Someone ( George Bush ? ) recently said that American families should be more like the Waltons. The thought of it made me puke. Anyone disagree. Feel free to bring your cracker barrel

I think children would be happier/healthier growing up in a multi-generational home. My mother in law lived a few blocks from us and my kids benefited from it. I would have had no problem with her moving in, and we even bought our house thinking of it.

My father had a strange "Ozzie and Harriet" delusion that, left unsatisfied, eventually cracked him. Idylls exist as idealistic expressions. Expecting people to be perfect even in their imperfections is a recipe for disaster.

Of course, yearning for some former "Golden Age" is a common sentiment, even more so in times of trouble. We should not be surprised to hear that President Bush has stooped to this particular sentimentality.

As a side note, the following comes from Riesebrodt's Pious Passions:

Fundamentalist literalism also distinguishes itself from social revolutionary or reformist projections of the future that likewise seek legitimacy through an appeal to divine law, revelation, or an ideal original community. This identification with an ideal original order can be effected in either mythical or utopian terms. As myth it has the function of a restorative surmounting of a crisis. The "Golden Age" is to be recreated through a return to its principles of order as handed down verbatim. As utopia, in contrast, the ideal order serves the purposes of a "Progressive" social reformist or social revolutionary surmounting of the crisis. Not the letter but the "spirit" of the ideal order as it was once in the past is to be realized under new conditions. Consequently, "mythical" thinking is characterized tendentially by a statutory ethic; "utopian" thinking, in contrast, is supported by a radical ethic of conviction. As with all typological distinctions, borderline cases and other variations are conceivable .... (16)
_____________________

Notes:

Riesebrodt, Martin. Pious Passions: The Emergence of Modern Fundamentalism in the United States and Iran. (1990) Trans. Don Renau. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1993.

Someone ( George Bush ? ) recently said that American families should be more like the Waltons. The thought of it made me puke. Anyone disagree. Feel free to bring your cracker barrel

Yeah - I strongly disagree with you. The only reason you feel that way is because you weren't brought up in that type of environment and therefore have no idea of the advantages it offers.

Having a large, extended family nearby can and will prove to be a tremendous asset. I only wish I had realized it before I move my kids away from their grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins.

Anyone who cannot see the benefits is either too young (like I was at 25) or too close-minded to pause and think about it. Everyone today talks about "networking" being a powerful tool - and it is. And there's no more stronger and more reliable network than the kind under discussion.

I think children would be happier/healthier growing up in a multi-generational home. My mother in law lived a few blocks from us and my kids benefited from it. I would have had no problem with her moving in, and we even bought our house thinking of it.

I agree with you. I have a good relationship with my grandchildren.
But I find the Waltons too good to be true. I would hate to associate with such people if they existed.

My father had a strange "Ozzie and Harriet" delusion that, left unsatisfied, eventually cracked him. Idylls exist as idealistic expressions. Expecting people to be perfect even in their imperfections is a recipe for disaster.

Of course, yearning for some former "Golden Age" is a common sentiment, even more so in times of trouble. We should not be surprised to hear that President Bush has stooped to this particular sentimentality.

As a side note, the following comes from Riesebrodt's Pious Passions:


_____________________

Notes:

Riesebrodt, Martin. Pious Passions: The Emergence of Modern Fundamentalism in the United States and Iran. (1993) Trans. Don Renau. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1998.


That sems like an interesting book. I shall try and get a copy

I agree with you. I have a good relationship with my grandchildren.
But I find the Waltons too good to be true. I would hate to associate with such people if they existed.

but shouldn't we be more like them? Shouldn't people be too good to be true?

but shouldn't we be more like them? Shouldn't people be too good to be true?

Well, there's nothing to stop you trying

That sems like an interesting book. I shall try and get a copy

It's dry as hell, and attempts to establish itself as a pioneering work in the study of fundamentalism. As to those arguments, they're fascinating in their own right, but I've had the book for several years and never actually made it all the way through.

I'm obliged to now, because a friend of mine went out and bought a copy on the merit of my insistent use of the phrases "world-flight" and "world-mastery".

In the meantime, it's available via Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Pious-Passion-Emergence-Fundamentalism-Comparative/dp/0520074645) (naturally), including some inexpensive used copies. There are a few excerpted pages at Amazon, but the University of California Press (http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/5772.html) site directs to a better selection of material via Google Books.

Er ... anyway, I now return this topic to its original discussion.

I do agree that families should be naturally larger, say like that of the Waltons, and I do think my little nephews benefitted from having their grandpa move in with them, after he had his stroke and needed to move in, to not be alone and have proper "assisted living," as he was mostly confined to a wheelchair after that, and so weak as to often need help to get to the bathroom and get his meals and such.

Can't see where that "puke" factor could come in there. I think I would agree with Bush on that.

I do agree that families should be naturally larger, say like that of the Waltons, and I do think my little nephews benefitted from having their grandpa move in with them, after he had his stroke and needed to move in, to not be alone and have proper "assisted living," as he was mostly confined to a wheelchair after that, and so weak as to often need help to get to the bathroom and get his meals and such.

Can't see where that "puke" factor could come in there. I think I would agree with Bush on that.

Yes, there are certainly MANY good things that can happen before the older of the group ever reach that point. And even when they do, the large extended family - if they honestly care about each other - will chip in to assist in deal with those problems.

My grandparents and parents are long gone, but my wife's parents, both in their 80s and 90s, get a GREAT deal of assistance from their kids and grandkids that live nearby.

The resemblances between W's family setups - including the nuclear family he has direct control over - and the Walton's, are not all that striking to me.

Maybe it's other people's families that should be more like the Waltons, in his view.

I do agree that families should be naturally larger, say like that of the Waltons, and I do think my little nephews benefitted from having their grandpa move in with them, after he had his stroke and needed to move in, to not be alone and have proper "assisted living," as he was mostly confined to a wheelchair after that, and so weak as to often need help to get to the bathroom and get his meals and such.

Can't see where that "puke" factor could come in there. I think I would agree with Bush on that.

What makes me puke is not the aspect of family life portrayed but the fact that the Waltons are too good to be true. I do not believe there was ever a time when such people existed.

The resemblances between W's family setups - including the nuclear family he has direct control over - and the Walton's, are not all that striking to me.

Maybe it's other people's families that should be more like the Waltons, in his view.

How nice to have a lot of goody-goodies who don't make waves.

What makes me puke is not the aspect of family life portrayed but the fact that the Waltons are too good to be true. I do not believe there was ever a time when such people existed.

Then you would be mistaken.

Perhaps not in your part of the world but it was actually quite common in the U.S. a century ago. Prior to the time transportation was widely available and most families were dependent on farming or a family business for their livelihoods, they had a tendency to be pretty clannish and lived quite close to each other. Three generations living in a single large home was fairly common.

It was the widespread adaptation of the automobile and factory/industrial jobs that changed all that.

Then you would be mistaken.

Perhaps not in your part of the world but it was actually quite common in the U.S. a century ago. Prior to the time transportation was widely available and most families were dependent on farming or a family business for their livelihoods, they had a tendency to be pretty clannish and lived quite close to each other. Three generations living in a single large home was fairly common.

It was the widespread adaptation of the automobile and factory/industrial jobs that changed all that.

I know all that. My point is that they are all so bloody saintly. That' what I meant by too good to be true. Most, if not all societies, were like that before the advent of the car, for obvious reasons.

I know all that. My point is that they are all so bloody saintly. That' what I meant by too good to be true. Most, if not all societies, were like that before the advent of the car, for obvious reasons.

I don't know about "bloody saintly" but for the most part they all got along quite well - they had too, there was no where else to go. So they adapted to each other's individual differences MUCH, MUCH better than families do today.

I don't know about "bloody saintly" but for the most part they all got along quite well - they had too, there was no where else to go. So they adapted to each other's individual differences MUCH, MUCH better than families do today.

And your evidence ?

...But I find the Waltons too good to be true. I would hate to associate with such people if they existed.

Yeah, all that wholesome goodness, innocence, kindness, love, compassion, concern, consideration, caring, and other good things would just be too much, huh?

Yeah, all that wholesome goodness, innocence, kindness, love, compassion, concern, consideration, caring, and other good things would just be too much, huh?

You obviously missed the episodes where grandpa indulged in a bit of child abuse in the barn and Johnboy exposed himself. Then there was the lack of respect for the environment...chopping down every tree on Walton mountain. depriving animals of their habitat and precipitating global warming.

You obviously missed the episodes where grandpa indulged in a bit of child abuse in the barn and Johnboy exposed himself. Then there was the lack of respect for the environment...chopping down every tree on Walton mountain. depriving animals of their habitat and precipitating global warming.

Spanking kids is not child abuse. And nothing they did harmed the environment. Not one bit.

And your evidence ?

Actually, I am. Neither you nor anyone here is a member of my family, if that's what you're talking about. :shrug:

But if you mean I should present evidence, how do you expect me to do that from 100 years ago?

Myles???
The Waltons is a TV show, not reality. is it so bad to wish it was LIKE the Waltons? Is it so bad to want it to be LIKE the Waltons?

I don't understand your...frustration? anger?

Yeah, all that wholesome goodness, innocence, kindness, love, compassion, concern, consideration, caring, and other good things would just be too much, huh?


Please enlightnen me. What is the difference between goodness and wholesome goodness ? What would unwholesome goodness be like ?

Actually, I am. Neither you nor anyone here is a member of my family, if that's what you're talking about. :shrug:

But if you mean I should present evidence, how do you expect me to do that from 100 years ago?

There's an old saying: Don't talk about what you don't know lest you be suspected when you talk of what you do know.

My point is that if you have no evidence to support your statement why make it ? It just shows you believe in some sort of Utopia.

Myles???
The Waltons is a TV show, not reality. is it so bad to wish it was LIKE the Waltons? Is it so bad to want it to be LIKE the Waltons?

I don't understand your...frustration? anger?
I agree, but there are lots of guillible people who believe things were like that once.

Kinda like how CSI is how police work really is?

I think the issue is people talking about 'the good ole days' and forgetting to mention women died in childbirth and polio was an epidemic.
I thought the Waltons touched on issues such as racism, sexism, etc.

There's an old saying: Don't talk about what you don't know lest you be suspected when you talk of what you do know.

My point is that if you have no evidence to support your statement why make it ? It just shows you believe in some sort of Utopia.

No false beliefs on my side of this discussion. I once knew a GREAT many people who lived through that period of time and they all tell the same basic story of cooperation between members of a large family. It is you believing some fable of "one size fits all" that family members were always as independent as they are today.

And in my own case, my father was one of twelve children.All of them lived close by (on pieces of land that they were given by their parents from the family farm) until WW-II when just a few moved away. But the rest stayed, assisted each other and collectively cared for their parents when they became too old to completely care for themselves.

No false beliefs on my side of this discussion. I once knew a GREAT many people who lived through that period of time and they all tell the same basic story of cooperation between members of a large family. It is you believing some fable of "one size fits all" that family members were always as independent as they are today.

And in my own case, my father was one of twelve children.All of them lived close by (on pieces of land that they were given by their parents from the family farm) until WW-II when just a few moved away. But the rest stayed, assisted each other and collectively cared for their parents when they became too old to completely care for themselves.

Sorry, but you are missing my point. I am not knocking extended families. You can still find them in some parts of the world. But it erroneous to think that thy all live happily ever after. The Waltons are too pious to be true. That's all I'm saying.

Kinda like how CSI is how police work really is?

I think the issue is people talking about 'the good ole days' and forgetting to mention women died in childbirth and polio was an epidemic.
I thought the Waltons touched on issues such as racism, sexism, etc.

Yes. And we could write a long list of other problems which are conveniently overlooked. By all means let family groups stick together but let's be realistic and accept that it won't all be plain sailing. I am speaking from first-hand experience,

Yes. And we could write a long list of other problems which are conveniently overlooked. By all means let family groups stick together but let's be realistic and accept that it won't all be plain sailing. I am speaking from first-hand experience,

And keep in mind that I never once said that it was always clear sailing - I've simply been pointing out that (long before YOUR time) people were once better about accepting individual differences and worked together for the better good of everyone involved. In part, that cooperation was necessary for survival. Parents once needed a large number of kids to work the family farm. And grandparents served as built-in babysitters for those too young to work and freed up others - including the mother - to work and not be tied down with little ones.

Certainly there were disagreements internal to the clan!! And some of them very serious and occasionally even deadly - but they still made more effort to get along than they do today. Now days, when they disagree, they can just move far away - back then it was NOT so easy.

Someone ( George Bush ? ) recently said that American families should be more like the Waltons. The thought of it made me puke. Anyone disagree. Feel free to bring your cracker barrel

Whoever said it is quite right. I would hate to think it was George... he's not the kind of guy I would want to give credit to.

Title: We should be more discerning to watch the "good" on TV, and not so much the "bad." And naturally large families ought to be much more encouraged publically.

What makes me puke is not the aspect of family life portrayed but the fact that the Waltons are too good to be true. I do not believe there was ever a time when such people existed.

I'm not so sure that the Waltons are "too good to be true." I think when people for religious belief, or niceness, or faith, or whatever, allow for the natural flow of life, and purposely refrain from the use of any form of "birth control," that relates to them being kind and respectful to one another. Such people are more likely to see each and every human life, as sacred, special or something. Even in the "large family" movies, you can see children stick up for their siblings.

But if the Waltons be "too good to be true," did the Waltons even claim to be real? You did know that TV isn't exactly real, didn't you? I don't understand people's silly objections to "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" or whatever, as supposedly being "too perfect" of families. Even "Andy Griffith" seems to be a strangely popular TV show. When I watch TV, do you think I want to see "real life?" Of course not. I call look out any window or my car window, any time I like, and see "real life." Boring. I want to see something of "idealized life" or something like that. That's one reason I like sci-fi. I like to get some imagined glimpse, of how great life might be in the future. I like some of that optimism. Now some people seem to go the other way. They want to see action and violence or immoral sex on TV. And I don't always like every "sweet and syrupy" TV show. But I do have some respect for certain family-friendly shows, such as "The Waltons," or maybe "Eight is Enough." There's also the curiosity factor in, how can a family be so large?, or what were large families like?

And keep in mind that I never once said that it was always clear sailing - I've simply been pointing out that (long before YOUR time) people were once better about accepting individual differences and worked together for the better good of everyone involved. In part, that cooperation was necessary for survival. Parents once needed a large number of kids to work the family farm. And grandparents served as built-in babysitters for those too young to work and freed up others - including the mother - to work and not be tied down with little ones.

Certainly there were disagreements internal to the clan!! And some of them very serious and occasionally even deadly - but they still made more effort to get along than they do today. Now days, when they disagree, they can just move far away - back then it was NOT so easy.

Exactly. Had they had the chance to move away in the " good old days" many would have done so. They were bound together by necessity as well as familial love. What reason is there to suppose that they were better at accepting individual differences ? Even the kindly old Amish, who live in the manner we have been talkng about, will "shun" anyone who steps out of line

Title: We should be more discerning to watch the "good" on TV, and not so much the "bad." And naturally large families ought to be much more encouraged publically.



I'm not so sure that the Waltons are "too good to be true." I think when people for religious belief, or niceness, or faith, or whatever, allow for the natural flow of life, and purposely refrain from the use of any form of "birth control," that relates to them being kind and respectful to one another. Such people are more likely to see each and every human life, as sacred, special or something. Even in the "large family" movies, you can see children stick up for their siblings.

But if the Waltons be "too good to be true," did the Waltons even claim to be real? You did know that TV isn't exactly real, didn't you? I don't understand people's silly objections to "Leave it to Beaver" or "Ozzie and Harriet" or whatever, as supposedly being "too perfect" of families. Even "Andy Griffith" seems to be a strangely popular TV show. When I watch TV, do you think I want to see "real life?" Of course not. I call look out any window or my car window, any time I like, and see "real life." Boring. I want to see something of "idealized life" or something like that. That's one reason I like sci-fi. I like to get some imagined glimpse, of how great life might be in the future. I like some of that optimism. Now some people seem to go the other way. They want to see action and violence or immoral sex on TV. And I don't always like every "sweet and syrupy" TV show. But I do have some respect for certain family-friendly shows, such as "The Waltons," or maybe "Eight is Enough." There's also the curiosity factor in, how can a family be so large?, or what were large families like?

See my comments on the Amish.

If most families were like the Waltons and this meant that this kind of family life led to good little citizens/parents
how did things get bad?
since most people who think that most families were like the Waltons somewhere in the US do think that things got bad.
Often these people blame the hippies and the 60s.
But this would be silly since 'the 60s'
would be a product of the 40s and 50s when people
knew how to have good families.
If we blame current problems on 60s hippies, well then we can damn well blame
the existence of radicals and hippies on families in the 40s and 50s.

Let's remember that a lot of families that might have looked like the Waltons on the outside
were not so nice to the Johnsons and Washintons across the street or
on the other side of town, even while being nice to themselves -when they were.

let's also remember that a woman who claimed to be raped, in those days, had better be dressed right, have done the right things, not been in the 'wrong' place and sure as shit better not be saying it was someone in her family.

Let's remember how, in general, the police treated people who did not look like the Walton's, not to mention banks, government officials, etc. and this treatment had the tacit approval of 'the Waltons' of the world.

Let alone how sexual abuse was considered a non-issue in-family.

This is not to say loving multi-generational white families did not exist. Of course they did.

But in that nice little snowflake ball memory we can make about 'then' we are probably leaving out details
and creating an archtype rarely achieved and certainly not as widespread as we wish it was.