in Huck’s Raft to those years when they were children.

    2. Hi Rachel,
      I was really interested in chapter 5 as well. Reading about a slave child’s average childhood experience was absolutely heartbreaking. I can’t imagine how their mothers must have felt about it, as a mother myself. The lines from the mother about to give birth early in the chapter seemed like an apt summary– the idea that they were happy to meet their child but so, so sad about where they were being born. The parts that really struck me were the idea that kids didn’t get any regular food or clothing until they were contributing slaves and that, simultaneously, they were often being bribed to love their white owners. Those mental images are rather haunting. These aren’t ideas that they teach when you’re in elementary school or even high school. But maybe they should.

      1. So much evil associated with slavery–at all levels. Physical slavery, intellectual belittling and restriction of learning, and emotional manipulation. So much evil.

    3. Hi Rachel,
      I was the curator for Chapter 5 this week, and I agree this chapter was both heartbreaking and a unique way of looking at the multifaceted and potentially traumatic nature of childhood. For enslaved children, there was essentially no childhood as they were forced from their birth to be a labor commodity subjected to inhumane conditions for the entirety of their lives. I was particularly interested in how the author intermingled both the psychological and physical horrors that they were forced to go through, and how this erased any childhood they possibly could have had.

    4. Hi Rachel!

      I thought about my older relatives and my dad’s cousin and his wife (who in my eyes are grandparents to me) talk about their childhoods at all of our family gatherings. My maternal grandmother never talks about her childhood, despite being 2 years younger than my dad’s cousin and his wife. I wonder if she sustained anything in her childhood that she has been blocking out over the decades.

  5. Overall, I found chapters one through nine to be very insightful into the realities faced by different children through the eras. One of my biggest takeaways was that childhood varied greatly based on your families status, wealth and freedom. For example, in Chapter 3 : Sons and Daughters of Liberty it states, “teenaged boys from poorer families were regarded as more expendable than older brothers or more prosperous adults” (p.91). Also, in Chapter 7 : Laboring Children it states, “for the urban middle class, increasing economic affluence allowed parents to provide an extended, protected childhood; but for the laboring classes, a sheltered childhood was impossible” (p.182). Even though those are only two examples it was made clear throughout the book that ones childhood was heavily based around their parents status, wealth and freedom. With that being said, I don’t know if I could select one time period that was “best” for children as they all had areas of severe cruelty that makes me wonder if life for one class or another was really that much better. Lastly, I am unsure if any of these children were really children with everything they had to face and go through. So much of what they experienced forced them to grow up at a very young age so any childhood years were essentially eliminated.

    1. Megan,

      I was a curator for this week, and I agree with you. It didn’t seem like there were many pleasant childhood experiences. It did seem that Quaker children had more freedom and affection from parents, and they weren’t nearly as controlled as Puritan children. I also found it interesting that Puritans believed in school and molding children into perfect and pious adults. I think we still so the same thing in today’s society. If we are still dong the same thing (and have the same mentality as the Puritans about childhood), are we really as progressive as we think we are? The way things are going with American Education, I’m not really sure right now.

      Thank you for sharing!

      Carrie

    2. Hi Megan,

      I’m intrigued by your post and the idea that children aren’t children at all. I would love more clarification on that. If we think about childhood as a variable life stage rather than an experience meant to be mostly uniform, I would argue that all of the children we read about were children. They were under the age of 18, which we use in our society as the bar for childhood (Mintz suggests childhood went until fathers decided it was done in some chapters as I recall though, so even older in some cases). They were still actively learning how to navigate their worlds safely and appropriately. Did some have more knowledge about the world than others? Definitely. Did some of the childhoods described here feel unfair as a 21st century reader? There isn’t an ounce of doubt about that. I think that having an eye-opening, over-worked, under-played, under-valued, and under-protected childhood doesn’t negate a child as a child. They’re still children.

    3. Megan,

      The privilege aspect also stood out to me while reading the chapters this week. Throughout the chapters, we could see how having privilege allowed families to spend more time together and make sure that their children were given the best educations, as well as upbringing. I agree with your concluding thought about children growing up at a very young age. These children faced many situations that would force them to become adults: indentured servitude, slavery, being forced to work outside the home, and more. I was impressed with the stories of the young teens during the Revolution and their eagerness to fight for freedom. That added a new perspective on how our country gained its independence from England.

    4. Megan, I resonate with your point about no point in history in particular being “best” for children. I think you hit it on the nose when you’re saying it’s more about the parent’s wealth, class, etc. that determines the children’s quality of life. From what I’m gathering in this course, this is very much so true today as ever.

  6. As I was reading for this week, I couldn’t help but think about the changes in adult perceptions of children and childhood in other ways than are listed here or in the reading. We can see that children moved from tool to treasure between colonial times and the romantic era. Their value changed from good-in-exchange to irreplaceable. In general, Mintz shows that early American colonial parents used their kids for extra working hands, money makers, and sometimes settlers of a debt through sale. He talks about the stoic response to the death of children (of course, this was commonplace so perhaps it was a coping mechanism). As America shifts from colonies to its own country and into the romantic era, so too does parental perception of children. Education becomes more important to middle class parents who now cherish the children they have and see them as innocent empty vessels in need of filling. Of course, he also talks about working class children who didn’t benefit from educational opportunities nor did slave children. Eventually though, that modern view of childhood spread widely and encompassed more than just the middle class (though it was still not good enough even as late as 1950 when it was finally more widespread, according to Mintz (3-4)).

    I guess my thoughts here are less assembled than I thought they would be. Looking back over what I have here, it’s clear that the myths Mintz discusses continue to be clear myths to this day. American childhoods continue to vary greatly and almost certainly always will.

    1. Kristi. I agree, ” American childhoods continue to vary greatly and almost certainly always will.” I think that as our society becomes even more and more complex, the childhood options within our society become more varied and complex. We have poverty and economic disparities, prejudices, educational disparities, and media influences that present vast options for ways of being. I am sure that I have only touched the surface of influences on childhood today. Huck’s Raft was published in 2004. So much that affects childhood has happened since that time. American childhoods will continue to vary greatly.

      1. Marylynne,

        So true! I wonder if Mintz will release a new edition with updates and/or an intro that discusses the changes over the past 20 years. It would be nice. I’d buy it.

        1. Kristi and Marylynne, I’d love to see an updated version of Steven Mintz’s text! I haven’t come across any information about a new edition of Huck’s Raft. But just to have these resources in our discussion, here’s a link to Mintz’s webpage:

          http://www.stevenmintz.com/

          And here’s a link to “Play and the History of American Childhood: An Interview with Steven Mintz” (American Journal of Play, 3.2, Fall 2010, pp. 143-156):

          https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1070228.pdf

          I want to share a brief excerpt from the beginning of the interview, because Mintz’s response is such a concise, thought-provoking statement …

          “American Journal of Play: Professor Mintz, how did you come to study the history of childhood?”

          “Steven Mintz: It’s an important subject. In American society, childhood is a key to understanding the transmission of class status, the construction of ethnic and gender identities, the development of a consumer economy, and the growth of a modern welfare state. In my view, childhood is one of the missing links between the personal and the cultural, between the discursive and the social. Childhood is a lived experience, an adult-defined status, and an every-changing aspect of the life cycle” (143).

          1. Lisa. Thank you for these resources. Mintz’s quote about the importance of the subject of childhood is powerful.

    2. Kristi,

      I am certainly glad that there was a shift in how parents related to their children. Reading those chapters left me with a feeling of grief for the childhoods these children experienced (and most likely, their parents too). What saddened me was what you pointed out – the children were “tools” and “goods” to be exchanged for a debt. I had a difficult time keeping my judgement in check while reading these chapters because I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt -that maybe they did care for their children, but had no choice. It was a difficult time period, especially with the death of young children being so common.

  7. I like the questions that are posed for chapter 2! “What types of families are still prominent in today’s American society? How do you think childhood was affected by the type of family a child was born into?”

    I think the two types of families that are still prominent in today’s American society are the clan family and the private family. I could see that the clan family might be prominent for families that are large and still very close-knit. I could also see this type of family being prominent in the South. When I read about clan family, I immediately thought about Amish families. The clan family reminds me of a situation I was exposed to in my pervious job. A family had adopted many children with disabilities and also had their own biological children. The family had 3 houses on their estate and the Parents lived in one house with the youngest children. Then, the Parents’ biological children whom are grown and have their own families each lived in one of those additional houses and had their adoptive older siblings living with them.

    I think your second question is quite thought-provoking and is a great conversation starter! One could relate this to being a product of your environment. One could relate this to ACEs (adverse childhood experiences). One could relate this to quite literal terms – whatever family type you were born into determined how your childhood would be. One could argue that gentry family might create an entitled childhood for their children, especially the sons. One could argue that the artisanal family might create also an entitled childhood for their children given all of the members in their house. Additionally, one might argue that this type of family might create pressure of their children to “be perfect” given their home environment. Typically, having these many people involved in their home might lead on that their family is well-off. One could argue that a clan family could either create a very supportive childhood or a very dependent childhood which makes one wonder how the children will be when they are adults.

    1. Gabrielle. I just have to throw into the mix of your thoughts that each individual child comes with their own unique personality (I am sure you know this). This results in a variety of responses from different children to whatever type of family they are born into. I have five children, who have been raised under similar circumstances, but their perspectives and approaches to life are quite different from each other. It is fascinating to me. Thanks for your thoughts!

    2. Gabrielle,

      I have extended family who all live on the same road. The grandparents own a large amount of land, and all six kids (and all their grandchildren) live there in different homes. When the grandparents were alive, they all worked and contributed to each others families. However, when the grandparents passed away, it was amazing how fast the rest of the family fell apart. Many of the grandchildren became involved in drugs (thanks to the opioid epidemic), and the overall economic prosperity of the group suffered. I wonder if the clan families during the Colonial Era also had issues when the patriarch passed away, or if they were able to rally around a new leader in the group. Thank you for sharing!

      Carrie

      1. It’s very interesting how children fall apart when their parents or guardians are out of the picture. That is why it is very important to teach children the value of loving and protecting one another. That could be one of the major reasons why children are on the streets doing inappropriate things that are destroying their lives at an early stage. Children come into this world like empty vessels. What you put in, is what will come out.

    3. Gabrielle,
      I live in a community that has a large Amish population. One street alone contains four houses from the same family line (the parents and three of their sons’ families). The eldest boy in another family married last fall and is fixing up an old house two doors away from the house he grew up in. They socialize through the church district and youth groups. They support each other in times of need both physically (taking over chores) and economically (via a form of Amish insurance). They definitely resemble the clan family type.

    4. Hello Gabrielle,

      Your final statement resounded with me: “One could argue that a clan family could either create a very supportive childhood or a very dependent childhood which makes one wonder how the children will be when they are adults.” While mine is definitely not a clan family, I have often wondered as a parent… am I being supportive or am I fostering dependency? I definitely am of the mindset, that sometimes less help is the most helpful thing. As a teacher, I tell my student that I am helping them when I let them struggle to decode a word or find the answer to a question. They learn more when they can use the strategies they have learned to figure it out for themselves. However, as a parent it is harder to determine exactly what amount of struggle is good, bad, too much. I guess I did alright, as my children are leaving home and heading to college, they seem to have independence… although there is the occasional “how to” call.

      I’m also glad you brought up Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE’s). I definite influence on one’s childhood.

      Thank you for sharing.
      Karen

    5. Gabrielle, I think you’re correct about the types of families still present in contemporary U.S. society. As a new father myself, I could see the benefit of a clan family and often wish I had the familial support that the Amish or other tight-night communities have! I heard someone say that we currently live in the “no village” generation, which I think couldn’t be more true!

  8. As I read Huck’s Raft and this Main Exhibit, my first thought is that every era is more complex than it is often represented to be. The Main Exhibit states, “Childhoods varied vastly depending on the region lived in and the ethnicity of the child.” (Main exhibit above) Even beyond region and ethnicity, other factors determine what a particular childhood was like, for example: economic factors, the type of family unit or lack of family unit, general historical circumstances (such as war), etc. I was struck again by something I have always understood, that women and children suffer greatly when there is a war. In Huck’s Raft, Mintz notes that “During wartime young people had to grow up quickly, assuming the responsibilities of absent relatives.” (Mintz, 120) Fathers and older males in the family were gone fighting the war. Women and children are left trying to survive. Mintz also states that like other wars, “the Civil War’s greatest impact on children was on family life…the Civil War produced huge numbers of orphans and impoverished fatherless families.” Historical events greatly affect childhood.

    I also noted that as time progressed and as intense labor diminished for a family unit to survive, the expectations on children and mothers changed–“middle-class mothers gave their children more concentrated and exclusive care.” (Mintz, 81) Instead of every moment being dominated by making cloth, making soap, making food, etc., there was more time to focus on the children. And the children had more time for things like education. Society in general began to put a priority on educating children, all children. It took longer for children of different ethnicities to be included, but eventually they were. This felt like a general trend in our readings moving from the 1600s to the late 1800s. As demands on children changed, they had more options to do other things.

    As I continue to think about the variety of childhoods, I am struck by the contrasting thoughts about childhood during the Industrial Revolution. The useful childhood contrasted with the protected childhood. The useful childhood contributed “to a family’s support.” (Mintz, 152) The protected childhood was “sheltered from the stresses and demands of the adult world.” (Mintz, 152) I grew up working in a family business. I most certainly contributed to my family’s support, as did my five siblings. However, I was also not immersed in the stress my parents felt in keeping the business afloat. I worked a lot in the summer, but I did not work full-time during the school year like children did during the Industrial Revolution. Perhaps my experience was a combination of both types of childhood. And this was not a bad thing.

    I did connect to a thought Mintz contributed to John Locke. “The primary purpose of parenthood was not to impose obedience, but rather to nurture children’s powers of reason in order to prepare them to become self-governing adults.” (Mintz, 58) My hope as a parent is that my children will be self-governing adults who are thinkers and who can thrive in the society in which they are living. It seems as time moves forward, this becomes more and more complicated.

    1. Marylynne, I really enjoyed your post as it had several thought provoking ideas for me especially your last two paragraphs. While I don’t currently have any children that quote you cited made my think about my own parents and how they raised me. I do believe that my own parents allowed me the freedom to explore the world around me, make sense of it in my own way, and become my own unique individual. Without the freedoms and opportunities given to me I don’t think I would be as comfortable in myself or on my own as I am. One day I hope to help foster independence and uniqueness in my own children who contribute to society in positive ways.

  9. The question was posed at the end of the Chapter 2 summary, “How do you think childhood was affected by the type of family a child was born into?” I found this to be intriguing. One’s childhood is definitely influenced by the family they are born into. Yet, there are so many factors that could define “type”: race, religion, class, gender equality / acceptance, location, customs, communities, birth order / time frame, and a never-ending list of other elements. In other words, even if two people are born into almost the exact same circumstances, when one factor differs, it changes everything. For example, my mother was born into a family that had very similar aspect as my own, however the fact that we were born at two different time periods, gave us two very diverse childhood experiences. This makes me think, that we are so quick to judge others by these factors, such as skin color or class, when truly these factors don’t define the person.

    1. Karen, your list of defining factors is wonderful Today you could probably add factors like technology use, exposure to social media and the influence of celebrities (music, movies, etc.). Two of my colleagues have daughters the same age but one parent is much stricter about whether/when phones were allowed and what kinds of movies/music they are exposed to.

    2. You posed a great idea about how in the world today we are so quick to judge others based on their skin color, or social class, but those elements alone do not define who someone is. There are a multitude of factors that shape one’s identity, with guidance being one of the biggest. These first 9 chapters talk an awful lot about different ways children are affected by the world around them, such as war, poverty, slavery, and education. I think the chapter that discussed orphanages speaks volumes about this issue. Kids were either placed in living environments where they were valued and protected, somewhere where they were viewed as a means of money, or raised by other young children. I think as you said, two individuals can be born from the same parents, and even look identical but the outside factors ultimately will determine the routes they take in life and through these 9 chapters, I have realized once again that there is not a single way for a child to be raised.

    3. Hi, Karen! I enjoyed reading your post! I like that you mentioned you and your mother essentially were born into the same type and structure of family, but due to being born in different generations, you have different upbringings. This is so important to call attention to because I have thought of this many times. While growing up, I was raised during one generation, but raised similarly to my parents’ generation. This included the different values they instilled, as well as the different generational inventions. There were many times we would listen to a record, watch on a VCR, play a tape recorder, etc. These were not typically items that people in my generation were exposed to, but because my parents raised me, they were present in my life.

    4. Hi Karen!
      I think you bring up a very excellent point. I think we are so quick to judge and assume in society today, despite a lack in understanding all factors going into a person’s life. I know that I have friends who have grown up in the same neighborhood as me, and yet despite the vast similarities in factors contributing to our childhoods, our experiences were incredibly different.

  10. As I read Mintz’s Huck’s Raft, I was surprised learning about childhoods during colonial and early American times. I appreciate that this exhibit began, like Huck’s Raft, by listing the myths of American childhoods. Because I teach the Colonies through Westward Expansion, these childhood myths made me wonder about the curriculum I currently teach. Our social studies standards state that our students must understand the daily life of peoples during these time periods. However, while students are presented with the fact that life was difficult, discussion of indentured servants is limited to an explanation that they served for seven years, had little freedoms, and running away was illegal. So, the exclusion of childhood life expectancy and the circumstances that placed so many early American children into this form of bondage was disheartening to learn. As a result, I do plan to share this newfound knowledge with my students so that they can better understand the struggles many people, especially children their age, during the early years. If our children are “knowing,” rather than innocent, then they are fully capable of understanding the struggles that children their age may have had to endure.

    I was also struck by the stark differences between Native American families and early American families. I like the inclusion of the picture of the Havasupai girl and her child. As the exhibit points out, the picture demonstrates the closeness and the bond that Native Americans had with their children. As I read this section of the exhibit, I was reminded of the story in Huck’s Raft about the young girl who was taken when her settlement was attacked, and when given the opportunity to return to her family, she refused. Was it because of the intimacy of families in the Mohawk tribe? Or was it because of the strict nature of the Puritans? Contrast this idea with the Indigenous children in the video, “In the White Man’s Image.” Indigenous children who were taken from their families grieved the loss of their families, some even dying of heartache. Likewise, while slave families endured many hardships, they found ways to create a common community by creating those “alternative families”as pointed out in this exhibit.

    The question was asked: “What types of families are still prominent today?” I think today we see many different types of families. In some families, one will see the close bonds of the indigenous people, but unfortunately there are families who mistreat their children or treat them as burdens. As a result, our schools are filled with many students with behavioral and psychological issues. Sadly, these issues make it difficult for children to learn and have lasting effects into adulthood.

    1. Hi Beth,
      Your comment, below, really struck me. How true our “knowing” children are certainly capable of understanding the struggles of others.

      “I do plan to share this newfound knowledge with my students so that they can better understand the struggles many people, especially children their age, during the early years. If our children are “knowing,” rather than innocent, then they are fully capable of understanding the struggles that children their age may have had to endure.”

      Thank you for sharing!
      Karen

    2. Beth, your comment has me thinking about the story of Eunice Williams and Mintz’s statement, “We do not know why Eunice decided to remain with the Kahnawake, separated from family and friends, but it seems likely that she found life among the Mohawks more attractive than life among the New England Puritans” (8).

      I’d love to share a couple of items. The first is a Penn State acknowledgement of land statement developed in collaboration with the Indigenous Peoples Student Association (IPSA) and the Indigenous Faculty and Staff Alliance (IFSA).

      “The Pennsylvania State University campuses are located on the original homelands of the Erie, Haudenosaunee (Seneca, Cayuga, Onondaga, Oneida, Mohawk, and Tuscarora), Lenape (Delaware Nation, Delaware Tribe, Stockbridge-Munsee), Shawnee (Absentee, Eastern, and Oklahoma), Susquehannock, and Wahzhazhe (Osage) Nations.  As a land grant institution, we acknowledge and honor the traditional caretakers of these lands and strive to understand and model their responsible stewardship. We also acknowledge the longer history of these lands and our place in that history.”

      http://equity.psu.edu/acknowledgement-of-land  

      The second item is one of my go-to resources for my work in children’s and young adult literature … American Indians in Children’s Literature (AICL), established by Dr. Debbie Reese of Nambé Pueblo.

      https://americanindiansinchildrensliterature.blogspot.com/

  11. Wow, I love how you organized the information so it is very easy to follow. Separating by chapter, I was able to review the important parts of the readings this week easily. One chapter that stood out to me was chapter eight, which focused on childhood battles of the Civil War. I read the lines, “In times of war, age lines blur, new demands are made of the young, and children cannot be insulated from adult realities. The Civil War was no exception…Unlike later wars in American history, young people were involved in all aspects of the Civil War, including fighting on the battlefield” (118-120). While we have discussed the many societal factors that have altered the definition of childhood, we cannot forget one factor that impacts every society during every generation…war. Separating from family, watching men fall to their deaths, and starving on low rations can ensure a generation of children who know the harshness of the world. We think of young boys turning into men during this time, but young girls were also part of the war effort. Young girls could be a laundress or a nurse witnessing the bloodshed of the war. They also grew up taking on the responsibility of the boys and men that were gone. They became the farmers that helped keep the food supply in operation and they helped fundraise resources for the troops. While we view children to be incapable of the real world until a certain age, history proves otherwise. When called to action, children show up and grow up even in the harshest of circumstances.

    1. I love how you said, “While we view children to be incapable of the real world until a certain age, history proves otherwise”. This is 100% true. Growing up there has always been talk about children’s participation in the war, but there has been an awful lot of talk recently about how kids are growing up way too fast. I think, in the present day, we need to find some kind of balance, no we don’t need kids on our front lines, but we also shouldn’t overprotect them from the realities of the world. Moving forward as a nation we, once again, have to redefine what childhood means.

  12. Despite this week’s reading being extensive I really enjoyed each chapter in its completeness. One consistent theme I found within this book so far is the element of identity. For example, in chapter 2, a quote that stood out to me was “Through these sets of rituals, youths’ childish identity was shed and they were reborn as adults” (pg 36). It seems like children in history had consistently been viewed as “adults in training” and viewed the stage of youth as a time that needs to be shortened. Families depended extensively on their children’s contribution to the family for survival in the developing world. So many elements were mentioned as contributors to a child’s identity, including religion, environmental factors, parental guidance, society, and gender expectations. I am interested to see how this book concludes to continues to develop a better understanding of the term and the elements revolving around childhood, children’s roles in society, and children’s identity as a whole.

    1. Hi Lilyanna,
      I agree with you that a common theme is families depending on the labor of children to ensure economic survival. Your comment about this happening in the “developing world” got me thinking about countries around the world today who we would consider “developing.” We know about “fast fashion” and “sweat shop stores” exploiting child labor. It’s a reason many people choose to shop elsewhere so we do not encourage that practice. However, it is ironic (and perhaps hypocritical) of Americans to blindly condemn it when our own country built itself up through the developing stage on the backs of children and slaves. I’m definitely not condoning child labor practices; however, learning the history of child labor in our own country provides much more context to current developing countries’ decision-making.

    2. Hi Lilyanna!

      Thank you for your comment. It has prompted further inquiry and analysis of the parallels I observe between children (15+ years of age) and the economic survival of their families. As a teacher working in communities with limited resources, I’ve witnessed how pressures and financial burdens trickle down to the children.

  13. While engaging in this week’s readings and video, I have continuously revisited the time period/era where there was a shift in childhood and the view on children. In chapter 4, this idea that a lot of today’s childhoods underwent a shift, is fascinating. The question that was posed, “when does boyhood end?” was thought provoking. If we are assuming girlhood ends when girls get married, at what point does boyhood end? Does it ever truly end? This also has me wonder is there not a specific milestone or is it a double standard? If I reflect upon different life experiences that I would consider “boyhood ending”, I would think of when the boy moves out of their parents’ house, when they begin an adult job/career, when they begin to pay their own bills, etc. The problem with these milestones is many boys may have to face these problems while still young. Someone that is fortunate to have a stable upbringing may reach boyhood around 24/25 years old. But someone that is forced to be more responsible younger, they may reach boyhood at 13/14. This idea is so interesting to me, as this is the time in history that childhood shifted to essentially what we know it to be today: different milestones, different generations, different types of responsibilities.

    1. Antonina,
      Good point! The times we live in do determine when “boyhood ends.” There are many events throughout history that one can point to as examples of young males having to leave boyhood behind to become adults. For a majority of today’s children, I think they enjoy a lot more freedoms to play – they have less responsibilities than their historical counterparts. They play a variety of sports, video games, watch television, etc. On the other hand, throughout the world, we can see examples of young males who have to take on leadership roles in their families and communities due to economic and political conditions, as well as war. For these males, it is not a matter of choice, but necessity.

  14. The first 9 chapters of Huck’s Raft very clearly demonstrate that there is not a singular “childhood” and the intention Group A puts into demystifying the myths of childhood is noteworthy. In particular “The myth that the United States is a child-friendly society” speaks to me because, as the group points out, it was in fact the Native population that had better ideas and practices regarding childhood than the colonizers. Furthermore, as Group A points out from Chapter 5… “During the era of Slavery in the United States, enslaved Children faced traumas that significantly altered their psychological and emotional lives.”

    I found the delineation of Colonial family structures Chapter 2 particularly interesting. Living in Philadelphia, I’ve been exposed to Friends schools, which are private Quaker schools. Before moving to Philly, I hadn’t heard or been exposed to Quaker values (besides hearing about them in 5th-grade Social Studies), but I find the value placed on childhood in Quaker society as opposed to the New England Colonies, Chesapeake Colonies, and Southern Colonies interesting. When I look back at the Quakers, it shows me that there is no excuse for the theories of childhood others in contemporary society practiced; I think there is a tendency to say “it was simply a product of the time” and “if they weren’t in that circumstance, they wouldn’t have done X.” But, Quakers were still living during a tumultuous time, and still managed to have a society in which children were treated with respect and cared for.

    1. Akiva,

      I enjoyed reading your post, specifically your second paragraph regarding Quakers! I am from Millville, PA. We are home of the Quakers! Yes, William Penn! In fact, a wooden sculpture is in the center of our park. We have a Friends School that is called “Greenwood Friends School” as well as the Quaker House/Meeting House. When I was in elementary school, the Quaker House was still being used for the last generation of living Quakers to get together on a monthly basis. It is a huge part of our small community in our borough. I enjoyed reading this chapter as it was a fun text-to-real-world connection.

    2. Hi Akiva,
      Quakerism also stood out to me in Huck’s Raft this week! I am from Philadelphia and had a friend growing up who was Quaker; however, I did not know much about their beliefs until teaching fourth grade history when we investigated their role in Northern abolitionism. Huck’s Raft went into more depth and I appreciated this line from Chapter 2 – “Unlike the Puritans, the Quakers emphasized equality over hierarchy, gentle guidance over strict discipline, and early autonomy for children.” (p49) To your first point, it feels more accurate to say that the U.S. is only friendly to some children. We as a society are downright hostile to others (and always have been). The line from In The White Man’s Image about “Kill the Indian, Save the man” comes to mind.
      Thanks for your post!
      Cara

    3. Akiva, that is something that has been surprising to me as well – that there is not a single trajectory toward “progress” with children being treated poorly in the past and then things getting better as time goes on.
      Rather, there is all kinds of variation, globally and across the centuries, for how children have been treated.
      The examples from the text this week are fascinating evidence of that. I wonder about what other decades/eras we could find this kind of difference among people living at the same time, and even in the same place, maintaining very different ideas and practices as related to their children. It’s so interesting!

  15. In reviewing the gallery, something that has caught my attention are the times when the descriptions of living conditions and norms are written in a passive voice (this is not meant as a critique, just an observation!). Phrasing to the effect of “separation of children from their families was common” does not tell us who is responsible for the act of separation. Who directed that separation and benefitted from it? That actor is the subject of the sentence, but goes unmentioned as though the separation just happened on its own. Whereas, Mintz does not mince words on this. He is direct in illustrating which persons held the power to cause events to happen and conditions to exist, e.g. page 94 where he describes the intentions one slaveholder had when choosing to traffic and exploit the child, Celia.

    It occurs to me that for each of these eras of narratives of childhood, we give particular attention to the adults. It is the adults who are making decisions based upon current environmental and economic conditions that give rise to these narratives. What is, to me, a primary point of interest, is what the notion of childhood tells us about the reality of the adults in the situation.

    1. I forgot to add – Mintz uses the phrase “systematic deprivation” on page 95 to talk about the experience of childhood that enslaved children were forced to endure by the slaveholders who had abducted, trafficked, and abused them.
      This version of childhood, where family separation is a typical experience, did not happen by chance. It was intentionally crafted by the slaveholders to serve the specific purpose of destabilizing and dehumanizing the child and the family. We need to vocally, directly attribute the evils of slavery to the responsible party, every single time.

    2. Hi Deanna!

      After thinking about it, I also wondered who directed the separation and who benefitted from it. Was it a decision made by one person or several individuals?

  16. Awesome job on this exhibition, Team A! You did a great job summarizing key differences between regions of the colonies and the four different family types. I also like all the compare/contrast structure and the highchair and cradle images. To answer the question you posed about which type of family seems prominent today, I would say that there is a prevailing notion that the private family is the “conventional” family. There often is stigma and/or pity projected onto single-parent families, divorced families, and certainly orphans and children in foster care. In my experience, many people tend to see those family structures as a departure from the private family model of two (heterosexual) parents and children, connected via sentimental attachment. It is ironic that most people think this is the “conventional” family structure, knowing what I do now about all the variety of family structures in American history. The “private” family was actually less conventional at one point.

    Something that surprised me in Huck’s Raft this week was in Chapter 2 when Mintz described the prevalence of indentured servants and kidnapping into forced labor among white Europeans. On page 38, Mintz writes, “South of New England, two-thirds of all immigrants arrived in various forms of unfreedom: as indentured servants, apprentices, convicts, or slaves.” Previously, I thought it was only enslaved Africans, so this information added a classist nuance to the institution of forced servitude and slavery that was previously unknown to me.

    Finally, I was reflecting on other historical parallels to the assimilationist schools like the Carlisle School in “In the White Man’s Image.” I was thinking about the Nazi youth, missionary schools in Africa, and the Soviet schools in East Germany. The specific goals differ in each of these cases, but the mechanism of brainwashing youth is a commonality. As Pratt was quoted in the documentary, “To transform a people, you must start with the children.” I think it’s outrageous that Pratt is buried in Arlington with a tombstone declaring him as a “counselor and friend to the Indians.”

    1. Cara,

      Learning about the Carlisle Indian School was fascinating to me too! The layout was a forced assimilation meant to look noble on the outside. “Helping” the Native Americans become employable and educated for white society wasn’t helpful to them at all since this resulted in the consequence of Native Americans losing their cultural identity. We see this in history repeatedly, as you mention. Pratt was no fool, as he knew to focus on the long-term plan and outcome and he focused on the next generation.

    2. Hey there Cara, I like the perspective you shared regarding The Carlisle School and its similarities to Nazi youth missionary schools. The concept of “brainwashing” it interesting but much to your point, it is prevalent within both. I agree with Pratt’s quote in the aspect that the youth are our future but there are more civilized ways to achieve this. I believe greater transformation of any system comes with civility and internal change.

    3. Hi Cara!

      I also was shocked to learn that immigrants arrived in various forms of unfreedom and had the thought that it was only enslaved Africans. I also feel that this was my assumption based off of what I was taught in middle and high school. Your comparison of Nazi youth and the Carlisle school made me realize these parallels and I wondered why I didn’t think of it while reading Huck’s Raft.

  17. I found chapters two – Red, White, and Black in Colonial America and chapter five – Growing Up in Bondage to be very interesting. Regarding chapter two, I really enjoyed how you utilized a map to show the different colonies and then elaborated on each colony below. I found the ways children were utilized to be shocking. Quaker and Native American parents build an emotional bond with their children, even when potentially mourning their children. On the other hand, Chesapeake children were often exploited once the parents passed away like you said. Wow. Talk about a complete change. I wonder how the children who were exploited as a child grew emotionally once they became an adult? Regarding chapter five and the image used, everyone looks somber. I noticed that the children also have the same facial expression as the adults. Did they know that life was hard for them and their families? I wonder how maternal deprivation affected not only the mothers but their children.

    1. Hey Kelcey!
      I also discussed the stark contrast between the Quaker and Native childhood versus the Chesapeake childhood. It is truly incredible to see how children were loved, appreciated, and even mourned in a humane manner instead of hearing how children would be put to work on the “olden days”. I feel like for me personally, I was a history major and only ever really heard about regarding children was how they were put to work in mines or on fields, or even worse used for sexual exploitation. It was almost refreshing to hear that there were cultures that truly celebrated the purity that was childhood.

  18. Hi group A! To start out, I’d like to say what an excellent main exhibit you all have provided us with. My group and I focused on child labor in general for our side exhibit, so for this comment, I think I would like to discuss your explanation on the vast differences in childhood experiences depending on where at in the country the child resided. For example, growing up in Pennsylvania (and having a grandmother who adores local history) I had already known about the mentality surrounding quakers and their mentality towards childhood. That said, what I didn’t already know was that families in the Chesapeake colonies would force children into labor and servitude not because of certain ideologies, rather it was due to a lack in population. Upon reading this work, it was written that there was a strikingly high death rate making it nearly impossible to have enough of an adult population to perform labor intensive tasks. With agriculture being the main form of sustenance (im assuming here, don’t quote me on this) I can see why it was imperative that there be people willing and able to man the fields to provide for the family. Super powerful stuff to see all types of childhoods compared to one another! Thank you all!

    1. This contrast struck me as well, Kate-Lynn. The differences between the Quakers and the Chesapeake Colonies seem to be evidence that economic necessity drives the construction of what childhood means to people in a particular time and place.
      And, then comparing the Quakers to the Puritans, the differences in what childhood means between these two groups shows that religious belief also drives the construction of notions of childhood. The Quakers starting point being that children are “good” and should be treated with gentleness and the Puritans thinking that children as “bad” and need to be controlled. That sets up the way they interact with children from infancy through adulthood.

      To see these cross-cultural comparisons among people who were all from the same ethnic group, living in a single geographic region (the Colonies), at the same time, is really rich material for understanding that the whole idea of childhood is a cultural construct – one that is determined by economic necessity and religious belief.

      But that leaves me wondering, what else?
      If it’s clear that economic need and religious belief are the drivers of creating notions of childhood, what other elements (e.g. biology, politics, media, etc) are responsible for constructions of childhood and what determines which of these element takes priority in a given time and location?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *