Ego: a person’s sense of self-esteem or self-importance.
One of the most consistent criticisms I have heard about teachers is when they show any kind of ego. Often this is for good reason – it is easy for issues of the ego to interfere with many aspects of daily business for a teacher… and honestly, for any employee in general. We are taught to put our egos aside for the duration of our workday because ego often distracts from the goals of any collective.
Anyone remember the first time they enforced a rule with a student and got that back-talk? When I enforced a rule the first time as a student teacher, I was surprised by the powerful resistance I received from the student. I was annoyed at Joseph for blurting out in class, and I sharply addressed him and told him to cut it out.
I shouldn’t be trying to be popular – I was there to do a job.
I’m a witty person, even if I do say so myself. Or rather, I consider myself to be. So when the student resisted, I reflexively deflected with a witty comeback. It felt good. Students laughed. The student laughed too and even relented, but I could sense the defiance as he complied. When he pretended nothing had happened and inevitably offended again the next day, I was less confident with my procedures. He knew my moves. He would be prepared and bolster himself for my counterattack. I would no longer have the advantage of surprise. It was the worst thing I could have done for my credibility. I shouldn’t be trying to be popular – I was there to do a job.
As a wiser teacher, I – along with the rest of you internet warriors, probably – know what I did wrong. I made the issue of discipline about me. He was not coming up against a system of regulations in place for his education – he was against me. I knew it, and he knew it. Even my wittiness, while solving the problem in the short-term, was destructive. It perpetuated the notion that this was me making him do things, me wanting him to be quiet, and that if he resisted or shot back, he would be shooting back at me. My cleverness revealed my investment. My ego and his were on the line. And who am I? I’m some adult. Why should he care?
From that moment, I made a conscious change. Rules are facts of life. So I treated them like it. Correction came with no emotion, no anger, no annoyance. My classroom policy became like gravity: even if you disagreed or didn’t know how it worked, you still knew how to prepare for it. There was no mercy, no leniency. It stopped being about me. Every day was a new day with no record. A new chance to succeed. It came to be about us maneuvering together in this world – finding out its rules in order to win.
Stories like this tend to tell the teacher that ego has no place in the classroom or the workforce. It may sound like I’m spreading that lesson now. I believe the opposite, however. I believe there has to be ego. It just needs to be placed correctly.
The message was clear – enforcing discipline was a routine, but teaching them was my life.
I’ve stated already that correction came with no emotion. This doesn’t mean I turned into a Terminator every time Joseph got riled up. Instead, whatever emotion I was feeling prior to the incident would perpetuate. I would correct someone mid-sentence, enforce, and move back to my lesson. On the rare occasion that I had to remove a student, I silently texted an advisor and made sure to greet the student the next day. The message was clear – enforcing discipline was a routine, but teaching them was my life.
Here is where ego belongs – in your work. I show my lessons to my students like I’ve just invented sliced bread. “Today’s a really good one, guys!” I show my excitement when they engage, and I pull out all the stops when I help with their work. My ego is in what I do. Most importantly, we’re on the same side. Model pride as a motivator, not as a weakness.
That’s where your emotion belongs, fellow teachers. Not with your peers, not with your administration, and not in your classroom management. Ego belongs in your teaching. Be proud of your work. Be proud of your students. Show the path to their success, not the blueprint of their failure. They know how they fail – they have other people to tell them, more than we probably assume. How is a student going to trust you in any way if they think you’re going to drop them at the first sign of imperfection? They don’t need more of those people in their lives.
Ego should be about pushing for success, not fearing failure.
I’ve been hearing a lot of talk lately about how teachers should be armed. This would then put the power in the hands of a teacher to protect their students. I know I made light of some things in the podcast, but the gravity of all of this has become pretty hard to escape.
The romantic image being painted here is pretty vivid. The teacher, recognizing a threat – maybe hearing a gunshot – projects in an authoritative voice: “Get down!” Students scramble to positions as the teacher loads a clip and takes position behind a makeshift barricade. The door opens halfway as the attacker bursts into the room. A student screams, but before the attacker can even turn his body to the sound, the teacher levels his gun and fires three shots into the attacker’s head and torso.
So what’s wrong with this picture?
First of all, what the heck are the logistics of arming teachers?
“You give them a little bit of a bonus, so practically for free, you have now made the school into a hardened target,” says our President. I don’t know if he’s referring to just the price of the gun and training or something, but would this involve training teachers, or is it just the “you get a gun” bonus?
What stupid teacher would take a bonus for something like this? There’s already so much that we’re expected to handle that doesn’t show up anywhere in a contract and certainly isn’t covered via income. I’m supposed to know how to use a deadly weapon to defend my students? As simple as you make that sound, let’s take a look first at how we’re expected to handle less than this.
Below is from the website of the NEA about how we’re supposed to handle fighting in a classroom.
You will notice that nowhere does it say “directly intervene and prevent harm from happening to anyone to your best ability.”
It’s very clear: Teachers are expected to watch and monitor only, not to fight or beat their students. Obviously one of the problems involves legal liability. One cheap shot on a student because you intervened, Romeo-style, and you’re in trouble!
These same teachers that are officially kept from directly intervening in a physical altercation, are now obligated to eliminate deadly threats that may very well be members of the student body he or she is tasked with protecting? What if a stray shot hits a student? What if the gun jams and a student is killed by an attacker because the gun wasn’t cleaned? What if a surreptitiously armed student pulls on the teacher because he’s already stressed about an attack taking place?
My point is when this plan invariably goes wrong in one of the billion ways that it can, whose fault is it? If the answer is “the teacher’s, because he should know blah blah blah” then I’ll tell you where you can stick your gun.
Teachers do so many things that are not accounted for when being paid. This is an old gripe but needs to be considered when you want to add being trained bodyguards and all of the liability contained with that. There’s already an absurd liability on the teacher based on the fact that they are alone with the students for so long – who else is liable if not the teacher, right?
You don’t pay me to stay after school with your students. You don’t pay me to answer your student’s texts for help. You don’t pay me for the lesson I’m making at home. You don’t pay me for the fact that I would step in and prevent your son from getting his head thrown into a wall if it came down to it. You don’t pay me for any of that.
A bonus won’t go any way toward training me to kill for you or anyone else. I didn’t become a teacher to kill, nor did any of my peers. If being prepared to kill for you becomes part of the job, you can bet the “little bit of a bonus” won’t mean anything to me. Plus, you’d have to pay me what I’m worth for the job I already do before I’m willing to believe you’ll be able to compensate me for that kind of job detail. This job isn’t one that’s compatible with that one.
I may or may not have the ability to be the hero needed in the scene depicted above. The truth is, it’s all messed up. None of it is the job I signed up to do. In fact, a lot of being a teacher is doing a whole bunch of stuff that I didn’t sign up for. You think teachers need to step up to be heroes? We’re already working on it. We’ve done what it takes without you foisting “the ability to kill a man” into our job requirements. This isn’t even cowardice or any kind of self-doubt talking. Teachers have been reacting to these attacks and there are little to no notable accounts of any of them behaving less than admirable in high-stress attacker situations.
I don’t really see the complication here. There’s no need for a semi-automatic weapon to be easy to buy. Guns are already regulated, you say? Sure. Then keep developing those regulations so it’s harder for people to buy. Stop lecturing me about the AR-15 having only the minimum power of a bullet to take down a deer because again, I don’t care about the power – a semi-automatic weapon makes a dangerous person into a deadly person way more efficiently than a pistol or any other kind of non-automatic weapon. I’m not saying that I want anyone’s guns taken away, but stop expecting me to cry you a river over this “right to bear arms” that had nothing to do with automatic or semi-automatic weapons and everything to do with being able to defend oneself and to join a militia to protect your state. Limiting the type of arms is not unconstitutional or even unprecedented. I know this because I’m in a state that doesn’t allow me to own a pair of nunchaku.
Stop talking about responsible gun owners being inconvenienced; if you having to wait another month and another background check to get your gun saves my kids’ lives and gets you to shut up about me having to decide who lives and who dies when I’m not even trusted to stop a one-on-one scuffle, then that is a trade I’d make in a heartbeat.
Static characters are surprisingly a lot harder to find because they are easy to overlook. They don’t personally undergo any real journey other than the events of the plot – instead they tend to serve as a tool for the dynamic characters of a story to react to or receive guidance from. Here are four examples of static characters. I tried to avoid literary figures like Atticus Finch, so that students have room to talk about those once they understand the concept. I instead focused on making sure that these characters were prominent in pop culture to ensure that students would be able to see the concept at work with characters they already know.
If you’re looking for examples of dynamic characters, I wrote an article about that here.
I started the last one with a Dragon Ball character, so it’s time to start with one here. If that one worked with your audience, then this one will work for those same people.
I was tempted to start with Frieza, a villain, but I decided it would actually be a more effective example if I used a hero. Villains are easy. The idea is that they don’t change, so you don’t have to feel bad when the hero destroys them. A static hero, however… how do you explain that?
Static heroes were especially popular back in the day because it allowed an audience to pick up a series easily – what you see is what you get, and you can count on them to be that way because they’ll always be that way. What happens then is that the audience begins to see how the characters around him develop. Son Goku is no exception. It is his refusal to change that makes Vegeta’s transformation so stark in contrast.
The Benevolent Fighter
Son Goku starts the series Dragon Ball as a young boy. It is revealed when he is an adult that he is a Saiyan, an alien race subjugated by the evil Lord Frieza, and that he was sent to the Earth as a baby (named Kakarot) to destroy all life there to make the planet fit for sale to the highest bidder. However, a head injury as an infant causes Kakarot to become sweet and kind, a trait that stays with him into adulthood. Raised by an old martial artist named Son Gohan as a grandson (named Son Goku), the baby retains the strength and love of fighting possessed by his race, but his nature is converted by his head injury and perhaps most notably by his adoptive grandfather’s influence into that of a generous, loving hero.
Goku retains this nature as an adult, an immensely strong fighter who wouldn’t hurt a fly. However, for such a comedic, dopey, likable guy, he sure does have a huge body count. Goku’s love of fighting often gets him into trouble and interferes with his common sense, much to the chagrin of his comrades. His rival, Vegeta, is constantly developing as a character as a result of repeated attempts to surpass Goku. In fact, most of Goku’s friends were formerly dastardly villains that are won over by his constant, consistent optimism and unrivaled work ethic. In this way, Goku – like most static characters – serves as a device for all of the other characters to change and develop around him.
Steve Rogers/Captain America
This hero is definitely well-known, both in the comic world AND in popular culture as a result of cinematic success. (Captain America: The First Avenger, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, The Avengers, The Avengers: Age of Ultron, Captain America: Civil War, and the upcoming Avengers: Infinity War).
A Patriot Lost in Time
Steve Rogers just wants to fight for his country, and he gets the chance to do so when he is recruited and made the only successful test subject for the Super Soldier Program. Frozen in ice while saving the world, Rogers unexpectedly finds himself in the 21st Century, with most of his friends old or dead. With augmented athletic abilities, and a strong sense of hope and optimism, he is regarded somewhat as the flagship member of the Avengers – and most of the time, the group’s leader.
Captain America’s moral compass is one that never wavers. You never wonder if you should or shouldn’t be cheering for Cap, even when he does things against the system. I found this especially true during Civil War: “Oh, Captain America is doing something weird? Well, he must be right, so let’s wait and see.” While he certainly changes physically, Captain America as we know it hardly ever changes.
If you’re about to quote the comics at me, shut up. Comics explore every single idea out there because otherwise they run out of story. Any prolific series is going to have an evil version, a cynical version, an elderly version, a child version, a werewolf version, a zombie version… The point is when you say “Captain America,” there will always be a very specific picture in your head. He is and always will be. He arguably has more of a “boy scout” rep than Superman does!
He’s Batman. Unless we’re referring to the Adam West goon, Batman is a pretty static hero – especially once the 90’s animated series was underway, as its popularity validated what the comics had begun doing in making his character dark and brooding.
A Force of Nature
Bruce Wayne will sometimes change, but his role as The Batman seldom does. Batman is smart, crafty, and has a ridiculous work ethic. His status as a static character does not mean that he is without flaws. He has definite trust issues that often lead to very explosive incidents with those involved – particularly the time when it was revealed that he had secret files recording the weaknesses of every Justice League member and how to exploit them in case any one of them went rogue.
Batman also has a very firm policy against killing that never seems to change – despite fighting some of the most deranged villains in comic book history, and despite suffering equally devastating losses at the hands of these villains.
Much of the interest in the Batman series comes from watching the dynamic characters around him. (Batgirl. Robin/Nightwing. Two-Face. Red Hood. The list goes on.) All of them owe their engrossing storylines to their interactions with the force of nature that is Batman. The first Robin, particularly, goes from worshipping him to resenting him – eventually becoming Nightwing and forcing his surrogate father to recognize him as an equal. Batman stays the same – no matter how the villains or even his friends try to force change on him.
Geralt of Rivia
Whether you’ve played Witcher 3 lately (I haven’t yet) and just entered the series, or you’ve been a long-time fan, it’s pretty plain that Geralt is a static hero. This doesn’t mean he’s not a badass: His character design is top-notch and distinct, with white hair, scars… he has a sword and a silver sword – come one. One for monsters, one for people right?
Sure Geralt has revelations and crises of identity – but for the most part, if you are reading or playing the Witcher series, you know exactly who you’re dealing with and what he’s going to be like.
One trait he has is a stubborn adherence to his personal code. Geralt, like most Witchers apparently, has a very specific job description; he has to kill monsters. Of course, there are wildly varying impressions throughout the world of exactly how necessary or serious this job is – though as you might imagine, respect for this job is usually directly proportional to how close a monster is to messing up the lives of those whose respect is in question. This means that sometimes he’ll get a job offer asking him to deal with a striga (a terrifying monster whose description involves the words “dead monster baby” and a tiny coffin). No problem. But in other places where the monster problem is less than common, they’ll offer jobs that let you know they obviously don’t take his job seriously. King or not, he will refuse these people. Need him to kill a dragon? Dragons don’t count as monsters to him, so no. Not to mention that for the most part, he refuses to work for free.
Well, actually it’s no hold barred for the video game, right? Fetch-em quests galore!
Geralt, for the most part, is cynical, sarcastic, and dismissive of authority. He is also very loyal to those rare few that become his friends. He has shown himself to be sympathetic to the plight of even monsters, despite his overt commitment to kill those in his path for money. He is well-aware of the fact that he literally eliminates work for himself as he does his job. I’m not currently aware of how exactly he got his powers or why he wants to be human again, but I find Geralt’s static nature to be a nice anchor when transitioning from setting to setting in his stories. Most of my journey with The Witcher is “Okay, that’s the person available, okay that’s the problem… whoa, this is interesting… where’s Geralt? Oh, there he is, good, okay I know how this story is framed now.” The experience feels a lot like watching anything based on Sherlock Holmes. (I would have used him in this article, but he’s not current in my mind, despite the riveting BBC present-day adaptation.)
Hopefully, this article helps you talk about static characters when you need it. If you have better ideas for current static characters, let me know in the comments or social media!
If you’re a Witcher die-hard that wants to tell me how Geralt is actually super dynamic, then take a moment, Internet Warrior, to reflect on your life, and on how being static isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and then also know that I’m like two books in, so if he suddenly becomes a villain or something that’s gonna come out of left field for me.
Dynamic and Static characters may seem like an easy-to-process concept, especially with some solid examples. However, you may run into the problem of your solid, perfect example becoming suddenly (or not – let’s be truthful with ourselves) obsolete.
Well, here’s where I come to the rescue. Without further ado, here are 5 examples of Dynamic characters that today’s youth will understand. The design is such that hopefully if you cover this list, at least one will hit students the right way, and you’ll have that “Ohhhhhh” moment!
Vegeta, Prince of Saiyans
Vegeta begins in an anime/manga called Dragon BallZ, where he starts as a heartless alien prince hell-bent on destroying all life on Earth so it can be terraformed and sold to the highest bidder. He is cruel, sadistic, and arrogant. He shows this through his cruel fighting style, as well as his unflinching penchant for destroying those in a vulnerable position. A perfect example of this is when his partner – unexpectedly defeated by the heroes of the series – begs him for help. Vegeta pretends at first to help his long-time partner-since-childhood, then instead tosses him into the air and brutally destroys him in a blinding flash of power.
This one is great because every time we see Vegeta, he is going through some kind of change. Like the next example, we almost never see the same Vegeta twice.
Vegeta is forced to fight on the heroes side repeatedly out of self-preservation, and somewhere along the way a change happens inside him that he has to wrestle with. It arguably begins when he marries one of the heroes, Bulma, and has his first child with her. He battles with his newfound affection and benevolence for Earth, and even tries one last time to turn to his evil self before eventually holding his son close and telling him he’s proud to be his father, and then subsequently sacrificing himself to save the Earth.
Iron Man/Tony Stark
This superhero is one that is always in a different part of his personal journey when you see him, and even though his first movie was about a decade ago, he’s still hugely popular.
Tony Stark starts as an arrogant genius inheritor of a world-changing weapons manufacturer, Stark Industries. While the arrogant part of his personality takes a bit longer for him to adjust, his sense of responsibility for the world’s events begins when he is kidnapped and sees firsthand his company’s weapons being used in the Middle East to oppress innocent people.
This one is more impressive to kids if you go movie by movie.
Iron Man – By the end of this movie, Tony realizes that he cannot differentiate himself from the new task that he has before him in protecting innocent people. The last line is one that allows him to take responsibility for his actions and to truly own the changes he has gone through in becoming a hero: “I am Iron Man.”
Iron Man 2 – Tony starts this movie as a superhero, but an arrogant one. Bit by bit, this comes back to bite him as he first gets outdone by a man who figures out his tech from his broken down hut, followed by losing everyone close to him. He ends the movie a more humble hero, leading to…
The Avengers – By the end of this movie, Tony readily sacrifices himself for the good of humanity. He lives, but not because he wasn’t ready to die. In fact, he spends the 3rd solo movie freaking out about how traumatic this experience was. No matter what you think the catalyst is for his change, it’s apparent that the Tony Stark of the 2008 movie would not be prepared to do what he does in this film.
There are more movies, but I’ve got three more characters to go. Don’t be greedy!
Oliver Queen/The Green Arrow
Oliver Queen is a famous DC hero, but most kids will know him from The CW’s hit series, Arrow, or if they watch any of the other three or four shows that take place in the same universe. Warning: If you’re watching this show, I spoil it brutally here.
There are some obvious character changes here when it comes to Oliver before and after his father’s yacht, The Queen’s Gambit, is shipwrecked, marooning Oliver on the remote island of Lian Yu. Before the shipwreck, he is a fun-loving, irresponsible, selfish man who took his long-term girlfriend’s sister on a cruise for several days. Scandalous. However, there are less obvious changes that make this character dynamic. After 5 years of being away from home, Oliver returns as a figure known as The Hood, and begins to “save the city” by doing whatever it takes to destroy its criminal element – including eliminating people on a list that his father leaves him. While this may sound badass and hero-ish, this literally makes him a serial killer.
Over the course of seasons of the show, Oliver decides that the killing must stop. He also makes several changes regarding his life of deception, especially when it comes to who he should trust and what it means to be in a trusting relationship. This conflicts often with his life as “The Hood,” and later “The Arrow,” and then even later, once he stops killing, as “The Green Arrow.”
He also vacillates regarding how close he keeps the people around him, starting with his bodyguard, Diggle, who eventually becomes the hero “Spartan,” and Roy Harper, who becomes the Red Arrow (known in the show as Arsenal). By 2017, the show has a “Team Arrow,” composed of Wild Dog, Mr. Terrific, the third Black Canary, Spartan, and The Green Arrow himself. This is a big departure from Oliver’s tendency to go it alone.
This team is eventually broken up due to a breach of trust; Oliver suspects one of his team is a mole, which leads him to spy on the whole team. This shows the struggle that Oliver still has with trusting others. He eventually reconciles with the team, even though they agree to go separate ways.
Despite this apparent failure of this team, Oliver of 2018 is a lot more compassionate, trusting, and responsible. He is even elected as the Mayor of Star City.
This version of The Green Arrow draws a lot of comparisons to Batman. However, one should note that Batman’s character tends to NOT change, even as the events of the two plots begin to look similar.
Yeah, I know you know this one. We all know this one. This one works because a lot of our high schoolers were like three or four years old when Finding Nemo came out, so they’ll get it.
Marlin the clownfish is a paranoid, neurotic, single father who is terrified of the ocean and even more terrified of losing his son. This is mostly due to a traumatic incident in which a barracuda killed his wife and hundreds of his children, leaving only one survivor – his son, Nemo. As a result, Marlin is fiercely protective of Nemo, to the point that he stifles Nemo’s development. His fears are further exacerbated by Nemo’s apparent helplessness – one of his fins is tiny and underdeveloped (dubbed as Nemo’s “lucky fin”).
When his son is picked up by divers, Marlin goes on a crazy odyssey to recover his son. He is forced to confront his fear of the ocean’s dangers, as well as confront the faults in his own parenting that led to this situation. This is further helped by his encounters with a regal blue tang named Dory, who tries to help him despite having a memory and attention span so short that she often requires the same type of supervision as a child. By the end of the movie, Marlin is more confident and assured of his own abilities as well as those of his son, and he happily allows his son to have experiences in childhood unmarred by fear. He also accepts Dory as part of the family, which displays his newfound openness and security, along with the development of his ability to trust.
Hopefully, between these four examples, you are able to successfully convey the concept of dynamic characters. I purposefully avoided famous literary characters, because I know pop culture references work better, plus now you can ask them yourself after talking about them with your class without you having given them the answer. I’ll write another soon, talking about some static characters you can use – these are remarkably a lot harder for some people to pull out nowadays.
“People on “Sesame Street” had limited possibilities and fixed identities, and (the best part) you weren’t expected to change much. The harshness of existence was a given, and no one was proposing that numbers and letters would lead you “out” of your inner city to Elysian suburbs. Instead, “Sesame Street” suggested that learning might merely make our days more bearable, more interesting, funnier. It encouraged us, above all, to be nice to our neighbors and to cultivate the safer pleasures that take the edge off — taking baths, eating cookies, reading.” – Virginia Heffernan, The New York Times Magazine
You’ll definitely hear me harp on Sesame Street from time to time. Sesame Street was a gift to my development as a child, teaching me lessons that I didn’t even know would be integral to life both as an adolescent and as an adult.
Here are some lessons that it taught me.
Put Down the Ducky
This musical number is seemingly innocuous – like most of Sesame Street. Ernie keeps hearing squeaking noises when he tries to play the saxophone, and it’s because he tries to play while holding onto his rubber duckie. The song tells him to put down the duckie.
I was using the phrase “put down the duckie” long after I watched this is a child; it was clear to me that if something is preventing you from doing what you want to do, then you need to learn to let go of that thing in your life. This can apply to bad habits, addiction… anything that keeps you from “playing the saxophone.” Sure, you can learn to accomplish your goals while compensating for this weakness that you refuse to give up, but if you know deep down inside that it’s time to let go, you’ll still hear that little squeak when you play.
This metaphor mixes up a little bit with the lighter concept of “it’s okay to let go – if it’s good for you then you’ll be able to pick it up again.” We know that Ernie’s relationship with the duckie is not in itself harmful – he just needs to let go of it for the moment. His friend assures him “you can just pick it up when you’re done!”
Being Proud of Yourself Doesn’t Mean You Need to Bring Others Down
This lesson needs to be taught more. I hear so many people talk about how important it is to have pride.
“I’m proud to be [insert race here]!”
“I’m proud to be a [man/woman/other]!”
Then they go and disparage others. “The white people do not understand blah blah” “You’re cisgender so blah blah.” “This meeting is only for [my group that I have pride in].”
In Fuzzy and Blue, Grover expresses his pride in being born fuzzy and blue. (“It’s just the way that I grew…”) He is joined by Harry Monster, and then Cookie Monster (“me just so fuzzy and blue!”) who enter seamlessly.
Then comes Frazzle. Frazzle is orange. Frazzle is a very different addition to the Sesame Street cast – his appearance is extremely fierce, with bright orange fur, a strong, thick unibrow, and an inability to speak English without a thick gurgle that renders him incomprehensible to non-monster ears. Grover is reluctant at first – or perhaps simply trying to comprehend the pull that Frazzle appears to feel for being involved in a song that is about pride in being blue. (“All right, all right, just thought I’d mention it!”) Then, although the song is practically over, they restart it for Frazzle and modify their refrain:
“We’re fuzzy and blue (and orange!)”
They do this with no outside prompting, no mediating parent, no supervisor, and no union intervention. It’s true – pride in oneself is important, and that involves knowing what it is you’re proud of. I can be proud of being tall – does that have to mean that I’m disparaging short people? No. Short people can be proud to be short, and I can agree with that pride without undermining my own pride.
Frazzle is different, and his friends support his difference and his pride in being different without any insecurity about themselves and what they value.
Interestingly, everything Frazzle says sounds the same (something directly addressed in the show). Who hasn’t made that comment about a foreign language before? Frazzle represents a foreign identity even to Sesame Street – which has monsters, but most of them are friendly colors.
Oscar the Grouch
Oscar the Grouch makes it very apparent that Sesame Street is not a perfect place. He is a misanthropic, grouchy monster that lives in a trash can. He doesn’t enjoy anybody’s company, nor does he want anything to do with learning any lessons.
Oscar is as close as it gets to being a social pariah – my memory isn’t amazing, but as far as I can recall he is the only character whom other characters chide and to whom they even suggest that he needs to change his ways. His life doesn’t look very nice, which could be a cautionary tale… or it could even suggest that Oscar is crying for help by making sure to surround himself with the people of Sesame Street. Whichever it is, Oscar’s grouchiness doesn’t keep the people around him from talking to him or involving him in their conversations.
Sesame Street – with Oscar – is now a complete image. It is not an idyllic, utopian place, it’s a ghetto. Yet, the show is adamant that the place is amazing, with everyone wanting to know “how to get to Sesame Street.” The people (and monsters) of Sesame Street aren’t trying to leave – instead, their reaction to the hand they’ve been dealt is to watch each other’s backs.
The relevant links can be found below, but I want to take this opportunity to make a point. I’m not saying Sesame Street is a gem to the world of television (it is, but I mean that it’s not my main point). I’m saying that the kid shows you put your child in front of have lasting effects that go beyond the obvious – and certainly go beyond that stage of development. We remember the things we see, and they DO stick with us. So the next time you let TV do the babysitting… it’s worth thinking about what you’re letting your kid be inundated with.
Either that or communicate regularly with your child. Crazy talk, I know.
NOTE: Old School Sesame Street and modern, HBO Sesame Street are not the same beasts. As a result, some people argue that old school Sesame Street might not be suitable for children today, as a lot of the concerns modern parents have were not voiced or even present back then. We’re talking a depressed talking elephant that only one character can see, a homeless misanthrope, and a scene where Cookie Monster eats a pipe. If these sound shocking to you, then you know not to watch. If it just sounds like pre-hipster age television, then enjoy.
Or again, you could show it and then just talk to your kids.