After rather leisurely reading the novel for the past two weeks, I finally turned the last page this evening, and was left satisfied with the literal resolve set forth by the author, but still with questions. I don't even think I'll make an attempt at trying to understand the reasoning behind time travel or the metaphysical basis that is explained in conversations between Marcus, Julia, and Miranda, but I would like to quickly meditate on the metaphorical implications of the construct of it in the novel.
SPOILERS BEGIN HERE (if you didn't already know the book deals with time travel)
So the laughing man is Marcus, an older Marcus who essentially proves his childhood theory of time travel as it applies to A Wrinkle In Time correct; he traveled back in time, knew about what was going to happen to him (as told in Miranda's letter), and saved Sal's life by being in the same place in history. This construct was fairly demanding of my mind to understand, but I think it raised some important questions elsewhere in the book. The laughing man spends his time in anticipation of Sal's hasty run into traffic, practicing his rescue-kick. The laughing man, though, had already read the letter (or the novel), and knew of the boys' first interaction where Marcus sucker punches Sal, leading to the fear that ultimately makes Sal run from Marcus into traffic. The biggest question I am left with is why the laughing man didn't stop Marcus from hitting Sal to begin with. My own speculation is that Marcus's reflection on that particular action, as in how he explained it to Miranda, was a significant learning experience in his life that he didn't want his younger self to avoid; he perhaps believes that he will be a better person for having learned from that mistake.
Writing this lead me to a connection with my own experiences with the children in school. I see many teachers and administrators trying to catch or prevent children from doing things that are considered bad behavior, and many of these things may be on the basis of protection. I wonder if there is a place, particularly in school, for facilitating a lesson out of mistakes, rather than punishments, so that a child can really learn and be a better person for having learned.
Speculation. Of course.
Does anyone else have thoughts about the construct of time travel?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good point Sean! I think we as teachers want to constantly protect our students from the dangers that inevitably wait for them in their lives. But a part of me wants to know why? Why do we feel the need. As a child I can remember countless instances when I would scream "I want to make my own mistakes and live my own life" and now as an adult, I am not allowing others to do so.
ReplyDeleteThe hardest thing is to watch others make a mistake; but sometimes, the mistake is necessary. I am in no way saying let's NOT protect our students should we see something happen; but I am saying the small things they might have to learn from themselves.
I agree. At times it is so hard to let our students make their own mistakes, but it is their lives and their choices. We have to allow them to live it out and learn from their actions. I was wondering the same thing, "why didn't he just stop his younger self from punching Sal in the first place?" - but it must have been for that reason, like you said.
ReplyDeleteSean, great observation about the sometimes overbearing protection of our students.
ReplyDeleteThe safety of our students is of the utmost importance, but do we, as teachers, overprotect? I think most of my best learning experiences came from my own mistakes or the mistakes of others. I have caught myself being an overbearing teacher and trying to protect students from harm that might not even be that harmful. How did this happen? My parents gave me more freedom than most parents and I made more mistakes than most kids, but I think I also learned more on my own than most kids from my mistakes. Why do I feel it necessary to intervene in small events like boys play-wrestling on the playground before class?
Humans are supposed to experience a variety of things, good and bad. That's how we learn. Are we, as teachers, prohibiting students from meaningful learning experiences by by protecting them from the smallest of events?
Let's take the part of the story when Marcus punched Sal. They both learned something from that dramatic event. Marcus learned that hurting someone did not feel the way he thought. We are not too sure of what Sal learned. Maybe he learned protect himself or he learned to be very careful walking home. In any event, no long term damage was done unless you directly correlate Miranda and Sal's relationship disintegrating from this event. We learn later that this was not the reason, only the straw that broke the camel's back.
I got off topic.....what I'm saying is that people learn best from dramatic incidents.