"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> urbanMamas

The cult of spring: Perspectives on mamas' need for nature

I have just negotiated a new quasi-peace in the house -- Monroe, I declare, is no longer allowed to use the iPod touch to play fruit matching games due to tearful angry meltdowns when he gets even a taste, while depriving him wholly keeps relative calm -- when I open the newest issue of Brain, Child. The cover story takes me several hours to begin; honestly, it sounds as bent for artificial controversy ("let's get mommies talking!") as any of the other mommy war-type content that has lately been flooding the journal's pages. Titled "Guilt Trip into the Woods," it starts as all long essays in mothering magazines do: with a little anecdote. Family, consisting of blogging journalist mama, dad and seven-year-old son adopted from Asia (this seems relevant to the writer), must decide where to go on vacation: nature, or New York? They pick New York, kid loves it, can't get enough of Times Square and the 10-story movie ads. He's just not a nature guy, says mama.

She's feeling bad about it, after all; she's been reading and seeing stuff online about getting kids out to nature. The focus of much of her ire is the echo of the headline, Richard Louv's Last Child in the Woods, with generous distaste left for the National Wildlife Foundation's Green Hour (for which, incidentally, I wrote a blog post last year). But writer Martha Nichols is not a believer. "...perhaps most disturbing for environmentalist moms and dads, I’m discovering that the nature movement—green and forward-thinking as it appears at first blush—looks an awful lot like a conservative message cloaked with some liberal fig leaves." She goes on to explain that she's feeling guilty, in the "morning when there’s barely enough caffeine in my system to cope, NPR seems to pummel me with stories about why our multi-tasking, Internet-chained pace isn’t good for kids..." but "whether nature is the only solution is the question," and though she connects with the concept of loving nature herself -- remember that pine tree I used to climb when I was a kid? she asks -- " long before I finished Last Child in the Woods, I wanted to chuck it across the room."

What comes down to it is this: her son isn't the nature journaling type. "He’s never been one to draw daisies in a journal if I suggest it. Instead he’d sketch a jousting tournament or a new comic strip, no matter how much I burble about the veins of a leaf. Or he’d rip the leaf apart—which for Louv might be just the ticket for a young naturalist—except that what fascinates Nick is the landscape inside his own head." She begins to describe the "fellow believers" of Louv as sectarians, they "present themselves as valiant nature warriors facing a horde of technology Visigoths," they're "nature evangelists," they're "polemical."

She's frustrated that Louv and other writers about getting kids into nature are making the assumption that parents need to "get religion" if they don't like nature (instead "maybe we're into updating our status lines with five hundred digital friends," she argues -- as defense?); she finds it ironic that Green Hour began on the web, but doesn't encourage the use of much technology (it's supposed to?); she's upset that nature believers won't enter debates about multiculturalism and feminism.

In other words, she feels targeted (she's being pointed too, obliquely, as the responsible party, "fear, worry, hovering—when these labels are leveled at “parents,” they’re not very subtle code for female"), she doesn't have enough time to get outside (making the assumption that she needs to live "by a canyon" or in "a suburban existence that implies a long commute" -- why? -- to get nature), the "virtual worlds these kids might also want to explore" aren't given their due.

I try to put my finger on what frustrates me so much about her piece about her frustrations with the nature cult. At the end she is conciliatory, mentioning an essay by Rachel Carson (the mother of all environmentalists) and giving a nod to nature -- "Here is my Asian child, not born of my body, his dark eyes taking in ninja cartoons and clouds scudding across the Halloween moon with equal awe." After all, I too am considering letting my sons watch The Last Airbender. Everett has an account on Runescape, a virtual worlds game, with my (qualified) blessing. He (very rarely) tweets for goodness' sake!

I think it is this. "Any form of intensive-parenting advice—and Last Child in the Woods is as intensive as it gets—comes down to a lot of work on the part of adults. These days, both moms and dads are putting in the hours. But ignoring the fact that women do the majority of childcare, and by extension much of the staring at stars and nature journaling, doesn’t make the inequity go away." That's it, isn't it: taking kids into nature is a lot of work, and we're busy, what with our Important Feminist Ceiling-shattering Work and our status updates.

I don't think the nature believers are cultists; I don't see that we're protecting any important social equity line by foregoing outside play so we can get in our Facebook time; I think the balance needs to be more than just watching clouds scudding across a moon upon occasion. I do believe in the Green Hour, although I don't time my kids; we do very little nature journaling; in truth, I haven't read any of these cult-of-nature books.

What I'd tell Martha, were she to stop by and read my blog post in the course of her time not spent outside mucking in the pesticide-free mud, is that I have discovered that, even more than my children, I need time in nature. And by "nature" I do not mean a canyon or a carefully manicured acre of Japanese gardens or a house in the suburbs: often I mean, looking up into the tree-lined streets and alleys as I bike, sitting in our muddy, messy backyard-in-progress stalking caterpillars. I don't have much in the way of "economic means" (really, my family qualified for free lunch last year) and yet, still, I have found a way to get nature in, a lot of nature in, my family's life.

Here's how my own seven-year-old with a penchant for ninjas and virtual worlds does nature: outside, with a stick for a spear and piles of branches for a fort, leading a crusade with his little brothers against imaginary bad guys whose powers would set the airbender on his ear. They have powers, too, a mix of Pokemon and martial arts and medieval chivalry. To see them out there makes my heart thump-thump with "all is well" and the corners of my eyes screw up into almost-tears.

I don't think "nature is the only answer" but without a lot of nature I'd be less of a parent and, I've seen it in my kids: a day spent keeping the play focused around wired media is a day that ends badly. And this is where I'd share something from Dominique Browning that appeared in yesterday's New York Times Sunday Magazine, about her sudden period of unemployment. Her children were, at the time her 35 years of office work ended with the shuttering of House & Garden, grown. And once she shook off the initial depression, this is what she wrote: "Spring blew in so wildly that year that it seemed unnatural, or perhaps I just noticed what spring feels like once I wasn’t sealed in a climate-controlled building all day. Weather — the actual experience of it, not the forecast — is one of the more dramatic discoveries to come with a slower pace of life. There were days at the office when I didn’t know whether it was muggy or cool, or if it had rained. It dawned on me that there was something unsavory about having been so cut off from nature that I was surprised by the golden hue in the slant of light at four in the afternoon — on a weekday, no less." Later, "as I stop struggling so with fear and simply accept the slow tempo of my days, all those inner resources start kicking in — those soul-saving habits of playfulness, most of all: reading, thinking, listening, feeling my body move through the world, noticing the small beauty in every single day. I watch the worms, watch the hawks, watch the fox, watch the rabbits. I open my heart to new friends."

Is it ok to say this? I believe that Browning (slow down, watch the worms) is right and Nichols (my own romance with nature does not mean my son needs to feel the same attachment) is wrong. She's not completely wrong, but I think she could do with a bit of discovery, a bit of opening up. It doesn't need to be hard and forced and blindly faithful; but a healthy portion of reverence for the "soul-saving," the letting your "body move through the world" isn't at all misplaced. Let's not set our stopwatch, clocking in and out of nature every day; let's do whatever work it takes to stalk a caterpillar or the bud on a plum tree now and again.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

We take an approach of giving opportunities to experience, whether it's a snowy hike or a twilight walk, or a movie indoors in pajamas at noon. There is room for all of it, where I think we get stifled is when we are so scheduled and conditioned to do a predetermined list of things with no regard for what might just happen.

I have so much to say about your response that I should probably better write it on my own piece of internet real estate.

The essence of what I would say, though, is that I agree, agree that we miss so much when we isolate ourselves from the outside places.

(Hard to miss, though, living here in the NW. Although, I suppose, it would be less hard if I worked close to home and went straight into a fluorescent-lit building all day, 'til past nightfall.)

I could not believe that Brain Child would publish something so badly organized and shallowly reported. Normally, their essays have some teeth - people with opinions who know how to back them up. She writes how much her child likes artifice as if it were an innate part of his character, but what would he like if she hadn't provided the artifice to begin with? And she goes on about the Asian-ness of her child but never really comes to the point - is she trying to conclude that his ethnicity has some effect on his love for the digital world?

She had one good argument. Calls for a return to the good old days of anything - hard core attachment parenting, a simple, free play/media free childhood, healthy from-scratch food - say something about women as mothers. They don't directly rebuke us for working outside the home, but they call into question everything that is lost when we take time away from our children for anything else.

Loved what you said, love also how you said it. And would add, that when we treat nature like vegetables, (when, for that matter, we treat vegetables like vegetables, take it, it's good for you, you're not expected to ENJOY it) or feel guilty about it, we are missing something important. And that, to say that "enjoying nature" has to look like some quiet contemplation and keeping of a journal or driving to somewhere remote and, um, pristine, is too constrictive, and would exclude the way a lot of us do it. Yes, wielding sticks against imaginary bad guys is taking in some nature. And that we are busy, and something is always being sacrificed, but that maybe over time we come out even, soccer season ends and we continue going to the park anyway, or the gardening program at the kids school sparks an interest you never expected your supposedly nature-averse child to have. I keep thinking that we're made to like being outside; it calmed each of my children when they were little and fussy to go outside, walk around the block together; I often cannot think until I have walked. But neither of these ever felt like "Oh! Better go get my daily quota of nature." Because I am not sure what that would be.

I really agree on what anon had said..

anon, yes, I think you put your finger on other things that bothered me but I didn't find the voice for. yes, where did his love of Airbender and ninjas come from? -- surely it's not from his Asian-ness. saying so seems more deeply and insidiously racist than any nature evangelist could be, saying as they do that nature heals better than organizations who focus more on race than nature (a thinly supported, if it is supported at all, argument). I fear that this is an essay of a troubled mind turning over and over her own darkest strivenings, and as such it belongs in a personal journal and not as the cover story for a magazine 'for thinking mothers.'

Mara, yes, vegetables.

anon, I agree, too (and you put your finger on why). I found that article very frustrating. And I truly could not follow her argument that the back to nature movement somehow undermined the notion that bonds between adoptive parents and children are invalid. At least, that's what I recall her saying (I lent my issue to someone).

Readers are commenting on this at the Brain,Child website and the author is responding to everyone, if folks want to take their comments to the source.


Sorry, that should have read "...that the back to nature movement invalidates the bonds between adoptive parents and children.

Um, perhaps his love of anime came from the fact that anime is really cool? She never says anything to imply that his love of media or technology has anything to do with being Asian. She merely states that he's more cerebral than outdoorsy and she doesn't see why she should force him to be something he isn't. This whole notion that ALL kids love playing in nature is about as ridiculous as saying all girls like cooking and all boys are athletic. She's not saying her kid is camped in front of the tv all day, she's saying he's rather be making up stories or drawing cartoons then creating a nature journal. Well, so would I, for that matter. I think it's also necessary to make the distinction between playing outside and communing with nature. Most kids do the former, whether or not they enjoy the latter. I grew up in Manhattan, where it is rare to find a tree that does not have a teeny tiny fence around it, and I still spent a huge amount of my free time outside. I may have been on asphalt instead of grass, surrounded by people and buildings rather than critters and hundred year-old evergreens, but I was in the sunshine and open air and there was plenty to see and experience (I even kept a journal with sketches and everything).

See, where I would have an issue with this would be if she said her son hated the outdoors, so she forced him into an outdoor school so he would learn to love it. Or, if her son wanted to be outside all the time, but she was terrified of bugs and poisonous plants, so she kept him indoors. All I read here is a mother who is looking at her son as his own person with his own interests and preferences and supporting them, rather than trying to wedge him into what he "should" be according to the parenting movement du jour.

I agree with the last anon -- I was raised on a farm and HATED it...wished that I could have been raised in a city. That said, I now like being outside more and spend a great deal of time outdoors with my kids because they like it. If they didn't, I wouldn't force it on them...

It's all about meeting your children where they're at and respecting who they are, not what you secretly wish they were or feel compelled to turn them into...if the writer's son wasn't into it, he wasn't into it.

My left eyebrow was raised for most of the article. I thought using the word "Guilt" in the title was appropriate. I think she feels guilty for her point of view and needs to support it with bizarre assumptions (veiled conservatism? I don't see it!). She should own her point of view and move on. I guess then there wouldn't be an article.. but, come on this is Brain, Child?!
Anyway, I kinda love camping/the outdoors, the kids for sure love it. I also love a weekend in NYC and I know the kids will when we go. There's beauty, excitment and awe in both (for me). Maybe not for you, that's fine... if I was all about Times Square, I would NOT take the time to make a case against "the woods." Seems kooky.

Thanks so much for this post and for bringing the article, and Brain, Child magazine, to my attention. I referenced your post on my blog and have linked back to you!


Really worth to read this child story.

Children must be trained in their tender age. They are not yet mature and in the stage of learning. They need extra care and love.

This is a good common sense Blog. Very helpful to one who is just finding the resources about this part. It will certainly help educate me.

Another informative blog… Thank you for sharing it… Best of luck for further endeavor too.

This is a good common sense article. Very helpful to one who is just finding the resources about this part. It will certainly help educate me.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment