kodama Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 I've just finished the book and it absolutely blew my mind. The author, Jean Liedloff has spent 2 years and half in the Yekwanas tribe, in Venezuelian amazonia, and what she discovered was a really peaceful society with happy and spontaneous people. She obsevered that the mothers were carrying their children for the 8 first month, constantly, while they are doing their usual activities. She explains that the babies are totally quiet, with no anxiety or tension, with very flexible muscles. She develops a theory about the innate expectations of human being that must be satisfied, in order of their biological constitution. The human baby expect to find a very protective person to carry him or her, giving him food as much as he or she needs. Human baby also needs to watch and experiment all the normal and authentic human activities, feeling safe in the arms of the one who does it. So when he feels ready to experiment by himself, they start to explore their environment on all fours, and know that they can come back to the mother when they need it. She describes a very convincing (to me) way of taking care of babies, step by step, by the Yekwanas people. Then, and I must say it was really hard to read (and I've red several testimonials of people that have read it, and everyone says that it was the really disturbing part of the book), she describes the way the western society does with children. She doesn't talk about violence or bad treatment as we are used to hear by talking about "torture on children", but it is a real offense to the babies. The description of the loneliness in the dark and silent pretty decorated room almost gave me nausea. As a therapist, I am really engaged in the way of emotional recovering since many years, advising everyone to read Alice Miller, that saved my own life. But since I've red this, I must say that it goes really farer. Alice Miller really understood the cruelty of the children treatment, but she's finally talking only about what she red, knows and seen by herself. Jean Liedloff is really describing a way to get OUT of this system, by taking example on another society. It is in accordance with (my neighbour is listening the Lambada really loudly as I am talking, it is totally contrasting with the mood I am in...), the theories of unschooling, Montessori...so I really hope that we will slowly move in that direction. But where it blew my mind so much, is for the therapy. In order of the theory she develops, we would better do meditation and taking heroin (really I could not believe that I would be aware of that kind of theory one day), than doing primals and feeling the traumas. So I will develop an idea of therapy that can include emotional recovering (as I think it's is impossible to cure completely without knowing with lucidity what happend to us, that dove us in that state), and following the continuum, the "carrying step" that we missed. If some of you have red the book and are interested about it, please tell me, and I will make a topic for sharing with you my ideas, and I hope, for you to share yours.
Ruben Zandstra Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 Hi Kodama! I read the Continuum concept a while ago, so my memory may have lost some detail. I too thought it was mind-blowing, and it absolutely changed my perspective on (my) parenting. That having been said, I've taken some distance from some of the ideas / conclusions that Liedloff seemed to lead me to at the time. This may have to do with the fact that shortly after reading the CC I took up reading Lloyd deMause ( for instance http://psychohistory.com/books/foundations-of-psychohistory/chapter-1-the-evolution-of-childhood/ ) This quote comes to mind: "The further back in history one goes, the lower the level of child care, and the more likely children are to be killed, abandoned, beaten, terrorized, and sexually abused." DeMauses' historical approach is in taking the types of childrearing throughout history as the central subject matter, discerning between different levels of empathy towards children, categorizing them in "psycho-types". The fact that apparently Liedloff's particular primitive tribe was very benevolent towards infancy does not convince me that deMauses thesis is false. (Of course it doesn't exactly prove he is right either) But I have come to suspect that Liedloff may have been romanticizing and idealizing her experiences among the people she was with, for instance when she was stating that it was "other tribes" that were violent war-mongers, without giving any clear idea as to why her tribe was peaceful and the others were not, other than (if I recall well) that the other tribes had been "more in contact with western culture" So in brief, her solution appeared to be in the realm of rejecting modern culture. Anyway, I'm basically plugging Lloyd deMause here, I'm pretty convinced he will blow your mind even more. In a not necessarily comfortable way btw, brace yourself.
kodama Posted June 13, 2015 Author Posted June 13, 2015 Hi Ruben, I know Lloyd deMause, I red Foundations of psychohistory. But he's not talking about tribes and primitive cultures. He's talking about old civilisations and all what can be found in books. I have also a friend, she lived in the Indian jungle (south Bihar), and she noticed that the culture of the tribe she was in touch with, was absolutely different than the Indian culture. They were more open, free minded, woman and men were equals, they had no religion... I don't say I have nothing to blame on the Yekwanas culture, for example they don't really let the choice of the part a man and a woman play in the society, they are cruel with others cultures and animals. What I feel is that they do what it must be done only for themselves, they didn't have the opportunity to develop an open mind, certainly due to their way of life (hostile nature, had to hide for long). But if you look at other animals, they are not very friendly to each other, between species... I don't think she rejects everything in modern culture, actually she's only talking about nurturing, and it's true that it's really bad what civilisation has done to education. I would like to know what is really good in modern cultures concerning birth, nurturing and development of the human being in adequation of their biological constitution? If you are interested about Lloyd deMause, I advise you to take a look at Bernard Lempert. He's writing about history of violence and sacrifices on children and the relation with the bad treatment of today. Btw, i don't agree with Lloyd deMause on everything, it's true that today, what was a norm in the 16th century is not anymore, but when you know that there are millions of child abuse pictures downloaded everyday, I mean...is it not hypocrisy to say that we are really evolved compare to the 16th century? How can we know how much children were sexually harrassed then and today? I have red a book "La marche rouge" (only in french sorry), talking about child abduction during the 18th century in France. When you follow a little the actuality on pedophily in France, it is scaring, even today...so what is really changing? Is it changing that much, or is it more hidden?
Ruben Zandstra Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 Thanks, I will see if I can find anything from Bernard Lempert when I get a chance. Right now Google only brings me some French entries unfortunately. DeMausse has quite specifically written about contemporary aboriginal tribes: see the "happy aboriginal childhood thesis", http://psychohistory.com/articles/on-writing-childhood-history/ As to what is fundamentally better in modern culture compared to primitive tribalism concerning the care of children ... well, the one defining improvement is that children now pretty much survive their childhoods instead of facing really terrible odds most of the time, most of which relate directly to tribal culture / psycho-class. But I agree; deMause might be too optimistic as to the progress western civilisation is making in terms of childrearing. And it's not necessarily a straight road forward.
Recommended Posts